Minor civs' necessity > Main civs

Two important units that must be in-game: Hwacha and Turtle Ships. Also a historical battle scenario for Koreans about Admiral Yi Sun Shin.

What qualifications did Joseon ave to become a major civilization, they were always the tributaries of the Ming and Qing dynasties. There is nothing that stands out in military culture, oh did you say Yi Sun-sin? He was just a poor guy who was excluded by the Lee family of Joseon royal family. Koreans have been bragging about how powerful Yi Sun-shin is, while completely ignoring that it was Ming Dynasty and Yi Sun-sin who fought together to defeat Toyotomi Hideyoshi, not Yi Sun-sin himself,Age of Empires 2 added Goryeo because of the development of Korean e-sports at that time, but now Koreans have no market for rts games. It is a good way to give Joseon some mercenaries,Singijeon , Korean arquebusiers, etc. , but there is no need to make it a major civilization, Burma or Vietnam, Thailand is obviously much more powerful than Lee’s North Korea in history


Really appreciate that!
We need quick-editor like you, outstanding man! :blush:

That’s jut what I’ve said. :+1:

Well if you’re basing adding civ on historical accuracy then why both Aztecs and Mexico are in-game together? Joseon or Koreans have the qualification to become a major civ more than the Maltese tbh.

As an upcoming Asian civ, Joseon have enough landmarks to be used as Age-up buildings. The culture of Koreans are quite popular among the global community. The Battle at Noryang Point can be added as a historical scenario. Lastly, hwachas and turtle ships are mandatory to be added in-game.

Regarding Admiral Yi Sun Shin, it wasn’t that Koreans that overhyping their best national hero. He’s a legendary figure among the admirals of the world respected by both in the West and the East. An admiral of the British Empire and an admiral of the Imperial Japan pay homage to the guy. He never lost a battle and he’s a great military leader not only in the sea but also in land. The winning factor is contributed to this strategies against the Japanese.

I do agree that Siam is a more powerful contender but both can be added in an East Asian DLC.

1 Like

Instead of Hashashin Hideout, they could have Ishmaili Mosque, that could train Hashashin, since the majority of them where Ishmaili Shias, if I recall.

The Qizilbash were also Ismaili, but are more fitting for this era. The Hasashin were destroyed by the Mongols in the 1200s.


The fact that you just copied the terrible WoL Korea civ even though I wrote a better one adapted for DE gameplay is borderline offensive to me, ngl.


I want to see Korean things in the game, so I don’t expect them to be a complete civilization.

We clearly know that AoE3 is not suitable for having a large number of civilizations, and the number of active players today is not easy to attract Microsoft’s willingness to invest in the long-term, so in my opinion it is eventually very likely not to exceed 30 civilizations.

For now, the game already has 11 Europeans, 4 Native Americans, 3 Asians, 2 Africans, and 2 Revolutionaries, for a total of 22 civilizations. However, we still have Danes, Polish-Lithuanians, Mapuches, Safavids of Persians, Omanis of Arabs, Siamese, Kongolese, Zulu, Brazilians, etc. more suitable and more popular candidates. Based on this premise, many Asian sovereign entities that were not as powerful as the surrounding countries (China, Japan, India), such as Joseon of Koreans, Ryukyu Kingdom, Vietnam, Burma and so on, are better to become mercenaries or minor civs than to compete for the meager chance of becoming a complete one.

In fact, it’s the mercenary and minor civ mechanics in the game that indeed represent the rich amount of diversity that AoE3 covers, with units from far more than 22 kingdoms, empires, tribes and organizations. To me, their presence is actually what makes the game really appealing.

It is already a very common and reasonable practice to use the mercenary mechanic to represent a unit of a country adjacent to a civilization. On the other hand, the introduction of European royals also gave those small countries a model. This is not a waste at all. On the contrary, it can save the essence and introduce the symbol that best represents the country into the game. Moreover, there’s no need to spend a lot of resources on research and development, and there’s no risk of misinterpreting the culture or making the game unbalanced.

What’s more, we could even try to introduce a new kind of minor civ. Like the trade post on the Silk Road is a variant of the trade post on the general trade route, we can also provide such variants for the small countries. What I imagine is that it will bring more content to the King of the Hill mode.

In the center of the map, there will be a landmark such as a fortress, palace or wonder of the small country (e.g. Koreans), protected by many of their units as guardians. Players need to take down those guardians in order to hold the Landmark, which is like forcing them to ally by force, and long-term alliance with the host country is equivalent to winning on the map. Additionally, once no player’s units are near the Landmark for a short period of time, they will break free from being controlled, interrupt the player’s countdown, revert to neutrality, and respawn guardians.

To go deeper, the Landmark can fire the enemy, and at the Landmark, players can train up to 6 types of their land units, research up to 8 techs and a 2x2 big button, and even provide their ship units for docks. (Here the turtle ships you are!) This makes them similar to the current minor civ mechanics, but has a completely different meaning. They’ll have richer content, be more important and determine the game. Imagine the Chinese and Japanese vying the palace of Joseon for an alliance with the host of the map Korea for getting their units and victory, and the Joseon will also try to take autonomy back once the Chinese and Japanese get too far from the palace.

The current KotH mode isn’t much fun other than fighting over a fortress named King’s Hill that can’t train units and fire. Therefore, the introduction of the landmarks of the small host countries also brought changes to it. The King’s Hill will become able to fire and train the player’s civilization’s units like a real fort, to essentially align with the landmarks. And we don’t have to worry about it being hold too early, because it will also be protected by a large number of guardians (maybe Outlaw Musketeers or even the Boneguard units) just like landmarks. Landmarks will also be available in KotH mode for any map, just like King’s Hill. For example, it is also possible that the palace of Joseon can randomly appear in the Nile Valley, Carolina or France, not just in the Korea. In this way, they don’t have to be limited by the limit of 5 maps required for a minor civ.



That’s completely meaningless when civs like that got passed over for Malta. Korea would be a million times better than Malta and a solid civ choice.

1 Like

Do you think the Maltese were less important than the Koreans, but the Maltese were introduced, so the Koreans too could have been introduced earlier than the civilizations that were more important and fitter than them? Lol. So to put it this way, peole can also support a nation that most people have never heard of and say they are more worthy than Koreans. All nations and ethnic groups that had existed between the 16th and 19th centuries, whether they were super world powers or weak small tribes, could be options. So for Koreans and Maltese, like any other else, the comparison between being so-called solid and not solid is completely pointless.

How many people have told you that the meanings of the introduction of the Maltese, in addition to the development cost, the most important thing is their significance to the history of this game, which is a feature that no one else has, not their significance to the real history of the world. You are such a famous Maltese hater.


The fact that Malta was introduced means that the importance of nations is irrelevant. And I think you’re underselling the significance of Korea. Out of your list I’d only give Persia and Oman priority over Korea.

No they can’t. They need to have at least a basic amount of significance and record of their history to make up a unit roster and card set.

They made a ton of new assets for this expansion that would have worked better for Malta than what they got so the argument that they cut development costs is silly. The Hospitallers were a widely dispersed religious military order. Their inclusion in the game would have been much better as something like the Jesuit settlements instead of a full civ.

Then any of your arguments that Korea is more important or more reliable will not hold.

Significance is determined by region and in comparison with surrounding countries. This is relative, not absolute. 16th century Korea may have been stronger than all Native Americans, but they were not as important to the game as the Lakotas or the Aztecs due to the different regions. Even if they only compete with Asian civilizations, Koreans, like Ryukyu and other small countries that need to rely on other powers, cannot be compared with the Siamese who can independently diplomacy and war from beginning to end. Culturally, they are also too close to Chinese and Japanese, and other options are more likely to offer more diverse new content.

Don’t get me wrong. I agree that Korea has its own cultural identity and history, but for various reasons I think they are a strong candidate in the second tier. If we can be sure that there will be more than 10 new civilizations in the future, maybe there is a good chance in the second round, but the current situation is that even the candidates of the first tier are unlikely to be all introduced.

Do you know what is ridiculous? You reject the so-called ranking of significance on the grounds of Maltese, but use it as a reason for supporting Koreans.

In Taiwan, there is a group of aborigines called the Amis. I believe more than 90% of the users on this forum have never heard of them. But what? We can still find words and sentences that can be used as units and cards in the language of the Amis, just like all peoples in the world. Since you don’t think the significance is meaningful, I think people can also be crazy to ask for the introduction of the Amis.

Just because other parts (e.g. European royals, historical maps) have a lot of new content, it doesn’t mean that there is a chance to get more cost to make a second civilization. When developing a game, it is often a matter of determining the maximum amount of money that can be used, and then discussing what to do. And when it comes to deciding on new content, it’s likely that the Italians and those European contents have already been identified, so those projects are given priority to most of the funding. This leaves developers with only a handful of resources left to create other new content and even a second civilization, after determining the cost of Italians and European contents.

If you use other parts as a reason, it means that you think the development team should abandon those wildly popular new contents to make a second civilization. However, even the current Maltese are interesting and well-received. It turns out that the development team was right not to do that.

The reality is that they became a civilization, so I would embrace the status quo and look forward instead of staying put or even turning back and complaining.

Before the United States and Mexicans were introduced, I was also someone who didn’t want revolutionaries to be playable civilizations, but after they were introduced, I also offered them many new ideas, such as home city customization options and new immigration cards.

If Koreans really become a new civilization, I’ll take it and think about advice for them. But the status quo is that they haven’t, so now I’m not going to support the Koreans and come up with what I think is a better way for the game, such as making new content for the King of the Hill mode with these massive but not such important Asian countries, you know, compare to the first tier.


I personally think that if you want to choose a new Asian country as a civilization, South Korea is definitely not the first choice. Burma, Siam, and Vietnam have all fought many wars with surrounding countries in history, and even challenged the authority of China, the hegemon of East Asia at that time, South Korea has been subject to China since its reunification in 1368 until it became a Japanese colony in 1894 after the Sino-Japanese War.

If you like to know the history of South Korea, you can watch this movie. This movie restores the military and political level of North Korea at that time, and it was made by South Koreans.


Sure, they could actually remake Noryang Point if they wanted to…

In fact the Koreans were already from AoE 1 with Choson Choson | Age of Empires Series Wiki | Fandom; it’s simply continuing the legacy just…

1 Like

Yes, I am a writer of the AH wikia in Spanish since December 2010, just this year I began to get more often in the wikia of aoe, seeing that the sections of AoE 3 were a little outdated and passing to add things and information about the new expansions, both AoE 2 and AoE 3 several weeks before they came to the market …