People want to split Germany in addition to adding new areas, not instead of. Yes Europe is overrepresented, but it’s not our fault we got Malta as another terrible Euro civ that no one asked for. Personally my priority would be adding Siam and Persia to Asia, and adding civs like Maori and Haida to introduce the Pacific region. But after that I think adding Prussia could bring a lot to the game.
1 Like
I’m not sure what your issue is, do you think Prussia would exclude all the minor German states? Brandenburg united with Prussia very early on so it would be a central part of a Prussian civ.
1 Like
I do agree that Persians, Kazakhs, and Tatars should be added next since they’re too important to miss out.
2 Likes
No. Read first about the Kingdom of Prussia and the German Empire and their army - then have your say.
Nothing. Brandenburg is not represented in the game in any way at the moment - except Potsdam Giants (Potsdam is located in the center of Brandenburg, close to Berlin) that Berlin is Home City for Germans civ. That’s all.
Thanks to Age Up’s unique mechanic of choosing a German state to unify Germany (under Prussian leadership), not only Brandenburg could be represented in the game. Her choice could provide some tech, Home City cards, and I would like them to provide Potsdam Giants training facilities in military buildings.
You are definitely right. Maltese was added probably only so that these DLCs could have two civs instead of just Italians civ. It mostly uses content from the campaign - Depot as a unique building for the Maltese is total stupidity and Fixed Gun is too powerful - both of these buildings should remain as part of the scenarios. The only real news for the Maltese civ are Sentinel and Order Galley and the rest is copy paste from the campaign…
I would have more understanding if Sicilians civ were added instead - which could include Malta.
By Maltese civs, eurosceptics have this as an argument against any potential new european civs…
1 Like
I’m 100% sure the reason is because WoL removed Malta and no one can convince otherwise, hahaha
The issue I see is that Brandenburg was part of both Prussia and the HRGE, but maybe I just need to go out more or whatever
I’m pretty aware of that. However, time and money are not infinite. Working in Prussia means not working in Persia
I don’t know about the prosecution of second Schleswig and Austrian wars, but the French lost not only because of the Prussian army but also because of internal turmoil. Until that, their land army was one of the best of Europe for centuries. If you want to discuss the quality of the Prussians, von Clausewitz spends part of On War complaining about the ######### taken by other Prussian generals during the Napoleonic Wars.
TBH the only countries I’m interested in getting at this point are Persians and maybe the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth and a big maybe for the Kingdom of Ayutthaya (Thailand) as they weren’t colonized, everything else in the context of AOE3 were complete non powers and I don’t see any benefit in adding them, it’s not like the game lacks civs. A couple of neat revolts more akin to Revolutionary France that can go Imperial would be nice though.
Why do they have to be global superpowers to be included? There are many potential civs that were more regional powers that could be tons of fun. And even if you’re limiting options to civs capable of significant power projection, you’re forgetting Morocco, Oman, and Prussia.
2 Likes
It doesn’t make any difference to the game. Imagine that Brandenburg was a State that belonged to an organization associating states from all over Central Europe, even though it was a State in Prussia - this is just a picture of the situation.
Not at all. The creators will support and develop the game, provided that it pays off - for us, the game is entertainment and for them a source of income, it’s a huge difference.
When they create DLCs, they will do them in a safe way. This means they will make civs that will sell. Persians, Poles, Siamese, etc. - there is a lot of talk about them, so they may become parts of DLCs in the future. Kazakhs, unfortunately, but if they would somehow appear as a civ, they would be such a Malta next to Italy - the creators will not create a DLC in which Kazakhstan would play the first violin. Unfortunately, it wouldn’t sell as well as any safe DLC - that is, based on European and post-colonial civs, which have the largest fanbase. African civs have support simply because they are sorely lacking in the game - it’s the same with Asia, but the more famous civs from there are missing.
Thus, creating a Prussians civ would not mean a lack of money and time for the Persians civ - on the contrary, because the money from the sale of the DLC containing the Prussians civ could finance further development of the game, including the creation of the Persians civ. Of course, such a possibility would be only if the Prussians civ appeared before the Persians civ.
BTW. I guess you’d agree that Prussians civs would be a hell of a lot better civ than Maltese civs?
Read what I linked.
1 Like
This is an interesting point that I hadn’t thought. However, it would depend on how popular a Prussian civ would be. I once made a survey in reddit and it surprised me and it would surely surprise you
https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe3/comments/zhwa77/would_you_like_to_split_germany/
My brain says yes, but my heart is still salty because Malta is not in WoL anymore
Will do. But when a polity wins over another you need to understand not only why one one but why the other lost
You see. More people are for split than against it.
This is the decision of the creators of WoL. On the other hand, it’s less of a pain to delete content in a mod than in a game.
Okay, but it must be admitted that the Prussians reformed the army so much and contributed to the development of military technologies - among others thanks to outstanding engineers and the most modern production and mining plants at that time.
The Prussians could be depicted in AoE 3 as such a modern European civ - which I wish the British civ would do as well. The current Germans civ are a bit archaic and multi-ethnic at the same time, so they are Austrians.
I was gonna disagree on Hungary, but Malta was never a sovereign nation, so I guess there’s nothing stopping the game from adding civs that never achieved independence during the game’s time. Personally I’d love to see Egypt.
I think Indonesia would be better represented as ethnicies instead of a single civ. A bit like the Native American civs in that sense, I guess?
1 Like
However, the alternative that has the most votes is no and the second is to add Austria. And it was far from being unanimous
Edit:
Breechloading was being improved for decades before the Dreyfuss if that’s what you are referring to. And British engineers were as good as the Germans. See tank and ship development. And in the US, Maxim and Gatling guns
That’s what happens when only one option has many variations. The various options for a split are also so long and convoluted that they’re cut off so people don’t even know what they’re voting for. And it doesn’t help that you prefaced it with a bias against a split.
Nuance is always necesary. It’s not just yes and no
Yes. I could have rfrainded
You could start off with a yes or no and then do a second option with the specifics if it is a yes. That way people wouldn’t vote no just because their preferred option wasn’t there.
- Majorly rework the current Germans to create new Prussia + new Austria
- Keep current Germans as HRE and create new Prussia + new Austria
- Keep current Germans as HRE and create new Prussia
- Keep current Germans as HRE and create new Austria
- Rework current Germans to Prussia and create new Austria
- Rework current Germans to Austria and create new Prussia
In my opinion only the first and last options make any sense. But people are generally not very informed and have all kinds of strange ideas. Probably a few that want Leichenstein split off.
1 Like
Well, yeah, lol. This is textbook eurocentrism. There’s no world in which Poland was a world power. Regional power sure, but in what way would they even be close to world power, they had like that one colony in Tobago courtesy of Courtland that was barely profitable.
Oman and most anywhere in Southeast Asia had more weight in the world scene. The fact that you don’t really hear about any of these places is because, well, we’ve been taught that only Europe is important. But you’ve gotta bear in mind, there’s eleven playable factions from the tiniest continent in the world and all of Africa has a grand total of two and all of Asia, the largest continent with the most recorded history, has three.
You don’t see me arguing about Central Asia here, but I truly believe the steppe nomads were about as relevant as the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth at its height.
2 Likes
You’re funny 
A few “small states from the smallest continent” conquered the whole world and made numerous countries their colonies.
Not that anything, but it was the European civilization that turned out to be the strongest in the geopolitical game of history. America and later Africa were almost all divided between Europeans. Asia also largely succumbed to Europe - in 19th century: India became the British Raj, China was controlled by Europe and Japan became ############# All of Oceania became mostly British in the blink of an eye.
I do not belittle non-European civilizations, but be realistic and think logically:
Aztecs, Incas, India, Africa etc all fell through Europe. Smaller nations are not mentioned not because European propaganda said so, but because they were too much weak and lost.
1 Like
your comparing them to great powers, that means they are strong.
1 Like
That’s it!
If Britain and France were not afraid of them, they would not have formed an alliance togheter with other powers against them - despite the famous traditional Anglo-French hatred of each other.
1 Like
So I suggest like a dozen new civs, and just because one of them happens to be European, I have to be Eurocentric, yeah.
I never even said world power, try to read more carefully first. I have only said “regional power” or just plain “power”.
Having colonies is hardly relevant. China was a world power without having them.
Note that I’ve literally suggested all the civs you mention here, but this isn’t true except for maybe Oman (at best). The Siamese kingdoms or Burma had next to zero power projection outside their home areas, they didn’t even control the highlands on their region and the borders with other SEA contries were ill-defined for most History.
The old great naval powers of South East Asia were already gone. One of the few remaining ones, Malacca, quickly fell to the Portuguese
If you said during the Middle Ages, I could agree and I’ve literally said that on this forum many time. But during the Early Middles the world stage change dramatically in favor of European countries. In fact, the most populated empires were all located in Europe , India or East Asia. So it isn’t a small continent or insignificant continent at all, especially during this time period.
I also agree Africa and especially Asia should have more civs, but you are dramatically downplaying the role of Europe between the 16th and 19th Centuries and I don’t think it’s Eurocentrist to think a large proportion of civs from this game should be European ( althought half is a bit excessive). For similar reasons, I think Asia should hold most civs in a game set during earlier time periods (I do agree aoe2 has way too many European civs, since Europe was far less relevant during the Middle Ages than during the Early Modern period)