Lol Nostradamus? I don’t know about that xd. But hey, maoris sound like a lot of fun.
Hehe now that we finally got italians, I think that brazil and mapuches are the logical choices.
Also, what about persia and siam??
2 Likes
And it’s not like the US and Mexico were already revolutions. LOL.
1 Like
I’m generally less focused on the actual history of the civs and more focused on the theme and what sorts of new things they can offer gameplay-wise. I don’t see as much with those two.
Any civ can be made as innovative and interesting as any other. FE has a lot of creativity.
Persia could be a very interesting cavalry civ.
Maybe an elephant and gunpowder themed DLC with Persia and some other elphantine civ (with Ottoman and India tweaks)…
4 Likes
The Polynesians sound interesting, but I think after the success of the Italian and Maltese civilizations there is a possibility that they will add an Asian civilization and then one or two civilizations from the American continent, but i can be wrong.
3 Likes
They definitely do have lots of creativity, but I would still say certain civs provide more room for that creativity, especially if it explores an entirely new region.
If anything I think the success of the KotM DLC will get us more European content, but I hope they continue branching out.
2 Likes
I’m hoping for an Indian split in AoE3, though some people say that’s unnecessary
1 Like
I would find it compelling if India was disproportionately popular, but I still don’t like the idea of making heavy changes/splits to existing civs, and I doubt the devs would do that since it sounds messy to make it a dlc.
Yo solo esperaría que se dividiese en 2 ( y que sean muy únicas y no tan similares entre si como el age of empires 2) en las 2 facciones indias serian el imperio mogol y la confederación maratha. otra cosa que espero es que reemplacen los morteros estándar de los rusos por morteros unicornio, siendo estos mas potentes y con la capacidad de usar munición explosiva contra unidades de a pie y otras cosas mas que se pueden ver
Early modern Persian armies didn’t use elephants in battle. Nader Shah, for example, recognized that elephants were a liability in the face of massed muskets and cannons. In any case, besides the elephants kept in the royal menageries, it was difficult and costly to procure war elephants, and required they be transported across the Hindu Kush from the breeding grounds in India.
They should, however, have a strong cavalry component utilizing both horses and camels.
Regarding Polynesians, they have an awesome and rich culture, but I hope that they hold off adding the Māori/Hawaiians until the skirmish AI learns to handle island maps better.
2 Likes
Polynesia will eventually arrive…
1 Like
Yes, stop a little…a dlc has already come out and you already want another xd…
1 Like
De arriba a la izquierda hasta el último de abajo de la derecha es este orden:Persia,Polonia-Lituania,Dinamarca,Birmania,Siam,Australia,Brasil,Marruecos,Corea,Vietnam,Mapuches,Congo y Ashanti…
Personally, before going there, would like to add more about South Africa and Madagascar (I’ve never read ‘Madagascar’ on the forums, by the way).
I see.
20 characters
Sure, Maori (1500-1840) and the Kingdom of Hawaii (1810-1894)…
1 Like
And you tell them it’s the kingdom of Hawaii, not the state of Hawaii…
1 Like
Of course, Persia and Siam can each be in their respective dlc:Middle East (Persia and Oman) and Southeast Asia (Burma and Siam)…
The Kingdom of Hawaii was formed in 1795, the USA was founded in 1776, and Mexico became independent in 1821. So during the time period of the game Hawaii was only be 19 years younger than the USA and 26 years older than Mexico, two civilizations already in the game.
*The most recent event depicted in the game is the Battle of the Greasy Grass of 1876, so for convenience we’ll assume the game’s time frame ends in 1876 at the earliest.