Huns Gauls Britons Celtic tribes and some more needs their own civilazitions
1 Like
They can add the Huns and Celts of aoe 2 and voilaâŠ
1 Like
Itâs an intresting topic, because if a new DLC contains new units or techs, they should be available even for non-DLC owners. The architecture set is the other big question, at least 3 of the new civs should share the new architecture set or the game become assymetrical. Itâs much easier to create AOE2/AOE3/AOM DLCs without affecting the already existing civs.
In AOE2 there is only one new universal unit added by DLCs, the siege tower, which is underpowered and in AOM a lot of players hate the new units added by TOTD DLC. A DLC without new units and techs is also possible, but some players will compare it to Rise of Rome and complain.
Check SteamDB, there arenât any depots even updated nowdaysâŠ
1 Like
So sad. 
Why would the devs do that? Dlc is additional revenue for the game.
Of course,usually the civs of the dlcs are usually stronger than those of the base game,but that is for question of balance and not turn the game into pay to winâŠ
1 Like
I think new civs should be Celts, Germani, one Indian civ and perhaps Scythians.
Celts would be more cavalry civ, but has good inf line too. They should have fully upgraded heavy cav, which means it has metallurgy, but they dont get Cataphract.
Germani should be more inf civ. I think they should also make bronze and iron age axeman upgrades, which these new civilization would have. One of the civ bonus for Germani could be +10-20% axe and sword inf speed.
I would imagine that celts and germani should have same architectures and their wonder could be stonehenge.
India should be elephant and chariot civ. Their civ bonus should be something with elephants perhaps +2 pierce armor. India would also have new building tile set.
Scythians would be archer and mostly horse archer civ. Maybe +1 pierce armor would be good for archers and horse archers.
Of course each civ should have more bonuses, but here are some ideas that they should have.
2 Likes
Because itâs AOE1 logic. There are no unique units. Rise of Rome (1998) introduced Camels and Slingers, they are available for all civs regardless they are Expansion civs or not. Same for the techs.
Imagine, DLC-owners have access to 2 more units and techs for the same civs. It would be a serious balance problem. Pay-to-win DLC. 
If DLC wonât provide new units and techs, it isnât really worth it, however there would be enough hardcore fans, who buy it.
They are stronger only after the initial release because players have no experience with them and itâs a disadvantage, but patches used to nerf them.
No. 
1 Like
Of course, we would have to see thatâŠ
Of course, Celts, Teutons, Indians and ScythiansâŠbut in a two separates dlcsâŠ
Byzantine-Sasanian war of 602-628 is great, for AoE2DE though. Insert Roman-Parthian wars of 54 BC-217 AD there.
5 Likes
So we get another DLC for AoE2DE, while AoE1DE needs them far more. This year is 25th anniversary of AoE1, so please give us new DLC for AoE1DE with new content, civs, units and techs.
6 Likes
Yes, we fans of the best age of empires game, beg you, Microsoft to give us much needed new content for age 1 DE.
2 Likes
Surely they are busy doing the AoM DEâŠso they must be up to the top of things to doâŠ
First they have to get Age4 on the right course.
And when they have done that, another update for Age2. And then Age3 has to get new content.
Yes, and when thatâs done, all eyes will be on Age4.
I hope I havenât forgotten any game now⊠
1 Like
Sassanids were long feared enemies of the Romans. Would therefore already fit to Age1. Even if historically was towards the end of the Roman Empire.
We already have Persians.
Yes, well, we also have three Greeks, so⊠