It's not over. AoE4 can still become the best AoE game and keep growing. Here's how

[MatM1996]

Sure sure, the Sassanids would be a good option for them, they last until the 7th century with the Arab invasions, but the Safavids were more a gunpowder early modern empire (they fit better in AoE 3)…

[RunicAvenger]

Chinese is much better than “Tang” because captures the civilization, not politics.

Similar, Persians much better than “Sassanids”, because captures a very long civilization instead of politics.

[MatM1996]

Sure sure…maybe the Persians in AoE 4 would encompass various historical periods of Medieval Persia:

1. Dark Age: Sassanid Dynasty (224-642)

2. Feudal Age: Saffarid Dynasty (860-1000)

3. Castle Age: Ilkhanate and Golden Horde (1256-1501)

4. Imperial Age: Safavid Dynasty (1501-1576)

[grizzgolf]

I wonder if we will ever see the Persians in this game

[Darkness01101]

It’s not over. AoE4 can still become the best AoE game and keep growing. Here’s how

Microsoft could have Activision/Blizzard artists overhaul the graphics, animations, and UI for AoE4 since they own them now. Such a move could finally get me to buy AoE4

The graphics would be more fitting for the era the game takes place in (so, more immersive), more detailed, higher quality, better effects, and fit for the year 2023 rather than 2010.

[MadMax8915]

@MatM1996

but the Persians were under others civs in medieval times…

@RunicAvenger

Not that simple. Very far from it. Just need look at the maps 1, 2, 3, 6, 7, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 17. You’re mistaken about this point, see?

Oh and moreover:
1- Timur acclaimed himself as “Emperor of Persia”, look it shows Persia on the map part of Timurid time, “Persia” it’s under Persians agree with me?

2- you can’t have AoE4 withour Safavids which is part of Persians, they were structurally important in world geopolitics

3- Persians were the longest, main rival of Byzantines while the Roman Empire was a world A-power; think DLC

@MatM1996

Sure sure…maybe the Persians in AoE 4 would encompass varios historic periods of Medieval Persia:

1. Dark Age: Sassanid Dynasty (224-642)
2. Feudal Age: Saffarid Dynasty (860-1000)
3. Castle Age: Ilkhanate and Golden Horde (1256-1501)
4. Imperial Age: Safavid Dynasty (1501-1576)

Persia is basically a big “battle royale”, with no permanent dominator. There have always been changes and some of them were quite impactful.

The Persians, it’s difficult to treat them as something simple… since there were many changes in power and a lot of diversity.

*Suggestion: Perhaps to create a Persian civilization, you would need to create one that could choose different empires/dynasties when it evolves, when choosing its landmark… so each landmark would represent some period and would bring with it new units and upgrades. Remembering, if an Empire/Dynasty is missing, it would be enough to create it as a variant in some DLC in the future.
NOTE: The colleague “MatM1996” has already made this suggestion. It really would be the easiest way to resolve it. I just add the option to vary the choice of dynasty/empire according to the chosen landmark.

I believe that AoEIV is portraying the initial age as being the 8th century or perhaps at most the 7th century onwards, which is why I do not mention older empires. In my case, I’m disregarding the 7th century, because it would be too early a period to focus on an entire empire there. And until now there has never been a portrait of an empire focused on the 7th century and previous centuries, because it wouldn’t make sense, because there would be a lack of technology in the last two ages, how would a gameplay of this work?
There would probably be a need to merge with another dynasty/empire to provide more balance.
Or perhaps if you are going to focus on an ancient Empire/Dynasty (7th century and earlier), it would be better to make a civilization variant. Since there would be no gunpowder units and there would be more different gameplay.
→ Why do I say this?
The answer: - The developers themselves mentioned that AoE4 would be more modern if compared to AoE2, so we would start at an older age and go a little further. (I no longer have the link to this interview, but they themselves have already responded to this.)

Getting back to the point:

I have some images below that show certain periods in more detail. This completes the images above, with greater detail.

• Empires/Dynasties that once reigned over Persia, names are in the photos below:

Persians 747-1095 (8th to 11th century)

Persians 1193-1600 (12th to 16th century)

Persians 8th to 13th centuries (Islamic Golden Age + Invasion Mongol)

Persians 13th to +16th centuries (Fragmentation Period + Timurid Period + Safavid Period)

[Kameho3743]

@MadMax8915

I believe that AoEIV is portraying the initial age as being the 8th century or perhaps at most the 7th century onwards, which is why I do not mention older empires. In my case, I’m disregarding the 7th century, because it would be too early a period to focus on an entire empire there. And until now there has never been a portrait of an empire focused on the 7th century and previous centuries, because it wouldn’t make sense, because there would be a lack of technology in the last two ages, how would a gameplay of this work?

I believe in a interview the dev mentioned the timepsan era was from the 8th-century to the mid 17th century.
712-1654 to be more specific.

So anything to much before or after that would be off the tables.
Basicly the era in focus is mainy the High middle ages to Renaissance, what most people would associate the medival age.

[grizzgolf]

Still a lot of good civs from the Middle Ages I hope they add

[MadMax8915]

Very good, someone else remembered. I’m not out of memory yet. hahahaha

I just remember that the developers mentioned that it would start in a more modern period and end a little further away.

Now that you mention the years, it gets even better. Rotating between the 8th and 17th centuries.

[DarthVader1808]

@MadMax8915

I have some images below that show certain periods in more detail. This completes the images above, with greater detail.

I want to see byzantines,Habsburg Empire,Jerusalem(Baldwin),Portuguese,Mamluks,Knights hospitalar,Safavids,Great Seljuk Empire and venetians

[RatcicleFan]

@ISlyvanas

byzantines

Already confirmed for The Sultans Ascend.

[DarthVader1808]

im not sure to buy it.I dont support jeanne d arc as a variant civ.

[GorbMort]

Kinda separate to you wanting to see a civ that is coming to the game. The Byzantines are coming in this expansion, regardless of how much you don’t like other aspects of the expansion content.

[RatcicleFan]

You can simply not use them. If Jeanne D’Arc isn’t used often devs will probably understand people don’t want anything like them.

[DarthVader1808]

@GorbMort

Kinda separate to you wanting to see a civ that is coming to the game. The Byzantines are coming in this expansion, regardless of how much you don’t like other aspects of the expansion content.

If I buy.This will encourage them for more content like jeanne D Arc

[DarthVader1808]

i have still hope.They must delete jeanne

[GorbMort]

@ISlyvanas

If I buy.This will encourage them for more content like jeanne D Arc

Oh, I’m not saying you should buy it. If you don’t want to, don’t.

I’m just saying: the Byzantines are still coming in this expansion. That’s not going to change.

[DarthVader1808]

Yeah they seems beatiful and japan too very good indeed.But as i said.Maybe my decision doesnt change anything at all.But i am actually hated the idea of bringing persons to civ game.She have been a unit like khan no problem.But bringing she as a civilization insult to other civs

[MatM1996]

@MadMax8915

Persia is basically a big “battle royale”, with no permanent dominator. There have always been changes and some of them were quite impactful.

The Persians, it’s difficult to treat them as something simple… since there were many changes in power and a lot of diversity.

*Suggestion: Perhaps to create a Persian civilization, you would need to create one that could choose different empires/dynasties when it evolves, when choosing its landmark… so each landmark would represent some period and would bring with it new units and upgrades. Remembering, if an Empire/Dynasty is missing, it would be enough to create it as a variant in some DLC in the future.
NOTE: The colleague “MatM1996” has already made this suggestion. It really would be the easiest way to resolve it. I just add the option to vary the choice of dynasty/empire according to the chosen landmark.

I believe that AoEIV is portraying the initial age as being the 8th century or perhaps at most the 7th century onwards, which is why I do not mention older empires. In my case, I’m disregarding the 7th century, because it would be too early a period to focus on an entire empire there. And until now there has never been a portrait of an empire focused on the 7th century and previous centuries, because it wouldn’t make sense, because there would be a lack of technology in the last two ages, how would a gameplay of this work?
There would probably be a need to merge with another dynasty/empire to provide more balance.
Or perhaps if you are going to focus on an ancient Empire/Dynasty (7th century and earlier), it would be better to make a civilization variant. Since there would be no gunpowder units and there would be more different gameplay.
→ Why do I say this?
The answer: - The developers themselves mentioned that AoE4 would be more modern if compared to AoE2, so we would start at an older age and go a little further. (I no longer have the link to this interview, but they themselves have already responded to this.)

@Kameho3743

I believe in a interview the dev mentioned the timepsan era was from the 8th-century to the mid 17th century.
712-1654 to be more specific.

So anything to much before or after that would be off the tables.
Basicly the era in focus is mainy the High middle ages to Renaissance, what most people would associate the medival age.

@MadMax8915

I just remember that the developers mentioned that it would start in a more modern period and end a little further away.

Now that you mention the years, it gets even better. Rotating between the 8th and 17th centuries.

Of course, of course, it’s quite a topic, but it could be as you say…

@ISlyvanas

Yeah they seems beatiful and japan too very good indeed.But as i said.Maybe my decision doesnt change anything at all.But i am actually hated the idea of bringing persons to civ game.She have been a unit like khan no problem.But bringing she as a civilization insult to other civs

Yes, don’t worry, lastly, it’s more secondary content… the main civs are Byzantines and Japanese plus the Abbasid campaign of the Crusades… the rest is trash or not to fill out the expansion…

[BitStuffer]

There’s this topic about a Persian civ.

The Persians civ concept (Second version)

In the wake of the announcement of The Sultans Ascends DLC, I thought what I can be doing is bring the second version of my Persians civ concept from Reddit into the Discussion with the Age of Empires Forum with one difference I made here. So here it is: The Persians are a civilization, representing the namesake civilization within modern-day Iran. In the late antiquity to the early middle ages, the Sasanian Empire ruled over Persia and other areas influenced by the Persians. However, after the…

Although they lack a continuous kingdom in the Middle Ages, I thought that the Persians could be represented similarly to the Chinese. Instead of dynasties (which admittedly weren’t all original Chinese) you’d get different periods, be they Persian rulers or foreign overlords. The in-game system for this could be whatever, I’m not saying copy-paste the dynasty system of the Chinese. I’d be against that, actually.