In the spirit of the discussion about civilizations and the upcoming gamescom, what is your opinion on the final (optimal) number of civilizations that AOE 4 should have?
Can you provide a list of additional civilizations (preferably without pictures)?
0 voters
This is quite biased, consider I love making Civ designs.
but you can never have to many Civs. in my opinion.
Civ = Content.
You can never have enough Content.
Now when it comes to balancing, yes It can become problematic, but nothing to impossible.
For people who have it in their mind that it is impossible to balance infinite amount of Civās.
You are correct.
But perfect balance in itself is impossible to achieve, unless you sterilize everything leaving you with only a single option. Only then is it perfectly balance.
Will things become more or less balance?
That all depends on your perspective. With great assymetry, comes great challange, not just in balance but also integration. But again. nothing that isnāt any more challening than the usual when doing a project.
But AoE has a solid core fundation. As long as that is kept intact, any ideas and mechanics built upon that, should be able to be towed in line, and over time balanced out.
Yes, there will be Civās stronger vs some Civās naturally. we already have this in game.
But then it becomes a matter of Perspective, and how you interpret Game Balance.
In my opinion, what is most important for game balance is Enjoyment.
In the end, if I get great enjoyment out of it, I couldnāt care less if French were its hardcounter and it only has a 30% winrate against french. If the Civ is really fun to play, it outweighs its difficulties against the French.
Over time, they will find out things that make them so weak against this specific Civ, they will add things to help adjust it a bit.
So my Conclution.
You can never have to many Civs.
It what makes diversity, and Diversity is fun, its one of my top favourite things about games such as AoE2, Civilization, even Total War (before warhammer bleh)
thatās what I had in mind when I created the survey, itās more about what the community wants than possibilities
I think 14 to 16 is more than enough, at least imo.
AoE3 DE was really fun to play at the start, a lot of the new content was good, but it was just too much. A lot of the new mechanics felt like powercreep and new units and civs were pretty much far improved versions of the old civs.
Hopefully if they add new civs to aoe4 they will use a similar formula to the current 8.
I voted 15 for the competitive scene. Out of there, for me as if you/they want 40 civilizations.
The best civ list I could possibly contribute to the community, is never given by my (or anyoneās) worthless personal whims / hype. It is given by rock-solid, steel-substantiated History, taken at time periods throughout AoE4 timespan.
So, here it is. Take a look at the āRise and Fallā civ time analysis and investigation and the final result and Ranking (it even has fitting epic music):
Final Ranking of the investigation (Iāve deleted the amazing flags):
.
.
.
.
If youāre interested in the best DLC themes as investigated from rock-solid history (the famous Topic that may have fully predicted Gamescom new civs 2 months before any hints):
We like your civ designs, Iāve adopted some of your ideas into my ābest suggestions listā, and I generally agree with you, thereās never ātoo much contentā.
However, in my opinion. yes you can have too many civs @Kameho3743 .
Even with 20 civs, not all of them are exactly in the same strength league actually, but their clashes are conceivable at least. If AoE has 100 civs, youāll end up with
Thereās a ridiculousness red line in a classic, history-based franchise.
I picked 16 just because itās a nice multiple. Itās really difficult for me to pick only 8 new civs because itāll leave out some good ones. But just because I like a challenge:
Turks
Byzantines
Vikings
Khmer
Vijayanagara/South India
Japanese
Mali
I would really like Hungarians to take spot 8 but Ethiopia makes a good DLC combo with Mali so thatās my guess.
If there were 20 tho, weād have a nice set of 4 themed DLCs with 3 civs each. Toss another civ in with Mali/Ethiopia and maybe add a European DLC.
I hate the increasing number of AoE2 civs, feels like they are only a cash grab, I just hope they dont do the same mistake with AoE4.
number of civs does not matter.
everyone will pick French + English to play knights + arbalest. Cause other units trash.
An increase of 44 to 47 civs is different on so many levels from an increase of 8 to 11.
That. Is why we need AoE IV to be better than AoE II.
i would trade my soul for the japanese to be included in the next DLC just to have my fantasy of āknights vs samuraiā. 
Dont Bash me guys ( Ķ”Ā° ĶŹ Ķ”Ā°)
KEKW
It was about aoe4. French + English - is dominating in low elo ladder.
And you know why? Cause with all ECO difference in aoe4, Cav + archers is the only option.
Iāve always had the fantasy of a Persian Assassin (Hasashin) vs NInja(Shinobi).
Basically Prince of Persia vs Naruto. lel.
think 20 is to many, all civ have many details, for me the best num is like 16, 8+ civ, in the time, like 3 years
More than 20 would be fine,less than 20 would be very little, being that the civs of aoe 4 are not as asymmetrical as those of the 3ā¦
I usually use cav more cannons, the infantry is very slowā¦
Yes, and then to do AoE 5 xdā¦
you are too toxic bro
play age3 if you like more
I do, only AoE 4 left me a little cold after spending all their campaigns, although I still consider that it is an excellent game and that it has a lot of potential ahead (eg. Mongols, repair bridges, buy mercenaries and cities with gold, etc etc etc)ā¦