其实豪德诺索尼、拉科塔也算是代表性一霸，首先一个代表了林地原住民，一个代表了大平原原住民。其次他们在欧洲人殖民时期和外界互动足够多，例如前者在欧洲人的纷争中会选择支持的阵营。
而如果一个地区没有明显霸权地位的文明，按照这个游戏的逻辑，就应该做一个文明混合体——“豪萨人”就是个例子，把西非整个做进去了。
所以正如你所说，朝鲜从各个角度来看都难以做成一个独立可玩文明（游戏聚焦于19世纪末的话还可以谈谈）。看着有趣就要出可玩文明的话，那不如去玩《欧陆风云（Europa Universalis）》，那里应有尽有。哪怕是乱成一锅粥的东南亚，我认为也只适合出两个文明，一个陆地一个海上文明，前者可以是缅人可以是泰人，后者可以是爪哇人可以是马来人。但你非要把什么佬人（Lao）、高棉人、他加禄人、大肚王国（Kingdom of Dadu）甚至琉球人都做成独立可玩文明的话，就有点过分了。
P.S.马耳他做成文明，很大程度上是因为情怀。不要忘了战役一上来就是马耳他大围攻啊~上来就大炮轰堡垒，给很多玩家的印象是很深刻的
You both are trying too hard to find justifications to not include Korea, lmao.
Korea is much, much easier to implement starting from the simple reason that it has an unique unit roster that’s miles easier to research than almost anywhere else in the world other than Europe.
Like you’re trying to argue that it lost almost every single last conflict they found themselves involved in… yet, they maintained sovereignty. Sure, they were Tributaries to China, but who the hell wasn’t tributary to China in the region.
Not to mention that even if we approach it from a non-military point of view, the approach to a confuscian state that they had going on during the Joseon times that had this weird un-religiosity that makes them stand apart a lot from anything else I’d even say in the world. The suppression of monasteries just to turn back to seek their help during the many invasions that led to the rise of Righteous Armies and whatnot.
All the funky rocketry units and armored ships are more than worth the “irrelevancy” that Joseon otherwise had.
Maintaining sovereignty (referring to the abandonment of integration with Joseon as a base for obtaining food due to Hong Taiji’s core policy of annihilating the Ming Dynasty)
Its ability to maintain sovereignty is only because it is mostly mountainous and hilly territory. For feudal agricultural dynasties, rather than directly ruling at their own cost, it is better to let the lords in this area provide resources for them, which can greatly reduce costs and obtain the same benefits
In fact, to put it bluntly, the reason Joseon was not conquered was because it was poor and difficult to govern and develop for ancient dynasties, just like the Guyana region in the New World and the Gabon region in Africa. They were only controlled by Europeans in the late colonial period due to their poor environment. For the rulers of China, they had an extremely prosperous Jiangnan region, while the northern region was controlled for defense needs, The Joseon region is relatively too poor and lacks strategic value, and direct governance by oneself is not worth the loss. That’s just it
At least you can take “funky rocketry units” away, most of them can be found in Chinese military book like Wubei Zhi.
Yes, but China doesn’t have them.
But guess who could have them if we added a new civ!
Sure, I understand… Just like any Asian civilization is good…
They’re just a bunch of deranged Chinese nationalists trying to downplay Korea. Ultimately this is a game and a bunch of fun and unique units and a bit of cultural relevancy holds much more weight than sovereignty and power projection.
You are just a person who cannot objectively view historical facts. We and the Koreans once fought against Japanese aggression in Northeast China, and we also acknowledged the deeds of the Wang family’s Korean kingdom in fighting against Mongolian invasion. However, this is not a reason for me to give Li’s Korea recognition. A historical game should be in line with history, otherwise how can it be called a historical game? Have you really read any East Asian historical documents? Or just relying on false propaganda and subjective assumptions?
The hatred of the Chinese towards the Japanese is far greater than the discord between the Chinese and the Koreans. If the Chinese can recognize the Japanese, they will never unreasonably deny the Koreans
Of course, objectively viewing history may not exist in your concept
I would recommend you do less of that.
What we deny is the influence of North Korea during this period, rather than the country and culture itself. If any country can be called a hegemonic country because of its unique culture, all countries in the world from the 16th to 20th centuries have their own unique culture. Would that make all countries playable? If you can’t understand this point, perhaps you should learn more?
Your speech itself is a subjective assumption and malicious distortion of what others are saying
there where long periodes of peace in ireland under british rule, and was no guarantee it couldn’t have panned out differently in another timeline.
also ireland just got a unique unit, and as MatM says they weren’t a state, what could you actually show about ireland in the period that isn’t already in the game? are we also going to have to add belgium, catalonia and holstein since each of them had some form of complicated relationship to their parent countries? id rather just leave at larger powers than split hairs over sub factions.
Korea, while not in my personal top 5, at least was a state, and had some military even if it wasn’t ever really world class. there are units, history, etc. that one can draw on to design a korean civ, i seriously doubt one could do that with ireland.
I agree with Korea not having enough influence in AoE3 timeline.
Arguments in favor of the Koreans usually focus on their culture, such as the appearance of their armies and ships, but each group has its own culture, which is probably not enough to fully support a new civilization.
You can always argue that culture is more important, but there are historically based arguments against them that are not unimportant. Ahead of Koreans, there are many candidates more suitable than them, who not only had their own rich culture, but were also obvious powers and influencers in their region, such as Persians, Omanis, Kongolese, etc.
Let me start by saying, please don’t get me wrong. I appreciate Korean culture, eat Korean food, and have traveled to Korea. This is just a matter of fact.
Some candidates like Mapuche and Somalis have similar role to Haudenosaunee and Lakota, being quite influential powers in their respective regions as main local competitors of other powers. And let’s stop using the Maltese as an argument. They exist a lot for the Homage to the origin of the AoE3 campaign story. This reason is unique and no any group can compare them.
In contrast, Korea’s influence in East Asia became weaker and weaker after the 16th century. They did have won several battles to defend themselves and to suppress rebellions, but that’s about it.
Some of their opponents (such as several Jurchen tribes) are weak and insignificant so that the wars are not worth mentioning, others are strong enough (such as the Qing Dynasty and Japan) that they simply cannot parry on their own. Either relied on external forces to resolve the situation, or be defeated and surrendering quickly (even sooner than many Native Americans resisted European powers).
In those centuries, the real participants in the competition on the peninsula were actually China and Japan.
They did have a lot of culturally rich units like Gakgung Archer, Dangpa Spearman, Woldo Cavalry, and Turtle Ship. We still have ways other than introducing a complete civ to introduce them into the game, such as minor civilizations and mercenaries, and this is what makes AoE3 different from other games.
It is worth noting that the experience of fighting the Japanese musketeers forced the Koreans to reform their military. They learned from the experience of the Ming Dynasty to train their musketeers. Joseon musketeers were pretty much the only opponent to impress the Qing emperor when the Qing defeated Joseon easily. Later, when Qing clashed with Russia, the Qing army also “hired” Joseon musketeers. This fits the definition of mercenary unit very well, and could even allow Japanese, Chinese, or Russians to have Korean mercenary shipment cards, like there are mercenaries from Ireland in the game.
Yes, I agree with these. If a country can be selected due to its unique culture, every ethnic group in the world has its own unique culture, which means that every country should appear, but thinking about it is an impossible choice
In all the invading wars that Korea has faced since the 16th century, the civilian people of Korea have indeed shown considerable bravery. During the reign of Nurhaci in the Later Jin Dynasty, the uprising army spontaneously organized by the northern civilians resisted the invasion of Jurchen for 20 years, but this cannot change the fact that the Kingdom of Korea was weakened during this period
Similarly, after the rise of Hong taiji of the Qing Dynasty, he recruited Korean soldiers and a portion of capable civilians to join the Qing Dynasty’s army through several conquests and compromises. This army, historically known as the “Korean Eight Banner Army,” emerged as a trusted military force by the Chinese emperor and participated in a series of military conflicts, including the Matsujin War between the Ming and Qing dynasties, as well as the Battle of Yaksa between China and Russia
Seems to me like the Koreans have a lot in common with the Italians in the period.
Every time someone suggets civs like Poles or Siam and others suggest pairing them with reasonable ones like Danes or Burmese, they keep getting snubbed by the dumbest reasons over “relevancy” or pop culture. How about not ruling out civs just because of the lack of concepts thrown or not being popular among fans? Jeez.
Almost every single person who cried “Italy, Italy” wanted them to be an archaic civ which felt forced, I’m happy the devs made them mixed with different periods rather than a forced boring archaic civ with crossbows which should be done to every future civ, esepcially when it comes to iconic units.
Yes, it is also a classic civ of the saga since 1997…Persia during the Middle Ages was occupied by many empires and yet it appears as civ from the beginning in aoe 2…
Yes, we also know that sooner or later the devs will get to Korea since 1) There is no native Korean civ and 2) Put Korean mercenaries would be a bit desilucionante, being able to have a unit roster like the Koreans of WoL…
Yes, devs know how to put new civs, let them surprise us …
Not quite to me.
There were still several influential powers in Italy in the 15th and 16th centuries, while the Renaissance influenced the whole of Europe and even the whole world.
They Interacted extensively with many existing civs, also had tried to explore lands outside of Europe.
I’m sure I’ve said more than once that “because AoE1 and 2 have them, AoE3 should have them too” is a very subjective argument. It doesn’t help.
They are heavily based on the Sasanians, a powerful dynasty of their own.
Maybe. But until then, there should be many, many things that deserve/should be done first. By then, perhaps the entire game will have been very different.
Is Korean civilization bad? No if it’s just talking about themselves. They have a lot to offer as content. But there are many such groups in this world. And, when discussing them with the entire game and other candidates, I don’t stand so firmly in their favor. I wouldn’t say they are one of the top contenders in Asia when there are clearly better options out there than them.
Introducing their units as mercenaries or natives is the easiest, quickest and least controversial way to be able to see them in the game. That doesn’t mean it’s blocking them from being possible as a civ. The Italians, Swedes, and Incas all had their units in the game before they were introduced. But we still cannot deny that there’s a chance they won’t end up being a civ because of the more decent candidates and possibly limited civ amount, so doing that is the way to make sure they exist in the game.
The Middle Ages is a long historical concept, and the Sassanid dynasty was the most powerful country in the world in the early Middle Ages, The background introduction of Persia in the game background also happens to be from the Sassanid period
Yes, but it is a point of nostalgia and historical continuity of the saga… The Conquerors civs would end up coming to AoE 3 as launch civs (Spanish and Turks/Ottomans), the Aztecs would end up arriving at TWC and the Japanese from AOK would end up arriving at TAD…
Yes, I know, but it is during the first 200 years of AoE 2 and also the Sassanids connect with the Persians of AoE 1 (although in the middle you have the Parthians)…
Yes, I know…I do not say to put them now (in Asia there are still Persia, Oman, Burma, Siam and the states of Central Asia)…
They lasted until the seventh century. They definitely belong in AoE2.
The Persians in AoE1 are basically based entirely on the Achaemenid Empire rather than Sasanian.
But none of that has anything to do with AoE3.