New North American Civilisations concept

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

Inspired by the new South American civilisations I reworked my old concepts for North American Civilisations. North Amerian DLC suggestion (I know there is a typo but I can’t edit it anymore which is secretly the main reason why I make a new thread.)

Disclaimer

Suggesting civilisations doesn’t mean I don’t want your favourite civilisation in the game. It doesn’t even mean that I prioritise those civilisations over other suggestions.

New civilisations

  • Haudenosaunee
  • Muscogee
  • Oceti Sakowin

I don’t like the name “Mississippians” for a civilisation because that is not how they called themselves, nor how anyone else called them back in the day. It is just the name archaeologists gave them based on the region they lived in. So they are Mississippians but they are called by the modern names of their descendants.

Regional Units

  • Eagle Scout Line
  • Mantlet Line

Mantlet

Infantry and Siege Unit that throws Torches at medium range.

They are good against buildings and archers since they have high pierce armour. Especially good against Skirmishers since they only take 1 damage from them while doing full damage in return.

Proposed Stats
Name Mantlet Heavy Mantlet
Cost 100 Wood 50 Gold 100 Wood 50 Gold
Training Time 30s 30s
Hit Points 150 200
Attack (melee) 7 8
vs. Building 8 10
Rate of Fire 3 3
Range 5 6
Armour 0/6 0/8
Armour class Infantry Infantry
Siege Weapon Siege Weapon
Speed 0.8 0.8
Line of Sight 7 8

They are affected by:

  • Infantry Blacksmith Upgrades
  • Barracks technologies (Squires and Arson)
  • Siege Engineers

Regional Buildings

  • Wooden Fort
  • Wooden Wall

Wooden Fort

Hybrid between Krepost and Castle. Replaces the Castle for North American civilisations.

Proposed Stats
Name Wooden Fort
Cost 350 Stone 300 Wood
Hit Points 3800
Attack 10
Range 8
Armour 4/6/4

Wooden Wall

Replaces Stone Wall. Same HP as Stone Wall but lower armour.

Does not replace the Palisade Wall!

Proposed Stats
Name Wooden Wall
Cost 3 Stone 2 Wood
Hit Points 1080 (Feudal Age) → 1800 (Castle/Imperial Age)
Armour 4/6/4

There is not upgrade similar to Fortified Wall.

Haudenosaunee

Alternative name would be Iroquois. Their federation was founded around 1450 but their ancestors lived in that area for a much longer time.

They are an Infantry civilisation.

Bonuses:

  • Villagers drop of 10% additional Wood
  • Mills Replaced with Longhouses

Team Bonus:

  • Buildings +2 Line of Sight

Unique Technologies

  • Castle Age: All Infantry get a charge attack that does 2x their normal attack (including bonus damage). Does not recharge while in combat.
  • Imperial Age:

Unique Unit

Tomahawk Thrower

Ranged Infantry that is good against other Infantry. Higher range then other ranged Infantry.

Proposed stats
Name Tomahawk Thrower Elite Tomahawk Thrower
Cost 30 Wood 50 Gold 30 Wood 50 Gold
Training Time 15s 15s
Hit Points 50 60
Attack (melee) 5 6
vs. Infantry 5 6
vs. Shock Infantry 1 2
Rate of Fire 2 2
Range 6 7
Armour 0/0 0/0
Armour class Infantry Infantry
Speed 1 1
Line of Sight 7 8

Unique Building

Longhouse

  • Drop of for Food
  • Provides 10 population
  • Costs 100 Wood
  • Size 3x3 tiles

Important missing technologies

  • Stable
  • All gunpowder units
  • Cavalry Archer
  • Siege Engineers
  • Ring Archer Armour
  • Arbalester
  • Thumb Ring
  • Keep

Concept

Their Castle Age UT is pretty powerful. It allows them to practically always get 1 additional hit in when starting a fight. That includes Tomahawks too.

They should play pretty generic. Their additional wood bonus is slower then the Celts but it also makes trees give 10% more wood overall which helps making trees last longer. Extra wood that they need for their wood costing fortifications and Wood costing Unique Unit.

Muscogee

Also called Creek. They represent the Southern Mississippian people.

They are an Archer civilisation.

Bonuses

  • Berries last 50% longer
  • Stone miners generate an additional 33% Wood in addition to Stone
  • Mantlets and Buildings receive 20% less bonus damage

Team Bonus

Unique Technologies

  • Castle Age: Eagle Line Gold cost replaced with additional Food cost (70 Food 0 Gold)
  • Imperial Age: Archer Units and buildings +1 attack +1 range

Unique Unit

Javelin Thrower

Archer that is good against cavalry. Does more damage in close range.

Proposed stats
Name Javelin Thrower Elite Javelin Thrower
Cost 30W 40G 30W 40G
Training Time 15s 15s
Hit Points 40 50
Attack (pierce) 5 6
vs. Cavalry 3 4
vs. Camel 2 3
vs. Elephant 2 3
Rate of Fire 2 2
Range 4 4
Armour 1/1 1/2
Armour class Archer Archer
Speed 0.96 0.96
Line of Sight 7 8
Ability +3 attack at 3 tiles +4 attack at 3 tiles

Holds a javelin in both hands and does not have a shield to make clear it’s not a Skirmisher.

Important missing technologies

  • Stable
  • All gunpowder units
  • Cavalry Archer
  • Ring Archer Armour
  • Plate Mail Armour

Concept

Strong buildings but fragile units. Their Archers have both additional range and more damage at the cost of lower armour. They can also use Mantlets as mobile walls. Since they have Siege Engineers they do have additional range. While their Javelin Throwers are a good answer to Cavalry. Their Elite Warriors are missing the last armour upgrade but they only cost food, making them a good Hussar alternative.

Their early game eco bonus is that Berries last longer. That doesn’t give them a higher food income but it allows them to delay farms and use the extra wood on Archers. Later they get Wood from Stone miners which helps them get their wood costing fortifications up quicker.

Oceti Sakowin

Also called Sioux. Represent the Northern Mississippians.

They are a Cavalry civilisation.

Bonuses

  • Archery Range units move 10% faster
  • All buildings cost -15% Wood
  • Houses do not lose their population room when destroyed (Mongols get a new UT since no one wants to pay for this anyway)

Team Bonus

  • Lumber Camps, Mining Camps and Mills are constructed 100% faster

Unique Technologies

  • Castle Age: Eagle Line +6 vs Cavalry (+5 vs. Camels)
  • Imperial Age: Cavalry Archers ignore one melee attack every 30 seconds

Unique Unit

Tokala Soldier

Cavalry that get’s stronger when outnumbered.

  • +1 attack for every 5 enemies that outnumber allied units in a 10 tile radius (+5 max)
  • 1 HP/Minute regeneration for every 1 enemy unit that outnumbers allied units in a 10 tile radius (25 max)
Name Tokala Soldier Elite Tokala Soldier
Cost 70 Food 50 Gold 70 Food 50 Gold
Training Time 15s 15s
Hit Points 120 150
Attack 10 12
Rate of Fire 2 2
Armour 1/2 2/3
Armour class Cavalry Cavalry
Speed 1.5 1.5
Line of Sight 5 6
Ability Stronger when outnumbered Stronger when outnumbered

Important available technologies:

  • (Heavy) Cavalry Archer
  • Parthian Tactics

Important missing technologies

  • Stable (no Husbandry and Bloodlines)
  • All gunpowder units
  • Cavalry Armour upgrades
  • Siege Engineers
  • Arbalester
  • Champion
  • Halberdier
  • Gambesones
  • Guard Tower

Concept

They are inspired by the Mapuche. They also have cavalry without having Cavalry armour upgrades or a Stable. But their focus is more in Archer units then Infantry. They have strong Crossbowmen in Castle Age with all upgrades and an additional 10% speed but they fall of in Imperial because they are missing Arbalester. Their Cavalry Archers do miss Husbandry and Bloodlines but that is compensated by their Civilisation Bonus and Unique Technology. Their Eagle Warriors are better against Cavalry then other ones, so they can somewhat take on the role from the Pikeman since they are missing Halberdier.

Their main eco bonus is that all buildings cost -10% Wood. That provides some extra wood in all stages of the game which also helps training more Archers.

Thoughts

I only gave each civilisation 1 unique unit because I think that is enough because they already have 2 regional units and 2 regional buildings.

I also tried to make a civ for each base unit type (Infantry, Archers and Cavalry) with relatively straight forward bonuses.

The concepts are not complete so you can add your thoughts.

5 Likes
2

Not sure a two word name would fly. I think I’d go with Siouans, to cover both Sioux / Oceti Sakowin and the Dhegiha to the south.

Would the Tupí castle be changed into this?

https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Fortified_Palisade_Wall_(Age_of_Empires_II) ?

I propose Iroquoians so that the civ would also cover other groups like Monongahela or Saint Lawrence Iroquois.

3

That would probably make more sense.

The Fortified Palisade is just a Palisade with 2x HP pretty much. I wanted a weaker Stone Wall not a stronger Palisade.

1 Like
4

the same questions i always ask (because this civ is clearly too late in my opinion), what would the campaign be? who would the AI leaders be?

all the history we have from pre-colonial times are intermixed with legends, we don’t know if people like Hiawatha even existed, let alone when they lived. I don’t think aoe2 campaigns should be based on myths, this was one of the major criticism of the 3K campaign.

aoe2 uses modern terms, exonyms and anachronistic names for other civs as well (Byzantines, Saracens, Teutons). I think “mississipians” is actually recognizable, “oceti sakowin” i have never heard of before.

this results in a trash unit without a trash counter. i don’t think it’s a good idea. I am not convinced that missing plate mail is enough.

horses weren’t common in north america until the mid 17th century. a north american cav civ does not belong in aoe2. If you want north american horse cultures, you need a game set in the 17th and 18th centuries.

3 Likes
5

The Haudenosaunee did fight the Oceti Sakowin and the Muscogee did fight the Spanish.

But there are probably a few more scenarios.

I didn’t look into names. I could honestly not name you more then a hand full AI leaders for pretty much any civ in the name atm.

Some current campaigns like the Ethiopian one are partially based on myths. Honestly even campaigns like the Huns one is half based on myth since we have no written documents from the Huns themselves.

Civilisation names are really secondary. I think a civilisation should not be named by archaeologists simply based on the region their remains where be found in.

Byzantines, Saracenes and Teutons were names that were used back then.

Also those are all civilisations that were added in 1999. We have the year 2026 now, standards have changed.

I’m comparing them to Forced Levy Two Handed Swordsman which have all Blacksmith upgrades and are just missing Gambesons.

I thought about not giving them the Elite Eagle Warrior upgrade but without the last Blacksmith upgrade they would just be way to weak.

I know it’s at the very end of the time frame of AoE2 but they are very iconic.

6

The one civ on the top of the list for North America would be the Cahokia/Mississippians, who had a fairly developped civ in modern-day Missouri. They got wiped out though, be it by the Iroquois or by the Sioux.

7

Do we have any clear records on Haudenosaunee history? Enough to build a historical campaign in the aoe2 timeframe?

I think that’s a major issue. civs need about 10 AI names at a minimum.

-The Byzantines called themselves Romans. The term Byzantines only really started gaining popularity after the fall of Constantinople
-the saracens never called themselves saracens, it’s a catch-all term used by europeans (or crusaders) for arabs/muslims
-Teutons is neither a historic nor a modern term for medieval Germans. teutonic was occasionally used an adjective (eg the Teutonic order) or in latin texts. Mostly they would be called Allemans (or some variation), Deutsch/Dutch, Franks or Nemec. Or they referred to them by regional names (Bavarians, Saxons, Swabians, Styrians etc)

i agree with this. We should hold new civs to a higher standard, but we still have civs named by more recognizable (or medieval sounding) exonyms instead of endonyms: bohemians instead of czechy, georgians instead of sakartvelo (not sure about the spelling).

it’s almost a century after the end of the timeframe. I know native americans on horses are iconic, but they belong in aoe3, not aoe2. napoleonic era warfare is also iconic.

I generally think we should not have any north american civs, as they were not developed enough and generally lived in relatively small tribes. Even the most famous cities (eg Cahokia population 10-20k) were not much more than towns compared to Meso-American (Tenochtitlan 200k), South-American (cusco 100+k), European (London, Paris, Rome, Constantinople each had 100+k), African (Cairo 400k) or Asian (several over 1million) cities.

2 Likes
8

Puru only has five I think,we are beyond any traditional paramiters we had for making a civi now (Ai names uu real wonder campaign unique voices).

9

they are not a aoe2 civ. the further back we go in history the less reliable the records are, so i think it’s more acceptable in chronicles.

I think the bigger issue than ai leader names is making an aoe2 campaign: medieval and at least mostly historical. there is way of doing this for any north american civ

10

We have to find a compromise here. We can choose:

  1. leave out large parts of the world
  2. add things with less historical evidence (like no written texts)
  3. add things that are at the edge of the time frame

The 3 Kingdoms are a bad example for this because there is enough in this area within the time frame that has a lot of written records but for North America we don’t have that.

You would likely rather not cover an large part of the world then have civilisations outside of the time frame or with not enough historical evidence to make a traditional campaign.

1 Like
11

Like I like the mode but it really needs to be its own game so it can’t be seen as a restriction on aoe2 civ bonuses or designs

1 Like
12

@SoullyLizzer is a Native and mentioned having some campaign ideas on the discord

13

i think it’s fair to leave out parts of the world that didn’t have civilizations at a comparable level of development.

correct. especially since we have a game that focuses on that precise period in human history: aoe3.

2 Likes
14

From a purely practical point of view, I’d say the minimum is seven, so that if someone plays against seven computer players with the same civ, they all have different names. I guess if you do this with Puru, there are some duplicate names. (I can’t test it because I don’t have the DLC for them. Also I don’t think I’ve ever played against even two computer players with the same civ.)

I don’t think it is: Athenians and Shu have an identical food from wood bonus.

I’m not saying I’m opposed to North American civs, but option 1 here doesn’t seem like a compromise to me.

1 Like
15

Actually eight, if you’re crazy like me and like to watch AIs fighting each other.

16

I don’t think I realised that was an option…

17

I discovered that a while ago. I have an entire series on my YouTube channel that’s centered around two Extreme AIs fighting each other. They have some pretty funny behavior.

1 Like
18

I would love to see a North American DLC, the Mississippians and the Haudenosaunee are on the top of my list.
Like the others, I think Mississippians are fine enough, it is a Native word from the Ojibwe, meaning great river.

The Mississippians did dress up as birds so that they get Eagles sounds good to me. However I don’t think it will work for the Haudenosaunee.

Also I don’t want to give any North American Civ a horse unit outside a converted stable or campaign moment.
The Native Americans on horseback are very iconic, but that happens after the AoE 2 timeline.
However an Easter egg unit like the Xolotl Warrior would be very cool.

1 Like
19

One possible issue is choosing the language, as the Mississippian cultural sphere encompassed multiple ethnic groups. Would it be Dhegihan Siouan of the Osage spoken in Cahokia, Muskogean of Coosa, Caddoan like the Wichita of Quivira? Cherokee because they are the most numerous today and have an even greater number of white people claiming descent from “Cherokee princesses”, making them an obvious choice from the marketing point of view, even though they were vassals of the Muskogee/Creek-ruled Coosa? A mix of various languages?

Making a civ out of every chiefdom encountered by De Soto might be a step too far, but one civ for the entire Southeast wouldn’t be ideal either given the utter lack of known leader names.

Assuming Devs are generous and we get a five civ DLC again, I’d go with the following to cover the five major language families prominent in the east:

  • Siouans (both the Dhegiha of Cahokia and the Sioux of the Seven Council Fires up north)
  • Muskogeans (a fairly straightforward umbrella, unlike other ethno-linguistic groups they inhabited a continuous territory and were eventually united as the Creek Confederacy.)
  • Caddoans (Quivira, Caddoan Mississippian Culture and their descendants like Wichita, Pawnee, etc.)
  • Iroquoians (Haudenosaunee Confederacy, Monongahela culture, St Lawrence Iroquois; I’d risk adding Cherokee as well, despite the cultural differences they do have oral history of migrating from the north and Ghigau can be a cool UU. And including them enlarges the pool of AI leader names.)
  • Algonquians (basically an umbrella for everything Algonquian. It’s debated whether Shawnee belonged to Fort Ancient culture or occupied mounds erected by previous inhabitants, but they are prominent enough to warrant inclusion. The Mississippi river and Cahokia are now known under their Algonquian names after all. Plus Vinlandsaga needs its Skraelings.)
2 Likes
20

a cool bonus to represent mound builders could be that their buildings always get the “on a hill” defense and attack bonus

3 Likes