[Poll] New civs for South America

Which civs in this list do you think could/should be added to the game?

  • Muisca/Chibcha (Muisca Confederation)
  • Quitu
  • Caras/Caranquis
  • Manteño
  • Cañari
  • Chimu (Kingdom of Chimor)
  • Moche
  • Lima
  • Nazca
  • Wari (Wari Empire)
  • Chankas (Parkos Kingdom)
  • Hunacas
  • C h i n c h a
  • Qullas
  • Tiwanaku (Tiwanaku Empire)
  • Aymaras (Aymara kingdoms)
  • Mapuche
  • Tupi
  • Guarani
  • Shuhar/Jivaros
  • All of them!
  • None
  • I don’t know
  • I don’t care
  • Other(s)
0 voters

Additionally, how many of those civs do you think should be added?

  • 1-2
  • 3-4
  • 5-6
  • 7-8
  • 9+
  • All of them!
  • None
  • I don’t know
  • I don’t care
0 voters

For those who pay attention to my polls, this one might have been expected as the previous one was about Central America. After all, the Andes and even maybe the Amazon rainforest hosted quite a few interesting cultures which could be turned into AoE2 civs. (and this time I didn’t forget about the Muisca!)
Some (at least most) of those civs could be seen as Inca split, but considering it would be the majority I didn’t think it would be worth it to point it out with each of them. Also, there are quite a few civs for which I couldn’t find any state or political organisation (which doesn’t mean I didn’t just miss it) but I thought they might still have their fans.
That’s quite probably my last poll this year, but hopefully it will have interesting results and bring interesting conversations. With all that being said, let’s vote!

4 Likes

I think if anything we have too many civs already

1 Like

Imagine guarani universities, monasteries, siege workshops, trebuchets, castles, ships, etc. I know we have aztec trebuchets and whatnot but this is ridiculous.

5 Likes

I voted for Chimu, Aymaras, Ch1ncha and Chankas, because they are in the Inca Campaign.
However most of them are descendants of the Wari, so if we get a DLC with only Chimu and Wari I would already be content.
I did not see Chachapoya or did you use a different name for them?

1 Like

Ah! I missed this one, I didn’t even know they existed… Sorry ^^"

5 Likes

Cumans having all of those are even more ridiculous.

4 Likes

All those Middle Eastern and Steppe civs with top tier crossbows better than most Euro civs is very realistic.

The Mapuches became strong in the 18th and 19th centuries, but it seems that after the fall of the Tiwanaku Empire in the year 1000, they had a strong migration from the north; so in AoE 2 the civ could start there until the conquest of the seven Spanish cities in 1598 (in short, a Mapuche civ between 1000 and 1600)… from then on, put them in AoE 3 (1600-1883)…

2 Likes

Let me give you a hint: this is a game, this is not real life. It’s 100% fine to take important civs from elsewhere in the world and put them inside the game mechanics
Any civ in the game has to respect the game mechanics while taking inspiration from real history. Anything else is just gatekeeping civs away for no solid reason

3 Likes

The Tairona, Diaguita, and Marajoara are also good contenders.

1 Like

It would have to be between 300 and 1550, that is, it would not include the Calchaqui wars (1560-1667) against the Spanish…

Maybe

Not even close.

They weren’t warriors, weirdly enough. Would be a cool pick if the game wasn’t almost exclusively focused on warfare.

Might as well put Yamnaya and orcs in the game if that’s the case. It’s just a game, right?

1 Like

Yes. twenty characters

It is a known fact that waving your hands and chanting caused tunics and pants to change colors and loyalties all the time and unmanned elephants were the most prone amongst them being well known untrustworthy creatures

1 Like

Gatekeeping isn’t all bad though; if you do away with it entirely, it’s questionable whether you remain with any kind of standard. And to be realistic, the vast majority of possible civs will be “gatekept” out by the devs themselves for the foreseeable future, and probably forever. So it’s more reasonable to hope for those civs that are perceived as being better matches for the existing conventions of the game. It’s true that sometimes people can be too antagonistic towards an idea, but I don’t think accusations of gatekeeping (or anything else) should be used to deflect any and all criticism.

Yes, you could design a Guarani civ, but I consider many other potential Meso and South American civs as being more iconic and better fits in terms of believably having relevant strengths in military, economy, tech/science, campaign potential, etc. If someone makes a Guarani civ concept I’m not going to go out of my way to dunk on it, but I’ll save my advocacy for civs that I consider to be higher priorities. Chimus top the list right now by a healthy margin but it’s uncertain whether even they’ll be added in the foreseeable future.

Would like to at least see some Editor units/buildings to at least partly represent many of these civs though.

5 Likes

You picked the single worst civ to use as example since they did have universities, monasteries and siege workshops lmao.

4 Likes

Anything that fits the basic outline of an aoe2 civi can be included.Being active during 400 to 1600,10 12 leader names an interesting story to tell,not being totally isolated from other ingame civis.
Not so long ago having a wonder and a UU was a thing but now we have more than one fantasy building for a wonder and generic unit names as uus.

2 Likes

Berbers were most known for their camel archers and certainly not for blackguards or Amazigh or anything more specific to the region nope

1 Like