Am pretty sure Malta was added just because it was an easy asset flip. Doesn’t require new architecture set, few new unit voice lines at all, a lot of the uniques are taken straight from the campaign. It was simply a cheap civ to make and throw as an additional extra on top of the italians which were the big feature.
I also think that it’s because they wanted to add European civs in groups of 2.
So if now they have gone for the mediterranean theme, on the next one they’ll go with the easter or north european theme.
So with spain, france and the ottomans already in the game, they needed another mediterranean civ. Greece fits more as a revolution, marocco instead could have been introduced, but I guess that malta is more iconic for aoe3 fans.
Morrocco could be saved for a 2nd African DLC perhaps.
True, probably they added malta for that reason…
Yeah when you think about it, there were few choices for a mediterranean DLC.
Don’t get me wrong, I wouldn’t have choose malta either, but it also true that I opens some opportunities for the future…
What actually surprise me is that by adding malta and Italy (with a big venetian theme) they didn’t add a scenario about Lepanto…
Im happy!!!
I know it’s not the common preference in the community for the time frame, but I’m very happy with the acquisition of these two civs with a lot of archaic/renaissance design units.
Since I don’t like it
aoe4, I will be able to enjoy a little more arrows and swords in the best game of the series.
When it comes to independent, recognizable and unclaimed (as in: not directly incorporated into any neighboring empire) countries, the number of choices is very slim. Especially when you take away anything related to Italy (again, Italy wasn’t unified for almost the entire period AoE3 is focused on).
You can bring a map from any century. I usually was looking at ~1600, but with Mexico, US, now Italy pushing to almost 1900, I usually look up the year 1700 for quick reference.
From the top of my head I can’t come up with a better candidate for a companion civ. Especially when taking campaigns into the account.
You have to be joking.
The obvious choice for the Mediterranean region would be Morocco. It was a rival of the “Mediterranean Knights” and would round out the African civs.
Greece, Croatia/Serbia, and Egypt are also in the region. I’d say they should be limited to revolutions only, but they’d still be far better options than Malta.
Most of the DLC is about Europe, not specifically the Mediterranean. The other option would have been too go with a different title focused on Europe and pair Italy with Poland or Prussia.
But this way they can add marocco and another african civ.
They don’t need to save Morocco for an African expansion. They could go with Shona, Zulu, Kongo, Merina, Yoruba, Akan, Sudanese, Omanis, etc. All of those would be better than a recycled campaign asset civ.
They can still add all of them in DLCs with marocco.
Like they can add other european civs like poles or danes in their own DLCs.
Not only that. Now that Europe has been opened up for expansion they can add European nations as part of their single civ dlc releases.
Morroco could be a single civ dlc alongside Ottoman rework as they could share some things and would round out the mediterranian.
I believe that if they’ll add a single civ release will be the brasil…
Africans and Europe will come in pair probably. Maybe Persia may come alone.
I’ve written about that multiple times and it’s staggering how much people just do not want to understand what they are reading. I’ve said ‘companion’ civ. How would Morocco be a companion civ for this theme? The knight aspect arguably is supported mainly by Malta here.
Malta is a big surprise and certainly not something people consider a major civ in terms of any broad importance in that era.
If they had enough money and time and freedom (it’s not their IP nor they are independent here) I’m sure they would include 999999999999999 civs, so nobody would have to listen to constant complaining if anything.
But they’re not. And considering how many things they are adding and retail price- it’s impossible to demand the inclusion second really big civ along with Italy in this package.
It’s not called ‘Rivals of Knights’ or anything like that. Stop making things up.
It’s not a choice between Malta and Persia in terms of required development time, research, investment, QA and balancing. Do I have to write that in bold? It’s not a choice between Malta and Persia
What is ‘obvious’? Are you working for the developer? As far as I know, you know nothing about what’s happening behind the scenes and what was and is road leading to this thing.
This DLC expansion is not called ‘Mediterranean’, they are not going down the list and checking off seas.
It’s called ‘Knights of the Mediterranean’ because this is the theme and their idea for what they want to do with this expansion.
Do you think making video games is easy, or running a business like that is easy? On what planet do you live? There’s a thin line between real enthusiasm and conceit, it will at least looks better if people could try to not cross it. If you have some leaked email when they could make Persia or Morocco but have chosen Malta- because, please do share it.
It’s very easy to be a CEO and invest someone else’s money from a comfy chair in from of a monitor.
If they will be given a green light, and have a choice in this matter, and feel like it, there’s a chance for Persia or any other civ. If not and people running the show don’t want it- there won’t be.
This DLC is like a big box of delicious chocolates, but one of the chocolates has been replaced with a ■■■■.
There’s so much fantastic stuff; the long awaited Italy, European maps, and historical scenarios. There are very creative features like Papal Guards that soak up damage and Royal Houses to represent alliances with the peoples of Europe.
…and then there’s Malta. An “empire” on par with Liechtenstein consisting of some rocks in the ocean. It’s got all the fun features we’ve all been wanting, like recycled buildings that self-destruct or garrison + teleport units. I honestly would pay more for this DLC if they deleted Malta.
Did a Maltese steal you wife or a wallet?
Have you played it? You are calling it a s***… because you don’t like it? Do you have any idea how immature and rude it sounds?
Who is saying it’s an empire?
Are voices in your head a reason for your anger?
Civ description:
One of the Mediterranean’s epitomes of a melting pot, Malta was strategically and financially important, and thus most of the surrounding powers coveted it, becoming a stronghold of the Knights Hospitaller.
Where did they suggest it was a mighty empire? Many already existing civs do not match to image of powerful empire like Spain or Britian. You should be first demanding the removal of majority of TWC and AK content.
You have no arguments so you’re resorting to taking name of the game as a premise and literally description of the content?!
Write to Microsoft to rename this IP to “Season of (mostly coastal) skirmishes around the world”.
It’s a very interesting country with a great and long history, devs (original or current) like them and feel they’re cool to have around and you want it thrown into trash to feel better? Pure malice.
Pay or don’t pay. As long as you’re gonna stop talking nonsense people should be happy.
Waste of time. I’ve got a long list of games to finish. I’ll remember to not waste my time in the future.
That’s quite extreme…
I wouldn’t have chosen malta too, and I was so disappointed a lot when they added the US and mexicoDLCs, but a civ is a civ, and despite not being what I would have preferred to see, a new civ is always a good addition.
If a civ is balanced, and doesn’t rotate around stupid meme bonuses (I’m looking at the lazo…) the it’ll always add game diversity.
Also, for how much someone can be disappointed that it’s preferred civ didn’t make it, I believe that it’s childish and unfair to say that some civ should have the priority. There isn’t a culture better or more worthy than the others to be represented.
Sure we can make arguments about the importance of the civ, but call it a ***** it’s were personally I draw a hard line.
I was really focused on the Italians that I didn’t look in depth inside the malta civ, so I’ll check it out… I saw that recycled a lot from the campaign, but that doesn’t mean necessarily that the meccanics are bad.
I’ll still check them out.
It’s really not. What I wrote was not a curse, the censoring in the chat is just unbelievably draconian and excessive.
Even still, my opinion stay the same.
Being disappointed or stunned by the civ doesn’t justify such harsh reactions.
I would seriously reconsider the common belief that most AOE players are grown-ups or even “the older generation”.
Screaming because a great expansion includes one thing you do not like. Imagine that.