On what makes sense for a possible European DLC

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
246

Perhaps a better name for those two hypothetical expansion would be:

-The Baltic Kingdoms: Denmark & Poland-Lithuania

-The Mediterranean Rulers: Italian city-states & Morocco

I also like the idea of an Italian faction aging up by adding city-states to the coalition like the US does with states. I think the capital should be in Turin, because they were more relevant in trade and regular politics and more consistently relevant throughout the whole time period of the game (Papal intrigues are hard to pin down as solely Italian affairs as they tended to range more into wider European power plays, plus an age up with Rome that provides bonuses centered around the church would be too super cool to pass up on).

-Their explorer should be a cardinal who can heal units, and can cast a sermon that halts enemy units in place for seven seconds (own units can move, but can’t attack either during the sermon, however the sermon does not affect assassins). The cardinal can’t attack directly, but can train assassins. He starts the game with two assassins.

I think an Italian faction should have royal guard Xbows, and a few unique cards to improve them (added range late game for instance), but no skirmishers. Also, they should be able to train better assassins than any other civ.

They should have no musketeers either. Instead they could have early access to two other units. An italian hand-cannoneer armed with a handgun for limited range attack with weak single attack but powerful splash effect (similar to an abus gun in attack animation, but more armored in appearance and with much higher range resist and also available in Age 2). They could also have halbs as their other Royal Guard unit, and perhaps also early access to them in Age 2. Also, they should have regular level pikemen.

The idea of them having mounted crossbows suggested in this thread as their other unique unit sounds fantastic, and they could get regular hussars so as to not stray away too much from the other European civs.

Their artillery should be made up of Culvs, horse artillery, mortars, Italian hand canonneers, and no falcs (no need to remove the organ gun from Portuguese exclusivity once a mass of Italian hand-gunners provide the same splash effect as an organ gun would).

Their navy could have access to frigates, caravels, monitors, and instead of galleons perhaps to a galleas, which would have the same firepower and resist of a galleon, but a smaller design that could compact more units in less space and more maneuverability than regular galleons.

Some crazy unique home city card ideas:

-a card allowing their xbows to garrison inside outposts or forts and attack from there.
-a card upgrading the church to a cathedral that makes the surrounding buildings 20% stronger due to advanced Italian engineering (would incentivize attackers to waste time taking down the church first during a siege).
-a card that improves assassins resistance vs mercs and their lethality against them and makes them cheaper.
-a card allowing assassins to be built at town centers and hired from the tavern
-a card increasing the movement speed of their boats.
-a card that creates an area of passive effect (similar to unction) around the cardinal that increases the gather rate of nearby villagers (age 4)

Some ideas for their age-ups:
-the Genoese Age Up: provides a single bank wagon + three xbows.
-The Rome Age Up: provides a second church wagon and from now on they can have two churches in the game + two halbs
-Venetian age up one dock wagon + 1 caravel
-Two Sicilies Age Up crates of gold + 2 assassins
-Florence Age up provides a factory wagon + 2 Italian hand-gunners (available age three onward only)(italians would only have one factory card option in their home city shipments, so they would still have a total of two max, but with the option of one in Age 3)
-Milan Age up an advanced arsenal + arsenal wagon + 2 culverins (available age three onward only)

Overall, they would be a fairly defensive civ with strong buildings, archaic looking units, a sleak and slippery navy, a strong economy, and easy access to both hire and kill off mercs (and hero units).

1 Like
247

Austria-Hungary didnt exist untill 1867, so no lets not add them.

Before that it was just Austria, and before 1806 they were part of the HRE, which is already in the game.

Not to mention AoE (with now IV not anymore and the USA) has people groups as civs, not countries. Germans, not HRE. Dutch, not Netherlands. If you propose Danubians, it would be a made up term as such an idea was barely if not non existing. Austrians are Germans, so that term also doesn’t work.

The Hungarians are included via revolution, which is about the best way to have included them.

248

This is false, one of the original designers of AoE II has said that the Korean civ did almost nothing for the sales in Korea.

I just dont see the big reasons of adding Korea. I rather have civs from areas that lack civs than put more civs off the same area that on themselfs werent really empire worthy civs. Same reason I dont see why to add Denmark when we now have Sweden and thw Europeans already being very similar.

1 Like
249

Austrians and Prussians were simply part of the same country, internal politics and systems is irrelevant to this.

Next to that, this is the exact reason why AoE used to have people groups, not countries.

Its Germans, so German stuff is included. Not just one German state or overcomplecating things with Italians and Germans being in the same civ for a while.

1 Like
250

They could be like the Italians of the napoleonic era mod,who have an explorer and a priest at the beginning of the game and then two different types of villagers: the architect (who only builds buildings) and the merchant (who only collects resources),then they could have the general condottiero (who trains units in exchange for coins and who would act as shogun) and a cardinal (who builds churches that increase the income of coins),etc,etc,etc…

251

And what you tell me for reasons of continuity of the saga…that is,if you have choson in aoe 1 and the Koreans in aoe 2,it would be strange not to have them also in aoe 3 (beyond that they only had importance in the imjin war of 1592-1598 and in the two Manchu invasions of 1627-1639) and already in the nineteenth century the French campaign (1866) and the clash with the United States (1871)…Japan also had 250 years of isolationism and yet they are also in the game…

252

It is irrelevant in the game. Austro-Hungary is a political change that is not significant in the AoE series at all.

So why is the Dutch civ in the game? They were part of the HRE after all.

Austria-Hungary, Danubian Empire, Habsburg Empire or Austrians - the name is not the most important thing here.
This empire was extremely important in the history of Europe and covered an area unrepresented in the game. Austro-Hungary is the only civ that would include the Carpathian region and the Balkans (adding Balkan units).

In Austria-Hungary, the Germans were a minority - less than 25% of the empire’s population.

So the Austro-Hungarian civ would offer what no other civ would offer. It wouldn’t be “another” German civ!

Austro-Hungary is not only Austrians and Hungarians, but also most of the Slavic nations, Romanians, Italians and more :wink:

1 Like
253

NO!!!

These were completely separate states - EMPIRES!!!

HRE can be described as an organization similar to the European Union.

More than 75% of the inhabitants of Austro-Hungary were NON-GERMAN peoples.

Nonsense

254

japan did a lot of interesting things before that 250 years periode and became a great power within a couple of decades after they opened up again.

255

Technically,the Dutch were territories of the Spanish crown,which became independent in 1581,both from Spain and the HRE,so they are a civ apart from the other two…

256

and Koreans don’t?..during their period of isolation (1598-1866) they had a strong national imprint where Korean culture was strengthened…

257

no they really didn’t.

the only thing interesting in korea was them getting invaded.

258

You could also add the period before the Japanese invasions (1419-1592)…

259

1419? no. 1492 is the start date.

but really this topic isnt about korea.

260

The Asian Dynasties begins in 1421 (chinese campaign) and Henry the Navigator lives in the first half of the fifteenth century…as long as the game is maintained from the fifteenth century onwards I see no problem with it…and I said Korea to give an example to put in a dlc,before you have Italy,Poland-Lithuania,Denmark,Morocco,Zulues,Persia,the Crimean Tatars,the same Korea,Siam,Vietnam,Maori,Mapuches and the independent Latin American nations…it will be by civilizations to get into the game xd…

261

Thanks for the well constructed argument that brings new light to this discussion. I now see the errors of my ways and that I was definatly wrong here.

They are Germans both, the civ is Germans not Germany, the majority of German states (all) were in the HRE so its only logical the general theme is HRE. HRE is also not EU, its more, if you believe it, centralized than that.

You didnt see what I was writing, I said that Austria-Hungary didnt exist for the biggest part of the timeframe. So that cant be the name. The game uses people groups so if you pick Austrians then, its wrong, because they are Germans and Germans are already in the game. If you pick Hungarians, they are already via revolution in the game. Bohemians are also kinda represented with the Germans already and the Romanians have a Revolution as well I believe.

This all is irrelevant. The civs (Europeans, asians and natives atleast) are people groups, not specific countries. Hungarians, Austrians, Romanians and even to a small extend Bohemians are already in the game. We dont need a whole new civ specifically for including Slovaks and Slovenians and the other smaller groups. At best they should be a revolution, but even that fur such small peoples in an empire game is kinda too much.

1 Like
262

Exactly…the Holy Roman Empire was a political grouping located in Western and Central Europe, whose sphere of power fell to the Germanic Roman Emperor from the Middle Ages to the beginning of the Contemporary Age.Due to its supranational character, the Holy Roman Empire never became a nation state or a modern state; rather, it maintained a monarchical government and a state imperial tradition.In 1648, the neighboring states were constitutionally integrated as imperial states.The Empire was to ensure political stability and the peaceful resolution of conflicts by restricting the dynamics of power: it offered protection to the subjects against the arbitrariness of the lords, as well as to the lower echeos against any infringement of rights committed by the highest echeos or by the Empire itself.

263

But understand that a civilization does not have to have any connection whatsoever with any particular nationality / group of related nations. Perhaps the differences between the Kingdom of Prussia and the Habsburg Empire were very great. The other German states were also important and strong, but not as dominant as Prussia or Austria.

We are arguing that the Germans are German, but do you realize that the peoples of Germanic origin are also British and Dutch in the game?

The British is a supranational name because it refers to the British Isles. Apart from the overseas possessions of Great Britain and focusing on their empire in Europe, it was also inhabited by Scots, Irish, Welsh, etc. - according to your logic it should not be a civilization, after all, a specific nation is a civilization …

The current Germans civ introduces us to the Holy Roman Empire, not the Germans! We have the Czech Hussite Wagon and general references to HRE. The units are archaic as is the HRE.

Civ Germans cannot and are not able to represent Prussia and Austria, which due to their importance and uniqueness deserve their own civs.

The current Germans civ would not be shocking or incorrect if it had changed its name to Holy Roman Empire. The changes to this civ to convert it to HRE civ are literally marginal - no need to delete the content; changes would only be textual and visual - a new Home City and a new ruler. Mechanics, Royal Guards and HC Cards, you just need to change their names and that’s it - no impact on entertainment.

I think the EU is definitely more centralized than HRE - definitely more!

You’re clinging to unimportant details.

So what about USA civ? Yes, I know that it was created earlier than the term “Austria-Hungary”, but the Habsburg Empire (Austrian line) existed from 1526 and covered quite a lot of territory in Central-Eastern Europe - 350 years before US independence!

The name Austro-Hungary for this civ is not incorrect because it was officially used in the AoE 3 timeframe (it does not matter for how long), or it defines its area, does not refer to a specific individual nation, and is generally well known.

This civ could also have other names, for example: Habsburgs (strange, but the creators of AoE 2 wanted to add this civ) or Danubians (a reference to geography. This empire was commonly called this way).

If you think this civ would be Germans 2.0 then you are grossly mistaken. Besides, it means that you do not even know the character of this empire and its history - I do not know each other but I will say …

You do not understand me…

Austro-Hungary is a civ, which covered a huge territory, inhabited by the largest number of nations in all of Europe (and from different ethnic groups!). In this game, people from the territories that included this empire could identify with it - according to history.

If you think I am aiming for tons of new irrelevant civs, you are wrong! Prussia and Austria were among the most important civilizations of that period. The Kingdom of Prussia, thanks to discipline and a strong army, united Germany, and the Austrian Empire created a multinational empire in which culture and art flourished.

The current civ Germans have NEVER EVER REPRESENTED Prussia and Austria !!! - if you think that is not true, it means that you simply have a phobia towards the Germans …

PS:

When it comes to revolutions, Czechoslovakia would be a better solution than Slovaks, and Yugoslavia would be a better solution than Slovenia :wink: - the ideas of these countries already existed within the AoE 3 timeframe, which is difficult to define. These would not be strange revolutions considering the fact that there is already a Canadian Revolution option in this game X DDDDD

264

Germanic ≠ German.

I said people groups, British is a people group.

False and if you read my comment I wouldnt have to say this again. The civilizations is Germans, the name literally says it. Almost all Germans lived in the HRE, so its only logical that the largest part of the civ is represented through the HRE, but ultimatly they are Germans. Dont forget that they literally speak German. Dont forget aswell that in Bohemia there were also German minorities. I agree that the civ has a lot of HRE material, but Ill just again refer also to the fact that 98% of the civ is German.

They can, they already did. Again every civ is a people group which ultimatly is represented by the bigger countries of which they were part. The Germans in-game already have both stuff from Austria as from Prussia.

And then you sum up changes which literally change the fundamentals of the civ. Different cards, different mechanics and different royale units is not just text and visual based. Not to mention those 3 points are almost all that makes a civ unique.

It doesnt make sense to both have the HRE and a German civ.

They are very similar, but the HRE had a combined army which the EU does not yet have.

Its not, its part of the civ, so its important to discuss. Why even bother with this civ, because you think its not representative of Austrians and Prussians, but then to throw away historical accuracy for names which do not make sense?

Say were I wrote or insinuated these civs were unimportant in history. You will have to search long, because you arent going to find it.

They are already in the game, thats a simple fact. And again the HRE is the major influence on the German civ, so Austria and Prussia were simply in them.

Are you serious? I speak fucking German partly. I live next to Germany. Why would I have a phobia because I say that? Who do you think lived in the fucking HRE for the majority of the AoE III timeline? Hobbits? Dwarves? What is the Uhlan for you? Both were used by Austria and Prussia. Needle gunners? Are you kidding me? Do you know history? I can keep going if you want.

265

Austria ≠ currently Germans civ ≠ Prussia

Danubians also is a people group.
Prussians also is a people group.

Name this civ HRE and that would be a more appropriate name for this civ.

Definitely not considering that one of their UUs is a TYPICAL CZECH unit - the Hussite War Wagon.

Nothing, given what kind of powers they were. They deserve a presence in this game!

Do not understand…

First off, renaming HC Cards doesn’t affect anything - it’s just a different name! Understand? Likewise with the rest.

Secondly, the HRE civ would represent HRE and not Germany. HRE is not only Germany! Austrian civ is less than Germany! Prussia was also inhabited by other nations! - in this respect the most German civ of these civs would be Prussian civ, the other two are multinational !!!

The EU is about to become a united state - a common army, politics, economy. The current member states would become autonomies …

HRE was more decentralized and members were de facto more independent.

It is a futile bother to keep arguing that Austria and Prussia would be Germans 2.0 and that the current Germans civ represents everything that was German (which is impossible with the diversity of Germany’s greatest powers).

Which names do you think don’t make sense?

THEY ARE NOT PRESENT IN THE GAME!!!

RUSIA WERE NOT IN THE HRE (EAST PRUSSIA)!!!

HOLY CROWN OF HUNGARY WERE NOT IN HRE (MORE PART OF THE HABSBURG EMPIRE)!!!

RATHER I SHOULD ASK YOU THIS QUESTION

Do you know the history of Austria, Prussia and HRE at all?