I dont want a roman civ in aoe2

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
25

Guess what, Huns had a large amount of connections with the Avars and the early Proto-Bulgars (In fact they were used to represent Bulgars in Honfoglalas scenario back in HD game). Heck even Tarkans weren’t Huns but a Bulgar military class.

1 Like
26

But we already have a Roman civ and despite what people like to claim the early Byz and late Romans were practically the same

2 Likes
27

100% agree
Leo I had a lot of influence of who was Emperor after Majorian’s death. He even apointed Anthemius, who was born and raised in Constantinople, and gave Julius Nepos an army to assert himself as Emperor in the West.

3 Likes
28

Sorry, AOE2DE is a game released in 2019 with only 4 years of history,for many players like me, I have no idea what the difference is between the Huns and Dravidians.

29

While I’m onboard with the Romans (Late Antiquity Romans) coming in the DLC, I’d also wouldn’t mind if they end up overhauling the Byzantines as a whole then change its name to the Romans (as it should be historically as well).

1 Like
31

Why? Was it a naval civilization? Something that didn’t have knights or crossbows?

32

Love it. Although the civ is well designed imo at this point. The only additions could be cosmetic changes, and replacing the Knight line with something else (but heavy cavalry in the ballpark).

33

We must acknowledge the underlying problem of the age series. There is no proper representation of the time period between 0 AD and 600 AD. Some civs are added in AoE1 while others in AoE2, and honesty speaking they fit in neither place.

Civs which can be represented in this AoE1.5 are:

  • Romans (Roman Empire - till 628 AD)
  • Persians (Sassanids - 22X to 628/632)
  • Goths - they certainly survived till AoE2 time frame, but they didn’t exert influence. They had influence in this time frame.
  • Franks - the Throwing Axeman thingy. The AoE2 civ can be modified to French.
  • Huns - having some occurrences in Europe and some in Asia (white Huns)
  • Bulgars - okay come on, they are not represented by Bulgarians, which are slightly different.
  • Vandals
  • Angles (proto-English)
  • Celts (the AoE2 civ can be modified to Scots)
  • Indians (Gupta Empire and Empire of Harsha, ? - 647)
  • and many more
34

I’ve always been thinking of the same thing. Because besides a few exceptions, each AOE game has a “center” time period of its representation, which can be seen from the unit appearances and composition of military.
1: late bronze to early classical
2: mid-high medieval
3: 1700-1800s

And the nature of AOE games does not decouple “time period” and “tier”. As a result late antiquity and late renaissance were “skipped”, either as a low-tier, lackluster early game or a huge stretch from the late game.
You cannot represent the great migration well with either Greek swordsman and chariots from AOE1, or knights with kite shield from AOE2. You cannot represent thirty years war with crossbows and hand cannons from AOE2, or bayonets and hussars from AOE3.

1 Like
35

Are the Romans going to have castles?

36

If they are released as an AOE2 civ they’ll have

2 Likes
37

If the leak was true, it looks pretty cool

38

castel is literally the roman word for their fortifications, why would they not have them?

39

Whats the problem with Byz?

2 Likes
40

I think the latin word is “castrum”. “Castel” is old french or occitan.

1 Like
41

Yeah, I wasnt very precise there.

The latin word indeed is castrum, but that was mostly used for the fortified camp of an entire legion. Since legions were often too big, their parts built their own defenses - small castra, in latin castela. There were more castela than actual castra, hence this is the word that survived.

4 Likes
42

Byzantine is fine right now, I’m just suggesting an “if” scenario if they decided to not add a Roman civ but to overhaul the existing Byzantine, like Legionary being a regional unit for Byzantines & Goths for example, or changing their architecture mixing it between Mediterranean & Middle Eastern styles that sort of thing

1 Like
43

I was thinking of replacing Cataphracts to that of Centurions for Byzantines UU, Catas meanwhile would replace the underwhelming Byzantines Knight line. Catas then could also become a regional unit for Persians, Saracens, & other middle east to asia civ. Of course that would be hell to balance which is why I shelved this idea.

5 Likes
45

I guess the problem with Romans in AOE2 isn’t merely the timeline but the general feeling that Rome is more about (Late) Antiquity than Middle Ages.

Goths amd Huns though make sense because we don’t see them as part of that ancient time but as something that heralded a new era. They were like the nails hitting the Roman coffin. And the following centuries continued the trend of eastern people pouring into the decaying corpse of the Roman Empire. By the way, a Barbarian DLC would be very cool.

And even though I like the idea of renaming the Byzantines as Romans, remaking the civilization in the process, the fact is we don’t see them as Romans but as a separate culture that emerged from the Roman political structure. The very fact that the Empire got divided in two pieces, West and East, already indicates relevant differences.

6 Likes
46

The East appointed Western Roman Emperors, so it wasn’t a clear political divide.