European DLC (polls)

Question of European civs

I invite everyone to vote :blush:

Question of European civs
  • Yes for new European civs
  • Maybe
  • No for new European civs

0 voters

How many new european civs would please you?
  • 0
  • 1-2
  • 3-4
  • 5-6
  • 6+

0 voters

Which regions of Europe do you think are missing civs?
  • Balkan
  • Central Europe
  • Eastern Europe
  • Mediterranean
  • Northern Europe
  • Western Europe

0 voters

Combine popular civs options to save slots (like Serbo-Croatians (Serbs & Croats), Bavarians (Swiss & Austrians) )?
  • Yes
  • No
  • Maybe

0 voters

If you are already interested in combined civs, what are they?
  • Serbo-Croatians (Southern Slavic umbrella - mix of Serbs and Croats)
  • Bavarians (Southern Germans umbrella - mix of Swiss and Habsburgs / Austrians)

0 voters

Which civs would you like to see?
  • Croatians (they could potentially be part of the Serbo-Croatians civ mentioned in the above poll)
  • Serbians (they could potentially be part of the Serbo-Croatians civ mentioned in the above poll)
  • Romanians
  • Albanians
  • Saxons (Eastern German umbrella) (potentially an umbrella for North Germans)
  • Westphalians (Western German umbrella)
  • Hansa (Northern Germans umbrella) (trade German civ)
  • Habsburgs / Austrians (they could potentially be part of the Bavarians civ mentioned in the above poll)
  • Swiss (they could potentially be part of the Bavarians civ mentioned in the above poll)
  • Swedes
  • Dannes
  • Silesians
  • Pomeranians
  • Novgorodians
  • Venetians
  • Catalans / Aragonese
  • Moors
  • Basques
  • Irish
  • Dutch
  • English

0 voters

3 Likes

I would like to point out that the option of combined civs such as Bavarians (mix of Swiss and Habsburgs / Austrians) and Serbo-Croatians (mix of Serbs and Croats) is a saving for civs slots.

1 Like

I wish there was an option for ‘I’d like an European DLC after seeing some other regions first’, so I went with Maybe.

6 Likes

This right here. Especially if 48 is the hard cap, id max out at an absolute max of 2 more European civs. 1 prefered. And no matrer what we should get out of europe for the next couple dlc

10 Likes

For Swiss & Romanians, what do you think of these Youtube proposals?

This guy actually implemented and tested them in AoE2 using the editor.

EDIT: For the Romanian suggestion, the creator wanted to encompass all the Vlachs from Transylvania, Wallachia and Moldavia rather than one particular country. I would argue calling them Romanians and using the seal of Michael the Brave could better represent his idea. Michael the Brave briefly united Transylvania, Wallachia and Moldavia and his seal combies the coats of arms of Moldavia, Wallachia, and Transylvania.

Also, a while ago I made a campaign suggestion for Michael the Brave, this guy won a lot of times when he should have lost, it takes place between 1593 - 1601 so right at the end of AoE2’s timeline:

3 Likes

I really think his Vlach design is pretty good beyond some minor tweaks to some bonuses but his swiss design has a massive weakness against archers.

Is that really what you want?

8 Likes

Swiss proposal is pretty bad ngl. Preferred way more the Realms one which was more focused on Pikeman and had some kind of Gold heavy Halberd.

So are Slavs and Teutons, then…

4 Likes

Most of these options suck.

And as always you ignore dark age civs which are way better than most of the options here (Dutch and English really?). In general this poll doesnt have much point at existing with the Temudhun poll either

6 Likes

Why are huns on top of italy? shouldn’t they be in crimea?

6 Likes

Huns are impossible to place properly like Goths considering they have no country nowadays. They were at the gates of Rome so I placed them there. Not an ideal solution but better than nothing I guess.

Particularly Teutons. The divisions here are all types of bad

1 Like

I think we need at least two non-Europe DLCs before we get another European one.

6 Likes

I find it hard to take seriously anyone who thinks English are not already in the game, but…

Are these really “popular”? Apart from Swiss, I think I’ve only seen them mentioned by one or two people ever.

4 Likes

I would say three or four even if they only include 2 civs.

1 Like

you post those everywhere lol, is this hidden self promotion or what

1 Like

As as Swiss, I’d simply skip that one. I’m honestly pissed Africa and America have to content themselves with 3 civs each and some people still want more Europe.

3 Likes

If there were to be a Low Countries civ representative, I would strongly oppose the Dutch. I’d rather have the Frisians, seeing as they have a lot more activity during most of the time period and influenced more regional affairs than the Dutch did during the Early and High periods, whereas the Dutch are already placed where they should be, in AOE3 during the height of their power.

The Kingdom of Frisia before and during the Frankish and Viking Occupations held a decent amount of regional relevancy with piracy and slave trading all along the coast, while the later Frisian Freedom period gave way to a Frisian golden age, where they flourished economically and culturally under their association with the HRE. They also held a shared history with the later Dutch lands dating back to the Kingdom of Frisia; the County of Holland, Bishophoric of Utrecht, and the Duchy of Guelders all originally started out as cultural Frisians themselves, and only later separated into what is now the Dutch. I feel like that shared heritage and the early relevance that they had makes the Frisians more deserving of the Low Country civ spot if one should be introduced. You don’t even have to exclude the Medieval Dutch either, as many of the early and middle period local counts and dukes of the Dutch polities were considered at the time to be Frisian as well.

3 Likes

I think it’s bad design how you don’t have an option for “None of these” on each poll about which civs you want. I’m also going to copy and paste a post I made a while back that I really like and think is relevant here.

The problem that I personally find with it is the 48 civ limit. I’m not sure if this still exists, but until the devs confirm it can be changed, we have to assume it is. Because we have 39 civs currently, this leaves space for 9 more civs. If we look at the use of different architecture sets as an easy measure of where civs come from:

  • Eastern European, with 6 civs, about 15% of the civs use this.
  • Mediterranean, with 5 civs, about 13% of civs use this.
  • East Asian, with 5 civs, about 13% of civs use this.
  • Central European, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
  • Western European, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
  • Middle Eastern with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
  • South East Asian, with 3 civs, about 8% of civs use this.
  • Mesoamerican, with 3 civs, about 8% of civs use this.
  • African, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs use this.
  • Central Asian, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs use this.
  • South Asian, with only Indians, about 3% of civs.

Now, if we condense this into continents/larger areas, we get:

  • Europe, 19 civs, about 49% of civs are European.
  • Asia, 11 civs, about 28% of civs fall into the Asian continent.
  • Middle East, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs are from the Middle East
  • Central America, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs are from Central America.
  • Africa, also with 2 civs, once again 5%.
  • South America, with only 1 civ, about 3% of civs.
  • Indian Subcontinent, which I’ve counted as part of Asia, but I’ll also put it here, because it only has 1 civ, making up 3% of the game.

Now lets say we add some of the most common European civ suggestions, such as Romanians, Wallachians, Serbians, Croatians, Venetians, Swiss, and probably a few others. Let’s just say we add those, over 2-3 DLCs. Now we have 3 civ slots left if we assume the 48 limit is correct, and Europe has now changed to 25 civs, giving it 55% of civs. Asia, as the next highest now only takes up 24%, and South America and India now only account for 2% of total civs. The entire African continent would only have about 4% of civs in the game. Lets say we add Georgians and Armenians, another popular suggestion. Now the Caucasus accounts for 4% of civs, the same as all of Africa. But we only have 1 civ selection left. Where do we put it? It isn’t possible to put it somewhere that will fully be able to represent the neglected areas, India, Africa, America, at least two significant areas will be left out.

Now, let’s use a different hypothetical scenario. Lets say that instead of adding those European and Caucasus DLCs, we add a DLC to South America, adding 2 civs, such as the Chimu and Wari, diversifying it, justifying a new architecture set for South America, to which we can add Incas, as well as increasing the civ diversity in South American campaigns. Now South America takes up 7% of civs. Now, we have another 7 civs we can add. Lets say we add 4 to Africa, probably over 2 DLCs, lets say the Zimbabweans, Nubians, Congolese, and Swahili. Now Africa has been increased up to 13% of civs, and Europe has balanced out a bit more down to 42%. And now, we are in the same position we were earlier with 3 civs remaining. This time though, Europe makes up 42%, as opposed to 55%. That’s a pretty major difference, and allows for a lot more civ diversity. Now, with our last three slots, lets visit India/Southern Asia, the final neglected area. Let’s say we add two civs to India, for example the Rajputs and Chola. This breaks up the Indian umbrella, allowing different parts of India to feature. Our final civ could then be anything, it could be another Indian civ, it could be Nepal, or Tibet, it could be a European civ.

Another key argument to consider is how we differentiate civs from one another. Some of the popular suggestion for the European civs listed above include Heavy Cav unique units, focus on booming, Cav Archer units, Swiss pikes. Most of these either aren’t hugely unique, or cross over quite heavily with civs that already exist. Swiss Pikes from example might just be a Kamayuk/Teutonic Knight hybrid unit, which isn’t very unique. Lots of the European suggestions revolve around knights, of which most of the European civs already do. About 10 of the 19 European civs are typically played as a cav civ, just over 50%. If we add civs from other areas we can diversify this more. We can have more elephant civs added from India, Camel civs from Africa, not to mention the fact that entirely new regional unit lines can be created for these areas.

In summary, if we add more Euro civs, we throw away the potential for greater civ diversity, as well as filling up most of the slots with civs that probably won’t really bring anything new to the table in terms of units, gameplay, mechanics, or architecture. That’s my view on it, we really need to prioritize other parts of the world than Europe as long as the 48 civ limit remains in place.

10 Likes