How many civs should each region get? We are now at 42, meaning if they went with DLCs of 2 civs again there would be space for 4 expansions to reach a total of 50.
Would Central or South Africa or both be getting civs? Which would make the most sense?
I assume for East Asia weād get Tibetans and Jurchens with a rework of the Chinese umbrella.
Would this be the chance to give East Asian and Steppe civs more fitting architecture sets?
If they managed to combine Georgians and Armenians into one civ - we could get Wallachians & maybe Serbs alongside a Slavs re-work and call it a Europe-Caucasus DLC? (e.g. āGatekeepers of Europeā)
(This would also free a slot for another North/Central/South African civ)
Would the Vikings and Slavs then receive a wooden architecture set?
What two South American civs should be added, possibly alongside an Andean Architecture set?
Should they not be able or willing to include more than 48 civs - which 2 would not make it?
Should an in-game poll be made to ask every single player with what final number of civs theyād be satisfied?
3 Africa, 3 Asia, 2 North America would be a nice way to close things out at 50. If 48 is the hard cap then maybe 2 Africa, 3 Asia, 1 North America. That would be my preference.
3 from Africa next would be nice. Iād like to see some more American civs as well, but Iām open to negotiations.
Iām pretty happy with Asia at the moment. Itās not nearly as fleshed out in detail as Europe, but as long as they can find good civs outside of either of those places I wouldnāt mind not getting more Asian civs, although I certainly wouldnāt be mad if East Asia or the Middle East was revisited for one or more new school civs. I wouldnāt even really mind if say Georgia or another sort-of-euro-civ was included in a Middle East or Asia revisit.
With so little civs slot left we shouldnāt care about representation anymore. Only two civs for subsaharan Africa is too little, yes. The area is indeed underrepresented.
But if 48 or 50 is the final amount of civs (it should be, imo), then we should care to include those civs who really should be in the game, no matter where theyāre from.
My list:
If 48:Jurchens, Tanguts/Tibetans, Somalis, Georgians, Thais and Mississipians.
If 50: add Vlachs an either Kanem or some southamerican civ.
Edit: With āshould be in the gameā I donāt only refer to historical achievments, but player preferences as well.
As a history and geography nerd I am, Iād love to see every cultural group have its representation in the game. But letās be real, thereās no way to make it past the 50 civs without turning the game into a complet chaos full of alien mechanics and weird civ designs. It wouldnāt be AoE anymore.
Any american civ would work for me.
I actually donāt want any other american civ in the game. But thatās my oppinion, and I know itās unpopular. People want more America, so I included in the list the one Iāve read being requested the most.
We already have way to many civs. The new civs dont really add much to the game. Almost all new civs from DE have to juse gimmicks to make them somehow unique.
I wish that the devs much more focus on getting rid of all the issues and fixing all the bugs in the game. But in reality they just dont care at all about all the bugs and issue. Only thing they seem to care at is grapping some money using terrible designed civs. That is for me the reason to no buy the DLCs.
If they will focus much more on fixing all the issues and bugs, then i would know they really care about the game and i will happily support them with buying the DLCs. So i will give this as challenge to the devs: Please add more focus on fixing your game. As result i will buy the DLCs. And i am pretty sure there are many more players like me as well.
But currently i would have stopped adding new civs at something like 37? What was the number of civs at the release of DE? I might be off by a few civs.
That depends on how tolerant you are with gimmicks and overlapping bonuses. I already feel weāre running into those problems with the amount of civs we have right now. Not after the 50 civs, I mean now with 42. Still the pros of more civs are more than the cons, so I can welcome some more.
I think the claim to fame for AOE2 has always been the absence of gimmicks. But care to explain what āminor overlapsā mean?
Would outright copying of existing, unique mechanics be still considered as āminorā? Not saying this never happened here before but the more of it the worse.
Bonus overlaps.
For me I donāt really know why everyone is against reusing bonuses. If you take one bonus from 4 civs, for one civ, its still a unique civ right?
Iād say it depends. I wouldnāt like it if they started āreusingā bonuses of UUs like Samurai, Obuch or Konnik which in a way define civs. In the case of Leitis, they already did it.
To me it shows they really couldnāt come up with something new or different.