You have started a gang war(tbh I dont have a clear stance on this one, all the kingdoms seem to be shortlived there)
1 Like
true (although i love my cav civs), but i think it would be nice to have a âknight civâ in the sense that you donât get cavalier but you get an imp UT that essentially buffs your knights to paladin level with some extra stat buff
3 Likes
Not true, Slavs (at least the ones in game) are Ruthenians and not part of the Balkans. Byzantines = Eastern Roman Empire (greek)
3 Likes
No georgians or armenians??
If people want american civs that much, Iâm quite puzzled as to why they vote for muiscans, mapuche and tarascans. Muiscans were a copper age civilization, with tons of gold, and are the origin of el dorado legend. But they were just a tribal society grouped in a confederation at their peak. Their territory was very small too. Thatâs not enough. Mapuche were a stone age civilization organized in 6 separated tribal societies during the period aoe2 portrays. In my opinion, they belong to age of empires 3 because they used horses and learned to use metal (mainly copper tools and silver ornaments) after the Spanish colonization. Tarascans are the only solid option out of these 3 because they had bronze. But even then, they didnât know how to refine metals, so their bronze alloys werenât as hard and resistant as other types of bronze from refined copper. They also learned to use metals VERY late aprox some decades before the Spanish conquest, and got the knowledge from trades with ecuadorian regions.
6 Likes
Our passion and love for this videogame speaks through the very posts that we publish here in this Age Forum. 
3 Likes
I think it would be cool with a Tibetans civ, that only gets Knights and no Plate Barding Armour, but gets 2 UTs for them, one for Lammellar Armour with a huge PA value, and anotehr one to make them a Trash unit.
1 Like
Which includes Greece=Balkans
Byzantine inhabitants spoke Greek.
Slavs cover South Slavs perfectly.
1 Like
We are rumored to already be getting Georgians in DotD, so I did not include them. To be honest, having both would be redundant, as Armenians are already well covered by Byzantines, to whom thy served as Heavy Cavalry, and justify the Paladin unit.
We have Bulgarians for taht.
3 Likes
maybe not a trash unit⊠as the knight is all around good, but it has its gold cost for a reason. a trash knight will also serve as a good anti-building role imo, since you can mass them, something that is usually reserved for siege in a trash war. however it could be balanced depending on what techs they have or if the UT also nerfs them and etc.
3 Likes
A Trash Knight would be similar to Magyar Huszars. I think they would be broken.
1 Like
Maybe it would be their only viable Imperial Age Trash unit, and without Plate Barding, it woudl still be counterable by Pikes and Halbs, even Camels.
1 Like
Tbh Bulgarians didnt justify their existance gameplay wise. Too much like Slavs with infantry, cavalry and siege and they were Orthodox and had Boyars as well. I would have rather have Serbs over them
1 Like
If you seriously believe Rusâ could cover the Balkans lol
2 Likes
Serbs were known for Siege, Defenses, Heavy Infantry, Heavy and Light Cavalry. I disagree with you.
It is called Slavs, not Rusâ or Ruthenes.
2 Likes
agreed, then again Serbs = Hussars again XD
Serbs did have pretty good archers and gunpowder so thats something at the very least
1 Like
I feel like you shouldâve let the voters decide on that but doesnât matter much anyway, maybe weâll get a Caucasus DLC with a new architechture set just for Georgians, Armenians and Byzantines.
A Serbian guy in the forum said the opposite. Serbs werenât known for good archers.
Everyone adopted gunpowder in that region, not just the Serbs. Magyars were the strongest gunpowder users and they donât get anything. Remember Bulgarians had Hand Cannoneers in BETA, it was removed due to game balance.
5 Likes
In that case pick whoever there can be made diferent enough from Slavs and use them to represent southern slavs or just dont add them at all.
2 Likes
Exactly what I think. Now, I have NOTHING against Native American civs in general. But adding them into Age2 is no simple matter. Age2, with a medieval setting can only accommodate historical civilizations that fit into the âmedievalâ atmosphere.
Many American peoples (and some African peoples too) never really entered a âmedievalâ age, but jumped rashly from Stone Age/Bronze Age into Early Modern Age by the colonizing Europeans of the late 15th century onward.
The only American civilizations that had a somewhat âmedieval eraâ were the Meso-Americans, and they are already in the game as Aztecs, Mayans, and Incas.
2 Likes