Tibetans are likely never going to happen, too much of a touchy subject and Microsoft won’t want to anger any potential Chinese audience. Hopefully I’m wrong about that,
Maybe you are using a translator, I cant understand what you are trying to say here.
Are you saying to have a civi called HRE and make the teutons become the TO?
This would have the additional benefit of giving us a civilization that starts with the letter “Q” which we don’t have yet.
1 Like
This is the silliest civ name I’ve seen outside of AoE4’s variant civs. But for me, the bigger question is how would this civ differ from Teutons? I think they already represent the Germanic part of the Holy Roman Empire very well.
Wales is already very well represented by Britons; Ireland and Scotland much less so because Celts are nonsense, but they are effectively in the game already.
I find it highly implausible that there are people who currently don’t play AoE2, but would play it if a specific civilisation was added. You really think there are potential players thinking “I don’t play AoE2, but if only it had the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation in it, I would play it all the time”?
3 Likes
We saw it with the DLC “Dawn of Dukes” that when the Poles came into the game, the number of players in Poland increased. In general, market research shows that people are more likely to play a game if they can identify with a character (or in our case civs).
The name already exists in the short form in AoE 4 (there it is simply called Holy Roman Empire or short: Holy)
A disin idea might be an allusion to the elective kingship with the electors (“Kurfürsten”), which was unique at the time. However, I have trust in the game designers.
In Burgundy and France they also managed to design two different civs with a similar orientation.
Wales and Britten are different too! While the British civ came about through the migration of Anglo and Saxon people, the Welsh people had been there for a long time. They also had their own language (Cymraeg), their own legal system and, unlike the Brits, no feudal system. The military also differed greatly. While the British required every farmer to have archery equipment and know how to use it, Wales often relied on a kind of Gurilia tactic. The missionization of Christianity also took place over 300 years later
Firstly, do you have direct evidence of that? I saw a lot of Poles already playing demanding Poland, but that just means DLC sales.
Secondly by that logic, a Chinese-theme DLC should be inevitable, due to the massive potential market.
AoE4 is not AoE2. Civs in AoE4 are closer to empires, while AoE2 are cultural and ethnic groups. See Delhi Sultanate in AoE4 vs Hindustanis in AoE2.
Not really at this point in the Middle Ages. Wales spent a lot of it completely conquered, and before then they were not a unified polity.
The Britons civ has elements of both, to get Wales would require basically making two new civs, and scrapping Britons. It’s not happening.
CCP eased their video game censorship laws over a year ago. Also there are games you can play in China as Middle Ages Tibetans. And the Tibetans were twice considered for AoE2, but lost out to other Asian representatives.
There are no issues adding them outside of Microsoft suddenly getting cold feet.
5 Likes
I would need to see some data on this to believe it. As I said, I find it highly implausible.
Yes, and AoE4 has a different civ naming convention from AoE2. AoE4 civs represent specific political states, AoE2 civs are cultural groups.
I obviously wasn’t explicit enough. How would the functional design of the civ differ from Teutons? How would their gameplay be different? Naming some political feature of the Holy Roman Empire doesn’t answer the question, especially since politics is not really represented in AoE2 civ designs.
I think you’re getting “British” and “English” mixed up. Welsh people are definitely British. The Britons’ civ design is primarily based on England and Wales from the late 13th century until the end of the 100 Years’ War.
This didn’t happen until after England had conquered Wales – this was required of Welsh people as well.
What? The Welsh were Christianised before the English (although there were Christians living in what is now England before the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms officially became Christian) – not that this would have any impact on civ design.
2 Likes
First: what you are referring to here was my answer to the fact that the name is too long.
Secondly: the fact that the civs in Age2 only relate to the culture is not entirely true. Otherwise, for example, Borgund, Bohemia and perhaps Sicily would have no right to exist, since none of them were separate cultures
Bohemians are most certainly a seperate culture…
Burgundy and Sicily you’re right, but they’re also fairly widely considered the most dubious additions to the game, and they’re exceptions not a rule.
2 Likes
The figures for this could be seen in the dashboard annual review. Unfortunately I only have the one for 2024
https://aoe2recs.com/year-in-review/
By the way, the Koreans were added to the game for exactly this reason, as can be seen from an interview with Sandy Petersen (game developer of Age2). And in Return of Romes-DLC there is also a civ aded for this reason in Age 1. So it’s not like the developers never did that
I have never spoken out against a China DLC, on the contrary: in my first post I said that I wanted a China or a Germany DLC. So yes, that argument also counts for China
that is correct. My mistake. In other words, that would mean splitting up the civ.
England: The Church in England was closely linked to the Roman Church from the time of missionary work by Augustine of Canterbury (597).
Wales: The Celtic Church had a certain degree of independence until the early Middle Ages and maintained its own traditions until it became more closely aligned with Rome in the 8th century.
However, there are always allusions in the properties of the unique units, technologies or bonuses to the political situation of the CIV or historical events
Edit:
While Wales retained its Celtic roots more strongly, England experienced greater integration into the feudal European system through the Norman Conquest. The cultural differences persisted into modern times despite increasing English dominance.
And you’re right, it’s unlikely that we’ll see the Wales, Scots or Irish in any form in the next DLC, but there is still potential for new civs in the future and perhaps a new Celtic regional unit for the 3 civ
Yeah, they did it, it really didn’t do what MS wanted it to do in either instance.
3 Likes
The devs were strong-armed into it with Korea, and it didn’t work anyway (especially not with the Dai Viet).
Let me re-phrase. Then China should have been a higher priority than the other DLCs we have gotten, if pure fishing for new players from that region was the goal.
If we’re splitting European civs to this fine degree (and I am including Teutons in this), then we should start be re-addressing the lob-sided balance of civs towards Europe.
For example. South Asia is about 2/3rds the size of Europe (and had higher population during the Middle Ages), and has 4 civs to Europe’s 19. They would need about another 10 civs to bring them up before smaller European* civs are added.
*Some of the ones I’ve seen people suggest didn’t have an empire. Ever.
3 Likes
Burgundians are a different germanic tribe from franks,bohemians are slavs and very much its own thing,sicily is normans.
If you really want to spilt the teutons TO and HRE are the worst choices to pick.saxons bavarians austrians swiss are better candidates.
2 Likes
An important point is the current number of players and the potential of this number. Even though America, Argentina and Mexico have large numbers of players, it is difficult to find a civ that players can identify with (although personally I would perhaps like the Tlaxcaltecs or the Huastecs)
Therefore, in terms of player numbers, almost only China or Germany remain if you want to potentially reach the largest group possible. A growing group of players needs an advertising medium (either marketing or an existing player base) and an emotional introduction to the game (where a connection to a civ can help)
By the way, Campania is also a good introduction to the game, which is why I was looking forward to the chronicles, even though I almost only play multiplayer.
1 Like
Then in that case, it is a much better idea to make a Chinese DLC and not touch Germany at all. As Germany has a far far lower population than China, but nearly the same number of current players. Meaning a DLC set in Germany would have diminishing returns due to fewer remaining parts of the population who would be potentially interested.
Aztecs & Mayans.
4 Likes
Burgundy was a notable civ in ancient times, but in the Middle Ages it was a rich region, but it was a duchy of France, whose culture was almost no different from the French. At least not like the regional differences in France at the moment anyway
Bohemia was one of the 7 principalities in the Holy Roman Empire and, like every other principality, of course had its own cultural peculiarities but nothing outstanding. The only special thing about Bohemia was that they were temporarily part of Great Moravia.
That would be an alternative approach that would actually work better with the two principal principalities in line
Do the current inhabitants of Mexico, USA or Brazil actually see themselves as descendants of the native inhabitants or as descendants of (often European) immigration
1 Like
If you take that into account alone, you’re right (I would like both a China and a Germany DLC)
But if you bring in other local aspects it becomes difficult. How high is the player potential in the countries really? In Asia, PC games are decreasing a bit, but mobile games and console games are increasing. The German region is also very special, especially when it comes to strategy games. The bottom line is that it’s hard to predict what would be better in terms of sheer number of players
For me as an American of European ancestry, yes, I view my decent as being European (English and Ukrainian mainly), but at the same time I would love to see my part of the world represented a little bit (I’ve hoped for Mississippians as opposed to Haudenosaunee, they fit the timeframe better). Buuuuut i’m also someone who already plays the game, I don’t necessarily think that would draw new players as much as just give pre-existing players a closer-to-home civ.
Bohemians are also ethnically Slavic as opposed to the ethnic Germans of (most) of the rest of the HRE.
1 Like
This is exactly why a civi called HRE will never work in aoe2.Teutons are HRE and TO.