Some to think off:
How is that by my logic? I see not Indonesian type civ in game? I see many regions in Asia and Africa left empty.
According to your logic content > then no content. So can I then argue what you are saying means they can add the Soviets? Or Americans? What about the Mexicans? It would be more content then nothing ĀÆ_(ć)_/ĀÆ
Donāt forget about the Middle East as well because thereās also Kurds. That civ should be in AoE2 and perhaps, it can be added to AoE2 alongside with the Pashtuns and Siamese, all three perhaps being the final three civs to add to AoE2.
If you meant important civs then say so.
I made the original version of this map (which has some differences to this version) and posted it here originally: Reddit - Dive into anything
Now, you seem to be too harshly critiquing the person whoās posted it here for not stating the metric by which civ choices were determined. This is unfair to them because they didnāt make the original map, I did. So please donāt get mad at them about anything.
When I made this map, I chose civs based on a strong regard for historical influence/significance, military/political prominence, cultural uniqueness, whether they were in uncovered regions, whether they were popular community requests and one particularly important thing: whether I felt they could offer unique gameplay potential, with the possibility of unique concepts from history being aptly reflected in the game. Itās certainly a very subjective thing, making these choices, and is essentially down to me personally feeling whether or not theyād make a good civ based on these metrics.
For example, the Swiss are on there because designing a civ for them is easy. Iāve never felt there is a limit of unique civ bonuses, it just takes time to think up good ones, so thereās no reason not to add civs like the Swiss which are so easy to come up with bonuses for (in my opinion). Thatās also why there are lots of American civs on the map, because there are so many Eagle bonuses to choose from.
This has nothing to do with AoE2, but if they ever add Polynesians to AoE3, I hope they add at least two civs (maybe Hawaiians and Maoris?). In AoE2 Iād be fine with a single civ tho. lol
Missing croatia
Also you said Armenia wasnāt relevant in medieval but then have Iroquois and Mississippians haha
Awesome work!
Iāll just focus on East & SE Asia since thatās the region Iām most familiar with.
For East Asia I suggest removing the Khitans and add in Dians/Nanzhao/Dali (any of those 3 names are fine to use since they largely refer to the same people). The Khitans are very similar to the Mongols both linguistically and culturally and can largely be covered by the later, hence I donāt think thereās a need to introduce them. On the other hand, no current civ can represent Dians/Nanzhao/Dali as well as the various Non-Sinitic tribes (such as Bo, Raeu, Li, Luodian, etc.) that existed in Southern China at that time, so I think it warrants their addition into the game.
For SE Asia, I think the Sundanese and Javanese have largely been covered by the Malays, so their addition isnāt really pressing or necessary. A somewhat better alternative would be the Moluccans, representing Eastern Indonesia. The Sultanate of Ternate was founded either in 1257 or in 1486, which is somewhat late, though still falls within the timeframe of the game.
And I nearly forgot about the Mons. They were the earliest civ builders in SE Asia and their kingdoms spanned much of the gameās period. Though I think they would largely overlap with the Khmers.
Where does celts or sicilians stand in that context?
what do you mean by sicilians
Look at his parameters for importance.
Sicilians were hugely influential in the decline of the Byzantines and reconquest of Italy from the Muslims.
Venice and Swiss are not influential in europe?
Venice is part of the Italians. Swiss seem like a decent option eventually, but Europe is already really crowded.
Seems like thereās some debate about it but itās either 1451 or 1142 based on a description of an eclipse. Either date is kinda late for AoE2.
I believe Anasazi is a derogatory term used by the Navajo. Iroquois might also be similarly derogatory but thatās a little less clear.
Inuit are often what Skraelings is referring to but this is mostly later interactions in Greenland. This was around 1300 so itās a little bit on the later side for AoE2. Technically the Norse are the indigenous inhabitants of southern Greenland and the Inuit didnāt take over until the little ice age.
What Iām thinking of for the Algonquins is the Skraelings mentioned in the Vinland sagas. The Norse even mentioned them possessing weapons similar to catapults.
Hawaii is pretty isolated from the rest of those. At least the Maori and Easter Islanders didnāt separate until the ~1300s. Tonga is probably the most solid choice for a more specific civ, but it could draw on other Polynesian elements. If you wanted a more general Polynesian civ it would make most sense being based on the Tahitians/Rarotongans who are likely the ones who the Maori and Easter Islanders diverged from.
That article does a pretty good job summarizing the relevant aspects to an AoE game since itās about the design of an AoE3 mod. They draw most of their information from here:
https://nzetc.victoria.ac.nz/tm/scholarly/tei-Bes02Maor-t1-body-d5.html
I think Romani and Romanians are two different things
It was, but I think the people themselves actually adopted it for a while, and thatās the name historians used for a very long time. Itās only recently that itās been considered derogatory.
I didnāt know there were two separate Skraelings.
Very cool!!
I was trying to think of the additional inspiration and representation that I had for the Polynesians, and I think Tahiti was largely it.
I think Nanzhao and Mons are must haves when I update this map. Iām getting rid of Sundanese but keeping Javanese because Iāve got a good concept for them thatās very different from Malays. Keeping Khitans as well.
Khitan was way bigger than Bohemians and Poles and those 2 got introduced to the game.
Forget Croatia he did not even add Assamese. More than 600 years of continuous sovereignty.
