Future DLC civ ideas

Some level of Al Andalus civ, whether you want to call it ######### Moors, Cordoba, etc, should for sure be different because the Muslim population of Iberia was quite different from the rest of the Arabs. So I suppose maybe leave Saracens as is and just making some form of civ to represent Al Andalus (Moors would probably be the best name tbh) might be a more conservative solution.

I was debating Swahilis, I actually had that written first and then updated it to Bantus, but I was having trouble finding much more than coastal/island city states for the Swahilis, and I was trying to focus my solutions on groups that actually had bona fide kingdoms or empires. Cham is actually a really good shout, and pairs well with Siam. I guess I was thinking modern-day Vietnam along that whole coastal region is why I wrote them off but the more I look I like that idea.

I’m still hesitant about messing with China but of your three ideas I think the Song Dynasty set is probably less risky. That also adds the benefit of being able to leave the China civ as-is while getting some of the other players around them, so I like both of the ideas in that regard, i’ll take this back when I go to do some more tweaking on my ideas.

at least Al Andalus makes much more sense than the insane people arguing that we should have Aragon and Basque civs on top of the Spanish civ we already have. Although I feel Berbers kinda covers that niche already, kinda sorta.

2 Likes

Like I said, I was having to stretch for where to put the Mayan campaign 11

Mesoamerican expansion imo. Teotihuacan was about as important to the region as Rome for Europe and I don’t see it nearly as much in discussions for new civs, Zapotecs, Toltecs and Purepecha are also very valid option for civs.

It’s just the awkwardness of not having cavalry that holds them back, they probably need more regional units, but since Forgotten Empires has been more creative with those things lately, I very much believe it’s doable.

2 Likes

Kings of the South and Eastern Emperors are the only two ones which I want.

Tsar of the Steppe is completely out of the window with the Russian market being non-existent in Age due to sanctions and the Russian invasion of the Ukraine.

The other ones would (and admittedly also the Eastern Emperors) just bloat the preexisting sets to the same level than at least the Eastern European one or to the same point than the Mediterranean one.

Not to mention that half of the civs are European and we didn’t have anything yet post-DE for America and Africa.

2 Likes

If you’re creative enough yoy dont really need it. A civ that doesnt have a bonus almost custom made to make the civ revolve around the unit would even be nice or even a civ or two that dont have elite eagle warrior but get by on other units being stronger.

If they can’t think of anything then maybe the community members who can should be making them instwad of the idea empty suits

We’ve only had 3 Eagle Warriors civs right now. This is not even a fourth of what we’ve got in terms of subvariants of heavy cav civs and their UUs.

3 Likes

There’s literally a single civ in South America and people keep coming up with the pettiest of kingdoms to add to Europe, it’s kinda funny lol.

6 Likes

It’s not funny, it’s sad.

2 Likes

Eh I kinda disagree with the Barbarian one, since that creates a whole new architecture set and gives some old “barbarian” civs more proper architecture too, and with that done the Central European set would only have Teutons and Vikings, I think adding a couple more (and maybe giving Bohemians the Central Euro set, I know they were Slavs but still) would help fill that set back up again.

I do want the Balkans one but I will grant the Slavic architecture set is the second most bloated one after the Med one. I would rather see Africa and E. Asia focused on first though, i’ll agree there for sure.

What’s funny is that when I read your comment the first time, I took it to mean that there is only one viable South American civ to include in the game. Because that’s the reality. The only empire in these lands was the Inca, and thus, only the Inca can make it to a game called Age of Empires. Don’t get me wrong - I know that non-imperial civ do exist in the game, but those civs at least had town centers in real life.

Not on top of. The Spanish would be split, similar to the Indians, because the current civ is way too broad and not representative of any particular medieval Spanish power. It’s mostly representative of the Early Modern Spanish Empire, which is basically outside the practical AoE2 timeline. That’s why we want more Spanish civs. Not on top of the current one; in place of.

1 Like

Does that spanish civ thing solve the issue of too few eagle civs? Didnt think so.

Again if its a fear of “oh nyoo! I cant think creatively enough to be in the position of designing the ideas for new cavalry denied civs but I can program or something” then maybe they need someone sho can actually think

Could we talk about actual big empires covering a lot of different ethnicities like Chinese when talking about splits? A Spanish split is about as necessary as a Saracen split, and people seem pretty against that for some reason. Wonder why.

1 Like

Gotta love how, after I pointed out there’s a single civ in South America, the immediate answers were both “Yeah it’s too bad there’s a single possible civ in THE WHOLE CONTINENT” and “Trust me bro we definitely need four civilizations in a country the size of Paraguay”.

2 Likes

The Chinese were always consistently unified. The Spanish were not.

Mapuche and Chimu arent crammed into Paraguay or am I misunderstanding where your ire is

Euros being biased you know. And I’m Swiss, just as a side note.


By the way, thinking that China is a monolithic block is believing Chinese propaganda.

Just showing you the diversity of the Sinosphere (Area historically influenced by Chinese culture).

Languages of the Sinosphere (including Tibet, Hainan, Korea and Taiwan) by language family:

Iranian languages:

####### Sariqoli,

Thai languages:

Tai, Lue, Zhuang, Bouyei, Maonang, ##### Dong, Li,

Tibeto-Birman Languages:

Yi (Lolo), Bai, Jingpo (Kachin), Lisu, Qiang, Nu, Lahu, Hani, Tibetan

Miao-Yao languages:

Miao, Yao, She

Mon-Khmer languages:

Wa, Puman

Tungusian Languages:

Manchu, Nana, Evenki

Mongolian Languages:

Khalkha-Mongolian, Burjat

Korean

Korean

Chinese proper:

(Northern/North West/Xia Jian/South Western/ South Eastern) Mandarin, Wu, Northern Min, Southern Min, Hakka, Yue, Atayal

Austronesian languages :

Atayal, Tsou, Paiwan

Religions inside China: Confucianism, Taoism, Chinese Buddhism, Islam, Benzhuism, Bimoism, Bon, Dongbaism, Manchu Folk Religion, Miao Folk Religion, Mongolian Folk Religion, Yao Folk Religion, Zhuang Folk Religion, Shanrendao, Northeastern China Folk Religion

3 Likes