East Europe Rework: Boyars regional unit (Stable) for - Slavs, Lithuanians, Bulgarians (possibly Romanians and Serbs)

[Player870583437]

@SirWiedreich

I don’t, at least for a while. That’s something I’ve been very explicit about though, so you don’t have to imply that it’s a hidden agenda. To be fair I understated the number of people starting these discussions, so call that a lie if you wish. However the larger point remains that an influx of largely redundant and overlapping threads within a short time has the net appearance of spam.

I have an interest in this forum being legible as possible, although that’s obviously not shared by everyone. I made the same type of comment when there were literally 100+ different threads discussing Return of Rome. I called that spam as well even though they weren’t all made by the same person, because the result was tons of unnecessary threads and repeat discussions because people had to make their own thread to have a discussion that was 1% different from the other threads.

I was likewise explicit about wanting Romanians in Age of Empires 2. Or Vlachs, or Wallachians, in any form. I find it unfair that all of Europe was explored except for the Balkans. French & Italians even got 2 civs. And as pointed out here, the Vlachs could have easily been the Burgundians.

The Vlachs - AoE2 Civilisation Concept (including tech tree)

It fitted their style perfectly, with being very powerful in Castle Age but weaker in Imperial, much like Vlad the Impaler, Mircea the Elder, Stephen the Great and Michael the Brave won the first half against the Ottomans but lost in the finals. While the Flemish Militia is basically Stephen the Great’s Small Host, basically every peasant was obligated by law to learn how to use a sword & carry with him a sword all the time, even in the field, else he would be put to death. Being a small kingdom surrounded by big empires tends to have that effect. And there were suggestions for Vlachs before Lords of the West (I looked it up).

Anyway, enough what was done, I do not considered them redundant because I always talked about different things. Yes, the common theme is the same, I want Romanians in AoE2, but I didn’t just make a new topic “hey, Romanians when?” every 15 days or so.

Taking a look at your list. Yes, the Boyar regional unit was already posted, you are correct here, I forgot about it, I played AoE2 and thought “hey, these could make a great regional unit” forgetting that I made the same suggestion 2 weeks ago. But for the rest of it:

Galactic Battlegrounds & player counts is unrelated. The Vlach Civ Concept was mainly focused on the history of Romania without any specific tech tree mentioned, it was an informational topic. The 2nd topic Bassarab & Stehpen the Great were actual scenario campaign suggestions. Map of Mountain Royals was just mentioning that they forgot to add the Vlachs to the list of missing civs. “Why no Romanians” I was sad at that time because there were a lot of talks on the forums that the Vlachs could go well with Georgians and Armenians, turns out, they didn’t add them and went back to 2 civs/DLC. Which mountains? the Carpathians. While Battles of the Black Sea is civ tech tree concepts.

So even if all of the 6 topics you mentioned have a common theme as the Romanians, they are all different topics and not copy-paste from each other.

@SirWiedreich

You’ve personally made 6-7 threads in about the last month and a half about Slavs and/or Romanians.

Maybe it’s unfair of me to call that spam, but it’s definitely a lot, especially when there seems to be a preference for making new threads rather than participating in existing discussions on the same topic. I’ve not been the only one to comment on this either.

As pointed out previously, all 6 topics are very different, is it still fair to call them spams?

@Nerathion

Honestly, the recent influx of Russian/slavic nationalism on the forums has smelled really weird, not gonna lie. I truly hope the devs don’t actually look at whatever’s posted on the forums as ‘oh the people REALLY seem to want a Balkan or Slavic DLC!’ just because five accounts have spammed threads about Slavs in last week.

@SirWiedreich

Perhaps it was unwise of me to bring this up as it’s only likely to breed negativity, but that sadly seems to be the familiar rut that a lot of these threads fall into regardless, especially for civs in these regions. But it’s easier to be positive when it doesn’t look like people are trying to force engagement by creating threads far out of proportion to the actual interest level in these topics (as shown by some recent polls).

It’s funny because when a western European nation is called for in the game it’s never about nationalism. But as soon as someone mentions an eastern European nation being added it must be nationalism.

Why? because eastern Europe is unimportant and the only reason you would ever want an eastern European nation in the game must be nationalism.

I remember once I pointed out that the Wallachians gained their independence from the Hungarians and not from the Mongols, and was called an ethno-nationalist for it. Which?! I have Hungarian friends from Transylvania and have been to Hungary myself, never had an issue with the Hungarians as a people but history is history. Like, how can I tell the truth without being ethno-nationalist? Because the Wallachians did gain their independence from the Hungarians.

Basarab I of Wallachia

But if someone was to say that France fought vs Sweden in the 30 years war most people would call him an idiot for not knowing that France & Sweden were allies, like you are supposed that (as opposed to not supposed to know Wallchians got their independence from Hungarians, not important), rather than calling the Frenchman nationalist for pointing out that France and Sweden were in fact allies.

I don’t want to call “discrimination!”, “woe me!”, but I’m definetly noticing a double-standard, and I’m not the only eastern European to do so.

And I get that eastern Europe is not as important as western Europe. What I don’t get is that as soon as someone makes a claim about eastern Europe, including Nerathion when talking in that topic, the other guy must be an ethno-nationalist because why else would he know/talk/support/mention the history of eastern Europe.

As a matter of fact, Sveaborgare, the guy Nerathion replies to calling him a Russian nationalism, has a very dangerious job, he’s a pro-west Russian. And no, it’s not BS. There are shades of grey in everything, we talked about the history of Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, and yes, Ukrainians and Russians are in fact different people. So he called an anti-Putin pro-Ukraine Russian, Russian nationalist. Point is, don’t take things black & white, they rarely are.