How much content is needed to consider the game "complete"?

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
1

This game is very expandable, as it is designed in such a way that it can be expanded in many different aspects in addition to simply adding new maps and civilizations.

One way to expand the game is by polishing and reworking what already exists, and adding new things to fill in the gaps. For example, the regions of Central and South America, although represented in the game, are underrepresented in relation to their North American counterpart. I think adding new maps, outlaws, mercenaries, natives, treasures, etc. to these regions it is necessary. (I explain this better in this forum: Renewals to the original content and its first two expansions).
We could also complement these regions with DLC that doesn’t necessarily have to be equipped with new civilizations: [Poll] DLC without civilizations

For those who like civilizations of postcolonial origin such as Brazil, Mexico, the United States, Greater Colombia, Argentina, etc. It could bring a large amount of content, since it would also bring historical battles, more units, etc. (Personally I don’t like it because I feel it’s too forced, but I respect those who do like it).

Now let’s talk about what would be completely new for the game and that is the places in the world that have not been touched in the game such as New Zealand, Australia, Southern Africa, Madagascar, the Easter Islands, the Middle East, etc. Considering that each region provides maps, civilizations, natives, mercenaries, etc. completely new we would have a lot of potential DLC to come.

I think that at least we should have about 6-10 more civilizations trying to represent all possible regions and cultures, and what is not worthy of complete civilizations, represent it with revolutions, natives, etc.

How many DLC do you think are necessary to consider the game “complete”? I personally think that at least 5 more DLCs (not counting postcolonial civilizations).
​

3 Likes
2

A DLC for the “Middle East” is a must and I will not consider this game complete at least until a Persian civ will be present.
Asia in general is also relatively poor in content, I think some civs from South East Asia and Central Asia could also bring a lot of variety to the game and would be aesthetically very different from the rest of the civs.
I also think Africa needs at the very least a couple more civs.
I would also like to see Poland or more postcolonical civs, but I think that would be a lower priority than what I previously mentioned.
And although they were not maybe that important in the period, having some civ from Oceania would also be neat.

Other kind of content I would like is more customizations for the Home cities and more maps, even if they are from continents already covered in the game. I like how the devs have been reworking existing civs to make them more unique and historically accurate and I hope they will continue to do that with the native American and Asian civs.

11 Likes
3

image
image1920×953 137 KB

Yes, this is the world map of 1789 (beginning of the French Revolution that ends the Modern Age)
the game does not require too many dlcs to be complete:

  1. Europe: Poland and Denmark (Switzerland does not count because it is very neutral xd)

  2. Central Asia (by the Tatar Khanates) (in fact the Tatars appear in the historical battle of Chuvash Cape, but they are Chinese reskinned with Indian architecture) (it could be like a post-Timurid dlc and obviously from the TLK of AoE 2 DE)
 Tatar armies are a mix of Chinese and Russian cavalry. When played in multiplayer or through the use of a mod, they use Indian architecture for Asian buildings, and Northern European architecture for European buildings, with the Ottoman Mosque model.

  1. Middle East: Persia (for obvious reasons) and Oman (for having territories in East Africa until 1856)

  1. Southeast Asia: Burma and Siam (obviously because of all the wars they had throughout the period and their relationship with Great Britain and France)

  2. East Asia: Vietnam and Korea (to boost the competitive scene and for obvious reasons too)

  3. Oceania: Maoris and Hawaii (Tonga is better for AoE 2)

  1. South America: Mapuche and Tupis (since in North America you have Hauds, Lakotas and Aztecs) and the Mapuche would be like the Lakotas and the Tupis like the Hauds, but from South America


  2. Post-Colonial Countries: Brazil (because it was an empire) and Argentina (because of San Martin)

  3. Caribbean: Haiti (civ of pirates and freed slaves and because it was also an empire twice like Mexico) and Gran Colombia (for Bolivar, of course)

  1. North Africa: Morocco and Bormu

  2. Central Africa: Kongo and Bantu

  3. Southern Africa: South African Republic and Merina

1 Like
4

There are many mistakes in this map, like the full British control of India, most of Indonesia already under Dutch control and that fictitious state in the South Caucasus and North-West Iran with the flag of Azerbaiyan (which is from 1918).

Good luck, that didn’t even work on aoe2. Besides, those civs would be great additions on their own, they don’t need to be shoehorned for this reason.

why?

5

It symbolizes the control of the EIC between 1757 and 1857


Dutch East Indies


You’re right
well, let it symbolize some khanate


Yes, but they are still well-known civs
 in RoR you have Choson and Lac Viet, and in AoE 2 Koreans (from TC) and Vietnamese (from RotR)
 it would just be continuing the chronology (Koreans fighting against Japanese and then French and Vietnamese fighting against French and Spanish)

By Tortuga Island (well-known pirate base from the 17th century and then obviously slaves freed by the Haitian revolution)

By 1670, the buccaneer era was in decline, and many of the pirates turned to log cutting and wood trading as a new income source. At this time, a Welsh privateer named Henry Morgan started to promote himself and invited the pirates on the island of Tortuga to set sail under him. Morgan and some 2,000 privateers then attacked and sacked Panama the following year. They were hired by the French as a striking force that allowed France to have a much stronger hold on the Caribbean region. Consequently, the pirates never really controlled the island and kept Tortuga as a neutral hideout for pirate booty.

6

Personally, I hope to see the five civilizations of Persia in Asia, Congo and Zulu/Shona/Swahiliin southern Africa, Poland and Austria in Europe (if Germany were to be split). This would be considered a complete game for me

In my view, the priority of civilizations in countries such as Korea, Myanmar, Vietnam, and Maori is not as high as the five countries I mentioned above. While it would be great if they could join, I would prefer the civilizations mentioned above to appear first and fill the gaps in major regional maps, especially in Asia, where Persian civilization and maps of the Persian region are highly needed(Including the southern region of China, where there is also a lack of proper maps)

4 Likes
7

But they did not control all of India until many decades later

Something similar here, the Dutch only controlled half of Java and a few outposts on other islands, they did not control all of Indonesia until the later 19th Century.

It symbolizes historical revisionism.

That was centuries before the birth of the Haitian nation and nothing to do with them other than the territory.

It’s already bad that the Haitian rev is pirate-themed, but a full civ expanding that concept? No, please

1 Like
8

True, that was already during the British Raj, but since 1757 the EIC had nominal control over the Mughal Empire after the Battle of Plassey


Company rule in India (sometimes Company Raj,[6] from Hindi: rāj, lit. ‘rule’[7]) was the rule of the British East India Company on the Indian subcontinent. This is variously taken to have commenced in 1757, after the Battle of Plassey, when the Nawab of Bengal Siraj ud-Daulah was defeated and replaced with Mir Jafar, who had the support of the East India Company;[8] or in 1765, when the Company was granted the diwani, or the right to collect revenue, in Bengal and Bihar;[9] or in 1773, when the Company abolished local rule (Nizamat) in Bengal and established a capital in Calcutta, appointed its first Governor-General, Warren Hastings, and became directly involved in governance.[10] The Company ruled until 1858, when, after the Indian Rebellion of 1857 and the Government of India Act 1858, the India Office of the British government assumed the task of directly administering India in the new British Raj.

Yes, but the most important city in Indonesia, Batavia, was under Dutch control since 1642 and symbolizes the area of influence in the region


Well you can change the flag
the map is only representative


Yes, but AoE 3 covers several themes and periods in a single civ (Germany with Hussite and Landwer units, Renaissance and Risorgimento Italy, British with longbow archers and Congreve rockets, Indians with Maratha and British Raj units and so on) 
that Haiti has pirates and freed slaves would not be a problem (the problem is that since they cannot mention “slavery” in the game, it is most likely that we will see a zombie-pirate Haiti like in WoL xd)


9

Only Bengal

I could buy that for Java, but not for the other islands.

Unless the maps becomes interactive, I won’t be able to change much :rofl:
I would have left that area either white or under Persia (since they were vas-STUPID CENSORSHIP-sals although quite autonomous at that time due to the collapse of the central government of Persia)

But they were different peoples, it’s like saying the USA and the Haudenosaunee are the same civ because they share a lot of territory in different time periods.

1 Like
12

Not much realllllllly - just a decent update or two to smooth other current issues, plus QoL things.

However that’s boring and there’s a wealth of stuff that could be added to make it an even better game.

We could say that we want a:

State (Brazil)**

Euro (Polish/Danes)
AD (Persians)
Africans (Shona States)
Natives (Mapuche)

However, firstly I’d reallly want to see an update on the scale of the previous one a little while back - focusing on Asian Dynasty civs instead of the previous Euros.

Name/Skin improvements and possibly some kind of Modernisation shipments. Japanese, Chinese and India getting some love would be great. (I’d also really like Indians to be renamed Mughals and focus on that more than being a little East India Company - at least the Ottomans are called the Ottomans, rather than Turkish).

To coincide an Asian update, a DLC could follow that brings us the first new Asian Dynasties civ addition - the Persians

Now, ideally it would be just Asian Dynasty civs, like Persians, Koreans, Siamese/Vietnamese, Khazakhs (or another nomad Central Asian civ), however Persia (huge effort) and those ‘teased’ (rather, found somewhere in flag form) Euros, Polish and Danish (not as big effort as we have the Euro foundations).

I think unless a whole new region (ala Africans) is introduced with their own regional quirks and mechanics, like a North African & Middle East set with Morrocans and Omani, then future DLC should be a mixture, covering a couple of existing regions at once and maybe having an additional Campaign as the narrative/ theme for the DLC. AOE4’s most recent DLC does the same with the Japanese and Byzantines.

With this in mind, I’d love to see as a DLC:

  • Persia (AD)
  • Shona States (Africa)
  • Mapuche (Natives)

If we want a DLC for DLC’s sake:

  • Morroco (African mechanics)
  • Polish (Euros)
  • Danish (Euros)

TLDR? Would be nice for more content, however I guess it can be considered complete when things are as balanced as poss and more Quality of Life updates are made.

8 Likes
14

3 campaign-worth of sp contents
1~2 new civs

15

Adding civs is meh - leads to bugs, balancing problems etc.
Adding more Campaigns - actual historical campaigns would be so gooood!
Adding more game modes, timed events, co-op playing - absolutelyyyyy the bestt!!

2 Likes
16

In my opinion, there are still missing European civilizations that must be polished like Spain, I would like each European civilization to be unique, unique units, unique buildings, unique ships, etc., etc. In short, European civilizations need a rework just like the one Russia had.

The game also needs a naval rework.

As for the DLC and campaigns, I would like one focused on Europe first, then I would like another campaign focused on America.

The problem with the postcolonial civilizations was generated by adding the USA and Mexico, first because it broke with the chronology of the game and second because the criteria with which they added these civs does not seem fair to me. I suppose they added the USA because their community is large. And it may be attractive to this community, but Mexico? I mean, is it a civilization for the Latin community? I don’t think so. Latin America is so big that Mexico only represents a small part of it, so it doesn’t seem fair to forget the rest of Latin America, especially South America, which is a region that can contribute to the game with many interesting battles and stories.

To be realistic, I think the game needs a big update (the update would come with several reworks for the European civs and a new naval combat system) and 3 dlc, the first would be about Europe, the second about South America and the third about Asia , each dlc would have 2 civilizations and a historical campaign

3 Likes
17

I forgot to touch upon this but yes, I’d love if the naval side go a little rework and polish.

18

First of all, there are a bunch of general improvements that are needed to make the game complete.

  • Better AI (especially the ability to handle water maps)
  • Better UI (the multiplayer menu is pretty bad)
  • An actual historical campaign (or at least more historical battles so that every civ has one)
  • General balance tweaks so no civs are too weak or busted
  • Automatic competitive map rotation
  • Polish up the placeholder models (Indian Cows, European Boars, basically all of Malta’s buildings)
  • Consistency of auxillary units (older natives to same level as royal houses, older outlaws as viable as new ones, make mercenaries more consistently upgradable across civs)
  • Fully fleshed out revolutions
  • Rework the Native civs
    • Get rid of the tribal marketplace and give Lakota a unique mechanic
    • Get rid of Captured Mortars
    • Make Inca not a hacked together Aztec clone
  • Rework the Asian civs
    • Generic landmarks instead of wonders
    • Get rid of monks and take outlaws out of the monastery
    • Give them actual native artillery and reduce the reliance on the Consulate

Then you can get into what DLC would be needed to make the game feel complete. I’d say the following would be the absolute minimum:

Asia:

  • Persia
  • Siam
  • Maps for the missing parts of Asia

Africa:

  • Shona
  • Morocco
  • Maps for Southern Africa

Americas:

  • Mapuche
  • Haida or Tlingit
  • More maps for South America and Canada

Oceania:

  • Maori
  • Maps for Oceania

Revolutions:

  • Greece
  • Ukraine

But to really round things out, a few more from throughout the world would be nice.

Asia:

  • Korea
  • Oman
  • Uzbeks
  • Javanese or Malay
  • Split India into Mughals/Marathas

Europe:

  • Poland
  • Denmark
  • Prussia (with Germany renamed to Austria)

Americas:

  • Maya

But to totally exhaust all the possible civs you’d be approaching 50 main civs and dozens of revolutions.

10 Likes
19

I hope it never goes beyond 30-35 civilizations.

1 Like
20

AoE2 has 45 and is showing no sign of slowing down so it could eventually be possible for AoE3. Not all of them have to be extremely unique. Some would have lots of overlap and shared units like the European civs do. Civs like Lakota/Comanche, Kazakhs/Uzbeks, or various Indian civs could share a lot of units.

1 Like
21

As long as it doesn’t feel too far-fetched everything is fine. The problem is when they introduce civilizations like Malta, which although it played an important role in that period of history, I don’t think it met the requirements to be a playable nation.

2 Likes
22

Definitively (20 charcters)

23

Agreed, some civs like Malta and Aztecs would be better as minor civs, and civs like USA and Mexico would be best as revolutions. But they’re already in the game so there’s not much to be done.

3 Likes