I can’t help but be reminded of Bertrand Russell’s opinion on the subject: (from his autobiography)
In the teaching of history, there should be no undue emphasis upon one’s own country. The history of wars should be a small part of what is taught. Much the more important part should be concerned with progress in the arts of civilisation. War should be treated as murder is treated.
Presumably you disagree.
Also Goths, since they have an Anglo-Saxon unique unit, and are used for Anglo-Saxons in some official scenarios. (Although obviously – I hope – I’m not claiming that the Anglo-Saxons were Goths.) Also Vikings, for the Danelaw.
I feel like this is the source of a lot of disagreements on this forum. No in-game civilisation design can represent every feature of a real-life civilisation for the entire 1000-year+ time period. The more someone knows about the real-life civilisation, the more unrepresented features they will spot in the corresponding in-game civ design – thus they will suggest new civs that have those features. (And very often, do so without making it clear what those unrepresented features are.)
I do, but simply due to my cynicism about human nature. I believe that people are much more predisposed to fight than collaborate, even when they share religious and ethnic backgrounds.
Aztecs are around the same edge. Huns are at the opposite edge. Whats the problem here? There were also Kongo peoples before those dates and Im pretty sure they warred like everyone else
Anyway, You need to stop quoting 50 posts and making walls of texts. Like I get you’re being thorough but seeing a ping with such a short and non heavy engagements based reply doesn’t actually draw as much engagement as you think.
Yes, I mean, I said that Kongo can enter, but I feel that maybe they will leave it for AoE 3 and focus on more medieval civs like Zimbabwe… the Hausa could also enter in AoE 2, but let them be the Hausa before the 17th century…
Yes, it seems long, and I’m too lazy to answer each answer in detail, but if I can, I do it throughout the day…
I think that in terms of the area of the broadly understood Germanic world (Germany, Scandinavia and the British Isles), it could be covered well enough in two DLCs:
Prince-Electors of the Holy Roman Empire DLC: Allemanians, Bavarians, Lotharingians and Saxons civs
Jarls of the North DLC: Danes, Swedes, English and Irish civs
I’m not an expert on the issue but I don’t think having both angles and Saxons is realistic if not in a very very long time. Anglo-Saxons are fine as a single civ for now (both for England and Saxony) and I don’t think Jutes have enough going on. If you have to add another dark age north European civ with Anglo-Saxons I think Picts would fit perfectly in that DLC. That would also resolve the Celts ambiguity with pagan woad riders that would go to Picts and Celts could be renamed as Scots and get a proper medieval UU.
Yes they’re European civs but it’s common sense that like many regions the dark ages are not very well explored in this game (there’s a huge hole in campaigns between the fall of Rome and Charlemagne aside from some sparse scenarios).
Only Danes and Swedes…English are Britons and Irish are Celts…lastly, you can rename Britons in English and Celts in Gaels…
Danes are better than Juts and the Saxons can include the Anglo-Saxons too… in Vortigern only Saxons are your allies, then they began to form their kingdoms in Britain and thus the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms emerged…
I agree with that…note that between Vortigern (440-500) and Tariq (711-732) prior to Tours (732) and the Carolingian empire of Charlemagne (768-814) you have a very big gap…Bukhara (557) and Dos Pilas (648) are not enough…just with this dlc they completed everything between the 8th and 11th centuries…now they have to touch what is in the 6th and 7th centuries (Restauratio Imperii and Rise of the Umayyads)…in AoE 3 DE they were able to complete the 17th century with the historical maps of KotM (from 1618 to 1699) and now with the Baltic dlc the great European conflicts of the 18th century (from 1700 to 1802) …
