Key Missing AOE1 Civs

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Some key civs might be needed in the game. Some of these are inspired by Rome Total War.

Celts. (they can be renamed to Britons, if a British Isles scenario. In France, Gauls.) Basically fast moving infantry, but lacking the final armor upgrade. Decent archers and chariots. Infantry have a cheaper cost. Lower infantry cost since it fits their barbarian horde theme.

Germans. High HP infantry that lack armor. Specialize in armor piercing axe weapons. Fearsome ambush infantry. Berserkers, glass cannon infantry, high damage, but low HP and armor.

The Huns and the Vandals. I should not have to go into detail about this one.

The Franks. Barbarian version of them. Great axe thrower infantry and cavalry.

Iberians. Both Carthage and Rome faced them in Spain.

5 Likes
2

I think that since Lac Viet civ have been added, they should add other South Asian civs as well, such as:

  1. Funan (ancient south of the Southeast Asia)
  2. Mauryans (ancient India)
  3. Pagan (ancient west of the Southeast Asia)

That way we’d get 4 brand new South Asian civs - which could mean adding a brand new Architecture Set.

3 Likes
3

Central Asia and India is missing as well.

Mauryans, Scythians, Xiongnu.

1 Like
4

Magna Germania DLC

  1. Celts
  2. Goths
  3. Germanians
  4. Nords

I think such a DLC would be a sales hit.

5

Nomadic Raiders DLC

  1. Huns
  2. Scythians
  3. Slavs
  4. Xiongnu
1 Like
6

do we really need to start complaining before the game is even out?

7

“You ok Hun?” DLC :stuck_out_tongue:

2 Likes
8

I think AoE2 is muvj better to represent the dark ages honestly

9

i dont think any of these civs need adding. the Romans are at the very end of the timeline for aoe1. most of those civs are bronze age civilizations iirc, so usually several centuries BC

2 Likes
10

This is for AoE1 civs.

11

Everyone is talking about it, including him, and his point is that they do not fit the game. Which is more than a reasonable thing to point out.
AoE1 is called AoE1 because it’s not AoE2. There is not a single civ that is ‘missing’. As usual, it’s all wishful thinking. Words have meaning and should be used properly.
Bringing the ancient era to the table doesn’t mean it needs to be expanded in a way that includes everything before the beginning of the medieval age.
Most of the things mentioned here are in AoE2 already in one shape or form.

2 Likes
12

Given the timeline of AOE1 (stop around AD 300) for the proposed civs :

  • Celts : yes. Either keep them a single civ, or split them between Gauls (armour + cavalry), Britons (chariots), Dacians (damage-dealing infantry)
 the Gauls also had a decent cavalry, not heavy though, and had stopped using chariots by the time of the Gallic War (chariots were very impractical, mounted cavalry replaced them for everyone who had access to strong enough horses). They also had very good chainmail and had mastered iron before the Romans did, so they definitely should have good armour. Britons are famous for using chariots but it’s mainly because they were behind the technologic curve. As for the Dacians, they used 2-handed war scythes that terrified the Romans, making them use some armour extensions to protect their arms.

  • Germans : yes. Like the Gauls, they had a decent light cavalry, used as auxiliae by Caesar.

  • Huns : by the time they appear on the radar, we’re already in AOE2 territory. May I suggest the Scythians instead for a horse archer civ ?

  • Vandals : toss them in the Germans. By the time they become significant, we’re in AOE2 territory, where the Goths are a good placeholder civ.

  • Franks : toss them in the Germans. Their confederation wasn’t formed yet by the time of the Principate so they’d only “appear” at the very tail end of AOE1

  • Iberians : I’m not sure about them. I knew some Celts were in Iberia but I don’t know how much of the peninsula they controlled.

4 Likes
13

Why Slavs ? The large majority of Slavs weren’t nomadic.

14

They also were not “on the radar” yet

15

I didn’t say slavs. What are you talking about?

16

Or just copy the civs already existing in Romae ad Bellum mod?

Personally, I would have prefered if they would have imported Romae ad Bellum as an official standalone expansion to Age of Empire 2 than to make this Aoe1 into Aoe2 port.

17

Reasons why it can’t be ported =>

  • There are many bonuses that have been reused from vanilla civs.
  • There are models that modders made on their own and do not visually blend with the vanilla unit models. Devs will have to make their own copies of the models and render the same.
  • The company cannot simply copy someone else’s work without giving a commission or share of profit. It would rather prefer to make its own idea.
  • There are still many important things missing from the mod like making a working AI, making original voice sets that the devs will have to work upon.
  • It is no joke to balance this many civs introduced at once especially if you are publishing something official.
1 Like
18

It is better to call the civ Magadhans instead. Maurya is a dynasty of Magadhans who had multiple other dynasties too.

1 Like
19

There’s a whole lot of civs you could add they’re just 17 compared to 43 so there’s a lot of really cool and interesting civs the could add later!

20

The work and detail is amazing, the legionary doesn’t just attack he does it like the actual legionaries fought so the detail these guys put on the mod is really amazing ! I’ve told them already but congrats again