Id rather have one umbrella slavic people than Serbo-Croatians.if its Serbs and Croatians as different civis then im fine.
1 Like
The devs have generally avoided addressing pretty much anything in Eastern Europe that could so much as hint at being related to any of the still existing and very real tensions between its current peoples.
Thatâs why the 2 âEastern Europeanâ campaigns we have boil down to âTurks badâ and âMongols Badâ
Creating a Serbo-Croatian civ would literally be the opposite of this principle. The 2 biggest groups out of the Yugoslavs, theyâve had a history of mutual animosity (and conflicting territorial claims over modern-day BiH) since the AoE2 days. Being on the opposite sides of the Catholic/Orthodox split really did a number on them as well, despite the fact that, yes, linguistically, their languages are largely mutually intelligible.
1 Like
The Southern Slavs- Serbians, Croatians were ruled by the Byzantine Emperor⊠When appeared the Bulgarian kingdom at 681 AD, the Buzantines began to lose control of the lands of the SlavsâŠ
The first date for appearing of the Croatian kingdom- 925 AD, is the same date of the BIGGEST Expansion of the Bulgarian Kingdom, when the Bulgarian king and his army reach the capital of the Byzantine Empire- Constantinople.
When Byzantine empire conquered Bulgaria from 1014 AD to 1185 AD, the Byzantine Emperor AGAIN began to rule over the other southern Slavs- Serbs and Croatians.
And when the Second Bulgarian kingdom appeared again at 1185 AD, the Byzantines again began to lose control over the Southern Slavs.
Yugoslav Wars in AoE 2?
Yugoslavia was made, at 1918 AD, by the Great European Powers- Great Britain and France⊠They took parts of Austro- Hungary and Bulgaria and gave it to Serbia. The name of the new big coutry was YugoslaviaâŠ
Not at all, quite a few Easter European campaign missions are against the Byzantines.
Also, all Slavs should be united. Division is why Slav countries became weak.
We Western Europeans grow stronger in division, because we have a scientific-economic and Real Politik approach to the world. Slavs, despite the memes, are no so cold hearted, calculistic and brutally pragmatic as we are, and when they try to be, they end up with a USSR that holds back the region from development.
Politics aside, however, Eastern Europe is already well represented in AoE2.
Very correct if you seen the official facebook page for aoe this month is black appropriation month or something.they seem to look at things from the modern views rather than historical grounds.
2 Likes
Black History month, and that is only in the USA.
FE devs are mostly European, and do not care for USA celebrations. The Facebook page islikely run by Microsoft, which is an US company itself, but I doubt the FE devs care abot Black History Month at all.
In Europe, all History is History, there is no racial History, though there is regional History studies.
2 Likes
Seems like todays movies games all are just made for target groups and china,i really miss the good old days when everything was not about american politics.
3 Likes
American movies have always been for american audiences, and about american issues.
It cannot be avoided, every culture thinks to itself in isolation, at some point, and produces art about it.
The issue is that european movies are not very good, though in series and novels we have surpassed the US in quite a few cases.
China is only pandered to, because it is a big market, but a lot of modern stuff does not fly ther.
For example:
The Star Wars: Hight Republic series has itâs own official chinese version, in which there are no black Jedi and non-heterosexual themes are entirely abandoned.
Wokeness and post-modernism only works in America, and even European markets are abandoning US cultural products because of it.
There is a new series on Netflix called Tribes of Europa, that is about post-apocalyptic Europe, for example, when just a few years ago, all post-apoc media was about and set in the US.
1 Like
Marvel Movies are for a global market but even that is going the wrong way with âamerican valuesâ.its ok if the movie is good with or without a political agenda but now its crappy movie with all politics like the new star wars movies.
1 Like
No, they are primarily for american audiences.
The concept of the Super Hero came from americans realizing they had no ancient mythology to look back on, so they created a few heroic figures, based on the heroes of ancient Greece, Rome and Israel, but adapted to a more modern setting.
It evolved from that point onward, and Marvel is a sub-product of the USA search for a unifying mythology.
Marvel heroes have mostly been americans, or heavily related to the USA.
There is no true global component, unless it is to advance the âmelting potâ doctrine, which is as american as Apple Pie.
black appropriation month or something
The Black African Voodoo, Vodun Shamans want to conquer USA ???
I cannot agree. Respectfully, I believe this is a typical mix of ignorance and simplification which sounds a little bit (emphasize âa little bitâ) like âwe are the best and know everythingâ.
It sounds to me as if I say that all Westerners should be united and called Franks. The same what Arabians said about Crusaders regardless their origin.
For me, as a Czech, I can say you there is a huge gap in way of thinking in relation to law and state. Czechs in general prefer to have some kind of order in everything. They love humour and are able to make jokes about everything. Nothing is sacred to them. And I mean really nothing. There are less emotional and more pragmatic. I suspect that is due to German influence for hundreds yearsâŠ
The more you go to the east the more you find out the state/history/religion becomes a central role of thinking and emotions are growing. It is something which keeps a nation together. Like in Russia today it is a neverending feeling they are threaten by abroad powers. The victory in WW2 is sacred topic.
I simplify to put as much as possible into concentrated area. So of course, the reality is more colourful. Historically, we have been and still are interconnected with the âWestâ in all kinds of living and trading.
I think nothing can more describe Bohemians than the way how Bohemians became a hereditary kingdom (huge pragmatism).
I intentionally avoid the term Eastern Europe, because it is a mess without clear definiton. But to conclude making one Slavic nation is a wrong concept. There is nothing to mine from. No common core. No unique common idea. In 19th century there was an idea of panslovanism and making one great Slavic nation under the head of Russian Tsar. Even at that time here were many people who opposed it as the dumb idea because ânothing good has ever come from the Eastâ.
Sorry for a political note, however, I felt that is needy to say, that one Slavic state is horrible idea and always was. It is sad that 40 yrs of Iron curtain damaged alltime historical relations and biased some people in the West. And of course, it is also up to the all former communist states to prove they on par with the West. I am not saying that only the West can be blamed.
3 Likes
With all due respect to Europeans, I feel this game doesnât need more European civs, be it Eastern or Western European. Europe is already saturated with civs and is overrepresented. If we still add civs to Europe, then it will be too lopsided and we might have to change the title of the game from Age of Empires to Age of Europe.
Eastern Europe doesnât lack any representation in the game. We have the Magyars, the Bulgarians, the Slavs, and the Lithuanians, and in some sense the Huns, the Cumans, and the Byzantines are Eastern European as well. So Eastern Europe already has 7 civs in total. Letâs compare this number to other regions in the world. East and Southeast Asia, despite covering a much larger area, only has 8 civs (Mongols, Koreans, Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, Burmese, Khmers, and Malays). And thereâre other regions that are even less represented, such as Africa (3 civs), India (1 civ), South America (1 civ), and North America (0 civ).
2 Likes
Because?
My point was to bring up contemporary problems in the game about the Middle AgesâŠ
I fully agree with you bro. I am a Pole, there is discord between our nations, the causes of which would have occurred in the last century. Unfortunately, we are too emotional. We cannot forgive ourselves for past mistakes. It was politics, not average people.
The French, British and US helped rebuild Germany financially. Their relationship is normal as they are based on the economy. We have a stupid feature of historical envy.
Let all the Slavs reconcile and drink vodka at the common table. Drinking it with compote and eating sausage and preserves 
2 Likes
It was painful for me. Westerners view us Eastern Europe as âinferiorâ backward and poor people.
Economic unity and national unity is a big difference.
In your mind, this should be one civilization of Western Europeans (Spaniards, French, Germans and British).
The division of the Slavs was historically caused by the extent of the territory of the Slavs. It was natural that such a great nation had to be divided into subgroups.
In this game, the Slavs are actually Rus. For a Western man, all Slavs are Russians. This civ in the game supports this stereotypical image of the Slavs.
The new civilizations in the game will not weaken the Slavs, but enrich them. After all, you could see the representation of the other subgroups.
-
The Slavs present in the game (i.e. Rus - Eastern Slavs) have numerous Mongolian and Finno-Ugric influences. They are: Russians, Belarusians, Ukrainians and Ruthenians.
-
The West Slavs are Western civilization (Catholicism). They are: Poles, Czechs, Slovaks, Silesians, Kashubs and Lusatians (the Polabian Slavs died out).
-
The South Slavs are a Mediterranean civilization. Croats were under Hungarian influence, Slovenes under Venetian and Austrian influence, and Serbs had Byzantine influence - cultural diversity. Unfortunately, this turned out to be a flash point for the future of Yugoslavia. But AoE 2 doesnât have to deal with nationalist politics, let it show players that there are South Slavs. Let him give two unique units, eg Croatian and Serbian. Let him show what connects, not what divides. They are: Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks and Serbs (Bulgarians present in the game represent Bulgarians and Macedonians - and their Turkish origin, but it is also one of them).
Each of these subgroups is unique, and the cultural differences at first glance appear greater than between British and French (for example, architecture).
It is impossible to make a common civilization for the Slavs for this game (except for AoE 1).
2 Likes
No.
This the eastern european perception of themselves, when they compare the East with the West.
No, Western Europe did better under division, than under unity. It makes sense to have a lot of seperate countries in the West, or a lot of civs in the game.
No.
For a western man all Slavs are Slavs, and Russians are the most successful Slavs, since they have successfuly historically challenged us.
1 Like
Are nomadic
I would describe them as a civilization that is left over from the Roman Empire. Specific, neither Western nor Eastern.
I know how in the West people from Eastern Europe are treated and how they are presented.
Western Europe is much less ethnically and culturally diverse. Belgian, Dutch or French cities look very similar.
Compare Polish cities with Russian ones.
Do many similar civilizations make more sense than many different?
And thatâs what I was talking about.
It doesnât matter to you.
But if I said that the German and the Dutch are the same, you would be upset.
1 Like