Bengalis were waayyyy more powerful than most European kingdoms
And alao the argumentvthe other dude was maKing was just silly
2 Likes
Lol what?? Can you name one Chinese dynasty who did not attempt to conquer and assimilate Vietnam? China has tried to do it throughout almost the whole history, did succeed, then failed, then tried again and again and again,… but eventually failed, now you say China didn’t want that? “The fox and the grapes” much? 
4 Likes
Man I agree, this game really is a deastastor. They don’t even have the observable universe programmed in. How am I supposed to admire the Trappist star system from several hundred light-years away without it in the game?
Games don’t even have a 1:1 scale of the galaxy in them anymore…
1 Like
I never called them so, but they would never merit an AoE 4 civ for example, for numerous reasons (anything goes in AoE 2 nowadays…).
I never said any medieval / early modern had “global” importance. Not even global reach, an elusive concept anyways, just like the illusion of raw territory area without geography analysis. Portugal was the first to have “global reach”, but still had very limited importance overall.
The key point here is, we possess historical data, and also objective metrics. So yes, we CAN perform analytical and quantitative comparisons even if civs were not in direct contact. Therefore I reiterate the same thing again: the Ottoman Empire was the most powerful force on planet Earth during 1350-1650, the decisive last 300 years of Age of Empires 4, and even a while beyond that. Of course it means it should be in the game, but not because of that itself… it’s the sheer awesomeness of its story, weapons, innovations, battlefield win rate far higher than Mongols, architecture, wonders, etc etc etc
The Ottoman Empire was at the absolute core of European politics and diplomacy for centuries, with extremely deep diplomatic relations with European states. The indispensable actor in European politics for the last centuries of AoE 4, nothing less.
You should remember the Ottoman Empire was a full-fledged superpower in 3 different continents in AoE 4 time, both at land and at sea.
In Vienna 1529, not a single European alliance soldier dared to to step out of the ultra-fortified city, and the capital of HRE was only saved because monster-size Great Bombards could not arrive.
They never touched the bulk of the massive Ottoman army, Suleiman the Magnificent only decided to lift the siege because of the freak october blizzard which was remembered as a miracle in Austria for centuries.
Yes, Lepanto was the absolutely epic largest naval battle of all times, of the Ottoman Empire against Europe as a whole, and yes, victory was European indeed. But it hardly shook the Empire’s solid standing in the world. Malta was more a failed, interrupted siege with losses for both sides, with Ottoman corrupted infighting dooming the siege effort.
The key question is, would you like me to make a (long) list of all the Ottoman Empire’s victories against several European countries together?
Lol… Constantinople, Castelnuovo, Rhodes, Nicosia, Szigetvar etc, these were among the most sophisticated, the most expensive, the most incredible fortresses in the WORLD, defended by several European nations. And ALL of them were smashed by the Ottoman-exclusive mega-sized Great Bombards!!! Which no other civ in the world possessed. Man… you can read some.
.
.
That’s not fair or accurate my Chinese friend. Bengal was far wealthier in total, far more important in trade and economy, and more powerful than most European polities.
That’s diametrically opposite to actual History. Not easy to achieve 
Exactly. And ultimately failed. Respect to Vietnam.
3 Likes
I believe the conversation was about potential new civs in AoE4. Anyone have anything else to say about this topic?
2 Likes
Those objective metrics will show you that despite their size and power they struggled to conquer rest of Europe.
Because it was major muslim state that was threatening christianity. Once again. You can consider Ottoman Empire as European state when the only thing you take into an account is geography.
I guess they had understanding of basic mathematics and tactics and weren’t stupid enough to attack army 5 times bigger than what they had. Considering that decision about last assault was made before heavy snowfall this wasn’t the biggest factor. They were running out of supply and weren’t able to do any progress.
It stopped Ottoman expansion into Europe for decades and that started stagnation of whole state.
Poor excuse for losing most of the army against rather small garrison.
I can do list of their losses. Whats the point?
You need to read something about those sieges because most of them weren’t going so well for Ottomans.
Under Constantinople they struggles against very dmall defending force that wasn’t even able to properly man the walls. In the end they breached the wall in the same place that crusaders did it 250 years earlier without bombards and against way stronger garrison. So…not so great considering heavy losses.
Castelnuovo- similar story. Small defending force inflicting very heavy casualites.
Rhodoes- 1st siege failed and during second one Ottomans weren’t able to beat defenders despite huge numbers advantage. Defenders surrender when they supply runs dry after defeating each Ottoman attack.
Nicosia- fortifications weren’t completed in time. Despite that venetians defend the city for almost 2 months and Ottomans breach the walls after 15 assaults. By that point venetains depleted their gunpowder.
Szigetvar- small 2500 men garrison defends for month against 100000 army. During siege Suleiman dies and around 25k of Ottoman soldiers with him.
Yes. “Smashed”
You need to read how the battle went not only who won.
5 Likes
Would love to see some civs that were never in an Age Game personally, like Georgians, Somalis, Nubians, Bengalis, Shona and (I know this final one is a bit complicated) Tibetans. They all were pretty powerful abd very unique.
2 Likes
Deffo! I would love an Armenian Civ for example.
1 Like
I did some research.
The Ottoman Empire at it’s most rules over parts of North Africa, Eastern Europe, the Mediterranean, and the Middle East. In it’s modern form of Turkey it is Eurasian, but if you take it from the Ottoman Empire it was… Africasean?
Culturally it should be considered primarily Asian (Middle Eastern), but it was very strange diplomatically. They had a European style government and societal class system.
I think it’s best not to give it a continental name. It was huge, so naturally it was incredibly diverse.
Sources:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.history.com/.amp/topics/middle-east/ottoman-empire
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.worldatlas.com/amp/articles/is-turkey-in-europe-or-asia.html
2 Likes
I find it more constructive to work within constraints. Otherwise, these discussions become an endless list of more and more specific civs.
Let’s assume:
- They will release two civs at a time with one campaign (that will feature at least one of those civs)
- They have budgeted a release schedule of new civs every six months for the next 2 years. (So four total expansions.)
- At that point, the game will be considered complete at a certain level such that they would revisit the viability of the business model before deciding whether to continue more development.
(These are nothing more than assumptions – I know nothing, though I am using past experience with AoEO and other games in the franchise.)
So given these constraints, I am curious what four expansions (8 civs and four campaigns total) you would recommend they make.
5 Likes
I’ll go first.
First: Inca and either the Maya or the Aztecs
Second: Ottomans and Byzantines
Third: Persians and Indians
Fourth: Japanese and Mali
These four would do a good job of highlighting almost all of the largest empires during our era. Obviously limiting it to 16 civs will leave several big names off the list. But this list would allow for some really cool diversity in civ and unit design to bring out cool gameplay and still keep the civs grounded in a list of mighty empires.
Obviously reasonable minds can disagree. That is why this forum exists.
9 Likes
I like those a lot.
Mine would be:
1- Ottomans and Ethiopians
2- Byzantines and Persians
3- Chola and Khmer
4- Aztecs and Malians
And if they countinue we should get immediately after that Spain and Japanese togheter with Incas and Danes
5 Likes
I got some but they’re not all that historically significant.
-
Danish Kingdoms and a Celtic Kingdoms faction for a ‘Raiders’ DLC
-
Inca and the Maori Tribes for a ‘Traditional’ DLC
-
Korean Kingdoms and Viet for a ‘Southeast-Asian’ DLC
-
Ottoman Empire and the Kingdom of Ethiopia for an ‘Imperial’ DLC
Edit: just realized someone else got Ethiopia and Ottomans while I was typing, didn’t copy
I’d say that they’d all make some pretty good (and historical) campaigns. The Incan and Maori one may seem strange, but there’s evidence that Polynesians encountered Southern Americans.
3 Likes
No Priority or chronological order:
- Aztecs
- Inca
- Byzantines
- Ottomans
- Ethiopia
- Tamils (India)
- Vietnam
- Japan
After those I think it would be ok to return to Europe again and add civilisations like Hungarians, Poles or Castile.
7 Likes
Wouldn’t change a thing.
I reckon at the end of AoE IV’s life cycle we’ll see around 20-24 civs.
More than 16 civs?
Good luck keeping things different and balanced. They haven’t even really managed to do that with 8 civs yet, some of them still feel too generic, and we’ll see how balanced they are…
It’s also a put off for new comers to have so many civs as AOE2 or 3. Feels like you have to learn so much just to be base line competent at the game, so you end up playing something else instead, even if you played the games before all the dlc came out.
I think the mod’s suggestion is great actually. Based on the constraints he proposed, I’d say
First DLC: Byzantines and Ottoman Empire/Turks
(Clash of Superpowers and End of Middle Ages DLC)
Second DLC: Indians and Persians
(The Timeless Civilizations DLC)
Third DLC: Japanese and Ethiopia/Mali
(Civilization at the Edge of Known World DLC)
Fourth DLC: Inca and Aztecs
(Clash of the Worlds DLC)
Honorable mention: I really hope the game can also accomodate Spain, Vietnam and Italians after that (why not, HRE wasn’t a single state either)
1 Like
Prediction:
DLC1 1. Dravidians/Chola/South Indian + Other Indian civ
Campaigns will be about these two Indian civs fighting mostly against Delhi Sultanate.
DLC 2. Byzantines and Turks
Campaigns will be about Turks versus Byzantines
DLC 3. Poles and Spanish
Campaigns will be Spanish versus French; and the Poles fighting Moscow.
At this point, the developers will have messed up the balance to such an extent that they can no longer really fix it. Game will implode.
1 Like
Why do you expect the balance to be so bad 11
I basically outlined that in the topic I just added to my post.