There’s no precedent for what they are adding, there’s no way to argue for or against it. You just learned about it two days ago and it’s just an immediate no. That points to emotions being the primary driver for discussion, and that’s why it is both pointless and ultimately harmful to any discussion. No one knows enough to say why they should or should not be named that.
Empire of Jade could easily be mistaken for the Mayans and Aztec where hadde was frequently used.
There it is, as usual the counter-argument all boils down to the ‘shut up nerd, it’s just a game’ belittling of reasons somebody may have for enjoying the game. If history matters so little, go ahead and imagine they try selling this DLC without Japanese and Byzantines but just these four variants. I think it would be the worst selling DLC of all time.
I mean the other games in the series have some details that are not historically consistent, and that to go through the full list would be time consuming and counter productive. I do not want you to shut up, I want you to take some time to let more information come out before we resume a discussion on why the name should or should not change.
Edit: To clarify my position, I think the names are fine. I have no issue with how they chose to name them because I have no idea what the variants consist of or how/if they plan on implementing future variations. I think it is prudent to wait until more details release, mostly because the response has been mixed through the community. The game is what it is, but it’s the community that drives the most interaction. In the spirit of having a healthier community, and to establish an argument for change if it is necessary, we need to be able to have effective arguments for or against issues. Asking for change based off of “I do not think this works” is an argument. I do not believe it is effective, and I look forward to continuing this myself AFTER they release information as to what exactly these variations are.
You’re right they do. And every time they release something with questionable historical accuracy, people complain because that’s a perfectly legitimate reason to like and play this game, even if it may not be the reason that you play this game. And part of the reason I prefer AoE4 over AoE2 at least is that it pays a LOT more attention to detail. And NO amount of information they can release between now and Nov.14 will make “Empire of Jade” more historically accurate because no such moniker existed, or make ‘Sultan’s Army’ sound any less generic and historically uninspired. So I’m trying to get to understand that when you try to shut down complaints about the names, you are trying to diminish and gatekeep a reason people like this game, which is attention to historical detail. If you don’t care about the names, nobody’s asking you to join in and complain, or even better, you can say: “While it doesn’t personally affect my enjoyment, I do hope they can find a way to cater to the players who want more historical attention to detail”.
For me, the counterpart is maps. I honestly think maps are mostly fine, but I don’t lash out and shut down conversation every time somebody complains about the map pool.
3 Likes
I am not trying to shutdown complaints, what I am trying to do is help you build a more compelling argument. We don’t know enough about what they will be to suggest that they should change the name. The expansion releases in 7 weeks, it’s more than likely too late to get a name change in the first place. If you want them to actually take you more seriously you have to take a more considered approach, outrage isn’t enough to get attention. You need a compelling argument that applies to the variant they are designing so that it flows well. I mean really think about the scenario we are in, they have the names on the xbox storepage and their official webpage. If they did change it and the crowd response was just as negative, what does that do to the future relationship between developer and consumer? In my opinion this route that is being taken takes away from any kind of future conversation to be had and reduces the amount of transparency with the audience.
The last few weeks people have been clawing at the devs to release information. They caved and released A LOT more than they normally do. This is the response. You and the other people who are arguing for an immediate change are more than likely going to cause a reduction in interaction between developer and audience. It is a very fragile relationship, and it’s entirely their decision to even share anything with us. So you should take time to consider your arguments and disagreements because what the dissent is doing is a lot like “the boy who cried wolf”. You need an effective argument.
I understand that you want to change those names to make them better and less ugly, but I’m also starting to think that is a bit exaggerated, especially when the DLC costs 15 euros/dollars and has a lot of content to offer.
Most people, according to all the poll made, want those names to be changed, but I think we need to calm down a bit.
There are already several arguments and a frontal rejection added to this thread with +200 comments and others, but I think enough has already been said.
It’s just not accurate with the campaign of the expansion that happens at a time when it was named the Ayyubid, it was NOT named Mamluk at the time of Saladin.
The Sultan’s army really need to be Ayyubid to remain accurate, Mamluk makes no sense.
Orlean is also not really accurate. It’s just a TOWN, not a civ.
Orlean was under siege by the english, and Jeanne helped with repealing that siege, she never lived there, or ruled that town, or was involved with it in any way after that siege.
I’m french and I think this reduces her to just a town, I’d rather have Jeanne D’arc as name than Orlean. But we need to come up with a better name that represent the french civ better than a random town.
I agree that most of the arguments have already been made on IF the names should change, and the polling data has largely stabilized with the vast majority preferring a change across every platform polled. So the ball is in the devs court.
That said, I am still interested in anyone who has ideas for nuanced suggestions on new names. Obviously we can get more detailed when we see more details (Hopefully not too close to release, because that makes it harder to change). But I have already had a ton of super interesting conversations with folks on reddit regarding the quality of certain naming suggestions over others.
Right now I think we are still in “Don’t ignore our protest!” mode until we get some kind of acknowledgement / feedback from the devs. We have no idea how seriously they are considering our ideas (Even though its almost certain they hear us). We would love some more communication, even if it is just “We hear you and we will be discussing this internally.”
But while I am overall still hopeful that persistent protest will make a difference, I do understand why some people are frustrated talking about variant names when they would love to talk about the other content revealed in the trailer. I am also hyped for that stuff too, and I hope we can balance both raising hype and excitement for all the features that are legitimately cool, while also keeping the devs minds on the importance of the naming issue.
I mostly just wish there was some way we could help further, which is why I want more constructive and educational discussion, instead of just name slinging and dev dooming.
Across Reddit and Discord though I will say that since these variants names were announced, a lot of the protesters have been on the defense because of over the top unnecessary criticism to invalidate our concerns using bad faith methods. It has been difficult to keep from getting dragged back into the mud pit. But I appreciate everyone (including all the mods) who are doing their best to keep things civil.
It’s just not accurate with the campaign of the expansion that happens at a time when it was named the Ayyubid, it was NOT named Mamluk at the time of Saladin.
The Sultan’s army really need to be Ayyubid to remain accurate, Mamluk makes no sense.
I have zero issues with the Variant being called the Ayyubids over the Mamluks, both recognized and were aligned with the Abbassid Caliphate, depending on which Sultan is used to represent the civilization (Assuming its a hero unit of some kind) it could really go either way, and the creative discretion is completely up to the devs, I think the vast majority of users will be happy with EITHER. Now it may also be possible that the hero character is generically called “The Sultan”. If that is the case, then they have even more creative discretion.
Looking at what we know about the Campaign: We have Tughtekin, Nur al-Din, Shirkuh, Saladin, Qutuz, Baybars, Shajar al-Durr, and Barsbay all representing various Sultans.
Tughtekin founded the Turkoman Burid dynasty, and was Emir of Damascus from 1104 to 1128.
Nur al-Din is most likely the Seljuk Emir of Damascus of the Zengid dynasty from 1151 to 1174.
Shirkuh was a Vizier of the Fatimid Caliphate, General of Zengids, and uncle of Saladin, in 1169.
Saladin we all know and love, founder of the Ayyubid dynasty and Sultan of Egypt/Syria from 1174 to 1193.
Qutuz was the third Mamluk Sultan and Sultan of Egypt/Syria 1259 to 1260.
Baybars was the fourth Mamluk Sultan and Sultan of Egypt/Syria from 1260 to 1277.
Shajar al-Durr was the Sultana of Egypt and first of the Bahri Mamluk dynasty in 1250.
Barsbay was the 9th Burji Mamluk Sultan of Egypt/Syria from 1422 to 1438.
Assuming that the Campaign civ is actually not going to be the Abbasids, but the Abbasid variant civ, what is the common denominator between all of these? 7 out of 8 of these were either Sultans of Syria or Emir’s of Damascus (In Syria, known as Sham at the time). 6 out of 8 of these were leaders in or of Egypt.
Both the Ayyubids and the Mamluks controlled both of these areas for almost their entire history, but only 2 missions could really be considered Ayyubid, and 4 Mamluk, the other 2 are pretty much just Emir of Damascus.
So going off just the campaign alone, if we had to pick one dynasty it would be the Mamluks, but that is only half the campaign, Ayyubids would be even less representation. It could be more accurate to call them the Sultanate of Egypt or Sultanate of Sham, because nearly all the Sultans were Sultans of these areas, but they would have never really been referred to individually, they would have just been called the Ayyubid Sultanate or Mamluk Sultanate. We can also just literally call them “The Egyptians” or “The Sham” or even more specifically just “Damascus”.
Obviously none of these feel perfect, but I think any of these, even if stretching the scope a little bit, can still work. Much like how the Ottomans largely encompass some of the Seljuk Turks within their scope, and the Malians some of the Ghana empire. They are all still better than “The Sultan’s Army”.
I will let everyone else discuss which one they think might fit best. But my vote is on either the Mamluk Sultanate, Sultanate of Egypt, or Sultanate of Sham.
Orlean is also not really accurate. It’s just a TOWN, not a civ.
Orlean was under siege by the english, and Jeanne helped with repealing that siege, she never lived there, or ruled that town, or was involved with it in any way after that siege.I’m french and I think this reduces her to just a town, I’d rather have Jeanne D’arc as name than Orlean. But we need to come up with a better name that represent the french civ better than a random town.
When people refer to Orléans they are not referring to just Orléans but rather the Duchy of Orléans. Which was a Duchy on the same level as the Duchy of Burgundy, which showed up as a civilization in Age of Empires 2. So while it is a stretch to include, there IS precedence for covering similarly sized states in the past, and its definitely more than just a Town.
This is partially a hole that the devs have dug themselves, that they picked a single person to represent an entire civ, which was kind of a bad move in general, especially since that person could only really be represented by either the Duchy of Orléans (Which definitely doesn’t have the same level of fame and independence as Burgundy once did) or by the County of Armagnac, which is just a lower level county. Between the two the choice is obvious that Duchy of Orléans would be more relevant, and naming the hero Maid of Orléans would make it less necessary for it to be tied to Jeanne d’Arc specifically (and make it less awkward if she died).
By this logic I still hold calling it Orléans for short, but in full, the Duchy of Orléans: is the best choice.
1 Like
Duchy of Orléans would actually be a better name than just Orlean
1 Like
Edit, aah I see Xefjord already beat me to it!
Maybe semantics, but it was a duchy not a town, that, unlike Jeanne herself, lasted hundreds of years. In AoE2 we already have Duchy of Burgundy as an independent civ so there’s precedence. It’s a little disingenuous to say she has nothing to do with it besides the siege. Her nickname is literally Maid of Orléans, and the city apparently has a holiday to celebrate her every year. It is by far the area in France most associated with her in pop culture I would say. So if we need to come up with a French variant civ that is defined by a playstyle around a Joan of Arc inspired Hero, then it seems fitting to me to call it ‘Duchy of Orléans’ and call the hero “Maid of Orléans”. Everyone would still know what its inspiration was, and the civ name is not pigeonholed to one person who lived only 19 years
Although I prefer Mamluk Sultanate, I would support this name if only to stop people requesting Egypt as a civ and have to keep replying “Egypt is covered by Abbasid Dynasty…”
I’m ok with having civs represented by continuations of regions OR by continuations of political/state entities. I prefer the latter, but we already technically have the former in China, where one dynasty is defined by its Mongol Rule, and English, where it covers both Anglo-saxon and Normal England
1 Like
Side comment, but if you can update the top level post with some of the new civ ideas that would be helpful to new viewers and the devs. Like how we would prefer “Duchy of Orléans” and potentially the Mamluk Sultanate or Sultanate of Egypt for the Abbasid Variant.
Edit: I of course like Cathay or Liao/Jin for the Chinese Variant.
I had an idea. What if the names of civs are just a riddle? Do you remember how Byzantium was announced to us?
A blurry screenshot, guess what’s behind it. The names of the new civs look like they have much more obvious options behind them.
The name of the variant civs are so SHIT, it seems like the RELIC/WORLD EDGE know NOTHING about AOE and the players.
jade empire - cathays/chinistanis
jean - franks/Armagnacs
sultan’s army - Mamluks
Dragon Order - Teutons/Habusburgs
sounds much better , isn’t it?
5 Likes
Dear devs, If 90% of the people in this forum think the names need changed, than about 90% of the people who might buy the expansion will not like the names. This poll currently sits at 91% with a massive amount of votes. I did not know there where still 208 people active here.
2 Likes
Ehhh may be people buy age of empires to play with actual empires ???
2 Likes
Hi, I’m not here to fight or argue, but please Devs, reconsider these names, I don’t think they fit in this game, thank you 
5 Likes