How unique do you want AOE4 faction to be based on culture-region?

So Aoe4 factions are supposed to be quite unique from one another based on the trailer, at least I hope so. That means you can get factions that play completely different from one another kind of like in Warhammer series. Since they are historical faction not all of them should play completely differently. However some major changes should be present among them.
Originally in Aoe2 factions were distributed based on different culture-region which was visible on their unique architecture type. However I think on Aoe4 that should be even more deeper.
Each faction should have two trait, one is based on the culture-region they are from, the second one their own unique traits. Factions under same culture-region will have similar architecture type, similar ethnic units that are different from other culture-region groups unlike Aoe2 where Aztecs had European crossbowmen, also their own tech tree that enables them various unique buildings and units.
For example European faction can have university while middle Eastern faction have madrasa. Meso-american faction can have cheap slightly weaker units. Steepe faction can have movable building like tents.
Dividing in such groups early on can allow future inclusion of faction much simple as they can part of certain group and carry those traits alongside their own unique traits and of course unique units.

As for the culture-region themselves I think there can be 14 different types. Now this are just wishful thinking, I don’t expect all such factions to be in the game even after all the dlc comes. However two third of them should be.

Western Europe: British, Franks, Celts, Scots

Gothic/Central Europe: German, Polish, Goths

Viking/Norther Europe: Vikings or maybe Swedes, Danes, Norwegians (I know originally they shared the same architecture type as central Europe however Viking faction should play completely different from other European faction).

Eastern Europe: Rus, Slav, Bulgaria, Lithuania.

Eastern Mediterranean: Spain, Portugal, Italy or maybe Venice, Milan, Genoa if they want to be more historically accurate.

Western Mediterranean: Greece, Byzantium, Georgia

Middle East+North Africa: Mamluks/Saracens, Berbers, Moors, Levantine.

Persian: Persia, Hashashins (just wishful thinking).

Steppe: Mongols, Cumans, Kazhar.

African: Ethiopia, Mali, Bantu, Somali.

South Asia: Rajput, Bengal, Tamil (India is too diverse so at least three such faction can represent them nicely)

East Asia: Tibbet, China, Korea, Vietnam, Japan. (Japan should have lots of completely different units however their playstyle should be similar to other East Asian faction)

Southeast Asia: Brumes, khemer, Malay, maybe Thai.

Meso-american: Aztecs, Mayan, Inca.

Also there can be some fusion faction. These can have culture-region traits half from one group and half from other; having access to different units from both groups.

Turks(middle East+Steppe), Tatars(middle East+Persia), Manchu(East Asia+steppe), Jerusalem (western Europe+middle East), Normans(Western Europe+Viking), Magyar (east Europe+steppe).

So what do you guys think? How do I like my ideas? Share yours. Also tell me how do you think each of this group should play that’ll make them completely stand out from one another.

2 Likes

Depending on how arbitrary are you feeling, you can say AoE3 had something similar. European factions (from vanilla) share architecture, units and technologies (like portuguese, spanish and british who have a lot in common).

The War Chiefs DLC has Aztecs, Iroquois and Sioux. They have some things in common - like the BB techs, age up features, a barracks/outpost mix, capacity to train animals to fight.

The Asian Dynasties DLC also adds three, “similar”, civilizations: Japanese, Chinese and Indians. All of then age up the same way and have two special buildings to contact Europeans (consulate) and upgrade explorer (monastery). All three also have some kind of house feature.

Some civs having the same “cultural roots” as another makes a lot of sense when designing historically accurate factions. Even if no DLCs expanding the pool are launched, these “cultural legacies” could pave the basis to new civs added through modding.

2 Likes

Actually I like the way yout think. Unique buildings,techs, units, playstyles those are what I would like to see in aeo4. I would imagine having unique traits/specialties. Aoe3 had unique units such as “great bombard” and yes there were some differences of these unique units like areaof effect but to me that was not enough. Great bombard in history was design by Mehmet the conquerer, who specificaly designed and had it built for the siege of constantinople, which was a heavily walled city. Using “great bombard” to throw away few musketeers didn’t feel that great of a bombard. Or having musketeers strong enough to compete against european or ottoman fire power as japan doesn’t really file like playing as japan.

I would love if the developers could go deep into philosophy, culture and details about civilizations in history, which can help developing and understanding how civilizations could be designed in game. A quick example, Islamic culture’s swords are mostly curved and mainly designed for slicing and thought behind this is that it represents “maintaning the justice” with the “cut” being “stop of a flow/path” while in more assassin oriented understandings the weapon is mostly pointy such as dagger, which is mainly used for stabbing to ensure a lethal blow on the “target”. Having musketeer on every european civilization is boring. When I play german I want to play it as opposing to every other civilization in the game.

2 Likes

I really do not like the idea of seeing something like AoE3 Aztec again,

AoE2 version is not realistic, but at least playable.

I think their unique units should be simply mercenaries part of European Power that did conquer them.
So Aztec for example should be simply unique units for Spain or Spain colony.