Yes, the issue of managing Sri Lanka was difficult, because it had many Tamil villages fighting among themselves…even today it is difficult to manage Sri Lanka xd…
Vijayanagara. They should be added.
Yes, it may be… at least it serves to represent South India in the Renaissance… although the Chola Empire also serves…
None of the empire suggested here fit the AoE 4 timeline of 1000-1500.
Also I don’t understand why it’s shameful. Where did they promise to represent india? Delhi Sultanate was an actual civ of that time. There are plenty of civ that are just not in game. We don’t have korea, we don’t have persia, we don’t have x y z… They can’t put everything.
Idk, man - if we add the pink areas on the map for sake of making a civ then by that extension, modern day france is an empire for its hold over central/north africa.
The realm itself is pretty much contained to the subcontinent. If we expand the overall focus to south asia as a whole, then maybe Majapaphit? They were; a) the largest hindu empire in history, b) a nations that had several interactions with various civs (koreans, mongols, chinese, tamils), the biggest ############## new thing to add to the game.
Feels like we can add more with this that with the guptas or cholas, tbh.
Gupta don’t fit for medieval age. I cannot imagine them using guns and cannons. They are a civ from classical age. Big no to Guptas in AoE4
1 Like
IDK man. Majapahit was pretty much restricted to Indonesia and Malaysia.
1 Like
Boy let me tell you about Age of Empires 3.
Best option for AoE4 is in my opinion Vijayanagar Empire.
1 Like
Yes, the issue is that there are no large empires that covered all of India during the Middle Ages (you have the Pratihara to the west and the Palas to the east) and well, obviously the Delhi Sultanate is the only one that achieved this (being succeeded by the Mughal Empire , also invader of India - see Babur’s campaign in AoE 2-)…
Yes, it is a mix between the Mughal Empire and the EIC…
Of course, maybe they will opt for that one…the Viyanagara empire (1336-1646) was contemporary with the Delhi Sultanate, but covering the south and Delhi the north…that way you wouldn’t need another civ for India…
Looking at your maps there is one large gap in Kalinga. 
And Assam and Sri Lanka.
Well, I mean civs that cover the greatest amount of territory in India…obviously there can be gaps here and there…
1 Like
I don’t think we need a single civ that historically covered the entirety of India.
It took me a while to get this research done. I hope everyone can enjoy it.
In the images below, we can see ALL of India’s great empires and their respective years of power and expansion.
Even those Empires that managed to conquer a lot of land, were not strong enough to maintain them for long, thus showing the eternal power struggle that existed in Medieval India.
- I foresee the possibility of variants coming in the future to have more options in India.
But the question is: How many civilizations with unique architecture will it be possible to create in India?
Will we only have 2 unique architectures, separating north and south or will we have the possibility of having a third unique architecture?
I think… that due to the amount of work it takes to do… We will have 2 architectures… We already have the architecture of Delhi (North), the other would possibly be from the Dravidian people (South), then the other civil/variants will be between these two architectures. But it would be cool if they could do something more in the future.
India 760-1270
India 1330-1600
India 1640-1800
1 Like
Yes, ultimately you only have 4 empires left that occupied much of medieval India: Ghazanavid Empire (977-1186) and the Delhi Sultanate (1206-1526) in the north and the Chola Empire (848-1279) and Viyanagara (1336-1646) in the south…I would go with the Chola Empire to represent the pre-1200 period and because they occupied Sri Lanka and Malaysia…the Viyanagara Empire would perhaps fit better for the early period of AoE 3 (1400-1600)…
No, but you need a great civilization that represents that entire region…
Then there’s no point in representing the region by more than one civilization
So you say that just the Delhi Sultanate is fine?
Sorry, but I’ll respond here too, we’re all talking about in two different topics on the forum hahaha… this India topic is catching on…
Let’s talk about the periods that can or cannot be portrayed and what is seen both in AoE2 and what is seen and talked about by the developers for AoE4:
In AoE2 we have a few campaigns that portray the 16th century, generally in the Americas, Asia and Africa. Remembering that AoE2 also portrays campaigns in ancient periods such as the 4th and 5th centuries. In short, AoE2 covers the period from the end of the 4th century to the mid-16th century.
As for AoE4, the developers announced at the time that the game would portray a more modern period than that seen in AoE2. Therefore, they mentioned that AoE4 would start later and end later if compared to AoE2.
We can therefore conclude that the 16th century and perhaps even the mid-17th century could be portrayed in campaigns in AoE4.
So suffice it to say that the 16th Century is very safe to be worked on in AoE4, just look at the modern arsenal seen in the game it is much larger than what was seen in AoE2 in addition to the developers themselves having confirmed that AoE4 will go beyond what was seen in AoE2.
So the Empires: Chola and Viyanagara, both can be placed in the game. However, I imagine that one will be the variant of the other, since we have this new variant system. And the purpose of the variants is precisely to cover a specific period of that Civilization/Culture/Empire.
In short, we can easily portray the Empires in AoE4: Pala Empire (750–1161), Ghazanavid Empire (977-1186), Chola Empire (848–1279) & Viyanagara Empire (1336–1646), Bengal Sultanate (1332–1539 and 1554–1576), Mughal Empire (1526–1857) in the case of Mughal would obviously not retract the full period. Some of these, like the Mughal itself, would be a Variant Civil.
We also have Kingdom of Mysore (1399–1947) and Maratha Empire (1674—1818). I believe that Maratha would be too modern even for a variant.
India cannot be re-presented as a single civil society, the cultural diversity and the “exchange of powers” is very great. India looks more like a huge Battle Royale, where everyone wants the cherry on top.
Hindu architecture in the south (Dravida style) and north (Nagara style) are distinguishable, and even the east to a certain extent.
Not problem xd…Sounds good to me…I agree with everything…