Sultan’s army had an obvious reference so it’s easy to fix. There is no need to complain too much about it. Just push the change.
Jeanne d’Arc one the other hand if the name fits the best then it needs to be an one-woman-army civ (otherwise you can always name it “Jeanne d’Arc’s army”). And neither seems a welcomed choice.
It’s because that guy is very defensive of the Jeanne army name in particular. I saw more complaints about Jeanne’s as well, and ultimately I still think it should be altered, but it makes more sense now that they’re intentionally designing play styles around specific peoples, philosophies ect.
Zhu Xi’s Legacy is the same as Jean D’Arc civ, it’s like “me and my company team”…
If you want to talk about me, talk to me.
Anyhow you’re simply wrong. I just think the hero design gives the name valid reasoning. I’d have been fine with others, even suggested at least one of my own.
Thanks to the developers for paying attention to the players’ demands. Although this is still not a good name (not even as good as the Jade Empire, at least the former is the camp name), my suggestion is that if the theme is the Southern Song Dynasty, then the well-known “Yue Fei’s Army” in China is actually a better choice.
Zhu Xi was an official and philosopher of the Southern Song Dynasty. His reputation in today’s China is very poor. Some criticize him for attempting to suppress human nature with hypocritical moral standards, while others criticize him and Confucianism for their prejudice and oppression of women. In addition, as a civil servant, Zhu Xi’s military connection with the Song Empire is clearly limited.
At least I know Jeanne d’Arc is a person’s name, not a civ’s name. In that case, Zhuxi’s legacy is worse than Jade Empire.
Zhuxi and the gang 
Ayyubids change is good. I’m quite pleased with the change personally, and i can see most of the forum is as well.
Order of the Dragon was the one that was based on a real organization, so its mostly fine to me.
Zhu Xi’s Legacy just feels very odd still, but it’s better than anything Jade imo. I do get what they’re going for now, however; a major confucian theming and keeping the existing dynasty system. I do think that now that we know the theming, the community as a whole can come up with something better.
However, i feel like i’d like to request still, dont name a faction like that where’s just one person’s name, It’s just bizarre in terms of very poorly fitting with the rest of the game. Something as simple as ‘‘Jeanne’s Army’’ or ‘‘Jeanne’s Army of France’’ could work, or be more poetic and call it ‘‘Army of the Maid’’, ‘‘Army of Orléans’’ or ‘‘Army of the Loire’’. Its just it sounds so strange and out of place to have a faction named after a single leader rather than an organization.
Overall i thank the devs for listening and acting on the feedback, especially as someone who’s always wanted to play the Ayyubids as their own faction, and i understand the importance of the Maid of Orleans to the civ themeing, but there are alternatives, even ones that keep her name in the faction’s name, which i presume is a priority for clarity’s sake.
That’s my two cents anyways.
Lol whatever you say man, I was just letting him know that I saw the same general sentiment.
“Zhu Xi and the boys” civ
So you play with them like a nomad game, you have Zhu Xi and a bunch of villagers and soldiers.
Your goal is to build the Zhu Xi legacy before Jean D’ Arc and the boys kill your Zhu Xi.
As I said, I think we can work with Zhu Xi and Jeanne d’Arc if we just adjust the names. Army of Jeanne d’Arc and Zhu Xi’s Southern Song.
Order of the Dragon and Ayyubids are fine. So let’s keep flaming and trolling to a minimum and see if we can maybe get the first two I mentioned adjusted. They even get to keep the people names.
I don’t know if Zhu Xi’s Legacy will have dynasties. But if so, Zhu Xi’s China or Zhu Xi’s Middle Kingdom should work. But it should have an actual place / group name to work with.
They insist? I am dev my self and if customer says he wants somethign he always gets it as he is the one who is paying. They should realize who is the customer here. Jeanne d Arc never fought in battle, she was a symbol figure, yet I dont care that in game she is figting and has abilities. But to name civilazation after her is just pure laziness, nothing else or some politic and underlining “strong female character”.
But was it her army? I really don’t think it was.
Which makes a lot of the suggestions folks are proud of hard to justify if we’re being as precise as we seem to be about this.
I get why folks don’t like the hero-centric design. I get why people think the name stands out compared to the other civ / variant choices.
But getting the “right” name is tricky, if we’re insisting on historical accuracy.
I’m a dev as well, and this is a terrible approach to product design. This is generally what sales does, and it gets developers into no end of trouble 
Was it her army? In the case of this game, yes. The issue isn’t historical accuracy at this point. I said that issue was already resolved. The issue is thematic consistency in having every civilization, a civilization being a group that builds units, buildings, villages, castles, etc. Be represent by a name that fits a group.
Which is where Army of Jeanne d’Arc works better. She is the leader of this civ, it’s her army. It’s not p refectory historically accurate, but it falls within the realm of good enough, and it fixes the thematic inconsistency.
Oh, my bad. Sorry I was assuming historical objections.
From a convention perspective, the gameplay justifies her name imo. Agree to disagree there.
I’m gonna have to disagree here. The focus for me is the historical accuracy, as well as thematic consistency, but accuracy takes priority. You can’t have Jeanne’s Army as a faction because she never owned an army. You also don’t want simply “Jeanne of Arc” as a civ because it’s thematically inconsistent next to “China” and “Japan”. We’re kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place here. Maybe they need to just say "Legend: Jeanne of Arc, or Legend: Richard the Lionheart ect. in the civ selector to delineate that these variants are in fact not the same thing as normal civs.
They aren’t though. They made that very clear in their explanation and it is clear in the faction design.
I didn’t say the devs were. It’s clear they’re taking liberties when they feel it justifiable. All devs do it, to lesser or greater extents (and folks judge according to their thresholds for these things).
I’m just saying if that’s the standard they’re being held to, then the suggestions need to match. This is why I mentioned nitpicking in the other thread
I have been talking specifically about using consistent naming conventions. Historical accuracy has nothing to do with it. Historical accuracy cannot be used anyway to nit pick the name suggestions because they have already abandoned historical accuracy with the faction.