Varangian Guard with Druzhina sounds interesting. Also will they get the 25% discount from the Byzantines? Else they would be pretty weak with no bonus and missing a blacksmith upgrade.
Mounted Crossbows should be given to Saxons, Franks, Teutones, Italians, Burgundians, Bohemians and possibly also Celts and Britons. They would be pretty bad for all of them besides Bohemians and Italians without a bonus though. And not sure if any of those civs really need a buff.
Why no spspanish or portuguese?pretty sure they were not great with archers on horseback.Id also give the mounted xbow to the poles so differ more from lithuanians.
Yes, we’ll have to see what names the Saxons have…7 Anglo-Saxons AIs and 7 Continental Saxons AIs?
The Britons AIs who would become Saxons:
Alfred the Great (849-899): King of Wessex (871-899), successfully stopped the Viking expansion and became the dominant ruler in England, while improving education, people’s quality of life and more.
Harold Godwinson (1022–1066): often called Harold II or Harold the Saxon, was the last crowned Anglo-Saxon king of England. Harold reigned from 6 January 1066 until his death at the Battle of Hastings, fighting the Norman invaders led by William the Conqueror during the Norman conquest of England. His death marked the end of Anglo-Saxon rule over England.
King Edward: Presumably Edward the Elder (874-924), King of the Anglo-Saxons (899-924), son of Alfred the Great. He captured various parts of eastern England from the Danish Vikings. (Edward the Confessor would also apply) (This was only present in Age of Kin and Age of Empires II HD)
And the history section, which would also pass to the Saxons:
Following the withdrawal of the Roman legions to Gaul (modern France) around 400, the British Isles fell into a very dark period of several centuries from which almost no written records survive. The Romano-British culture that had existed under 400 years of Roman rule disappeared under relentless invasion and migration by barbarians. Celts came over from Ireland (a tribe called the Scotti gave their name to the northern part of the main island, Scotland). Saxons and Angles came from Germany, Frisians from modern Holland, and Jutes from modern Denmark. By 600, the Angles and Saxons controlled most of modern England. By 800, only modern Wales, Scotland, and West Cornwall remained in largely Celtic hands.
The Britons would have a history section starting in 1066, something like this:
The Normans, Vikings settled in Normandy (France) who had adopted French as their language, conquered England in 1066. William the Conqueror, who had a claim to the English throne, defeated the Saxon king Harold at the Battle of Hastings and was crowned king. The Norman dynasty would end with Henry I, whose death in 1135 ushered in a period of anarchy in England. This was a time of civil war, during the unstable reign of Stephen of Blois (1135-1154), Henry I’s nephew. Henry had named his daughter Matilda as his successor to the throne, but upon her death, Stephen managed to get the barons to elect him king. A period of insecurity and unrest continued throughout Stephen’s reign. Matilda’s son, who would later become Henry II, had arrived in England with the intention of conquering it. Stephen, weary of fighting, decided to sign the Treaty of Wallingford (1153), recognizing Henry as his successor to the throne. Stephen died a year later, and Henry II assumed the throne, ending two decades of royal anarchy.
During the final years of the 12th century, Richard I the Lionheart occupied the throne of England. This was a period of political instability. Richard I the Lionheart marched to fight in the Third Crusade and was taken prisoner by the Duke of Austria in 1192. Despite this, the process of centralizing power continued. In 1199, John Lackland ascended the throne. John had usurped the throne during Richard I the Lionheart’s captivity and was disliked by the English nobility. He was not a skilled warrior and lost the French territories of the crown to Philip II Augustus. The rebellion of the nobles against him forced him to sign the Magna Carta in 1215 to remain in power.
In February 1328, Charles IV of France died. Edward III had a claim to the throne as Charles’s nephew, but the French nobles preferred Philip of Valois, who reigned as Philip VI. Between 1331 and 1334, during the Scottish Civil War, Edward III supported Edward Balliol, who was crowned in 1334. David II, Balliol’s rival, sought refuge in France and swore homage to Philip VI.
In 1337, Philip VI confiscated the Duchy of Aquitaine. This ultimately triggered open warfare between England and France, which would become known as the Hundred Years’ War. The first victories went to the English, who were militarily superior: in 1340, at the naval Battle of Sluys; in 1346, at the Battle of Crécy; and in 1347, at Calais. This city would remain in English hands until 1558.
The son of Henry IV, Henry V (1413-1422) confirmed his claim to the French throne and reignited the war. In 1415, he won the Battle of Agincourt, and in 1417, he captured Caen. In 1420, the Treaty of Troyes was signed, by which Henry V of England married Catherine of Valois, daughter of the King of France. Henry was also recognized as heir to the French throne. Henry V died in 1422, before the French King Charles VI.
A child of just a few months old ascended the English throne as Henry VI (1422-1461, 1470-1471). He was crowned King of France in Paris in December 1431. In 1435, Burgundy reconciled with France. The French captured Paris, and in 1444, a five-year truce was signed. Between 1449 and 1453, Charles VII attacked Normandy and Gascony, and in 1450, he annihilated the English army at Formigny. In 1453, he captured Bordeaux, regaining control of all of France except Calais, thus ending the Hundred Years’ War.
In 1455, Henry VI succumbed to madness, triggering an English civil war known as the Wars of the Roses (1455–1487) between the House of Lancaster, to which Henry VI belonged, and the House of York. Both royal families shared a common origin in the Plantagenet dynasty, as descendants of King Edward III. The name “War of the Roses” was not used at the time, but it derives from the emblems of the two royal houses. On one side was the red rose of Lancaster, and on the other the white rose of York, which were used as emblems by the adherents of each faction.
The War of the Roses largely contributed to the fall of the Plantagenets, as it resulted in a huge number of deaths among the nobility, in addition to generating widespread social discontent. This period marked the decline of English influence on the European continent, the weakening of the feudal powers of the nobles, and, conversely, the rise of the merchant class and the growth and strengthening of a centralized monarchy under the Tudors (1485-1603). This war marks the end of the English feudal era and the beginning of the Renaissance.
this just shows how stupid of an addition the Saxons are to this game.
Between Saxons, Britons, Vikings, Celts, and Normans (Sicilians) we now have 5 representations of the inhabitants of the British Isles
Add scots irish welsh to complete the roster.
how dare you suggest “Welsh”. umbrellas like that need to be split, they deserve proper representation by getting unique civs for Powys, Gwynedd, etc. /s
It is not like all people from the isle shared a culture. But 5 is also too many. If I could, I’d choose only 3 - English (Not Britons), Celts and Normans (representing all of them - Kingdom of Siciliy, Normandy as well as Vikings).
Wont they share the roman culture?
True, but with the Saxons you could still represent the continental Saxons…
(Continental) Saxons (407-1547):
Icon civ
Saxony in 1000 CE
The Three Saxonies
true. Although they were part of the HRE really early on…
I just found out that “Saxon”, just like “Viking” originally meant something like “pirate” or “raider”, before it became the name of a people.
From what i gathered there is some debate if Anglo-Saxons and (the German) Saxons are even the same people.
Yes, for me, in the game the Saxons will not only represent the Anglo-Saxons in the pre-1100 CE scenarios (Vortigern, Charlemagne, Robert, Otto and all the Viking Age scenarios and campaigns from Ragnar to Hastings) but also the post-1100 CE scenarios and campaigns (Barbarossa with Henry the Lion, Kotyan and the future German campaigns that they might include during the Renaissance)…
Bohemians don’t even have a regular Cavalry Archer at this point – giving them its analogue would be a huge buff.
As a Pole I think Cav Archers make sense for us, we bordered the steppe and employed Tatar regiments.
Even if they weren’t the same tribe, the language difference was pretty negligent. (Not that it matters much, so was medieval Norse in Viking Age Denmark and Sweden yet here we go with the split…)
Could get a “trample damage” from Logistica (imp UT).
But then wouldn’t make sense for Slavs to have Varangian Guards with Druzhina…
I hope the devs have listened to this concern. Fingers crossed.
I think this rename will happen after a Vlach civ and some southern Slavs civs are added
Vikings in general had amazing heavy cav and trash light cav, especially later Viking armies. A lot like Teutons, but they have longships, and their infantry has a ranged sidearm. One of the things that translate badly to AOE2 is how versatile Viking troops were. Catholic Europe had all sorts of specialists, often supplemented by unfortunate peasants. Since they didn’t have a strict feudal hierarchy to maintain, the Viking norm and duty was for everyone to train from birth, so most troops could fill most roles just fine. Your infantry, archer, cavalry, farmer, and craftsman were all the same guy.
IDK. I just predicted based on current DLC patterns.
Yes, in AoMR the Norse have cavalry and it doesn’t look out of place at all… they can create cavalry, but in later ages…
Maybe an editor unit will have the AoE4 berserker style deisgn with animal fur + twin axes. Then modders would be able to do skin-swaping modes.
I don’t want the original berserker design to change, in french it’s not even the name they got, it’s “fou de guerre” (war fool, war zealot eventually), so maybe it’s the name that must change and not the graphics.
I mean yes the name is wrong for the deisgn, or at least it’s not that accurate. Same for the Hornes, I mean yes viking helmet had no real horns, it’s more bronze age scandianvian warfare that features that kind of stuff, and celtic bronze age / iron age warfare too. But as a kid I knew vikings with horned helmet, so it was cool. We must keep in mind it’s a game, not an historical simulation, so it has to have some clichés too.
It’s also about preserving the original game identity. Some of you may have started to play at a different era than I did, which was at the release of the original CD versions, and I want the game to still be the game I loved as a kid. I have no problem with architecture changing for example, I think it’s a good enhancing, but changing some original core units entierly so you could not recognize them from the original game to the current version ? Nah, it’s not what I’d like.
I’m hoping they’re adding some cool hero units for some iconic depiction and wider unit style. Especially for ships, I really hope they’re adding some hero ships to add abit of flavour to the campaigns. (Yes I like ships !)
Will this new DLC introduce venetian ship?
Very unlikely since there is no mention of Venice anywhere. Also what kind of Venetian ship are you talking about? Probably not one from the Viking Age.
