Although the recent Dynasties of India DLC is a very good addition to the game, I still feel that there are yet some medieval empires that are not properly represented in the game such as
Dravidians will be split into Tamils and Kannadigas.
Although the Ghurids are mentioned in the Hindustanis representation they need a different civ as Ghurids controlled the now Afghanistan and they are completely separate from Hindustanis and represent different people and culture.
So, my suggestion for these would be:
Tamils: Pandyas and Cholas combined
Kannadigas: Chalukyas and Rashtrakutas combined
(K)_alingas: (G)_ajapati Empire and Vijayanagara Empire combined
Ghurids: New civ separate from the Hindustanis
Rajputs: New civ separate from the Gurjaras, they represent the Rajput kingdoms in the medieval India.
Feel free to correct my mistakes as I’m no specialist in this topic, just an AOE2 enthusiast.
Also, I understand if people feel that another India DLC is too early. But just putting it out there, that there should be more Indian Civs in the game.
Gurjaras represent northwest India and Hindu Pakistanis I believe. So they represent the Gurjaras, the Rajputs alongside probably others, maybe even the Guptas.
The splits shouldnt be based on empires but on peoples imo. So instead of splitting Persians you can just add an Azeri civ to represent the Safavids or a Sogdian civ (although honestly I dont think this is needed and either way Persians are quite boring so reworking them could be nice)
If any expert is here, please correct me, but I think the Gurjaras are considered a rajput state. So for the moment we can consider this civ covers rapjuts in general.
Regarding new civs, the two major missing ones are the Kannadigas and the Oriya (the unmentionable Empire that starts with G). And renaming the Dravidians to Tamils.
I think the Vijayanagara Empire can be covered by the Kannadigas.
The Assamese could also be a third new civ too, covering North-Eastern India, which resisted foreign invasions for centuries. It could be a defensive div.
If we had an unlimited number of dlc’s ahead of us, I’d say Kannada (Dravidian split) and Deccani (Hindustani split) for a South Indian dlc, Oriya and Assamese (Bengali split) for an East Indian dlc, and Afghan (2nd Hindustani split) and maybe Nepali to complete the subcontinent. Afghan may sound anachronistic, but it was apparently what the Pastun were called in medieval era, and aside from the Ghorids it could represent the Ghazvanid and short-lived Shuri empires. The name may not be popular in the US, though.
I like when these threads just transform into a mental battle who can without any other thought can list random names of some historical whatever. Your post therefore achieved to avoid any other detail and just go forward to the face with what it is all about.
If you think all people are like this, I recommend you leaving your bubble of people in this endless contest of naming more random civ names. Maybe one time you realise not every name that exists should have its own AoE civ. The game is not made for 200 civs. A pure “I want all names to have equal representation else the game is racist” approach is not really viable outside niche discussion and the aforementioned contest of showing off how apparently intelligent one feels, however a game cannot be responsibly taken care of like this.
Like please, where is more than just names. Where are the civs design, making them unique and show they are urgent to be added and not just checking off random civ name lists. What are their UUs UTs, what is the impact on global history? The campaign hero ? So many questions, and all we get is 20 names long lists…
I am also more interested in new civs for aoe3 or 4, since those games have more unique mechanics where these “exotic” (non-european basically) cultures would shine more, in aoe3 even more.
But we must be careful with our words, since those games (especially 3) are still vilified by a large part the aoe2 community.