My African civ ideas

[JonOli12]

@FastAuthor96737

1.They have powerful Outlaws-unit cards to replace European mercenaries, or European rebels at the Guard level of Native American countries.

They could just have African Mercenaries. In fact, Portugal hired a lot of Mercenaries from Africa, for example.

@FastAuthor96737

2.They can obtain unlimited wood from logging farms, just like farmland can obtain food.

Incas have this, and it is considered OP.
There is a reason why Wood is supposed to be a limited resource, or easily exposed with Trade Posts around the map or Factories that cannot be rebuilt.

@FastAuthor96737

3.They can collect food from hostile pets, animal treasure guardians, horses.

A bit savage… and perhaps OP.

@FastAuthor96737

4. They have unique ways of using the treasures and guardians of the map.

Like the Nat-Ams?

@FastAuthor96737

5. Animals begin to migrate, and they will disappear when they reach the edge of the map, but new groups will also join.

Too complex for this game, and people already complai that Hunts are too hard to herd in DE.

@FastAuthor96737

6. The lions and cheetahs start to attack the singles. They will try to escape when encountering the army.

Why? No other Animal in the game behaves like this. Would likely make African maps disliked by the playerbase.

@FastAuthor96737

7.Military doctors and healers will become very important in this continent.

They already are.

[MechanicBark354]

I said we probably will get Ethiopians & Somalians because they are in historical battles

[MechanicBark354]

But I have a big question in my mind :
Is it possible that upcoming DLC doesn’t include african civs ? What will happen then ? African civs are 100% ?

[MechanicBark354]

Aoe 3 has many European civs - 3 Asian civs & 4 native civs . I think for africa at least they need to add 3 civs with new abilities. But if devs introduce a dlc like lords of the west then we will only get 2 new african civs & it’s not enough!!!

[TouchierFiend53]

Technically the Ottomans are also an Asian civ but yeah they are on this game pretty much European. They better add Africa as I dont want more blend, unoriginal and unbalanced civs like Incas and Swedes.

[DAC1789]

How is Congo more relevant than ethiopia?

Ethiopia was the only kingdom in sub saharan africa that had actual recognition by other European powers (because it was Christian). This in the 16th century.
Afterwards the basically resiste the italians and British and the russians who tried to invade.
This makes ethiopia relevant in the períod of the game (1500-1880s with the battle of big Horn and the meiji restoration)
The Congo simply do not have the same relevance.

[JonOli12]

@DAC1789

The Congo simply do not have the same relevance.

In AoE3, this is true.
Kongo had most of it’s glory days in the AoE2 timeframe, and they are highly requested in that game.
For this one, they would be a fallen power in this setting.

[Elowson3373]

I think we should get 3 civs from different parts of Africa, i suggest:
Ethiopians (Northeast)
Songhai or Moroccans (Northwest)
Zulu (South)

[TouchierFiend53]

I said on part not greater. Kongo was also catholic and had also a lot of diplomatic ties and military ties with portugal, also using Portugueze mercenaries against Portugal itself.

The kongo even got the Pope to recognize their territory as a new diocese. And had diplomatic ties (not saying allied more just had some type of diplomacy) with atleast the Papal states, Spain, the Dutch and Portugal what I could find and resisted the Portugueze also multiple times.

Even after the Berlin conference they enjoyed semi-independence as Portugal didnt have the means yet to forcefully occupy the country and Kongo remained an independent vassal, somewhat like Morocco was a protectorate of France.