Lotharingia as a new civ for AoE2

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

As a local i wish Lotharingia could be a new civ for AoE2. And i have some unique ideas for them.
The focus is the “whole of The Netherlands” thus Luxembourg, Northern France, Belgium, Netherlands and Western Germany to be represented by this civ.

  1. Guildsystem
    The society consisted of the nobility, clercy, and peasants. But within the peasants there was another diversion. The “horigen” who live in the countryside and mostly were serfs/slaves for the landowner who put them to farming, hunting, woodcutting. Other peasants lived in the city, if you did or if you moved there in many cities you were required to join a guild. Then you were required to join a guild of your craft or to learn a craft and join the associated guild. In several ‘bigger’ cities these guilded citizen were required to defend the city and thus learned to fight.
    The idea is to have a secondary villager called Guilded Citizen, who has the ability to swap to a fighting form like with a spear or a crossbow. Depending on the techs you did. And it benefits from blacksmith upgrades.
    Then the primary villager would be weaker. But has the ability to be upgraded to a Guilded Citizen for a price.
    The option to turn a Guilded Citizen into a spearman or crossbowman version should be locked behind a small amount of gold to grant access for that unit. As training and gear. And make the Guilded Citizen gather a little bit faster and especially build faster.

  2. The clercy
    Most of these areas were forced under christendom after the Romans came. Cities were founded by the Clercy or taken over by the Clercy. For example Utrecht and Liege. These cities became powerhouses in the region and respectfully for their own region were the conquering powers christianising the local tribes, towns and cities that were still pagan. This all happened before and during the Carolingian time. Mostly giving them a Frankish basis. Thats why Franconian would also be a good name involving western germany in this civ too.
    Thus this civ would be perfect to add a monastry in the second age and allow a monk to be trained that can only heal. And from the castle age on can pick up relics.
    Then add the Archbishop as a trainable hero monk that is stronger than the regular monk and has a military aura. Because these Archbishops were actually the rulers of their Prince-Bishopry, instead of having nobility.
    Some cities were granted City rights by a foreign power like the Holy Roman Empire, Denmark (Kampen), Burgundy (Bolsward),

  3. Waterships
    Our first actual form of governement were the Waterships. They were granted rights by the local nobility or clercy. They were focused on safety from water problems. This was done by taxing the locals. Then when the land was controlled and there was no flooding, many worked the land to sell peat. Also land was divided into parts throug surveying to determain owners. Thus i would say this civ can build the watergate and walls, to lock a river ingame. Then they should be able to build a Watershiphouse next to it, and if it’s in proximity of a gate it will generate gold. And in the imperial age it should get the option to generate stone, to make you able to choose between gold and stone. You’re limited to one Watershiphouse. And the Watershiphouse has a proximity where you can lay farms that are cheaper to build or free to build.

Summary:

  • Primary villager: Horige (weaker villager)
  • Secondary villager available in feudal age: Guilded Citizen (stronger villager and has the option to change into a spearman/pikeman or an archer/crossbowman and return back to a Guilded Citizen).
  • Monastry available in feudal age and can train a monk that can only heal and not pickup relics yet. In the Castle age the monk can pick up relics.
  • Archbishop becomes available in the castle age. A stronger monk with an aura for military units.
  • The guilded citizen is also able to build: seawall, seagate and watershiphouse.
  • The watershiphouse (limit of 1) can be build next to a seagate and then generates gold. And it has a proximity of cheaper or free farms being build around it. In imperial age the Watershiphouse also gets the option to generate stone (you pick gold or stone).

Other civ bonuses would be:

  • An upgrade from Foritified wall to City wall. (or make it an imperial age unique tech)
  • Fortification upgrades in the university and castle are cheaper (or make it a castle age unique tech)
  • Bloodlines is cheaper.
  • Spearman- and Swordsmanline have +1 armor in castle age and imperial age (+2 in total)

Unique unit: a Ruiter (rider/knight), a medium cavalry unit that can cross (5 tiles max) of water (if this is even possible, or allow it to walk in the light water).
It should be a little stronger than a light cavalry in hitpoints and attack and has a little bit more melee armor. Like 80 hp, 8 attack, 1 melee armor, 2 pierce armor, line of sight 5 (more than a light cav). This also makes it a little stronger than a hussar, making it more a medium cavalry unit.

Their roster would be same as Teutons but with the following differences:
They get arbalester, but no paladin.
And a ‘crossbow horseman’ should be added as a new unit for many civs.
No supplies.
They do get Husbandry.
They get no siege onager, no heavy scorpion.
They do get Bracer.
They get Shipwright and Drydocks. Still no elite cannon galleon.
They do get architecture and treadmill crane.
They lack Goldshaftmining and Stoneshaftmining.

This would make them a civ that is not an early fast civ. But from feudal age on you will have access to the Guilded Citizen and monk. That will make it a very defensive civilization.
In the castle age you can enforce control over rivers or water areas. Then raid with your unique cavalry which is backed up by a fine foot army or an army of guilded citizens.

An additional sweet option would be giving the player the dividing option of: or be a Prince-Bishopry and gain acces to the Archbishop or choose to gain City Rights and become a democratic citystate that allows Guilded citizens. To make it more unique. This would then be a Feudal age option, and the Prince-Bishopry would get the monastry in feudal age with healing monks.

Lotharingia in 959

Lotharingen
Lotharingen800×1064 159 KB

The Benelux in 1350

Nederlanden_Middeleeuwen_13501
Nederlanden_Middeleeuwen_13501660×845 87.1 KB

The Benelux in 1465 and the influence of the house of Burgundy

Karte_Haus_Burgund_4_EN
Karte_Haus_Burgund_4_EN1200×1690 248 KB

As you can see in this map the civ Burgundy in the medieval times is inbetween Swiss, Luxembourg and France.

The historical area in question in the Burgundy campaign:

aoe2 campaign burgundy scenario lowcountries
aoe2 campaign burgundy scenario lowcountries800×1025 233 KB

I’ve actually made a scenario about this some time ago: Multiplayer Scenario: Lower Lotharingia

1 Like
2

So, basically the same region as Burgundy

3 Likes
3

Isnt that the area between modern france and germany?

4

Yeah thats what Im pointing out, this is adding another civilization for a region that doesnt need it

Like, if the Burgundian civ was focused more in Arles I may be able to understand proposing Lotharingia but now it seems completely pointless

1 Like
5

No Burgundy is east france and southwest germany…
You are probably confused with the house of Burgundy in later times. Which is AoE3.

6

We already have overlap civis ingame so having more is not a huge issue.

How do you propose a villager building buildings one tile away from the shore line?you cant have a villager walk on water to build something,if this is the case your villagers can walk over water and build anything.

Just give them normal villagers no point in making the early game weak.

Pretty sure this is broken as you only need to invest 50 food to have an army which can gather and fight.

Kinda useless if its only a healer.

Not useful for a map without water.

Monks are slow would it really be useful to have them mixed to get a bonus?

7

As we see in the Burgundians campaign, they had territory in the Low Countries in the AOE2 timeframe as well, and some of the Burgundian civ design is based on low country influences (their wonder, and the Flemish Revolution tech for example). I believe the devs crafted the Burgundians civ to serve as the representative for the Low Countries as well as the French Burgundians, and therefore I don’t believe they will add a new civ for the Low Countries area

Whether designing the Burgundians in such a way as to fill the Low Countries slot was a good choice or not is certainly up for debate, but it’s the direction the devs have gone.

3 Likes
8

The Burgundian crown during the late AoE2 timeline held direct or indirect control over most of the territories of Lotharingia

Is not a huge issue but we already have one fairly shortlasting poorly ethnically defined nation from the region, we dont need another one

2 Likes
9

I have a hunch Burgundians was chosen largely for campaigns; they can represent the barbarian Burgundians of the fall of Rome (only loosely since a lot of their design is based on the later middle ages, but its something), they can be used in the Joan of Arc campaign to diversify enemies a bit more, and can be used to represent the Low Countries as needed.

Tbh that’s kinda the only way that they make any sense at all to include them. Honestly I think this was the thought process with the Sicilians as well (using them as “Normans” in a few instances) but its worse with the Burgundians; at least the Sicilians stand on their own some, the Burgundians really don’t at any point in their history.

2 Likes
10

It’s actually OP in the early game. You can heal your soldiers in battle while your enemy doesn’t even have access to monks yet. And heal your damaged villagers.

11

Doesn’t mean its historically accurate.
The Campaign shows a civil war withing the counties of Holland, Zeeland and Flanders. It’s only the coastel regions. Even in todays society they are arrogant and imposing themselves on our history, because later on they became the colonial powers and the ‘ancient’ capitals became less known. While we had our own religious vatican-like capitals.

Meanwhile our ancient capitals are ignored. That’s why i prefer a new civ.
The counties stated above were under burgundian french influence.
Everything to the east of that, from Friesland in Denmark and Netherlands to the south in Luxembourg and the West of Germany which make the Franconia. They are all with the HRE.
In the early medieval times there was a divide of influence between France and HRE. But also a cultural divide in a similar sence.

What i miss is the representation of the Bishopric Princedoms Utrecht and Liege for example, who were the basic of the Charlemagne empire in the Netherlands. They were the capitals that ruled the region. And spread religion, culture, universities. But they also conquered the whole area and christianised them. They also granted the Frisian freestates their rights in this time.
There was also Zutphen, Luxembourg, Loraine, Cleve and Munster.

Later on around 1300 formed the other counties like Holland, Brabant, Flanders, Gelre, Hainout, Arlois, Zeeland. Who became independent from the major factions through the rulers forming their royal alliances etc.

And in 1400 into 1500 the Burgundians rose to power in the courts of these late counties. And then several counties had independence wars against the house of Burgundy. This is what caused the conquest of Spain of the Netherlands and became the Eighty Years War. But there we evolve into AoE3 timeframe with 1500 into 1600. And there Burgundy is all relevant again.

So the cool thing about the history that i’m missing in AoE2 is the enterprising of the religious citystates Utrecht and Liege that were all powerful. And the HRE dethroned some archbishops and granted them and other cities; cityrights and democracy. And granted more and more cities the cityrights. Which created a culture difference and made our culture evolve from a religious despotism into a democratic society where citizens are fully emerged. The cityrights gave them selfgovernance, the right to fortification and trade. etc.

1 Like
12

What about Frisians (as for medieval Dutch)? Would it be the same thing as this more or less or not at all? Lotharingia seems more inland like Luxembourg etc rather than Holland.

13

I like this name more than lotharingians or dutch.But duch seems like a more umbrella term to cover lot of things.

1 Like
14

What do you think the Flemish Militia represents?

I think Frisians cooould maybe be an option, but honestly I could name like 50 civs I would add before them, some of them even European

1 Like
15

i’ve added maps in the top post.

The Frisians were first conquered by Utrecht and were given cityrights but the story isn’t known and papers were lost but it was early. And in 1300 they became free states, and in 1500 they were granted cityrights again by the lord of Saxony.
Since back then they had ties with the germanic and danish frisians, and since those medieval times until today still they have their own frisian court. Today this court is recognised by the European Union as one of the few eurpean ethnic minorities just like the Sami in Scandinavia for example.

16

I think they are out of place.

Yea i also want more american and african civs. But right now i’m not talking about those in this thread.

17

Frisians instead of Dutch could work similar to Franks instead of French. Dutch was a thing only at the very very end of aoe2, towards 1580 and didn’t begin to shine properly after 1600.
With Frisians I guess you could cover a bit of everything in the Netherlands, from the dark ages on.
Lotharingians seem very specific and maybe could be a subsequent split but I’m not an expert on anything here to be honest.
Maybe Hollanders or Flemish would be a better name? Idk.

You mean Frisians are not the same people as Dutch? I remember that some historians question even the ancient Frisii and the medieval Frisians being the same people since it seems that Frisii were the pre Roman Celtic tribe there, a bit like Gauls, while Frisians seemingly were a Germanic tribe replacing the barely romanised population around Ad Trajectum after natural disasters (probably floods) occuring there in late antiquity around the 3rd to 5th century AD.

18

you replied to the answer to your question… they even have their own language it’s an official language.
in the west/center of the northern netherlands there used to be batavians, they’re the tribe that populated the center.
in belgium you had the nervii.
i dont know if the frisians are celtic or germanic. im not even going to cover that topic, let’s just say their overlords were probably indo-european and if not they became indo-european through christening them just like the whole of europe.

19

my whole post is a point against that, we have our own culture and identity and it started way earlier. we were taken over by neighbours many times. yet i live in a city that started as a celtic town, then became a roman stronghold, then it became the vatican of the northern netherlands. there is so much more than just Oh this is burgundian, oh this is french, oh this is HRE. ah no this country only erupted out of nowhere in 1580.
No, we literally had wars with the HRE who were represented by Gelre, the south had wars with France. And we had wars with Burgundy represented by Holland.
The vaticanic citystates fought foreign powers that were investing in neighbours that revolted and became their own counties. It was all powerplay from the French, Burgundy and HRE.