Khitan were likely descendants of the Xianbei so it’s not totally wrong. The Xianbei Raider could just be renamed.
The Hei Guang Cavalry would still be less wrong then an European Knight but a Steppe Lancer would probably be the better replacement.
For the Wonder we can just take the Khitan one and we need a new one for the Tanguts, right?
Right, however, since Khitan were likely descendants of the Xianbei, why not just change Khitan to Tangut then let Xianbei(previous Wei) represent them?
Xianbei are seen as a less important civ, specially here in the AoE2 community
That would work too.
Xianbei is an important civ.
They founded most northern dynasties in “Southern and Northern Dynasties”, greatly influenced Chinese cultural and political figures since Sui dynasty, built wonders like Dunhuang Carves, Longmen Carves, and their descendants Khitan and Tuyuhun was later major enemies of central Chinese dynasties.
Current Han Chinese still have some Xianbei bloodline.
Oh I absolutely get why Xianbei are super important too
But here in the west we know more about the Khitan because its asociated with Christian myths (Prester John) are more recent, more longlasting and were part of the Mongol conquests
And in the AoE2 community the Khitan feature in a clasic campaign
The Xianbei were a mixed group of ethnic groups. Mongols, Tungustic and Turkic peoples made up their group.
In AoE’s standard, Xianbei is a civilization and an empire, that’s enough. Many civilizations and empires ingame include mixed group of ethnic groups, so it doesn’t matter.
The main difference between Xianbei and Khitan may be, Xianbei totally adopted Chinese culture and slightly modified it in their own favor, formed a Xianbei style Chinese culture, but Khitans adopted part of Chinese culture, plus it to their own nomad culture, formed a sinicized nomad culture.
Yeah thats also kind of the problem with Xianbei
While they are totally good enough to get their own civ, Khitans are more distinct
But I should stop discussing with you over the civ name when I would be happy either way lmao
That’s why I say it could be easily solved by name change, because current Wei is very similar to Xianbei dynasties in northern China. If change Wei to Khitans, it need much more work, since Khitans is distinct.
It would need a fair bunch of work, but since you also need to de-Khitanize the current Tangut-Khitan hybrid, it may not be that much more work
And recognizability may make up for the work in sales, specially with a Kushluk scenario or campaign
If take Kara Khitan into account, current Khitan isn’t that much bad. Kara Khitan shared some military features with Tangut, like usage of camels and central Asian style castles.
But making the current civ into the Tangut makes sense with the assets they have, and would allow for more variety than including a separate civ for the Xianbei and then their descendants
Also for Tanguts the infantry focus makes much more sense
What I’m worry about is the Pasture. Only Khitans were nomadic in that era, so if they lose it, they need some make up for their early eco system and Pasture should be added to other civs to avoid waste.
I agree, but you could give the Wei/Xianbei/Tanguts the pasture to represent their origins, and the Liao dynasty. You can then give the Tanguts either the Wei eco bonus or (personally my prefered choice) a new early to mid game mil bonus
Here is what I’d do:
Khitans
Cavalry Civilization
Pastures replace Farms
Shepherds and Herders generate +10% additional food
Melee attack upgrade effects are doubled
Heavy Cavalry Archer upgrade available in Castle Age and costs -50%
UU1: Cav Archer that uses charge attack (UU of Wei)
UT1: Cavalry generate gold while killing villagers (or something similar)
UT2: Cavalry regenerates hit points in combat (Ordo Cavalry)
TB: Cavalry +2 attack vs Siege (Wei)
Tanguts
Siege and Infantry civilization
Receive one free Villager for each Mill, Lumber- and Mining Camp technology researched
Skirmishers, Spearman-, and Scout Cavalry-line train and upgrade +25% faster
Siege Units move 10/15% faster in Castle/Imperial Age
UU1: Bubazi (renamed Liao Dao)
UU2: Mounted Trebuchet
UT1: Infantry and Skirmishers reflect 25% melee damage back to the attacker
UT2: Trebuchets, Mounted Trebuchets and Rocket Carts fire additional projectiles
TB: Infantry units +2 attack vs ranged soldiers
I dont like that for them
They already have +2 attack and it doesnt really make up for missing bloodlines. It just makes them win harder in melee. And in imp its OP
They should have an anti archer bonus (or knights). Also Jurchen already have this
I think they should ideally be a low eco civ, but I guess its an okay replacement
You have a good idea, while I only wanna keep all changes in a minimal size.
Bais
Archer civilization
Lumberjacks generate 1 food for every 10 wood.
Archery unit technologies at the Archery Range and Blacksmith cost -25%
Houses are built 100% faster
UU1: Luojuzi: Infantry whose attack snares enemies
UU2: Fire Archer
UT1: Spearman-line and Lujuozi gain additional hit points when near each other.
UT2: Archer-line fire additional projectiles.
TB: Foot-archers +2 LOS
…
Tibetans:
Infantry and Cavalry civilization
Military production buildings provide +65 food
Infantry regenerates 10/20/30 HP per minute in Feudal/Castle/Imperial Age
Monks move 15% faster
UU1: Tiger Cavalry but with a different name
UU2: Jian Swordsman but with a different name
UT1: Monks can convert everything from range (no Block Printing in imp)
UT2: Mounted units +4 melee armor.
Team Bonus: Cavalry +2 attack vs Siege