European DLC (polls)

Look, I’m all for more non-Euro civs to be added. I even agree that they should be added first before we revisit a European DLC. But honestly, I want to know what is the harm in asking people for what hypothetical civs they would personally want? Brainstorming civ concepts is fun, whether they fit the needs of the game at the moment or not, and I just don’t agree at all with how some people gatekeep civ concepts, especially Euro concepts, due to regional overpopulation. It kind of looks to me like y’all are scared because they’re going to choose to do a new dlc based on the most popular civs being proposed on the forums or something…

The devs have no doubt already laid their plans in place whether we want the civs they plan to deliver or not. Every possible civ is hypothetical until the DLC trailer drops since the devs admitted that they stopped giving hints with the update name. So, why can’t we just have fun thinking about what could be, while waiting for what will actually happen?

3 Likes

Well, I also don’t want more Europe anyway. Their architecture sets are overused, I don’t really like central or western Europe architecture sets much anyway. I also don’t really see what you could do for Europe that either A) Hasn’t been done already, B) Is still enjoyable and balanced while being new, and C) Couldn’t be used in a more interesting way for a non Euro civ. That’s just me though.

4 Likes

And I believe that opinion is absolutely fine. I’m not saying you can’t not want Euro civs at all, it’s perfectly reasonable actually. I personally don’t want NA native civs, since I don’t see very many good justifications to add them into the game in a way that’s comparable to the rest of the world given what we have of them. But I don’t see any harm in theory-crafting civ concepts for any civ north of Mexico. It’s all in good fun to me.

1 Like

I just found them relevant for the topic at hand, just as relevant as Skillshare, an online learning platform where you can learn thousands of skills from the best professionals in the domain.

“None of these” is simply don’t vote. The first question is “Do you want more European civs?”, if your answer is no clearly the other questions such as “Which regions of Europe you think are missing?” or “Which civs you would like to see?” are irrelevant. It is understood that the people who voted for the following questions are part of the pool that voted “Yes for new European civs” in the first question.

No, we don’t have to assume it is. For the 48 limit, as a programmer myself, it’s fake news. They can change that. Whether just by changing a number or by doing a lot more workaround & patch depends on the architecture of the program, but no it’s not going to be anything like “they have to work 6 months just to change that limit” or anything close to that.

I understand your point about more civ diversity within the 48 civ limit. But just as you argue “Adding more Africa and Asian civs leads to more diversity” someone else can argue “European civs were more important”, in the end, none of these matter. Size, importance, relevance, diversity, unique culture, power, etc. At the end of the day all these comparisons are useless.

The only reason you want civ A over civ B is preference, the other guy just has another preference. Your civ-picking standard is no more objective than his.

6 Likes

If you don’t vote, that doesn’t show you how many people actually don’t agree with any of those options.

As of right now, we have no news about them intending to change it. Also, I think 6 months could actually be a possibility, based on how much stuff breaks whenever they try and rework the old engine to any significant degree.

1 Like

You do, all the people who would vote for “No for new European civs”, would also vote for “none of these” in “Which civs would you like to see?” because they don’t want to see more European civs.

Why aren’t they shown? Because they don’t have to be shown. It’s already clear from the first question that: 19 people don’t want European civs, 25 do want European civs, 13 people are in between.

The question “Which civs would you like to see?” is for those who said “yes” or are in between. Out of the people who voted in favor of Europe, which specific European nations they would like to see. It’s redundant to add “none of these” for people who voted “no” because it’s already understood they don’t want new European civs.

It’s like saying: Do you like milk? No. What’s your favourite milk brand? Clearly, their answer will be none.

Clearly, they don’t want to go that far ahead in the future. We still have 9 nations, about 4 DLCs, until they decide whether they want to expand that or not, based on sales if I were to guess. But what I’m saying is that they can expand if they want, there no 48 civs limit.

4 Likes

Excelt maybe he wsnts one not listed.

You think thry cab change it. But what if 48 is a self put limit to prevent overwhelming players? Or wjat if its a game engine limitation? Either wsy, until told otherwise you should assumr its a limit because it changes your answer to the question

If 48 civs is the limit (no matter the reason) id only want 1 more eu civ.
If we can have more id br okay with adding more obviously but i think europe should be limited to no more then 40% of civs in the game (as opposed to the current nearing 50%).

Either way the next couple dlc should be non European

3 Likes

For me, the annoying thing about it is not being able to see the results for questions I don’t answer. I don’t want any more European civs, but I’m interested to see what other people’s preferences are.

1 Like

Which for me personally, is why I always make my polls only show results after voting, because it encourages more votes out of curiosity. I agree it’s a problem when there isn’t an option that represents you and the votes are hidden though.

Fair point. Although I believe OP did that so he wouldn’t influence players before they vote, you should be able to see the vote results if you don’t want to vote. It’s not ideal, but I believe a workaround is make a random vote and then delete/remove your vote.

If someone does, they can always write them in the replies. But so far, I haven’t seen a single person who wants European civs but one that is not on that list.

That doesn’t really make much sense. If 48 is a self put limit to prevent overwhelming players, then they can always go over 48, there’s literally nothing stopping them. If the game keeps being popular, they will go over that 48 limit.

If it’s a game engine limitation… that’s not how game engines work. If it was a hardcoded limitation, based on the number of bits allocated to that specific list (which by the way can be changed), it would have been either 32 or 64, not 48. If it’s 48, it’s softlocked. So in the darkest possible scenario, we still have room for 64 civs.

We shouldn’t assume 48 is a limit because technically speaking, it can’t be.

5 Likes

Think what you want but for a guy who doesmr want to see some non European civs “because thry got conquered by others” youre as hypocritical as they come wjen it comes to European civs on that front.

Oh, so all this insistance on the 48 limit was in fact because you don’t want European civs.

I think you may have confused the users, maybe you had an argument with someone else who said that on non-European civs “because thry got conquered by others”.

3 Likes

i would have added an option for the Papal State. feels missing from the game for a huge commit in monks civ and it is not represented already by italians

2 Likes

No. Theres literally factual evidence which has been pfovided to support the 48 civ limit.

Fact is though that nearly 50% of all civs are European as is. Time to to elsewheee for a bit. Abd seeing as the other poll shows people want to see non European civs coverdd i dont think thats too much to ask

1 Like

I think the Papal States has a very low authority to become the new civ.

The only Unique Unit that comes to mind for such a civ is the Swiss Guard.

I think that the Kingdom of Jerusalem would be a much more interesting civ in this style. Papal States would be too ridiculous civ.

5 Likes

i do not know if it would even be posible, but would be cool if you could choose different “sub-civs” for your civs, changing bonuses for others to represent civs under the same umbrella, basically giving new semi-civs

I think it is a better solution for AoE 3 than for AoE 2.

If you have the old cd version you might want to try age of chivalry mod, it does exactly what you just described.

Im sure there are ways to make both of these civis viable,papcy did have an army and crusader orders can be the uu’s for jerusalem.

1 Like