madagaskar that was it
There were:
1, Sumatra, Java - Javanese (aoe2 represents this civ with a wrong name)
2. Malacca - Malay
3. Borneo - Brunei
4. Phillipines - Visayans
5. Madagascar (isolated, different region) - Malagasy
But i think 1 and 2 are merged as malay
Ahhhhhhā¦I see.
Madagascar is THOUSANDS miles away from Java. 
Technically thoughā¦the Malay peoples do share some bloodline ancestry with the people who inhibit Madagascar todayā¦because many of the people of Madagascar are NOT entirely African, but DNA data has been discovered that they were once a people who lived in Indonesia, and who migrated west across the Indian Ocean all the way to Madagascar. Besides DNA, the other proof is that the banana plant, was introduced to Madagascar from its origin point which was somewhere in Oceania (around Indonesia area, probably Papua/New Guinea), where then from Madagascar, the banana made its way into Africa itself.
Nowā¦as for there being a dedicated āMadagascar medieval civā added into AoE2? ā¦I dunno. I need more information about Madagascarās history.
1 Like
Thx for that note, but it is quite weird information, to be honest. What Bohemians have in common with Teutons is the defensive nature (in general Bohemians were not mostly invaders, rather sitting in valley and waiting), full monastery (this probably is linked to Hussites), infantry and to some extent calvary (fits) and gun powder (Hussites again). Navy and archery very poor (perfect match). Bohemians are not known for extraordinery sieges or siege weapons 
If Bohemians are contained in Teutons then I am OK with that but I dont understand why in Barbarossa campaign Bohemians are represented by Slavs
Just to make thing clear Bohemians were not warred over by neighbours on regular basis. Until 1306 Bohemia was ruled by Bohemian House of Premyslid. And especially last kings of this dynasty were very powerful and a country prospered. After few years of chaotic throne changes in 1310 House of Luxemburg were chosen by Bohemian nobility and golden age came. They were Germans by origin, influenced by French culture and habits, but they embraced Bohemian culture with Charles making Prague the capital of HRE. After another few years Hussite wars began ending in electing one Bohemian noble the new king.
I want to say Bohemian had their own nobility, their uniqueness, they were no vassals of Polish, Germans or Hungarians. In fact, some Premyslid kings were even kings of Poland or Hungary as well. And Czech culture of one Premyslid king prevented him to be elected as an emperor. Bohemians began to loose its souverinity after 1620.
1 Like
While brave heart showed scots like this its completely wrong.no one painted blue or wore kilts.kilts came way later in history.
Yes, the Blue Paint (Woad) disappeared soon after the Roman Invasion, when the Isles turned christian, and was seen as a primitive pagan spiritist practice.
Woad Warriors went into battle naked, wanting to die so they could go to the gods. The Romans crushed them so easily (Armoured Infantry always crushes anything unarmoured) and then changed their religion.
The Woad Raider is woefully out of place in a Medieval game.
Also true. Kilts are an Early Modern Period vestment.
Pretty sure finns would fit well with aoe2 set up with all the conflicts they had.UU can be some simple unit old unit like the woad raider.
Greetings, it is a pleasant surprise to meet a historian. I am not a historian, but as with your case, AoE 2 opened the doors to a great passion for history.
I agree with all your points and could deal with the traits of many civilizations that could be included, however, the point that most caught my attention is that of ācorporate greed can kill a gameā, I completely agree and As has historically been shown, when an āempireā is over-expanded it tends to collapse.
So I suggest looking at some statistics:
According to this page (Spanish) AoE 2 DE is the 19th best-selling game on Steam (July 2020) and this considering that there are almost 10,000 games in STEAM and sales made by Microsoft Store are not added.
I know for many this is hard to believe since in theory AoE2 DE would be competing and beating powerful titans like CIVILIZATION, so letās see the rest of the statistics.
According to the Official STEAM page (2020): "The 100 best games of the year, measured by their gross income", AoE 2 receives the category āBronzeā, competing with games that are 2, 3 and even up to 4 times more expensive.
According to the Official page of STEAM (2020): āThe games of the year with the highest number of simultaneous playersā, AoE 2 again receives the Bronze category, which are the games that have more than 30,000 simultaneous players. Funny thing, since if we add the players of AoE 2 DE + AoE 2 HD, it would very likely reach 50,000 Simultaneous players reaching Silver rank, however, I believe that if proper AoE 2 DE arrangements are made, this game on its own would be able to reach Silver rank.
Currently AoE 2 DE has an average (STEAM only) of 30,000 concurrent players, although it is common for its lowest figure to be 20,000 concurrent players. The game reached 3 historical maximum points, the first was on March 30, 2020 (in full quarantine) with 34,321 simultaneous players, the second was on December 28, 2020 (taking advantage of the Steam Christmas sales) with 37,635 simultaneous players , and, the last historical maximum peak, and historical maximum to date, was on January 25, 2021 when the new Lord of the West expansion was released with 38,725 simultaneous players. (Source)
You should also consider the data from AoE 2: HD, which usually has an average of simultaneous players greater than 10,000, having a maximum peak in February 2020 with a total of 27,618 simultaneous players. To all this I mention that many players who are lovers of AoE still play AoE 2: HD because they do not have computers with the necessary requirements to play AoE 2: DE (it is something that happens in some areas of the world, such as Latin America). (Source)
Other interesting data are the number of views that the last Wololo tournament has, only on twitch it has more than 250,000 views in English, on YouTube the grand final has an approximate of 180,000 views in English, on YouTube the views in Spanish has a similar number. And this taking into account that the jackpot was $ 8,000, nothing to complain about, but we must remember that in 2002 there were already AoE 2 tournaments with prizes of up to $ 10,000.
Conclusions:
AoE2 is currently very much alive, currently managing to compete with the greats of the industry and that is thanks to the fans, who thanks to The Forgotten were able to reborn the game giving new mechanics, and not only adding new civilizations, they also fixed bugs and added new mechanics such as for example 2 unique technologies.
Adding new civilizations always adds a novel touch to keep old players and attract new players, however, the game should be avoided from being saturated with too many civilizations, as AoE 2 is a competitive game and it must keep its simplicity for multiplayer keep it fun instead of stressful. Personally, I consider that if civilizations must be added, they should do so in reduced numbers (2 or 3 new civilizations each year would be fine) and set a maximum number of civilizations, many think that 50 is the magic number.
Civilizations must be chosen according to the medieval theme of AoE 2, this formula has been maintained in these 20 years of AoE 2 and it has worked, the main complaints against civilizations are those civilizations that do not fit into the medieval world (as per example the Huns), and I have seen with horror and sadness how many people incorrectly assume false historical data in the medieval period of some continents such as America and Africa, do not get me wrong, I like that they are interested in these continents, but sometimes it gives me the impression that their information is not taken from books or serious research, but from other users on the internet or from a Wikipedia article that are in āedition warā, world history in the medieval period is great and interesting.
While the number of simultaneous players has risen to a new all-time high thanks to a new DLC that adds 2 new civilizations, there are also other factors to look at, such as level S tournaments like Red Bullās Wololo, and, * cough * the popularity that they may have unexpected elements in the community, such as Bugs, which in the case of Latin America took the Lithuanian infinite attack bug too well.
I know that according to Steam statistics, few are the players who complete the campaigns, however, personally I think that new campaigns should be added to give greater interest to the game, there are no campaigns with civilizations that are highly played such as the Chinese, Japanese or Korean.
Finally, thank the entire community, many times there are topics on which users do not agree, but the important thing is that there is still debate, to show that the AoE 2 community is alive.
3 Likes
Itās an RTS game first and foremost and competitive game second. Most people donāt care about MP anyway.
America and Africa needs more love.
2 Likes
Correct me if I am wrongā¦but arenāt the Czechs (Bohemian) people considered to be āWest Slavsā?
Hm. I see.
Personally, I despise the Braveheart film, but not because of the blue woad paint that it depicted, but for getting SO MANY OTHER HISTORICAL FACTS WRONG. Such that English Edward I was a ātyrantā (he was a strong rulerā¦not a tyrant. But it is justified somewhat in that the Scots at the time would have considered him such because he did try to force-annex the Kingdom of Scotland into the Kingdom of England).
I am not entirely sure that the Woad plant was still used as warpaint by the Scots (descended from the Ancient Picts, who did indeed use it as war paint during Roman times). In my last post, I assumed that the war paint was still sued by Scottish warriors in the Medieval Ages. So I could be wrongā¦but it may have still been used, as the Woad plant itself was still used as a blue-colored dye during the Medieval Ages: Isatis tinctoria - Wikipedia
Kilts though WERE used by the Scots during the Medieval Ages (albeit in the late Medieval period): Kilt - Wikipedia
Hear hear!
I have read your whole post (oof! A long one!) and this paragraph was one of your anchoring points, which voices my own opinion with Age of Empires 2. I appreciate you replying to me which such a detailed post. And one of the games that I was implying as being an example of āvideogaming corporate greedā is World of Warships designed and ran by a Belarusian company known as Wargaming.
That gameā¦oh Godā¦ is so greedy. Another game designed by the same company, World of Tanks suffers many similarāand in some cases WORSEāproblems than World of Warships (WoWS), but I only played WoWS, not WoT. So from my own experience, I can say that the devs of Wargaming have insulted many a player and that the forums for WoWS are so toxic, it makes jumping into a lava pit safer. If you ever want me to get into more detail, then PM me. (I do not want to side track too much from the main topic of New Civs for AoE2) I would be happy to oblige you Josh or anyone else!
While there some justification in that statement, one must keep in mind that the Medieval Ages was largely a European-Eurasian period of history, and that in the other continents (Africa, except Northern and Eastern Africa; the Americas, Australia and Oceania) were largely isolated from the Medieval Ages.
Also: America and Africa have been shown much love in the inclusion of 3 Meso-American civs, and 3 African civs. In total: that is 6 civs, nearly half of the number of original civs (13 of them) that came with Age of Kings. I say that is pretty generous.
Furthermore, the Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans were the most sophisticated and advanced nations throughout the whole of North and South America. That is not to say that the other tribes and peoples were dumber or more stupidā¦just that the Incas, Aztecs, and Mayans demonstrated a level of culture and societal achievement that matched that of the Europeans and Asians in achievement.
Examples: Mayan and Aztec astrologers were doing mathematical calculations of the Sun, the Moon, and the planets and stars with such accuracy, that European astrological studies would not catch up until the Early Modern era with Galileo and Kepler. The Incas developed a highly organized Empire with a centralized monarchy that came before the first unified European Empires were developed.
Having those 3 civs alone in AoE2 is doing the Native American peoples much honor.
I think that only the Mississippian peoples of North America, would be viable enough to be added into AoE2. But besides that, there is sadly not many good excuses for adding new American civs that would fit well into the transition of Dark AgeāFeudal AgeāCastle AgeāImperial Age game setup.
As for the Africans, the Malians, the Ethiopians, and the Berbers does that continent a lot of favors for representation. For one, the Malians dazzled the Muslim community during the Medieval Ages in the reign of Mansa Musa, who went on his famous haji pilgrimage in 1324-1325 AD, and the Mailians were a powerful community of African peoples, and that civ alone represents nearly all of the West African medieval peoples. The Ethiopians on the other hand, represents the Eastern Africans quite nicely, given their prominent kingdom-building and their early Christianization, making them one of the first regions in the globe to convert to Christianity after Jesus Christās passing.
It is sadly the Southern African peoples who would not fit well into Age of Empires 2. Those peoples, like the other American peoples that were non-Aztec/Mayan/Incan, do not have enough historical justification to have a Dark AgeāFeudal AgeāCastle AgeāImperial Age.
Many of the most primitive Native American and African peoples would not undergo massive social and cultural change until the arrival and interaction with the Europeans in the Early Modern Era.
Againā¦I am not trying to bash on all the primitive Native American and African peoples that have not been included as civs in Age of Empire. Many of them an creative cultures and societal systems, and some even banded together their tribes into Confederacies and Minor Kingdoms. And they also had a reasonably high level of intellect. But the fact of the matter is: they never took much part in the Medieval Ages and that they stayed largely in the Stone Age (in come cases, in the Iron Age).
To have a true āCastle Ageā, proposed civ needs to have a university or school system that existed in their history (prior to the European Colonization era, and preferably in or close to the Medieval Ages), and a system of sophisticated fortifications. Then, that civ can be reasonable enough to have their University and Castle.
To have a true āImperial Ageā the proposed civ needs to have a sophisticated system of military (high level units form the Barracks, Stable, Archery Range) and cultural achievements (a Wonder).
And finally: the proposed civ needs to have a historical excuse for a Navy tech tree and a reasonably defined architecture style.
If you can name a peoples that fits ALL those points I made, then that people can be made into a new civ. Otherwiseā¦you would be making stuff up for them.
One last point:
Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas are in the gameā¦but they did not have wheeled carts or indeedā¦even siege units. So you might ask, āif they are in the game, with such historical inaccurate things, then other American and African peoples should get their own civs!ā
My answer to that is: the Spanish and Portuguese are the excuse. When they came into contact with the Meso-American civs, they introduced beasts of burden such as the horse and donkey (the Incas though did already have the llama), which game the American peoples the final excuse to use the wheel on carts. Furthermore, though fighting against the Europeans, the American peoples would have learned from them on how to use horses as warhorses and use the European style of siege.
At least to meā¦that is how I can explain why the Meso-American civs can build the Ram, the Onager, the Scorpion, and the Trebuchet. While they did not build Galleons themselves, they could have āborrowedā the technology from the Spanish (or another way of thinking of it: a Mayan Galleon is actually a Spanish galleon, hired by the Mayan civ to fight for them). But the Mayans, Incas, and Aztecs too already were familiar with using warboats within their Empires, so them having a Naval Tech tree is historically reasonable enough, methinks.
2 Likes
Most civs didnāt have any IRL. There wasnāt a Hunnic university, nor a Gothic one, nor a Cuman, nor Viking one,ā¦
This is easy to fulfill. We have ruins as wondes, small building as wonders, tents etc. For Zimbabwean you would probably use Great Zimbabwe as wonder e.g.
In regards to units, all civs use the generic unit lines with Precolumbian America not using cavalry which makes sense. I understand the tech tree as relative tech tree, not as absolute truth and a way to balance civs. Goths e.g. didnāt use Hand cannoneers nor Crossbows irl yet they get both.
Of course a civ which was famous for its archery should get key techs on that regard, though it doesnāt really matter if they really had Thumb Rings IRL or used other techniques.
We have entirely landlocked civ having Galleons, Byzantine Fire Galleys and Demolition ships. Still struggle to see to which extent Demolition ships were a real thing. Considering Koreans fighting against Maya over the Lone Star state can be a thing, it doesnāt bother me at all seeing the Magyar Armada setting sail for the New World either.
This is also another easy task for Central Africa and North America:
https://www.deviantart.com/kondrikthus/art/Zimbabwe-Architecture-Set-342293509
https://www.deviantart.com/kondrikthus/art/Mississippian-Architecture-Set-Age-of-Empires-2-338494647
Most civs donāt have this very eurocentric passage of Ages. China had its Feudal Age in Europeās Dark Age. Some other civs completely skipped the Feudal Age part too.
TL;DR: To sum it up, I understand the tech tree, units, Ages as well as buildings as tools to represent a civ, not as an absolute value. Itās also clear that the game clearly is designed in this way because most civs would miss a lot of stuff to make them decent/balanced in the game. In the way the game is designed, European High Medieval civs fit in better than the rest (not very surprising considering the base game consists just out of those types of civs with some notable exceptions like the Goths), but that doesnāt prevent civs from elsewhere with completely different eco system and cultural backgrounds like Cumans, Chinese, Khmer or Aztec to work. In an analogue manner, Kongolese, Zimbabweans, Kanembu, Swahili, Mississippians, Iroquois, Chimor, Muisca, Mapuche, Tongans etc. could work too IMO
1 Like
Catching up with the topic a bit late cant read all posts atm. Anyway looking at your own methology I feel you cant deny the Poles really. They fit into your own criteria. 1 fit in the time frame, 2 had architecture worthy enough, 3 had military (tech tree) worthy of the time, 4 is different enough linguistically, polish is different from church slavonic not only using different alpfabet but also sounding different. If you draw similarities there it would be to say the italian should be represented by the Spanish for example. 5. They have Kingdom large and diverse so here is th Empire like history period.
I think the Mughals dont meet the timeframe criteria well.
Other than that I do agree with your PoV.
You mean Portuguese, yes theyāre kinda unnecessary and redundant.
Forgotten Empires put them under the same label. As a foreigner, itās probably understandable and to be honest, I donāt really see such a big difference between Poles and the other Slavs aside them being Catholic. Eastern Europe is now well represented too with 4 civs, better than many world regions too.
The Indians blob is ugly. It tries to represent a whole subcontinent, of course itās not going to work.
So for you Slavs are very well lumped together but Indians are not. I feel we could add aditional civ or two from the Indias but Im commenting on his own criteria what civs we can/ cannot add. So the choice is maybe with a faction that matches the timeframe better.
No, I avoided Portuguese on purpose. Italian and Spanish are more similar than Polish is with what language the Slav faction is given in the game.
The thing is Slavs as a group are roughly a third of Europe and they are normally subdevided into thee subgroups geographically and linguistically. It is normal to have at least one civ from each: Bulgarians - South, Slavs/Rus - East and Poles - West. Yet again Im comenting oh his own criteria he has set. Not how many civs we need from different regions.
I feel we kinda got the Slav split already with Bulgarians. I know we could get more on that regard but after two European expansions, Iād like to see something else first, especially considering how well represented Europe already is considering its size.
Iād happily buy a Slavic expansion too, but yeah, Iād even more enjoy an African, American and/or Indian expansion first.
1 Like
I agree with you here. It it was me I would visit Africa first again than other regions and go to Europe last. To me two civs are really missing in EU its Poles and Georgians/Caucasians while much more are missing in other parts of the World. Its just Im talking about criteria here.
2 Likes
Yeah, if we should get more Europe later on, Poles and Georgians should definitely be on the list. Probably Bohemians too. Maybe also Swiss but I might be a bit biased on that regard.
@DarthPyro4335 might like to hear that 
2 Likes
Both Swiss and Bohemians are options at least as much s Burgundians are, The real question is would we have place for them left 
3 Likes