Idea: Smaller campaign packs instead of full DLCs to finally get campaigns for the civs that are still missing one

Hey everyone,

As has long been noted by campaign fans, there are still a ton of civs, even from the original AoK, that have never gotten a full campaign of their own. The most recent expansion to bring us a campaign for one of those neglected civs was The Mountain Royals, with the persian campaign - in concert with a civ rework. Since then, the number of civs without a campaign has grown, with the introduction of Jurchens and Kithans. Many had hoped that V&V would relieve this problem, but it turned out to only contain one-shot battles instead of full campaigns.

So, with the current DLC strategy, how do we get the campaigns for civs that are lacking in that regard? Chronicles seems to bring in new civs for its campaigns, and so did the three Kingdoms, instead of finally getting us a chinese or even japanese or korean campaign.

My idea - though I have no idea if that would be financially viable - would be the release of smaller campaign packs - not marketed as full DLCs (which was part of the issue with V&V), at a lower price point, not even combined with a big balance patch - just 1-3 campaigns for the civs that still don’t have one.

Obviously, the east asian civs would be most in need of such campaign packs, for Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, Kithans and Jurchens. I’m not very good with east asian history, so I would leave suggestions to others.

(The following suggestions are copied from a reddit post I made some time ago)

After that, we have Turks - I think a Mehmed II campaign would work very well. A good showing for turkish gunpowder. Yes, the Fetih scenario covers part of this, but there’s much more to the story.

For the Maya, historical sources are rare - the most important historical events we know about involve the war between Tikal and Calakmul, already in parts present in Dos Pilas. Maybe someone else has a better idea.

Vikings: This one’s easy. The best option would surely be Knut the Great. We can forge the North Sea Empire and go against a multitude of factions!

Since Dracula is a split campaign, neither Magyars nor Slavs are really represented in their own campaign. For Magyars, I’d suggest Louis I (Nagy Lajos) - in his career, we have a crusade against Lithuania, an invasion against the golden horde, campaigns in italy (for example against Naples), wars against venice and the tatars - and becoming the King of Poland (after already being King of Hungary). He also happens to be the father of Jadwiga, so he would fit right in!

For the Slavs I’m thinking about Yaroslav the Wise - We could start with the civil war against his brothers, the fouding of the novgorod republic, alliance with the swedes, his campaigns against the byzantines and defending against the pechenegs. Great variety here and a historical figure full of contradictions.

El Cid is split as well, it’s 1/3 saracen and 2/3 spanish. Sarecens already have the Saladin campaign. Spanish need one that represents their strengths in gunpowder better, something set at the end of the medieval age. For that reason, I would suggest Ferdinand and Isabella, the Catholic Monarchs - also a great way to implement a co-op campaign and share responsibilities between allies in single player, as was done in Algirdas and Kestutis.

You can again start with the civil war that united their realms, continue with the end of the Reconquista (conquest of Granada), maybe a scenario about Colombus’ journeys, then of course, the Italian wars against the french (can be 2 scenarios at different points in time, honestly) and the conquest of Navarre.

Celts are a bit of a problem. They don’t fit in very well as a civ as the regions they are supposed to represent. They do have the learning campaign, but they should propably get a full one as well. Robert the Bruce would be the obvious choice, though I felt he was poorly implemented in Longshanks and isn’t well represented by the celts. Maybe Alexander III and his battles against Norway? Then again, I don’t know if there’s enough other civs you could include in a campaign about him, my knowledge about him is simply lacking a bit.

Finally we have the romans. This one would have to be set in very late antiquitiy. Aetius would be the obvious choice, I think.

What do you think? Viable idea, or unsustainable and potentially damaging to the brand, like V&V ended up potentially being? Do you think we will ever see campaigns for these civs?

15 Likes

This would be great in combination with moving the 3K civs to an alternate mode (aka out of ranked) and bringing in 3 other civs to replace them.

Then those three other civs can get campaigns later, that make more money without anyone worrying about bloating the roster further.

7 Likes

Been saying this for years with universal agreement…but the “devs” instead said “oH bUt ThAt iS NoT iNNoVaTiVe, gIvE tHem WeIRd RPG sCeNaRiOs wItH AlTeReD TeCh TrEEs, ThEY wIll LuV iT (V&V)” and then, after V&V failed, they were like “tHeY lIed, vOcAl MiNoRiTy, tHeY DO noT wAnT cAmPaIgN dLc, wE sHoUld NoT HaVE eVAh lIstEneD tO ThEm”.

We, smart people, don’t give a damn about “innovation” - this is a classic game from 1999, if we wanted some innovation so bad, we’d be playing AoE4 or other games. Just give us campaigns with 5 build and destroy scenarios, an ocassional escort/explore scenario with a few tasks, and an ocassional build & defend a wonder like it was in OG campaigns, and we will love it. That is what AOE2 is all about, not some innovative RPG nonsense with a trillion special objectives and triggers.

3 Likes

As a condition, the new campaigns need new assets (special buildings, heroes…) and full voice lines as opposed to V&V that brought nothing new on the table. Be the new assets part of the DLC or a free update matters little, but it must feel more than what could be downloaded for free as a mod.

3 Likes

For Vikings, I’d like to see a Harald Hardrada campaign. You’d fight in Scandinavia, Russia, the Mediterranean and finally in Britain, and it also has a connection to Hastings.

For Celts, maybe a Brian Boru campaign, fighting other Celts and Vikings, rising from a lesser noble to become king of (almost) all of Ireland.

For Spanish, there are lots of options, but I’d like to see the Duke of Alba just because of the enemy variety: Franks, Burgundians (Dutch), Turks, Italians, Portuguese, Sicilians too maybe. He’s not a ruler but it wouldn’t be bad to have a campaign protagonized by a general after all these years, I think the last one was Gajah Mada?

And obviously, if they make a campaign-only DLC (and not something like Chronicles, just campaigns for base game civs), then the price better be appropriate. Either make it cheaper than other DLCs or increase the amount of campaigns to justify the price.

5 Likes

For Byzantines, which currently don’t have a campaign, maybe Justinian/Narses/Belisarius or Heraclius or Komnenos. Man, they have a lot of interesting characters. It would be a shame if they wasted them with a fictional family

6 Likes

How about a DLC entirely focused on one civ with a very stacked history, which would fit the major players such as the Byzantines Franks Saracens Chinese Turks…

The DLC comes with a deep rework of the civ (whatever is needed to put it up to date) and includes 5-6 campaigns retracing the most important parts of their history to get a full picture, so for the Byz :

  • Justinian & Belisarius
  • Heraclius, the deadly total war against Persia then surviving the early muslim conquests by stopping them in Anatolia
  • Nicephoros Phocas & Basil II, slowly consolidating the empire until its medieval peak
  • Komnenos, betting on the Crusades to face the Turks until the catastrophic 4th crusade
  • The Palaeilogos, from retaking Constantinople as Michael VIII to a finish with Konstantinos XI. Not just the siege of Constantinople but a wide open scenario starting from the start of his reign, trying to face the impending doom
1 Like

Byzantines really need a campaign asap

4 Likes

@TrustfulMango90 I’m somewhat new to these forums so I didn’t know about your thread from two years ago, but good to see that there are others who share the same sentiment :slight_smile:
I’ve only posted about this on the AoE2 subreddit before, and while there was a decent amount of agreement, it wasn’t to the level that seems to be present around here.

Regarding the byzantines:

It’s true, the Bari campaign, while played as byzantines, isn’t really a byzantine campaign. Something more fitting for the civilization would be appreciated, and there are really a TON of great options.

The same is, in some ways, true for Yodit - if any campaign ever gets the El Dorado treatment again - remove it and replace it with one that better represents the civ - I think it should be Yodit. While other campaigns feature great heroes and leaders of their respective civs, for the ethiopian campaign, we get to play as someone who destroyed the civilization that they supposedly represent instead. Aside from that, the Yodit campaign is really poor in quality - it has propably the worst final mission of any campaign, and mission 2 is awful as well, with enemy desert raiders spawning out of thin air no matter how many camps you destroy.

7 Likes

There is nothing that forces to remove Bari, especially as it has been quite overhauled for the DE. But nothing prevents adding more campaigns.

I would like to see Basil I for Byzantines and Amda Seyon I for Ethiopians.

1 Like

Yes, I thought they were going to change Bari for another campaign with the DE, but they only changed El Dorado…

1 Like

I stopped that by building multiple layers of walls over the spawn points…

1 Like

Meanwhile Romanians have a campaign but no civ.

1 Like

The problem with campaign packs is that only those who likes campaigns would buy it and that’s not the best move from a bussines point of view.

I think it would be ideal for a DLC to add 2 new civs and 3 campaigns (2 for the new civs and 1 for a civ that doesn’t have a campaign). Additional content would be one of the next ideas:

  • An extra campaign for another civ that doesn’t have one(it must fit with the theme of the DLC)
  • A new architecture set
  • New regional units
  • More historical battles or more scenarios for Victors and Vanquished (this DLC needs more content for its price)
  • A civ rework

By doing that you can cover most of the player base:

  • Multiplayer base gets 2 new civs to play ranked
  • Modders get more toys to have fun
  • Singleplayer base gets more campaigns

I think everyone would be happy with this.

Yeah, they’ll probably do it in the next DLC…

Well, that was what Battle for Greece and Victors & Vanquished essentially was.

2 Likes

That’s the exact reason why they are packing more and more BS into every DLC and it would only grow worse

Originally a campaign only DLC? Add two really rushed mp civs
Originally a regular civ DLC? Add whatever campaign that is pOpUlAr and could sElL
Originally one of each? Stitch whatever you have at present together

Yes, that’s true.
-V&V failed because of its price (expensive for what little new real content if offers).
-Battle for Greece did well (I really really hope it’s the case).

Main problem: The business guys who generally only cares about more and more money. So they would make two conclusions:

  1. If single-player content fails then every new DLC should be for multiplayer and single-player to make more money.
  2. If it does well then, it can be for multiplayer too in order to make even more money.

That’s why a balance between single-player and multiplayer content is necessary.

Well, that’s the bad way to add new content and it should not be supported, but the problem is that many don’t care about quality content. They just buy a DLC when they there’s a new one.

In my opinion the case with 3K is that it was not a decision of the devs. They were forced to do it for the chinese market and the multiplayer base in order to get the most highest profit possible, but the devs were already working on a traditional DLC with Jurchens, Khitans and Tanguts. There was not enough time to finish both (The DLC had to be finished for the PS5 release) so they merged two civs in one, canceled campaigns for them, no voicelines and no new architecture set for chinese (maybe they didn’t even considerd the last one and i’d say that is stupid).