I don’t wanna see more post-colonial ones like Mexico or Brazil, they are kinda late for the timeline and feel off.
Persians, Danes and a Southeast asian civ would be cool as last additions.
4 Likes
Yes to all! I would gladly buy more DLCs after the success of African Royals. We need home cities customizations for all the civs and more historical battles.
4 Likes
Now that the African DLC is released, I would like at least two African DLCs adding two brand new civs. The last DLC added civs from the Sahel line (relatively). The second DLC could add civs from central Africa (Kanem-Bornu and Congolese) and a third from South Africa (Mutapa and Rozvi / or Madagascar). The Sahara could be represented by:
1 Like
That’s too many civs, i would be fine with just Moroccans. They do appear in a historical battle so maybe that’s a hint?
2 Likes
Agreed. I think adding the Moroccans would cover Africa nicely when taking account civs from other parts of the world I want added.
We’re not sure how well the African Royals DLC is doing other than reviews on steam, which right now are mixed. I mean, I hope it is successful so we can get more down the road but a lot hinges on how well this one is received and right now it looks like a repeat of how the base game came out last year.
I didn’t leave a bad review on steam but I’m certainly frustrated with the bugs introduced with this update, specifically the degradation of the allied AI.
4 Likes
The ‘mixed’ reviews mostly come from a frustration of a lack of new campaigns, usual new civ(s) overpowered, and the odd occasional crashing. But judging by a quick scan of those reviews, even those who posted positive ones the community clearly wants new campaigns added.
On that note, I would be like to see the Danes and Italians appear as potential new civilisations.
6 Likes
The lack of new campaigns is due to budget restrictions, overpowered things can be nerfed. But I can understand that crashes can be frustrating.
1 Like
Funny thing is that many people play like the single player experience, specially in age games. Age 2, having a LOT of campaigns, have a lot of replayability too, and they just keep expanding the game in that aspect.
3 Likes
Indeed, imo the campaigns are the biggest strenght of the AOE II games. Historical battles in AOE III are fun but are nothing compared to a fully fleshed out campaign like in AOE II.
3 Likes
We also have to consider Tantalus Media has only like 20 people employed. If Microsoft wanted more expansive DLC for AoEIII it would’ve happened. Though I actually prefer this smaller scale post lauch DLC model than previous games as it is more accessible to people financially while introducing fairly robust new mechanics and maps. Introducing 3 new civs before the game is even a year old bodes well for future content and support.
The campaigns in AoEII are superior to those in AoEIII and this is coming from a AoEIII lover. Historical battles are the closest we will get to AoEII campaigns, unfortunately.
As a strictly single player I live my AoEIII world in supremacy and right now the terrible AI released with this latest update has renderd the game unplayable for me.
4 Likes
AOE3 never had many good campaigns but it had the POTENTIAL to have AMAZING campaigns. It is a pity to see such a lack of new single-player content. There is no reason why AOE3DE could not have left behind a positive and rich single-player legacy like AOE2DE has.
6 Likes
Specially with SO many interesting conflicts happening in this time of history. It doesn’t even need to follow the vanilla game route, you can make 5 scenario campaigns like TAD ones and tell many stories. I’ve downloaded some scenarios in the mod section of the game and you can see that the is potential to make fun and engaging scenarios
4 Likes
Yeah. I wish we could go back and steer the devs into mimicking the AoEII campaign formula. I think that was the biggest mistake along with making the game specifically about colonization only to be abandoned by the two DLC’s and later the DE.
1 Like
I think the devs do listen to the community, so if we ask for more sp content, maybe we get it? I feel many people that are active on the community are mainly mp players, which is expected, but the sp people are not that vocal, probably because the experience is not the same, so they won’t ask for more, they just go to a game with more campaigns/scenarios/coop/challenges. Skirmishes are fine and fun, but there’s room for expanding the sp experience a lot more.
5 Likes
I hound the devs on twitter as much as I can 
6 Likes
How about no? I dont want 50+ civs or anything close to 24. I want balanced, unique civs not crappy quantity. Also more civs does not make the game better, usually only a small selection of civs get played a lot, meaning having 20+ civs means 14 or so almost dont get played.
1 Like
Exactly my opinion, one reason i got tired of AoE2 DE was that they crammed in a lot of questionable civs too fast just for the sake of more civs and they kinda lost direction. 40 civs is way too much and do the Burgundians, Bohemians and Lithuanians really need their own specific civ when you basically have the whole Indian continent with hundreds of different kingdoms and cultures covered by one civ?
I could see max 3 more civs added to AoE3 and that is Persians (this is not even a debate), and then maybe Moroccans and Danes or maybe Siam just to have some Southeast Asian representation.
5 Likes
seria legal Afegãos ou civis do oriente médio acho que a conteúdo bom na aquela região pra por no jogo
Well at least the number of potential civs are naturally limited by history for AOE3. By the early modern era seafaring, globalization and consolidation of power meant fewer significant empires.
4 Likes
I think that AoE3 would be more successful if instead of the long “Fairy Tale of the Black Family” we would get shorter Historical Campaigns - instead of 8 missions in 3 acts, that’s 4 missions in 6 campaigns in the vanilla version.
WarChiefs - instead of 8 missions in 2 acts, that’s 4 missions in 4 campaigns.
Unfortunately, we will not turn back the time…
2 Likes