The map does not display a strict time period nor does it try to. It’s just a representation of what each civ in my opinion roughly represents and what it doesn’t.
My main thoughts:
-I think the Byzantines as well as the Slavs civ do a pretty good job at representing the Balkan region
-Even though Malians have some elements of the Dahomey Kingdom, I think it cannot represent possibly every West African civ
-The Chinese civ is just representing the Han people. Jurchen, Khitans etc. are pretty solid civ candidates.
-Even though the Indians civ has some South Indian elements like architecture and 2 leader names, I think it mainly represents the Northern parts of India
Red Xs represent empty areas (peoples) that are not represented in any way by any of the civs already present in the game - for Europe and Asia. The rest of the world is much larger “patches” on the map.
I liked how you completely cropped out modern day Bangladesh as an empty civ. 11
But I think you should crop out more at the eastern part. How Aoe2 Indians represent modern day Asam?
Seems strange to place Huns in northern Italy. Sure they traveled there, but I believe their origin is from Central Asia, east of the Cumans and west of the Mongols. Possibly near the Tatars.
Some are understandably difficult to place without a specific time or group. Goths for example were not always in Iberia. I’ve read some theories that they originated in Scandinavia, which would make sense with the Huskarl unit. Would be interesting to see civs placed in their area of origin, or at least their earliest known home.
Even after all these years people still can’t cope with the fact europe was the most interesting place during the middle ages.
And it’s not just because there were a lot of people at war with eachother all the time, but also because we took the time to write about what happened, and can recreate it as a result.
I’d love more native american civs, or, to use a more charged term, “representation”, but I also do understand that
They were more tribes than countries or kingdoms, which isn’t suitable for “Age of Empires”
A lot of that history of theirs is gone due to… certain reasons… and as a result historical accuracy is borderline impossible.
If the devs are to add more civs, my personal preference would be America, then Europe. Frankly, with The Last Khans, we didn’t need 4 new cavalry civs, and if we were to add more asian civs they would look a bit too much like already existing ones. In Europe we still have to see probably Swiss and Vlachs, which have potential to be rather unique, much like any new american civ, meso or not, because there’s more room to breathe there, with UUs or shared stuff like eagles and the whole no cavalry concept.
I will refrain from mentioning other parts of the world and the reasons we can do without them in a game about wheelbarrows, blacksmiths, universities and wonders, as it’s not a topic that many like to discuss, or a conversation that should be happening here to begin with.
I think the last four European civs should be (if there is a 48 civs limit):
Germans (civ based on the German states of the Holy Roman Empire; breaking the Teutons huge umbrella civ; prudent to be added by developers the Habsburgs civ, as Sandy Petersen said - Landsknecht & Swiss Pikeman)
Swedes (to cover the territory of modern Finland and be a late medieval Scandinavian civ - Livgardet & Ugric Warrior)
Serbo-Croatians (finally breaking the Slavic umbrella civ and embracing the South Slavic nations - Hajduk & Kondura, Zupan [weaker but faster cavalry scout])
Romanians (civ that is not in the game but has its own campaign in the game; it would include a group of nations that do not currently have any representation in the game - Hospodar)
This is what the AoE 2 map of Europe would look like with the addition of the four final European civs I have proposed above.
(for Serbo-Croatians civ I used the coat of arms Sirmium - a Byzantine administrative unit [theme], which existed in present-day Serbia, Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 11th century. Its capital was Sirmium [today Sremska Mitrovica])
Fuck no. Go look at ANY major Chinese generals and tell me they arent as interesting as any European king. India and China both have practically as much recorded history as Europe. Africa has plenty of cool civis, better than anything left in Europe
If anything I find late medieval Europe to be the most boring pre-colonialism European period and thats the main focus of most medieval games. The dark ages + crusades are way more interesting
And you keep insisting with Teutons =/= HRE thing despite having little reasons to do so… Honestly seems like you are just making excuses for more late medieval Euro civs
