Your first post in the topic was saying it’s fine that there are no Africans or native Americans in the base game
Yes, richness contributes to influence
You never said European swords were better or worse, I was just pointing out that japan would be my favorite civ to have as the last not confirmed civ for that reason
I’m sorry, but are you suggesting that the developers only added the mongols and Chinese to this game because one summer an English king mailed a letter to a mongol general who never actually met up with him and moved away a few weeks later?
Dont bother telling historical facts to a guy who assumes english never left the island.
And don’t bother telling facts to a guy who reads the first half of a sentence and stops.
Oh boy, I better get popcorn this is gonna be interesting to see what happens next
Edit: wow nothing happen afterwards, surprisingly
guys, do you really read the posts? this is ridiculous…
Good if you would read and learn comprehension before making crazy posts. Sigh.
I think It can’t be said clearer. All civs must be connected, not one from each part of the globe. If not, campaigns would be of one civ only vs the same civ. That would be boring.
With the civs we know we can travel from england to china withouth passing throught territories of other civs: England, France, HRE, Rus, mongols, abassids, Delhi, China.
Also, I don’t understand people crazy because 4 out of 8 civs are european because:
Even if England visited Mongolia, my point still stands. I’m not arguing about arcane moments in history. I’m pointing out that AoE is an imaginary world based in reality but not dictated by it. My entire point is to refute the garbage argument that Native American civs don’t fit unless the game directly covers Europe’s travel to them.
No, he wrote
Which means, he admits the English managed to go outside of their island, but never did much there.
And that’s actually what happened during the crusades and other important events. A fact.
Go to youtube see AOE 3 DE Historical Battles. 
If all civs must be connected, then should we have the Devs cut the English or the Chinese? This is a huge deal and may delay release.
how woudl u know that, DLC aren’t even out yet, game isn’t out yet is it
Can we all just admit the rule is that it’s ok to have civs that don’t interact with other civs so long as they are white civs?
wait, what? The most fun of the AOE saga is facing any civilization in the world many of whom never knew each other or disappeared before on maps as crazy as the tundra.
It’s like watching a Trex versus a spinosaur, it never happened but it’s great
it’s even a meme, both in aoe 2 and aoe 3, like playing with the Chinese against the Incas in Texas hahaha
Well, here in my country, Lords of the West costs 80% the price of AOE 2 DE, while in US it’s 50%. Even if it was not expensive (spoiler, for 2 civs and 3 campaigns only, it is), that’s not fair anyway.
I played some of them.
The first was berbery states (variant of ottomans with new units, a shame it wasn’t a whole new faction for multiplayer) vs Spanish
Second was Portuguese vs Ethiopians (a future faction dlc).
Third, Russians vs Tatars (Chinese with the name changed).
Fourth, English vs Spanish.
Fifth, French vs English, with some indian allies.
Six: I didn’t played it, I know it’s United States, the latest added faction.
I don’t know what do you mean with your comment.
No, I dind’t say all connected to everyone, because that only happens in a globalised world. But there shouldn’t be isolated civs beacuse of what I’ve just said in the other comment.
It is fun, but then campaigns are hard to make if few civs are in contact one with the another.
I’m totally on board with making the Maya and Aztecs and Inca. They are each way more worthy than the English.