I’d like to express my ideas on each and every one of these ideas, if I may. A lot of it is moving civs around in dlc ideas.o
Alright, well, I know they are in a later dlc idea, but why not fully encompass the new method of focusing on regions and putting the Zapotecs with the Tarascans/Purepecha? Could be “Chieftains (or, Warlords?) of Mexico” instead, And leave the “New World” moniker for the NA civs instead? It would fall in line with the prior regional dlcs we’ve had so far, and I figured it would be the better option for integration into the norm.
Full agree on the Mayan campaign though. Jeebus, their HB is grindy…
Firstly… No Seljuks? That’s a bit of a missed opportunity for a medieval Turks campaign… but given the subject of the dlc, I guess I can see it. I’m not that convinced it’d be better to focus on the Ottoman Turks over the Seljuks in a medieval game, but hey, given the focus of the idea, maybe I could warm up to it over time.
Secondly, if we are taking this dlc title into consideration, wouldn’t there be no Mansas, only Sultans? Kanem Bornu converted to Islam eventually as well…
How about, instead of Somalis here, you put in either the Edo or the Yoruba, who were prominent Pagan cultures down in the Old Beninese Kingdom and the Oyo Empire respectively? They would have some pretty juicy content to chew through imo, and still keep the intent behind the OG title. Otherwise, if you’re adamant about the Ottoman Turk focus you’d need to adjust it to something like “The Sultans Of Africa” instead.
I get that repetition in DLC titles aren’t really wanted, but I don’t quite like the title here. What about, “The Celestial Monarchs” as an alternative name? Both new additions founded a new Imperial Family after they invaded and took the Mandate of Heaven. Maybe each of the 3 civ campaigns could focus on their respective dynasties’ ascension to power? I like the overall additions you have here though, so not much to say.
Eh, not liking the name here either. When I think Pacific, I think Tu’i Tongan Empire, Aeotaroea, Fiji, Samoa, Papua, Tahiti, etc. (Masters of the Pacific?) I’d say something like “Hegemons of the Southeast” or something like that would be better for these civs, or at least for the Siamese, anyway.
Personally, I’d rather it be the Siamese and the Javanese, though admittedly I wouldn’t profess to have much of any knowledge on Filipino history, so anything to do with pre-colonial Phillipines is out of my knowledge range. If they do have some interesting people and events, then sure, by all means.
4. Slavic Princedoms
Croats
Serbs
Ruthenians (renamed Slavs)
Vlachs (used for Dracula campaign)
Honestly, I see these all as the last no brainer divisions for Eastern Europe. The only point of order I have against this is that, when you only account for the Ruthenians, you disallow the full scope of the Rus… on the other hand, the only major polity in the north during most of this time period, Novgorod, was tied pretty closely to the princes of Kiev. I guess if we had to do a monolithic Rus civ, then I would agree with the Ruthenians.
Pretty sure that Afghans are covered by the Hindustanis, being the reason they’re the only Indian civ to have cavalry at all.
The Sinhalese… This is an odd choice for an Imperial DLC. They were Kingdoms at best, subjects at worst. I’m not against them being added, but only if it’s in a more involved Indian DLC.
Honestly, the Koreans are the only think that work for me here…
Nah, this one I hard disagree with. The Dutch, while around, were more relevant in the later stages of history. I’d much rather see the Frisians, who had a major regional presence in the Early period and Late Period, and taper off the cliff of relevance as the Dutch rise up to it.
Swiss… Man I want them, but the only way I can see them added is either standalone or in a completely random way. It sucks…
As far as the Magyars go… Eh. I’d rather have it’s campaign packaged with the Slavic dlc personally.
Songhai is, well, kind of funny. It’s basically the failed 4th Gunpowder Empire, since though there were guns in their army, they never really took to them well, and sharply declined in power due to it as other empires did.
I’ve already said where I wanted the Tarascans/Purepecha, so when I think of conquering nations in the Americas, funnily enough the Iroquois/Haudenosaunee would come to mind. They were warlike enough to get a reputation from their neighbors as snakes, and grew pretty large for Pre-Columbian America.
Vikings… So many people for campaigns, so little time. Even with the scenarios in the Historical Battles, there are plenty of stories to choose a campaign from.
I have no complaints here.
All in all, just minor cosmetic disagreements and maybe a civ change. These are all only my opinions, so take them how you will OP.
