The oddest thing is that article it cited never said anything about time period choice or the number of empires.
And early modern had major colonial empires with unprecedented scales. I cannot see how it is less “imperial” than medieval.
That was not my point. I was commenting about OP thread. If it is WWI or WWII period or something like that, we can’t say it is “Empire” and “Age of Empires” title would be very inappropriate.
I know that.
I’m just pointing out the statement about aoe3 you cited had no source or historical bases.
You mean few of them did not have empires.
1 Like
Most. Empire in the medieval sense is defined by having an emperor. So it would be like only: China, byzantium, teutons (aus HRE), Persians.
So Franks Mongols Turks Aztecs Inca Mali dont count?
Can you make a list? I think number of civs with an empire and without an empire will be pretty close.
France acquires a emperor title with Napoleon.
By medieval standards its just a Kingdom. You use the rank of Empire way too inflationary.
Mongols are counted as Empire (i forgot about them) since they conquered China. And Khan means smth Like King of Kings = emperor.
Aztec and Inca dont follow the medieval understanding of empires since they are from the new world. Aztec are a confederation of 3 cities btw.
Turks are like france and become an Empire after medieval times.
I know too little about Mali.
But the fun thing ist: you mentioned 6 civs, i mentioned 4. So its at best 10/39 empires. Less than a quater
Edit: Ethiopian is ofc an empire.
I voted for WW I & II because the other choices seemed meh, but honestly I think I would rather have a rework of already covered period broken into shorter time periods or with a shifting in focus. AoE1 needed a full remake more than AoE2, and I would like a game focusing exclusively on the Rise of Rome/Hellenistic Period rather than trying to shoehorn it into one that was designed to stop at Alexander the Great, or one covering only the Early Middle Age, or one covering the Early Modern Period but without focusing so much on colonisation.
Could just name it like they Did Age of Mythology, doesn’t have to have empires in it specifically.
Should have read the site before sharing.
AoE3 is still AoE and not Age of Colony.
Then that wouldnt be an AOE game… maybe something else
Yeah Charlemagne didnt exist, Suleiman wasnt an emperor and ndither wete the Selyucids, the Aztecs were always the triple alliance and definetily didnt treason the other two citids and the Incas surely werent an empire despite it being really the only accurate way to call them 
. Honestly I dont think I have to explain too much what point I am trying to make.
Also, Khmer, Majapahit (Malay), any Indian empire, Gugoryeo (Korea), Huns, Tatars, Spanish, Portuguese, Toungoo (Burmese), Russians and Bulgarians werent empires either.
1 Like
Charlemagne King of the Franks, King of Italy, and Holy Roman Emperor says Hi
Then so does Koreans and Japaneese.
The Ottoman Empire was an empire that controlled much of Southeastern Europe, Western Asia, and Northern Africa between the 14th and early 20th centuries.
Reading the ingame history section will enhance your knowledge of history and will remove this misconception.
From ingame civis these are the once without an empire as per my knowledge.
franks represent the french not the HRE. if they represent the HRE, the teutons wouldnt. So its a zero-sum game for you.
Suileiman wasnt even in the middle ages lol. the ottomans proclaimed to be the roman empire after capturing constantinople. the fall of constantinople is often considered the end of the middle ages.
aztec is an exonym. the Mexicans had no real domination over the other 2 cities. also the aztec had barley any controle outside their capital. great empire you have there.
its really ignorant to use european concepts to describe a culture that was millenia split from europe, asia and africa. the incan ‘empire’ worked very different from old world countries. the term empire was coined through early european description and is not correct. also it was really short lived.
khmer has like zero sources and the few we have describe it as kingdom.
malay is a kingdom
india is a umbrella term. other topics here describe them to represent mor rajastan then the mughals.
korea was a vassal state
huns didnt make it into the middle ages and its a micracle they are in the game at all
tartars - no
spanish/portugese/russians - after middle ages
burmese are vernacular called empire, but not by historians as far as i’ve read
you must be troll. quoting the ingame history and thinking its a credible source 
japan is comparable to europe as many many many historians stated. its the closest thing to european feudalism we get in asia. also the cocept of empire stems from classic antiquity and is comparable in the old world since there were millenia of contact through traderoutes. different state entities had contact with each other and made contracts etc in wich they called them dukes, kings, emperors … so they must have had a similiar concept.
It is but it is not the end of AoE2 timeline.
Maybe an European POV. We consider Majapit as an empire. If I remember, in game campaign too.
True but it had several empires before Mughals. Although in game Indians doesn’t represent them.
- But their territory is often referred to as Hunnic Empire.
Timurid empire?
Franks, Spanish, Koreans, Portuguese, Berbers, Burmese - they had empire during AoE2 timeline?
1 Like
The origin of the Timurid dynasty goes back to the Mongol tribe known as Barlas, who were remnants of the original Mongol army of Genghis Khan,[2][9][10] founder of the Mongol Empire.
Basicaly its the ‘tribe’ problem. Its difficult to sperate the mongols, tartars, cumans, etc. since there was always intermixing and you didnt have to be ethnic mongol to be part of a mongol tribe. At one point every tribe was called huns, mongols or tartars, since no european could tell them apart. If you go to the wiki page of tartars and ctrl.+f ‘timur’ you get 0 matches
also the control of tribes is questionable. most of the time the subjugated people payed tribute and lived on as always. Those people did not feel part of an empire to be sure. Thats the problem with the mongols and the huns (and somewhat the aztecs) since their realms spanned huge ammounts of land, but they had not the equivalent power.
possible. i’m not that deep into south east asians history, but its hard to think of china tollerating a real empire in their neighborhood.
the end and starting points are always difficult in history and so is the term ‘empire’. Most of the time you cant pinpoint the excact moment a powerfull kingdom became an empire. For sake of clearity i choose the middle ages as reffernece for a game about the middle ages,lol. Else it will will end in a slippery slope argument, where everyone pushes the timeline till we get to victorian england and the british empire