̶[̶P̶o̶l̶l̶]̶ ̶W̶h̶i̶c̶h̶ ̶c̶i̶v̶ ̶w̶i̶l̶l̶ ̶y̶o̶u̶ ̶l̶i̶k̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶ ̶s̶e̶e̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶A̶o̶e̶2̶?̶ ̶A̶l̶l̶ ̶p̶o̶p̶u̶l̶a̶r̶l̶y̶ ̶r̶e̶q̶u̶e̶s̶t̶e̶d̶ ̶c̶i̶v̶s̶ ̶i̶n̶c̶l̶u̶d̶e̶d̶

You do not njeed one. The game is not about covering geographical areas either, it is about important civilizations, taht either achieved the status of empire, or brough empires down.

No it is not, it peaks around the fall of Constantinople.

Alaric: 394
Noryang Point: 1598

Another Meso style civ would be nice but wouldn’t have to be exactly the same as the other three. For example the Tarascans were far more advanced with metal than the Aztecs. Could make for some interesting civ bonuses…?

I was talking about the “New World” civs but ok… Yeah we can also have the largest old american civs from 400-1000 AD and kinda speculate and theorize how they would be on 1000-1500 like they did before with Huns and others. The game was never too much historical accurate anyway…

1 Like

I think we have missed few significant civs in the list:

0 voters

Punjabis - Sikh Empire
Marathas - Maratha Confederacy
Kurds - Kurdistan
Kannadigas - Vijayanagar Empire
Visayan - Visayan Empire
Malagasy - Madagascar

Since I cannot edit the poll now, please consider voting on them here.

I want to give them trash eagles (unique tech), good ranged units and mobile drop off.

1 Like

everyone and their cousin hates this idea… and it breaks the game, as explained over and over and over and over whenever someone brings it up, its not the same as khmer farms…

1 Like

You can save tons of wood, but I don’t think so its better than the Japanese bonus

what??? no ways ! i neever would have guessed… now go back and read my message again

With all my heart yes! :heart_eyes:
That would be awesome

What would it do in the early game? You will need 2 of them anyway since you need berries and wood and you CANT gather them with only 1 mobile drop off. If you don’t want to push the deer you will have to pay 100 wood because you need berriers, you need wood and people dock next to shorefish. This is only matters when you want to REBUILD your lumbercamp instead of TC it in the Castle Age. (maximum 200 wood saving) It has huge impact in the lategame only. And it would have the same “hitbox” as a mill, lumber camp.

I just want them to finish accomodating adding civs in mods so we don’t have to have threads like this

Only 6 years prior, and serves as the Goths Campaign.

A single battle. All of the game’s units are from the 4th century BC to the 15th.

I do not see any 16th century Musketeers, Arquebusiers, armourless Pikemen, Cuirassiers instead of Knights, Dragoons instead of Cav Archers, Light Cavalry Lancers, Marines, Saber and Buckler Infantry, Culverins, Serpentines, Cannons (only Bombards, which were actually Medieval, instead of Cannon, which is not, and is it’s own weapon type), Abus Guns; and many, many other staples of European, North African and Middle Eastern warfare, on the 16th century.

Instead, I see only Medieval units, because the game only really goes as far as the fall of Constantinople, in terms of represented technology.

This game does not include until the year 1600.
You need to play AoE3 for that.

That was only 1 campaign after 1500 i didn’t mention: Bayinnaung, Montezuma, Francisco De Almeida, Kyoto, Lepanto

Yeah, they did but the last ones all got four.

Toltecs are the predecessors of Aztecs so they are also same civilization.

Vandals are a Roman Era civilization, not fitting in AoE2.

It is more like Toltecs would be something more unnecessary, since we already ahve teh Aztecs, and they had basically the same culture.

It would end up being just a copy of the Aztecs.

Yes, Vandals should be more of an AoE1 civ, and that is a game that is seriously lacking in global civs.

1 Like

Well afghans didn’t use War Elephants. They relied on horses. They were often called Ashvakas in Sanskrit implying good horse riders.

I agree Dari Persian culture of Afghans is very similar to Persians but I look forward to Pashtuns and Baloochs more when talking about Afghans. They certainly were very different from Persians. The Afghan is just a mix of all three of these cultures living in the particular geographical area. The afghan identity as we know it today is reinforced by Ahmad Shah Durrani (1747–1772)

1 Like

I Afghans were to be introduced, it should be under the name Bactrians, which would help cover more of the region’s history, from when they were Nestorians and Buddhists, all the way to the Pashtuns in the late Middle Ages.