They were considered for The Forgotten but got scrapped because they’re too old. They would have fit Age of Empires I much better. If Age of Empires V focuses on Late Antiquity, then the Scythians can be considered. The Cumans occupied pretty much the exact same area as the Scythians during the Medieval era, and historically the Scythians were largely absorbed into the Slavs.
I mean Scythians should be in AOE1 expansion…
If Forgotten Empires ever decides to make a Forgotten expansion for Age I, they should definitely add the Scythians, as well as the Celts, Mauryans, Indus, Olmecs, Armenians, Kushans, and Dacians.
2 Likes
Any military in the range of an outpost gets +1 attack.
Doesn’t get crossbow, but can upgrade to arbalest in Imperial.
Since the doors are opened again, I think these could be the next expansion civs (with campaign ideas attached):
India Theme:
- Tamils
- Chalukyas
- Bengals
Southern Africa Theme:
- Kongolese
- Malagasy
Caucasus Theme:
- Armenians
- Georgians
- Avars?
- New “Eurasian” architecture set used by Armenians and Georgians, also given to the Byzantines.
Oceania Theme:
- Polynesians (alternatively, they could be part of a naval-themed expansion with a civ like the Tamils)
Chinese Theme:
- Jurchens
- Tibetans? (only if the devs could ensure the game wouldn’t get banned; making it part of an explicitly Chinese-themed expansion might somewhat reduce that risk)
- Chinese campaign
- New architecture set for Chinese, Jurchen, and Tibetan factions, preventing there from being 7 civs with the original East Asian architecture set.
North America Theme:
- Mississippians
- Pueblos
- Mayans campaign?
Eastern Europe Theme:
- Poles
- Vlachs? (Dracula campaign changed to use this civ in missions 3 and 4)
- Avars?
- Lithuanian campaign
- Slavs campaign
- Vikings campaign?
Late Antiquity Theme:
- Vandals
- Hephthalites
- Persian campaign
4 Likes
More civs!
More civs!
3 Likes
Malagasy people are very interesting. They are from Indonesia. I think it would make lots of sense to put them together with Visayans and Polynesians with a brand new Ocenic Archicture.
We can make more Afrcian civs than Zimbabweans. There were lots of great kingdoms and empires: Kongolese, Swahili, Ugandans, Nubians, Somalians, Sudanese, Kanembu, Hausa, Mossi, Songhai, Benin, Vandals, Ghanaians, Senegalese.
I think Africa deserves 3 Architecture sets: Muslim African - the current one, Christian African - Nubians, Ethiopians, South African - Bantu civs
3 Likes
Could be really cool if the next DLC is something like “Eastern Dragons”, and includes Tibetans, Jurchens or Kithans, and a Chinese campaign.
Not only would it pair well with a Lords of the West title, but also add in one of the missing vanilla civ campaigns (China) and 2 other sino civs.
As I have been talking with chinese people, most do not think the CCP will mind a 12th century Tibetans civ in a game about the Middle Ages, as it was more than 800 years ago.
Malagasy (or just Indonesians) and Tongans could be a cool civ, and include a Japanese campaign.
Something themed around Island Emperors.
2 Likes
I think with that campaign a new Architecture set should come. All the East Asian set users could get a new Chinese-based Architecture, expect Koreans and Japanese.
Also this should include a Korean and a Japanese campaign. A Korean Campaign would be a war against the Khitans. (Possibly vs the Jurchen too??) You would ally with Chinese.
I’m not sure what would be the Malagasy campaign. Possibly a civil war and establish the Merina Kingdom of Madagascar. The Polynesian would be the Tongan expansion, attacking smaller Polynesian tribes, Samoans the major enemy, interracting with Malay and fighting the Japanese Pirates in one part of the campaign. The Visayans had battles against the Spanish and Brunei.
2 Likes
Considerating that the “umbrella term” no longer get any sense then ya add Chimus.
1 Like
If anything, the Tibetan Empire was earlier than that; it was formed in 618 and ended in 842.
The thing is though, Hearts of Iron was banned due to depicting Tibet separately, although that game is set 1100 years after the Tibetan Empire existed. I think at the very least, the Tibetans need to have the same architecture set as the Chinese and that the history section should treat them as part of China before the country was fully unified. Something like that might make it easier to avoid censorship while still including them at all.
2 Likes
Hearts of Iron is a 20th century game, which is closer to what the CCP cares about.
They would not really care about Medieval Tibet, if what I am told is to be believed, and even say it was it’s own seperate kingdom in the Middle Ages, in their History books.
1 Like
Break up china or india would risk getting banned.also keep in mind the devs seems to pick civis from the campaigns to make them look better.
I understand the first, but the would be the problem with Bengalis, Sinhalese, Tamils etc.? I’m sure the devs would be able to find a loophole to add the Tibetans. Like a different name or a propagand civilization history in the game.
Sinhaleese or bengals would be fine but breaking the indian identity within India might lead to unnecessary issues.
Units in Aoe1, DE included move faster going downhill.
i thought the problem was with china, indians usually like identifying themselves by state
1 Like
Lets imagine there is a seperate kashmiri civi.
1 Like
i don’t know what you’re getting at, i don’t know modern day politics, but i do realise one thing
if civ x gets a civ
then other civs get jelous…
Well tibet is a modern day issue and its still affecting the game and yes break off one civi and others would also aruge they dont get any rrepresentation.
1 Like