Let’s talk to Cossack history

I agree with you, but I think any changes to the current Germans civ (which could become the Austrians civ) should only take place with the addition of the Prussians civ.

Adding more Royal Houses (not only of German origin) makes sense to increase the immersion and variety on European maps.

I hope not, because I personally think that this mechanic is already hammered out for postcolonial civs. German civs could simply receive a new unique 5th century mechanic during the split, which I will quote below:

It would be something like a revolution, but it wouldn’t be. It would provide:

  • completely new units (which would be based on units from these empires) to replace more archaic units
  • brand new HC cards (with unique content) - a potentially unique HC deck of cards
  • more interesting solutions

Maybe I think that the British islands with simply the British are already sufficiently represented, there they could put more cards representing the Scots and the Irish, even an Irish revolution like that of 1798 or 1916…

1 Like

Of course, or last a Tatar civ…

1 Like

Anything is possible…

Ever since I found out that Maltese civ will be added to AoE 3, I felt that Ukrainians civ deserve to be in this game as well.

Someone may say that they can be a revolution for Russia … In the current situation (and perhaps even forever) it would be even worse for the Ukrainians peoples.

Ukraine has a lot of content to offer, which neither the Russian civ nor the Polish civ could offer it at all - because Poland civ must represent both Poles, Lithuanians and Belarusians. At the same time, PLC fought against the Cossacks.

The British already had their update. I think adding the Tudor and Stuard Royal Houses would be good to deepen your immersion in British maps.

DLC doesn’t have to be limited to adding just two civs. There may be an East European DLC adding both Polish-Lithuanian civs as well as Ukrainians and Tatars civs. I once proposed some DLC here on the forum:

1 Like

Yes, I think that eventually they will arrive if it is not in the next Baltic dlc, in the next to that …

There are 9 royal houses compared to 5 African kingdoms. They are already overrepresented (and the majority are German). What they need to do is rework some of their units and techs to actually represent the royal houses they are recruited from.

2 Likes

But I’m not saying just add more Royal Houses. I’d love to see more African Kingdoms, Native American Settlements, and a whole new type of Minor civilization for Asian maps as Holy Sites has become intercontinental.

You just need new DLCs to get completely new maps and Minor civilizations.

because it is an open conflict, where everything could happen?
Lets say the DLC gets released and next day ukrainian war atrocities are uncovered - ufff.
Lets say its released and some journalist starts a shitstorm: “microsoft uses game to profit from
human tragedy” - ufff.
Also keep in mind: its a small game, it will not make much revenue, and devs are risking a lot with such a DLC. Worse for them: it will be banned in china, russia and some other countries.
Dont make AOE3 a political game, because then we need to talk about a lot of uncomfortable topics.

Ivan was added 2005, alongside a lot of bad aged stereotypes in almost every civ. True, he is an ambivalent figure and i wouldnt recommend adding him into the game (would use Peter the Great instead)… but we have 2022 and we dont need to repeat the same mistakes … thats what i implied with “2006 Lakota vibes”
The problem with ukrainian history (as a base for a civ) is, that its still a “work in progress”; the scientific debates atm are much more intense than in other european countries; since they had less time to figure it out and its a matter of identity.

3 Likes

age3 won’t get involved in this kind of boring stuff, please don’t bring your political correctness into the game to ruin the game

3 Likes

They do not necessarily have to be royal houses per se, but cards that symbolize those dynasties when they pass age:

  1. Exploration Age:Tudor Dynasty (1485-1603) (Elizabethan and Shakesperan era)

  2. Commerce Age:Stuart Dynasty (1603-1714) (English Civil War and Cromwell improvements)

  3. Fortresses Age:Hanover Dynasty (1714-1801) (Seven Years’ War and American War of Independence)

  4. Industrial Age: Pax Britannica (1801-1914) (Napoleonic Wars and Victorian Era)…

2 Likes

Of course, I would not have said it better…

Of course, I would not have said it better…

Yes I thinking is Cossacks need for Developers should always add the revolution of Russia and Poland. To solve the problem, they can always add Cossacks and (only Russian civilization and potential Polish civilization revolution) But I have more new content to discuss the history of Cossacks
图片


Once the talking about The Zaporozhian Cossacks’s story lived on the Pontic–Caspian steppe below the Dnieper Rapids (Ukrainian: za porohamy), also known as the Wild Fields. The group became well known, and its numbers increased greatly between the 15th and 17th centuries. The Zaporozhian Cossacks played an important role in European geopolitics, participating in a series of conflicts and alliances with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire.

The Zaporozhians gained a reputation for their raids against the Ottoman Empire and its vassals, although they also sometimes plundered other neighbors. Their actions increased tension along the southern border of the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. Low-level warfare took place in those territories for most of the period of the Commonwealth (1569–1795).

Prior to the formation of the Zaporizhian Sich, Cossacks had usually been organized by Ruthenianboyars, or princes of the nobility, especially various Lithuanian starostas. Merchants, peasants, and runaways from the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth, Muscovy, and Moldavia also joined the Cossacks.

The first recorded Zaporizhian Host prototype was formed by the starosta of Cherkasy and Kaniv, Dmytro Vyshnevetsky, who built a fortress on the island of Little Khortytsia on the banks of the Lower Dnieper in 1552.[34] The Zaporizhian Host adopted a lifestyle that combined the ancient Cossack order and habits with those of the Knights Hospitaller.

The Cossack structure arose, in part, in response to the struggle against Tatar raids. Socio-economic developments in the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were another important factor in the growth of the Ukrainian Cossacks. During the 16th century, serfdom was imposed because of the favorable conditions for grain sales in Western Europe. This subsequently decreased the locals’ land allotments and freedom of movement. In addition, the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth government attempted to impose Catholicism, and to Polonize the local Ukrainian population. The basic form of resistance and opposition by the locals and burghers was flight and settlement in the sparsely populated steppe.[35]

But the nobility obtained legal ownership of vast expanses of land on the Dnipro from the Polish kings, and then attempted to impose feudal dependency on the local population. Landowners utilized the locals in war, by raising the Cossack registry in times of hostility, and then radically decreasing it and forcing the Cossacks back into serfdom in times of peace.[36] This institutionalized method of control bred discontent among the Cossacks. By the end of the 16th century, they began to revolt, in the uprisings of Kryshtof Kosynsky (1591–1593), Severyn Nalyvaiko (1594–1596), Hryhorii Loboda (1596), Marko Zhmailo (1625), Taras Fedorovych(1630), Ivan Sulyma (1635), Pavlo Pavliuk and Dmytro Hunia (1637), and Yakiv Ostrianyn and Karpo Skydan (1638). All were brutally suppressed and ended by the Polish government.

Foreign and external pressure on the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth led to the government making concessions to the Zaporizhian Cossacks. King Stephen Báthorygranted them certain rights and freedoms in 1578, and they gradually began to create their foreign policy. They did so independently of the government, and often against its interests, as for example with their role in Moldavian affairs, and with the signing of a treaty with Emperor Rudolf II in the 1590s.[35]

The Zaporizhian Cossacks became particularly strong in the first quarter of the 17th century under the leadership of hetman Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny, who launched successful campaigns against the Tatars and Turks. Tsar Boris Godunov had incurred the hatred of Ukrainian Cossacks by ordering the Don Cossacks to drive away from the Don all the Ukrainian Cossacks fleeing the failed uprisings of the 1590s. This contributed to the Ukrainian Cossacks’ willingness to fight against him.[37] In 1604, 2000 Zaporizhian Cossacks fought on the side of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, and their proposal for the Tsar (Dmitri I), against the Muscovite army.[38] By September 1604, Dmitri I had gathered a force of 2500 men, of whom 1400 were Cossacks. Two thirds of these “cossacks”, however, were in fact Ukrainian civilians, only 500 being professional Ukrainian Cossacks.[39]On July 4, 1610, 4000 Ukrainian Cossacks fought in the Battle of Klushino, on the side of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. They helped to defeat a combined Muscovite-Swedish army and facilitate the occupation of Moscow from 1610 to 1611, riding into Moscow with Stanisław Żółkiewski.[40]

The final attempt by King Sigismundand Wladyslav to seize the throne of Muscovy was launched on April 6, 1617. Although Wladyslav was the nominal leader, it was Jan Karol Chodkiewicz who commanded the Commonwealth forces. By October, the towns of Dorogobuzh and Vyazmahad surrendered. But a defeat, when the counterattack on Moscow by Chodkiewicz failed between Vyasma and Mozhaysk, prompted the Polish-Lithuanian army to retreat. In 1618, Petro Konashevych-Sahaidachny continued his campaign against the Tsardom of Russia on behalf of the Cossacks and the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth. Numerous Russian towns were sacked, including Livnyand Yelets. In September 1618, with Chodkiewicz, Konashevych-Sahaidachny laid siege to Moscow, but peace was secured.so this is Cossacks and Polish-Lithuanian’s story[41][42][43

1 Like

Yes, we had enough with the Amerindian rework and its tribal markets, and the redoing of the entire Lakota campaign of Chayton with the minimum participation of the Lakotas…

1 Like

Sure, the Zaporozhian Cossacks can be a revolution or a card from the Poles in 2nd age…

Yes the Zaporozhian Cossacks flags to be Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth and Russians’s age 2 card to There are more changes

Of course, exactly… but it has to be yes or yes in 2nd age since it was where they were most relevant (1648-1696)