Im definitely going to troll my swedish and Norwegian friends with this XD
Guys isnt this supposed to be about potential DLC pointless and uncared for wishlisting instead of one guys armchair history thesis?
5 Likes
Some solid suggestions there. Iâd love to see more sub-saharan African civs, especially Shona States (Zimbabwe).
As for Morocco, we donât really need them, however apart from being present as a single-player civ, they have an interesting history, with lots of conflicts with Europeans (mainly the Spanish & Ports) and butting heads with the Songhai, Algerians & Ottomans (to name a few), and fundamentally, remaining independent. It would be kinda a shame that a civ solely representing a fair chunk of North Africa and has some groundwork already is left on the shelf.
Yes, thereâll be overlaps, however a proper Morocco is not going to have every unit with a lazy âBerberâ prefix - thereâs so much more to them. The âAbid al-Bukhariâ (Black Guard) for example were black African & Haratin elite soldiers that were trained in archery, musketry and horsemenship, which in game times could give âRoyal Bodyguardâ versions of regular units, albeit in limited form (build limit).
Still, more unique African civs like Shona States would be more fun I guess!
Iâd also love to see a Pacific Northwest American tribe such as the Haida as they have lots of unique units/traits potential, however I think we need some fairness with Asian then African civs getting some love first 
The kongolose? really.
I donât think that will happen because of a certain little issue with how the Kongolese empire formed and itâs main income source and that would go against a certain portrayal and as such would not be able to be sanitised unlike the entry on dahomey amazons.
Egupt will be one interesting dlc
Egupt? Never heard of them 
1 Like
There is no doubt that Kongolese is the most promising candidate south of Sahel.
I guess the issue you are talking about is human trafficking, but this kind of thing was very common in Africa at that time. This culture seemed to existe long before the Europeans arrived, and the Europeans took advantage of it. Similarly, it may not be surprising at the time that colonists intentionally or unintentionally did a lot of harm to aboriginal people. After all, long time before, human wars had already been full of profit and slaughter, even between Europeans. History is full of tragedy, but we cannot judge people in the 17th century with human rights concepts after the 20th century, or it will be somehow unfair.
We still can try not to mention these things in the game no matter what. At least I tried.
1 Like
A lot of minor civs are basically Full Civ 2.0, especially in Asia and Europe, so I donât think overlap between Berbers and a Moroccan civ would be a game breaker.
1 Like
Not itâs not. Shona is probably the most promising since it could easily use the existing African mechanics but in a totally new region.
Yoruba and Akan are equally as good as Kongo if not better. But all of these would probably require a new or at least heavily modified version of the influence system since they are from areas where the Tsetse fly makes pastoralism untenable. The simplest solution would be to replace the Livestock Market with a 
Market, but we all know how likely that is to happen, so I doubt weâll get too many more African civs.
1 Like
Not really. Goats have always been part of Kongolese culture. They did raise goats, fowl and pigs. In the southern part of the kingdom which is relatively free of the tsetse fly, they also raised cattle. They could even buy cows from nomads further south, such like the Ovimbundu people. For example, in their markets, 100 nzimbu (Kongolese shell money) could purchase a hen, and 2000 nzimbu could purchase a goat. If you have checked my concept of Kongolese, you can know that the Goats as default livestock is even one of the features of the civilization. Not mentioning slaves is not a complicated work.
Besides, I still think that âZimbabweansâ is a better name than âShonaâ. It will allow for more content, not less.
2 Likes
No one else is interested in a Merina civ 
1 Like
hands up
Iâd be happy seeing the Malagasy.
âKingdom of Madagascarâ, the Imerina or just the Malagasy would probably cover them as the Merina Kingdom gained control of greater Madagascar (gaining the Betsimisaraka, Sakalava and the strangely censored other prominent tribe) anyway.
Got a 'wishlight civ thread anywhere? 
Merina Kingdom culture could be the âmainâ one with their Merina warriors filling the various roles, however shipments could bring in the other prominent Malagasy kingdoms that gradually came under their control, such as the Sakalava (who were one of the first groups to use fireamrs and cannon) and the Besimisaraka.
Alliances could also be another way to add more internal Malagasy tribe support as well as French, British, Ports, Dutch, Arab (hint hint, Omanis would be lovely ) and the more criminal Roundsmen (Pirates on the pirate âRoundâ who would use the coast of Madagascar for pirate tradeposts, settlements and the odd stronghold - the often worked with the Betsimisaraka and intermaried - one of their leaders, âRatsimilahoâ was purported to be the son of a Malagasy queen and the pirate Thomas Tew).
Sakalava (another fairly prominent group in Madagascar) warrior. These guys were tough!
Hereâs a start
Kingdom of Imerina
A.I Personality: Ranavalona I (also known as âRanavalona the Cruelâ, gulp) or Andrianampoinimerina, who unified Madagascar.
HC Captial: Antananarivo
Hero Unit: Andriana (nobleman/prince/soverign, in Aoe3âs case, a Prince) - similar to Ras and Emirs.
5 Likes
Just possessing livestock is a far cry from the absolutely fundamental role cattle played in the pastoralist African societies. Cattle was the food, currency, livelihood, and main component of the economy of those cultures. Thatâs why itâs a core mechanic of those civs. The Kongolese raising goats is not even close to comparable.
My problem is that they should mention slaves to do Kongo justice. It was a central component of their society and power structures. It would also be something that would fit the market mechanic very well. But unfortunately that aspect of Kongolese history would almost certainly be whitewashed and replaced with a half-hearted system like selling goats. Thatâs why Iâm not super enthusiastic about pushing for a Kongo civilization.
Thereâs also the fact that Kongo didnât really have good access to either horses or artillery. So theyâd end up being an infantry horde like Aztecs which is usually one of the lamest styles of civs to play. At least there was some presence of horses in Zimbabwe so a Shona civ would be justified in having Javelin Riders at a minimum.
I donât think a vague umbrella civ that lumps together unrelated people is better. Giving it a specific name doesnât mean you canât have other cultures in the civ (Hausa have Fulani units, Germans have Bohemian units, Swedes have Finnish units, etc). All the major empires in the region like Mutapa and Rosvi were Shona, so it would be the best name by far.
1 Like
Haha âwhitewashedâ. I understand they donât want people roleplaying slavery but they definitely would have to fudge some history.
1 Like
Sounds like a buzzword like âEurocentric/Eurocentrismâ
Haha, itâs got nothing to do with race. It just means to cover up or downplay (as if itâs covered over by a fresh coat of paint).
2 Likes
So now you admit that they still have the tradition of raising livestock. The point is that they do still have livestock that can be used in the Livestock Market mechanics, which means that as a regional power in Central Africa, the Kongolese kingdoms can still appear in the game.
The meaning behind the design isnât always the point when the gameplay can be satisfied. Before you worry about the importance of goats in Kongolese society, why donât you worry about why the Russians, Germans and Swedes donât have the Dragoons, why the Dutch build more massive Banks in the colonies than Mills and Estates, why the Ashigaru are kind of expensive and elite infantry, why the names of the Chinese Eight Banner Armies are fictitious or incorrectly used, etc.
By the way, I remember reading that they also kept livestock for investment purposes, especially if they were in a environment where they could keep cattle. To me, thereâs nothing wrong with having all this represented by the Livestock Market.
No, they should not. This is not necessary at all.
This is an entertainment piece, not educational material. Reflecting the disgraceful side of history will not make the game more interesting, and is likely to offend consumers. Imagine that European and Federal civilizations emphasize the massacre of indigenous peoples in their games, or that Indians and Chinese emphasize the persecution of women in their traditional cultural social systems in their games.
Itâs purely a bad decision to forcefully change to something slave-related when the Livestock Market is still valid.
Itâs true that they have no cavalry tradition, but artillery is not a problem at all. âImported Cannonsâ means artillery provided by your European allies, so while it can serve the Ethiopians and Hausa, it can certainly serve the Kongolese as well. In fact, during the alliance with the Dutch, the Dutch provided the Kongolese 4 culverins as support in the war.
4 Likes
These two are actually my two favourite picks for new African civs. But, honestly, I find it extremely unlikely either will ever be added. People just prefer others like Zulus that are much more famous in pop-culture
3 Likes
Yep, I mean Zulu are all fine and dandy however Shona had been doing things people assume are just Zulu things (like Bullhorn tactics) way before and had substantial defenses and infrastructure (stone buildings, lots of gold mining), which the Zulu lacked and lasted a damn sight longer (Mutatpa > Butwa > Rozvi Empire before finally becoming subject to the non-Shona Mthwakazi, who incidentally were led originally by one of Shakaâs exiled Lieutenant.)
Yea I know but the coincidence is funny to me. Iâve read Tom Sawyer 
Lol what? Of course they have livestock, Iâve never once said they didnât. If simply having livestock was enough to justify having the Livestock Market then every single civ should have it.
The issue is that it isnât valid. The African pastoralists have the mechanic because their cattle are the single most important aspect of their economies and societies. The problem is that despite cattle being vitally important to half of the continent, the other half is inhospitable to them because of Tsetse flies. So cultures like Kongo, Yoruba, or Akan donât revolve around cattle and the Livestock Market is not a good fit as a core component of the influence system for those potential civs. The kings of the Kongo simply didnât derive or display their power and influence with herds of goats. These societies did however have a thriving trade in another commodity that could be the perfect basis for their influence systems. Unfortunately, depicting that gets a bit dicey. Thatâs why Iâd rather a civ like Shona take priority over Kongo since they donât have all that baggage.
True they have some access, but in my opinion this system barely works for the current African civs. So the civ would still kinda suck until that system is improved.
None of these examples are in any way relavent or analogous.
A more equivalent example would be giving Banks to the Russians. Of course you could find examples of Russian banking, but it would be nowhere near the magnitude of the Dutch or Italians.