I think a World War AoE should not be called AoE. It should have a different name like AoM.
Honestly AoE3 should have had a different name too.
I’d want AoE5 to be the AoE3 we never had. Early modern but no Colonial setting. Lets focus on all the civilisations fighting other nearby neighbours.
Yes. Aztecs might be relatively wrong compared to almost all other civs but they were mostly using kinda similar weapon systems.
Generally Siege ist the thing that is most wrong in the game since many civs didn’t use it and because siege weapons were really only used for siege. There were not field guns before well guns.
We only have very early gunpoweder but at the time of the American War of Independence almost the entire army was using gunpoweder weapons and also much much more advanced ones.
And that is just at the very beginning of the USA.
Every generic unit line (besides maybe the Scout Line) would be totally out of place.
Every civilisation in AoE2 historically used both Archers and Spearmen but the US didn’t use either of them.
Musketeers and Riflemen are very different from Hand Cannons.
Also AoE1 is a bad comparison because it’s a different game, an older less historically accurate game.
They could easily be replaced by alternative units. Change the archer to a rifleman and we’re almost there.
I meant, my point is not that the US should be added as a civ, and I definitely oppose it, but as a thought experiment that it is not as ridiculous as it may seem at first glance.
The colonial era is precise the most “Age of Empires” period posible with the rise the most expansive Empires in history, the Medieval Age is more “Age of Kingdoms” than empires.
Guys… Are we seriously discussing about USA in aoe2, a game which is already badly equipped to represent the 16th century?
Dutch are too late already, you’d need to add many more gunpowder units and probably a new era just to fit decently the 80 years war.
Currently the Burgundians are a good enough placeholder for all of Lotharingia, in orange on that map, which notably includes the Dutch (who’d take many traits from the Flemish, such as capitalism) and the Swiss (the flemish revolution matches them quite well).
We can argue about the exact borders but that’s how Charlemagne’s empire is split between 4 civs. Add the Bohemians in Bohemians and remove the Franks in West Francia, + Teutons expanding eastward (Brandenburg & Austria) and that’s the HRE
And yes they also cover Lorraine despite regional history screaming that they are invaders (well they tried it once and Charles the Bold failed utterly and paid the ultimate price)
That is an order of magnitude bigger change then adding realistic Ancient Greeks is (which they already did).
Of course it’s always gradual and hard to define a red line.
Looks interesting but it would be really cool to see a game like that from Forgotten Empires using mechanics we love from AoE1-4/AoM.
Spanning from the Stone Age to Napoleon.
Each civilisation could exist in it’s correct place on the timeline and Huns would be next to Spanish or Sumerians next to Yamato.
Not sure how exactly the civilisations would work across the timeline but there should be some way to make it work without having to have Gunpoweder Sumerians or Bronze Age Americans.
Maybe a series or “revolutions” where you change your civ name.
The new Civilisation game lets you change our civilisation after every Era.
You have heard of the name call Age of Kings?
I don’t think we should be hung up on the name too much.
It’s clearly the game mechanics of AoE2 that are most defining for the series. AoE3 feels more of a spin off then AoM does at times.
AoE1 just didn’t have things figured out yet and AoE4 did reimagine the core concepts of AoE2.
I don’t think it’s the time period that makes AoE3 less popular, it’s the fact that it leaves out the things that most people like about the time period.
They haven’t even added Persia to the game yet!
Dutch civilisation predates the Republic and could be modeled on the county of Flanders, Holland, Frisia if you must insist on early middle ages even though other gunpowder civs exist.
Of course I’m not against adding the Netherlands to the game, I just think the focus shouldn’t be on that 30 years tail end already in aoe3 timeframe but a wider period, call them Frisians call them Hollanders, you get the point.
I’m not knowledgeable about them but I know for sure there were many stories to told there even before the 80 years war.
If you can stretch the high medieval sword the MAA and knight use backwards to the migration period and forwards to Renaissance, I don’t know why you cannot stretch the hand cannon to muskets and the bombard cannon to field guns.
Everyone seems to think that it’s acceptable to make jokes at America’s expense in any thread that suggests their inclusion. I assure you, it is not funny. How would you like it if I started making fun of your country in a derogatory way? I wouldn’t do that, of course, but let’s just I did. You’d probably be offended, right? Maybe don’t do that to my country.
Be cool, bro. I think ppl are actually making jokes at the devs.
3Ks did nothing wrong. Neither did Amercians. It is the devs that did stupid things - put 3Ks in the main game of AoE 2.
If this is acceptable, then why not also put Americans in it? At least America can be recognized as a real civilization!
