# Make India interesting again **URL:** \ **Category:** III - Discussion\ **Created:** [November 9, 2023, 8:01am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966 "2023-11-09T08:01:27Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/m1kazuki6861/32/213717_2.png) [@M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/M1kazuki6861)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:19am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/22 "2023-11-14T07:19:31Z")
Yes of course, however I meant it as how India can be approached. But that all isn’t that important, instead the focus should first be on the low hanging fruits → the unused cards. Changing all the useless cards + the explorer and church thing would already go a long way making India more attractive/authentic. ---
**Author:** ![UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/upmostrook9474/32/47514_2.png) [@UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/UpmostRook9474)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:20am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/23 "2023-11-14T07:20:40Z")
So should we splt Russians before Indians? Obviously there are also many ethnic groups, and the land area is the largest in the world. ---
**Author:** ![M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/m1kazuki6861/32/213717_2.png) [@M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/M1kazuki6861)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:21am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/24 "2023-11-14T07:21:52Z")
Nah nobody cares about Russia same with China 😂 ---
**Author:** ![RatcicleFan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/ratciclefan/32/115119_2.png) [@RatcicleFan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/RatcicleFan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:26am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/25 "2023-11-14T07:26:38Z")
Boo (20 characters) Jokes aside, i’d be fine if India was split into only 2 full civs and other ethnic groups were represented by minor civs. Asia has a severe lack of minor civs and most of the ones they do have are basically China/Japan/India Lite. And by minor civs I mean non-religious minor civs. As I said before I think the religious theme of TAD is really dumb. And these minor civs wouldn’t have to be restricted to Indian ethnic groups. ---
**Author:** ![Catalytic3351](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/catalytic3351/32/29258_2.png) [@Catalytic3351](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Catalytic3351)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:36am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/26 "2023-11-14T07:36:11Z")
> [@RatcicleFan](#): > > And I don’t like the idea of basically making a civ good at everything so people can just roleplay what they prefer, especially when people are currently complaining about content bloat in other civs (why is it okay if India does it but wrong if anyone else does?). I’d definitely do it in such a way that there would be too many options to simply select them all in a treaty deck. I’d force the player to make choices by simply using opportunity cost. Some things would synergize well. Others just wouldn’t. With Dutch, you don’t always take their merc focus card, but you could. With Germans, you don’t always take Prinz Electors to fill in gaps in your roster or the Prinz Chevalegeurs card to switch to 2 pop dragoons. You opt in and it doesn’t always make sense to do it. That’s not “bloat.” It’s giving players strategic choices and forcing trade-offs. I think those are good design ideas. India in particular could split along a Hindu/Muslim line pretty aggressively. It’s very hard to ignore the religious strife between these two religions that has played out for 1300+ years including still today. I alluded to a Mughal focus and a Vijayanagara focus and there’s certainly enough there to flesh that out in a rework. You could set it up a bit like how Italy has a “Roman” option for its infantry (using halbs/pavisiers) and a partisan option using the bersagliere and musks, or how Spain gives you the option to go archaic infantry early game or a lancer/cav focus late game with its cards. This is the kind of thing I’m talking about, where players have enough viable and useful choices that they have to actually build their decks around a strategy. Not all civs force that, but it is good design, IMO. It helps prevent a static “meta” from forming. ---
**Author:** ![M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/m1kazuki6861/32/213717_2.png) [@M1kazuki6861](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/M1kazuki6861)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 7:37am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/27 "2023-11-14T07:37:03Z")
Yes you are right this religious theme is a little bit misplaced that’s why I’m all for the Asian hero and church change 😂 We don’t even have to change drastically how they perform. 1. Japan has two cartographers instead sohei archers 2. China has a caravan leader and caravan soldiers (still the master - disciple relationship, the Chinese hero will however be probably be weaker 3. India has 2 zamindars riding an elephant Basically the same, but without the religious touch, then we split the monastery into a saloon type and church type and voilà. ---
**Author:** ![UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/upmostrook9474/32/47514_2.png) [@UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/UpmostRook9474)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 9:32am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/28 "2023-11-14T09:32:13Z")
> [@RatcicleFan](#): > > Boo (20 characters) You only used basic information about the modern India, such as the number of ethnic groups and land area, as the reason for the Indian split. Then, let alone Germans, Chinese and Russians will also have to split. > [@RatcicleFan](#): > > Jokes aside, i’d be fine if India was split into only 2 full civs and other ethnic groups were represented by minor civs. I don’t support any split unless we have no other good options for new civilizations. This game is not AoE2. Give me the Persians, Omanis, Siamese, and Burmese first. Even Koreans and Vietnamese are better than splitting up existing civilizations. Moreover, there are still potential civilizations in Europe, America, and Africa that are worth introducing. > [@RatcicleFan](#): > > Asia has a severe lack of minor civs and most of the ones they do have are basically China/Japan/India Lite. > > And by minor civs I mean non-religious minor civs. As I said before I think the religious theme of TAD is really dumb. Minor civilizations featured religion are not dumb. If we use ethnicity as the criterion, as in other regions, Asia will have an extremely large number of minor civilizations. I know that the original developers had a stereotyped fascination with Asian religions, but I have to admit that using religion as a theme for minor civilizations can effectively cover more, because a religious sect can be followed by multiple ethnic groups. Don’t get me wrong, I am still tolerant and welcoming of non-religious Asian minor civilizations such as the Ainu people, Formosan people, and native Siberian people (such like the Yakuts), because they are difficult to be covered with religion anyway. On the other hand, I still welcome new religious-themed mini-civilizations, such as new Islamic minor civs (to split Sufi), Taoism, Shintoism, Tantric Buddhism (Tibetan Buddhism), Theravada Buddhism, and Shamanism in Southeast Asia and Southwest China. > [@M1kazuki6861](#): > > India has 2 zamindars riding an elephant Although “Zamindar” was the name I had suggested, the developers later renamed a card Zamindar, so I’ve later suggested “Raja” instead. In addition, after introducing regular, common monks as healer units, a powerful elephant-mounted hero who uses firearms should not need 2. Originally there were 2 starting heroes, I think because they needed more than one to heal fast enough. Having said that, the Japanese still need 2 starting heroes because they have to build Shrines. ---
**Author:** ![MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/mutylator5553/32/115284_2.png) [@MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/MUTYLATOR5553)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 1:19pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/30 "2023-11-14T13:19:47Z")
I am of the opinion that both Indians civ and Germans civ should be divided into several civs: 1. Indians civ: Mughals (current Indians civ with great rework), Bengalis and Dravidians (working name) civs + potentially Punjabi civ 2. Germans civ: Austrians (current Germans civ with little rework) and Prussians (Prussians would have an Age Up mechanic like the US to represent German Unification) civs However, Italians civ should only receive the new Age Up mechanics similar to the USA civ. ---
**Author:** ![M00Z1LLA](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/m00z1lla/32/104042_2.png) [@M00Z1LLA](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/M00Z1LLA)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 5:09pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/31 "2023-11-14T17:09:58Z")
> [@MUTYLATOR5553](#): > > Indians civ: Mughals (current Indians civ with great rework), Bengalis and Dravidians (working name) civs + potentially Punjabi civ I don’t think Bengalis or Dravidians are a particularly good fit for this time period. Bengal was the first major conquest of Britain and only had a brief period of autonomy from the Mughals before that. Vijayanagara would be the the most significant Dravidian polity, but it was in terminal decline by 1565. After that Mysore emerged as the strongest regional power so I think they’d be a better fit. Marathas would be the other obvious Indian civ choice and could better represent non-Muslim Indians. The Sikh Empire could be a good option for a Punjabi civ, but I’d say that’s a bit lower priority. ---
**Author:** ![RatcicleFan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/ratciclefan/32/115119_2.png) [@RatcicleFan](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/RatcicleFan)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 5:14pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/32 "2023-11-14T17:14:51Z")
> [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > I know that the original developers had a stereotyped fascination with Asian religions, but I have to admit that using religion as a theme for minor civilizations can effectively cover more, because a religious sect can be followed by multiple ethnic groups. Then they’d have to rework the current holy sites as well, because they do a piss-poor job of covering more than one ethnic group. I’d make them more like royal houses in that they give more than one unit and some units speak a different language from the others in the same house. ---
**Author:** ![Ekdal1378](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/ekdal1378/32/34504_2.png) [@Ekdal1378](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Ekdal1378)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2023, 6:01pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/33 "2023-11-14T18:01:43Z")
You are going out topic. Focus on the civ we have, not in hypothetical splits that aren happening. ---
**Author:** ![PratUshh](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/pratushh/32/72339_2.png) [@PratUshh](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/PratUshh)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 5:18am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/34 "2023-11-15T05:18:15Z")
> [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > Moreover, there are still potential civilizations in Europe, OH GAWD NOOO NO MORE EURO CIVS plz. > [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > Minor civilizations featured religion are not dumb. If we use ethnicity as the criterion, as in other regions, Asia will have an extremely large number of minor civilizations. > > I know that the original developers had a stereotyped fascination with Asian religions, but I have to admit that using religion as a theme for minor civilizations can effectively cover more, This is a very exact explainationf of the reality, only . . . This following part is not applicable in Indias case… > [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > because a religious sect can be followed by multiple ethnic groups. U see Udasi are Punjabis and Sikh Sect, Bhakti are Hindu-sect anda Movement, Sufis as ############ sect. And a particular martial practice is associated with them. Very true : > [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > welcoming of non-religious Asian minor civilizations such as the Ainu people, Formosan people, and native Siberian people (such like the Yakuts), because they are difficult to be covered with religion anyway. On the other hand, I still welcome new religious-themed mini-civilizations, such as new Islamic minor civs (to split Sufi), Taoism, Shintoism, Tantric Buddhism (Tibetan Buddhism), Theravada Buddhism, and Shamanism in Southeast Asia and Southwest China. > [@UpmostRook9474](#): > > “Raja” instead. Well a King shouldn’t be an explorer. Also . . . The current monks dont heal in area neither heal fast enough. even though they have an age3 research in the temple. It still is not enough especially when it only Heals one unit at a time. I like the approach by @Catalytic3351 to add versatility by using card of a faction you want to go with. Just want to mention the current state of representation of these, and you can see its like creating a card and then giving it a Faction specific name for the sake of pretend inclusiveness : IN-GAME CARDS: - Zamindars, Mughal Architechture : (Mughals) Zamin = Land , Zamindar = The one who has land. -20% inf train time and replace vill of each card with 2 sepoys - Shivaji’s Tactics, Team Recruit Maratha : (Marathas) Shivaji Maharaj The great founder and tactician of Maratha empire who used Strategic advantage and un conventional method to beat Mughals / Ports (Naval) and Brits. - Dravidian Martial Arts, Team Kalari: (Southern India) Kalari = School for Kalariyapattu Martial Art, Urumi being the highest level of weapon among other teachings of Meditation/medicine yoga etc. - Generic Indian cards : Favourable Karm, Goraksha, East Indiamen, Spice Trade, Dukkha Suffering, Indian Gunpowder - Mysoorean Rockets : (Mysoore) The OG Rockets. - Europeons : Bombay Marines, Export, Euro Cannons, Foreign trading company WONDERS: Karni Mata (Rajput), Red Fort(Mughal), Charminar(Hyderabad), Taj Mahal(Mughal), Tower of Victory (Rajput) But none of the above mentioned things works well together, and neither contribute to a Specific Build order and gameplay. ---
**Author:** ![Catalytic3351](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/catalytic3351/32/29258_2.png) [@Catalytic3351](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Catalytic3351)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 7:55am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/36 "2023-11-15T07:55:23Z")
I keep thinking about this concept. I really don’t know enough history of India to make a historically-based argument, so my goal here is to do some brainstorming focusing on game play and see if others can help fill in what I cannot. I proposed 3 “focuses” reflecting the Mughals (Islam), the Vijayanagara as a broad, but inexact representation of southern India (Hindu), and the British Raj. In the game, India is going to have access to all its tools, but the player will choose cards to focus on the ones that work well for him. With some clever card design, we can hint at these historical connections, so long as the in-game strategies are coherent. I’m thinking of things like the Port Constables card that buffs select units, rather than all infantry or all cav, or cards like the Dutch Waardgelders or Buckriders which give them permanent access to mercs or certain outlaws. Ultimately, I’m going to want to think along the lines of early and late game, and the three basic unit types (infantry, cav, siege), and finally the consulate. If I think about the Mughals, a focus on the camels and “gunpowder empire” support comes to mind. I’d build around light, fast cav for raiding, with natural support from the Ottomans to bring in janissaries and bombards. They’d raid early and often, but when they show up in force with the heavy hitters, they can stand and fight. I like the idea of the arsonists (grenadiers) with rockets in this mix as well since it hints at the Ottoman humbaraci, but with an Indian version. Could gatling camels find a place here? If I think about my southern conglomerate, a focus on elephants and the unique Indian melee infantry has some historical precedent. Vijayanagara was a very wealthy empire, so a focus on high-cost, high-quality units makes sense. Early, they’ll use rajputs and later, we want urumis in the mix. I see the urumis a bit like the German dopples or the Aztec SKs: powerful, AoE attacking heavy infantry that clear out pikes so the elephants can wreck stuff. Elephants double down on this idea offering more tankiness and punch to the army. Flail elephants early and siege elephants later provide more than enough power to rapidly flatten walls or a city. Here, I wouldn’t mind seeing an option to use Thuggees (skirms) and Dacoits (musks) as high-pop, high-power ranged infantry as well. And the British Raj/British East India Co. style would have a strong consulate focus, bringing in redcoats, hussars, and falconets to back an army of sepoys and gurkhas. It’s an infantry-intensive army supported by falconets and rockets. Cavalry will be a relative weakness here that they can fill in either with regular camels or elephants. It’s not dissimilar from the USA civ’s relative weakness with cav. Here, we’d want some cards to help with export and maybe access to a second consulate to train from. As @PratUshh notes, most of this is already in the game. It’s there and not overpowered. But, could it be reshuffled a bit to make these concepts a bit more intuitive and a bit more clear? I don’t know. Again, it’s just an idea for trying to refresh the civ a bit. For me, I feel like I mostly do the same build every game with them, and that gets a little one-dimensional. ---
**Author:** ![UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/upmostrook9474/32/47514_2.png) [@UpmostRook9474](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/UpmostRook9474)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 8:22am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/37 "2023-11-15T08:22:39Z")
> [@RatcicleFan](#): > > Then they’d have to rework the current holy sites as well, because they do a piss-poor job of covering more than one ethnic group. This is another job. I would like to add maps of Japan, to make the Japan regions as detailed as they are in the campaign so that Zen only serves the Japan region. Similarly, Shaolin as a representative of Chinese Buddhism only exists in China proper. The reason why I mentioned more Islamic minor civs is because we should not only use Sufi to cover Islamic groups from West Africa to Southeast Asia. > [@PratUshh](#): > > OH GAWD NOOO NO MORE EURO CIVS plz. I mean, even Danes or Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth is better than Indian split to me. > [@PratUshh](#): > > U see Udasi are Punjabis and Sikh Sect, Bhakti are Hindu-sect anda Movement, Sufis as ############ sect. And a particular martial practice is associated with them. I don’t really know which ethnic groups within India follow which religions, but what I do know is that if you want more minor civs to reflect those things in India, you should first try to suggest more maps of India instead of having the subcontinent only with Ceylon, Punjab, Deccan and Bengal. > [@PratUshh](#): > > Well a King shouldn’t be an explorer. I don’t really care if it should be called “Raja”. You know my original intention was to name it a kind of lord, so I originally named it “Zamindar”. Maybe have the Zamindars card renamed to something else to make this term available again. I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/juggernaut8704/32/203886_2.png) [@Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Juggernaut8704)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 11:17am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/38 "2023-11-15T11:17:57Z")
How about adding Revolution Options to Indians? I mean they are probably meant to losely represent EIC India right now, sepoys, green jackets card and all. The revolution can be linked to be researched at the Wonders: Taj Mahal lets you revolt into Mughals Karni Mata lets you revolt into Rajputs Charminar lets you revolt into Mysore Tower of Victory lets you revolt into Marathas Agra Fort lets you revolt into British Raj Once you revolt at any of the wonders you reach age IV and all other wonders are locked. The effect of the particular wonder is slightly increased and you get new units and new homecity depending on what you revolted into. If you are reaching AgeV in generic way then the revolt option is no more available, you progressed to form Republic of India. ---
**Author:** ![Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/juggernaut8704/32/203886_2.png) [@Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Juggernaut8704)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 11:24am UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/39 "2023-11-15T11:24:12Z")
Vijayanagar will be boring without the Deccan Sultanates. They never really fought Mughals so it will be kinda dumb seeing them fighting. They will fit very well with their contemporary Delhi Sultanates in AoE4. For AoE3 Marathas are the best choice as a second Indian civ. ---
**Author:** ![MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/mutylator5553/32/115284_2.png) [@MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/MUTYLATOR5553)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 12:12pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/40 "2023-11-15T12:12:45Z")
> [@Juggernaut8704](#): > > How about adding Revolution Options to Indians? I mean they are probably meant to losely represent EIC India right now, sepoys, green jackets card and all. > > The revolution can be linked to be researched at the Wonders: > Taj Mahal lets you revolt into Mughals > Karni Mata lets you revolt into Rajputs > Charminar lets you revolt into Mysore > Tower of Victory lets you revolt into Marathas > Agra Fort lets you revolt into British Raj Revolution sounds strange. I think if you called it something else it could be quite bearable. On the other hand, it would be appropriate to do something similar for the Chinese and Japanese civs - for sustainable development. I suggest calling them not Revolutions, but Dynasties - as the DLC in which they were added to the game was called. I don’t know Indian dynasties, but for example the Chinese could choose from the Qing and Ming Dynasties, while the Japanese could choose from the Tokugawa and Meiji Dynasties. In the case of India, of course, the situation would not be identical to that of the Chinese and Japanese, who had relatively united states - for the Indians, dynasties would represent separate nations (groups of nations). ---
**Author:** ![MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/mutylator5553/32/115284_2.png) [@MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/MUTYLATOR5553)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 12:16pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/41 "2023-11-15T12:16:36Z")
Unless you make Wonders no longer an Age Up per se, but a privilege - you pay the cost for the Age Up and during it you can build any Wonder for free. Age Up would then involve choosing a Dynasty - each would offer something unique: units, buildings, HC cards, technologies. ---
**Author:** ![Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/juggernaut8704/32/203886_2.png) [@Juggernaut8704](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/Juggernaut8704)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 12:19pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/42 "2023-11-15T12:19:53Z")
Well why does it sound strange? Since I mean they are technically revolting to topple the company rule to form something new of their own. Dynasties will sound weird since I am not calling them Gurkanis, Sisodias, Wadiyars, Bhonsles, Windsors, I am calling them Mughals, Rajputs, Mysore, Maratha, British Raj instead. ---
**Author:** ![MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/user_avatar/forums.ageofempires.com/mutylator5553/32/115284_2.png) [@MUTYLATOR5553](https://forums.ageofempires.com/u/MUTYLATOR5553)\ **Post date:** [November 15, 2023, 12:49pm UTC](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966/43 "2023-11-15T12:49:20Z")
But look at it from a different perspective. For example, the Japanese civ. The Tokugawa Dynasty would obviously be the choice to bring Edo period stuff to this civ. Meiji, on the other hand, would be an almost complete transformation of the Japanese civ into a more “European” modern civ. Additionally, you can add these three Japanese Dynasties (or more precisely, Periods): Muromachi, Azuchi–Momoyama and Sengoku. Similarly for Chinese civ: Qing (early), Qing (late), Ming (early), Ming (late) and Qing New Army (latest Qing times, who fought e.g. against the Boxer Rebellion). Here I divided the two Chinese Dynasties into times because in the AoE 3 timeframe there were only two Dynasties ruling China - there would be two Ming and three Qing periods. In the case of India, it suggests Dynasties from the following regions of India: Punjabi, Mughal, Bengal, Dravidian (working name) + British Raj (Victorian India). Of course, for the sake of logic, the Qing New Army, Meiji and British Raj would be the “Dynasties” that would have certain things blocked until later Ages in cases where they were used too early. [Previous page](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966.md?page=1) [Next page](https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/make-india-interesting-again/242966.md?page=3)