id guess it would either be Norse or Danes, depending on how specific they want to be.
the Kalmar union is cool, but by the end it was more an extension of Denmark than anything else and also just relatively short lived, you’d miss all the aspects people would want from a Scandinavian faction.
Yes,you are right,they would be German states within a great German nation
Exactly,that would be another way to do it,as well as kind of like the US states…
In fact,Hungary was part of Austria from 1526 (product of the division of the first between Austrians and Ottomans after the Battle of Mohács) until the creation of the Austrian empire in 1804,to later be recognized as a constituent nation of a dual monarchy as the it was Austria-Hungary in 1867.
Why do you want more damn civs? I see players not even using USA or Inca, and the last african ones.
There’s already 19 civilizations, would be implayable to add even more since is really hard to know them properly.
New players would get totally lost in this mess already.
Inca are pretty niche, usa is actually pretty popular Most used civs [Poll]
As for the African civs, I think lots of people have been using them, I see them relatively frequently.
133 votes, does not represent the 4.5k people playing everyday.
Could you please name all those 3 units? I did an analysis of German cards and units several months ago here on this forum. I found 1-2 cards specifically related to Austria. The rest can be applied for the the areas of todays Germany.
What I would do with Germans? Thats easy. Since they lack almost any Austrian influence I will press for higher representation of northern areas such as: Hesse, Hannover, Prussia. That means they can retain Uhlans, but I would add Hussars. They should have musks and retain skirms. General focus of this civ should be on economy (higher efficiency of works, more factories/higher effiecient factory) while at same time the armies should be less numerous but highly effective. By this I am trying to capture the protestant nature, emphasize on economy (later Prussian state) and small but highly efficient armies.
To incorporate southern parts of todays Germany they can keep settler wagon to emulate southern catholic Germans (Bavarians).
I am not talking about balance I speak about “directions” in which I would explore possibilities.
I agree to some extent. If we say we follow purely colonial powers then Germans should have been omitted… On the other hand we have Turks… And Germans were I would call them “passive colonizers”. I mean they colonized heavily but in the form of emmigration… Plus in the years after AoE3 timeframe they eventually became colonizers… So I would say their addition makes sense in some way. But generally I agree with you. Yet, we are now in the European DLC topic so any the doors are opened 
I will post my opinion on this forum as long as I feel this opinion should be heart
I know. We were part of it also since 1526…
war wagon, dopplesoldner and Uhlan.
war wagon is hussite obviously but the region for pretty much this entire period was a part of the habsburg monarchy.
dopplesoldner afaik are a special version of the landsknecth, which again is most famously used by Austria.
and well Uhlan is clearly Austrian, they are by far the most famous users of them.
oh yeah lets make prussia, famous for their ranged infantry, into a melee infantry faction. the faction does not at all look like prussia.
by this point you no longer have the same faction, they removed the musk from the faction during development for balance/uniqueness.
this makes little logic in AOE 3, you get a better economy=you have more units.
i think i made it pretty clear why the developers themselves dont see an open door to germany. we have other places that dont even have any representation, they should have it before germany starts to play Speshul.
also honestly, i feel like none of you guys are thinking about the gameplay implementation of the german faction, they dont have musk because of gameplay, and similarly they dont get hussars because of gameplay.
i have never suggested you cant, but i am real tired of the same “BUT Muh germany is more important”. germany is pan german, you have to accept it, and none of the ideas you guys have is coming anywhere close to seperating the faction in 2 in a meaningful or fun way. reality is the faction most of all look like the catholic league from the 30 years war, they are far more austrian than prussian as is.
is the faction 100% historical? no, and that doesnt matter, making them historical accurate would mean making them a worse france.
In fact,the Germans colonized or tried to have overseas colonies in the Caribbean and West Africa (Klein Venedig in the 16th century (1528-1545);the Guianas (1669-1672),the Prussian Gold Coast (1682-1721) and the Danish Caribbean (1686-1735) during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries and finally in 1860 they tried again in the Caribbean but were stopped by the Monroe doctrine.Their last attempts to achieve it would be in the twentieth century:Venezuela in 1902,Mexico with the Zimmermann telegram in 1917, and even during the Cold War,when Fidel Castro gave an islet from Cuba to East Germany in 1972,but only symbolically.
so as you kinda stated, not german.
as for the german gold coast as far as i can tell it was 2 forts but ill admit i know very little about it, didn’t seem like it went particularly well tho considering they sold it within 2 generations.
the only legitimate german colonies are in africa and east asia, and they fall outside of the games periode.
Another topic converted to the good old German/Austria etc. discussion I see.
The Germans we have in game are themed around the Holy Roman Empire we can see this clearly in the unit roster and in the few historical references in the cards. And even though the Prussians were the main rival of Austria and the HRE they were still mostly a part of it. Frederick the Great might not have led it, but he still was the Elector of Brandenburg. And besides he is not the only leader in game that is fighting under a wrong flag, we have Napoleon under a Bourbon flag and Isabella under the Burgundian cross for example. It seems to me the leaders were mostly picked for their historical fame, their general celebrity status and just needed to have a general link to the faction they were leading. And how often do we see these leaders really? They might as well not exist when playing vs other players or when playing the faction yourself. If I play as the Germans and rename my home city the only thing Prussian about the faction is the Needle gunner. Which was invented after the fall of the HRE no less and would be better renamed to something like the Windbüchse for example.
Austrian references might not be clear at a glance but they are there and Austria and the HRE might as well be the same thing during the game’s time period. With few exception the HRE was Habsburg led for almost the entirety of the game’s time period and the Habsburg of course were the Archdukes of Austria, their royal house so to say. It is basically impossible to separate them from a HRE themed faction and adding an additional Austrian faction really means having 2 Austria in the game. I can imagine the devs are unwilling to do so a thing.
The devs clearly also think the faction is mostly based on the HRE if the flag change is any indication. I don’t know why they didn’t continue the small rework trend (probably to not waste voice acting work) but if the Germans were to be further reworked to be more HRE I can imagine something like the following:
Then if any gameplay changes are allowed?
5. Wallenstein’s contracts reworked to shipping Highlander mercenaries and enabling them in the Tavern. Both to strengthen to mercenary theme the Germans have and actually have the tech be useful in general game play.
6. Mexico revolution added. For the Habsburg theme. A minor thing.
Well As a Czech I absolutely disagree with you 
That is a Bohemian unit from period before the Austrian rule. Honestly, this has zero relation to Austria. Besides until 1626 (cca) Bohemia was “independent” on Austrian Crown. It had its own parliament and Austrians/Habsburgs could not come and called for soldiers…
As far as I know these units were mostly mercenaries from all parts of Germany waiting for any employment. They were employed mostly by HRE emperor as well as Italien mercenaries. As a result I wouldnt say they are specifically Austrian.
That is not true. Based on wiki they were originally Polish, later employed by Prussians (! another weak link to Prussia), later by Russia and Austria. And then even by British and French.
You neednt to be salty. If you cant discuss just stop reply to my answers… Saying current Germans are melee … it sounds strange… Rarely I see in MP zweihänder… Uhlans I see at the beginning and then they usually turn into skirm/cannons/wagons… Anyway, I proposed changes, not dropping the whole concept. You asked me, I replied. I really dont understand what do you follow… Are you trying to insult others?
Could be…
If you look at the way how new DLC is designed, how many new mechanics were added, I am pretty sure there is a way… The simplest and most brutal approach would be to decrease max pop…
I dont care. This forum is for idea exchanges. I have proposed very raw approach. If you disagree, I am fine with it. I am saying that “Austrian and its realm is already covered” is wrong statement. I supported it with several points. I cant do more.
No I am not like a guy “Deutchland, Der Erste!”. If devs leave Germans without a touch, I am fine with it as long as nobody would say Germans already covers Austrian realm which is not true. If a general concesus would be this area has some troubles but we should put focus elsewhere, I am fine.
The end: It is not Austrian Its a myth Its a mix of units/cards/events from central Europe with huge German flavour.
Yes, something I have known something is new to me. Thanks. I see it as I wrote. It was not a really full blown state organised movement to rule the seas and launch distant colonial states to empower national state. It looks like more a experiments what if… Partly because Germany was not a single powerful state at that time which could have capacity to support large navies etc. That came around 1880 in Scramble for Africa.
Instead of choosing cities, states or alliances you choose factions/families.
Those factions are influential domestic and in case of Poland-Lithuania also foreign families and other groups.
So for example Italy can choose the house of Medici as a patron while Poland-Lithuania can choose for example a Saxon Noble as a King.
This way Italy and Poland-Lithuania could share the same mechanics.
Maybe make it in a way that you can only have one faction at once but you keep some of the bonuses of the factions you had before like unlocked unique units.
Austrian Uhlans are far more famous than Prussian Uhlans. cavalry generally speaking played a fairly small role in Prussian military, instead they relied to a large extend on their line infantry.
byt the time Prussia rose to power things like heavily armored infantry, esp with melee weapons was going out of fashion. Austria however used many melee infantry units during the 30 years war which is the basis for this unit.
also the HRE emperor was Austrian almost always, so you kinda admit they are austrian now.
maybe you dont see them often but never the less the melee infantry is 1 of the things that make the germans unique, and clearly replaced the musketeer in the factions roster. the swordsman is the main reason germany does not have musketeers, the devs wanted you to use them and that probably just proved hard if you could just go musketeers+skirmishers, probably the same reason why dutch dont get musketeers because that way halbs and ruyters are actually being used.
which is exactly why they dont get hussars because hussars are objectively superior to uhlans, it is a negative to have the uhlan and is why germany dont get hussars.
the changes you suggested would fundamentally make the faction less unique and would remove the main flavor of the faction, giving them hussars and musketeers would de facto be the same as removing doppels and uhlans.
i am sorry if it comes off as an insult, that isn’t the goal but my issue here is that it just seems rather shortsighted, you have maybe adressed some historical accuracy issues but in return you’ve destroyed the faction meaning it is not a realistic or good way of changing the faction.
in my vision of german states mechanic then you get the option to unlock some of these units but it is a decision you have to make, therefor there is a good chance people wont unlock musketeers for example but instead gets like say 20% gather rate to settler wagons, just spitting ideas you know but still, it is a way to include more german units without destroying the factions identity and making the faction more fun and unique than it is now.
that is what the devs say. i generally agree with the statement but its not my words.
we know for certain that both germany and dutch had musketeers in the beta, but they where removed, likely to force the factions to play differently from other nations. like how often do you see ports or french use halbs?
even then you probably will just see an increase in use of natives, which would be fairly ahistorical.
there is just no way a better eco would not result in more units, you can always just reduce your settler population as germany already does today in treaty.
wouldn’t be a bad idea for Poland i guess. i would say that for Italy i still think a states/city-states mechanic seems more promising but for Poland factions wouldn’t be a bad idea.
as for Denmark i would like a Great people age up, there are plenty of options to take from. so you’d have say a general/admiral, a politician, an artist and a scientist to choose from in each era that then gives bonuses, just as ideas these could be:
Scientist: unlocks a new technology to research
General: gives a minor boost to a specific unit and sends a batch of said units
Artist: gives experience/shipments
Politician: gives economic bonuses and sends resource crates
their techs/bonuses would be related to what they did
so as examples:
H.C. Ørsted (Scientist, industrial): Electro magnetisme (factories produce more resources)
De Meza (General, imperial): sends 10 landsoldat, landsoldat gain +5% MR, +10% HP and 5% speed
Struensee (politician, fortress): settlers move 10% faster and gather all coin 10% faster
Johan Rantzau (General, commercial): sends 5 Pikemen, pikemen 15% dmg and hp
Let’s not encourage FE to be “bold” with their civ designs. It usually doesn’t end well.
If Italians, Poles or Danes were every added they should be consistent with the design philosophy of the existing European civs: a handful of unique units, some special bonuses, maybe a bit of unique architecture, a choice between a handful of politicians when aging up and an opportunity to revolt.
Hahahahaha, perhaps you got the point.
Since we probably could not give Italians a consulate, I regard the US mechanism is not bad, just switching the states to the city nations and the foreign allies.
And what would the revolutions of Italy,Poland and Denmark be? from Italy it could be Argentina,Switzerland and Brazil;from Poland,the United States,Ukraine and Lithuania and from Denmark,Norway,the United States and Iceland…
Fitting into US mechanism, there would be the revolution card from the home city, maybe La Giovine Italia or Carbonari.
I still prefer that Poland become a revolution option. It could be option even for 3 civs, which are Russians, Germans and Swedish, the civs that lack the revolution option.