[Poll] The first realistic, context-based AoE4 DLC investigation & poll (updated new Flags! latest Snapshot August 5)

the period around the fall of Rome.

A little history brush-up is needed apparently.

Persian empire fell way before Rome: Achaemenid Empire - Wikipedia
What came after was the Sassanids: Sasanian Empire - Wikipedia

AoE2 did not specify which dynasty was it I guess, but given that they had elephants as their unique unit, it could be any of the above. And AoE2 had Turks, which had the Ottoman period basically, since they had their unique unit as Jannisary, which was an Ottoman thing.

So as you can see, once again proven, Persia and Turks/Ottomans did exist in a game before made by Microsoft. I am not saying Aoe4 should have the ancient Persian empire -that would be ridiculous-, but the dynasties that came after that work just fine. Sassanids and Safavids both were legit states. It could be made like Seljuks and Ottomans for Turks, spanning the timeline.

In fact, bringing Byzantines, Turks and Persians would be a super cool DLC altogether, since all these three battled each other for centuries. There could be many campaign scenarios mined about of that period.

But AoE4 (so far) goes from 750 (beggining of Abbasid caliphate) to 1644 (end of Ming dynasty),
They were ruled by arabs turks and mongols most of the period and they should not be a priority.
There is just no important Persian empire that lasted more than a few decades.

I agree on the importance bit but total exclusion of from the entire game? No.

My argument is 100% valid, I would like you to give me a good reason Persia should be in AoE4 instead of trying (and failing) to invalid mines.

Your argument is invalided by the AoE franchise and the history to be honest, not by me.

Your wikipedia link already accept Sasanids as a Persian Empire in the first line

“The Sasanian (/səˈsɑːniən, səˈseɪniən/) or Sassanid Empire , officially known as the Empire of Iranians (Middle Persian: 𐭠𐭩𐭥𐭠𐭭𐭱𐭲𐭥𐭩, Ērānšahr )[a] and also referred to by historians as the Neo-Persian Empire

To kept it short…

AoE2 is another game, but something I like about them is that they give you a historical review of each civs… they clearly describe Sasanid Persia, from the beggining in the 3rd century to the end in 651.

Sasanids and Safavids are legit states, of course, but Sasanids are off of the current time spam and have almost 900 years since they were conquered to the Safavids being establised… That’s a HUGE gap. Not comparable to Seljuks and Ottomans that you can argue that both coexisted for a few years…

i’m not necesarely exluding Persia, but I’m saying they are not as important in this period, it shouldn’t be one of the first DLC civs and if they eventually make their way to the game it should be after several other more important ones

My argument was never invalidated, Persians are not an important empire for most of the middle ages…
AoE2 clearly describe Sasanid Persia and they are not in the current time spam by 100 years
You don’t have any Persian estable empire until you get the Safavids. Both are facts.

Your wikipedia link already accept Sasanids as a Persian Empire in the first line

Sure, they both were Persian empires, no doubt. The ancient one, the one that battled ancient Greeks, was the Achaemenid dynasty, and that is the one that is widely called “the Persian Empire” . That’s why you get that when you type Persian empire on any search bar. Sassanids were also a Persian empire that battled mostly the Rome/Byzantines.

Not comparable to Seljuks and Ottomans that you can argue that both coexisted for a few years…

Seljuks and Ottomans did not co-exist. They are different houses, Seljuks fell and disintegrated into many regional authorities called “Beylik” by the Turks. Something like Duchy in European terms, I guess that’s the closest term in English. Anyway, one of these, was the house of Osman, which formed the Ottoman empire later. They are continuation of each other, just like the Achaemenids and Sassanids. I agree that the time in-between is greater in the case of Persians.

My argument was never invalidated, Persians are not an important empire for most of the middle ages…

Well, they are not as significant as Mongols, Abbasids and others in the current game, yes, I’ve said that already. Probably Ottomans and Byzantines should be there before Persians.

Civilization is more than a ruler, a king, a sultan, a emperor, a dynasty. Persian civilization never, never stopped existing and being a top world civ during AoE4. Persia had Caliphate, Turkish, Mongol rule in parts of Middle Ages? That didn’t affect Persian civilization one inch. It’s still strong, look at Iran even today! It’s similar to China, who had Khitan, Shatuo, Tangut, Jurchen, Baiman, Mongol rulers. It’s still “Chinese” civ.

Take a look at the “Rise and Fall” civs analysis Topic for more on this discussion.

Both the Kingdom of Spain and Persians are top candidates to AoE4 civ. Two of the DLC candidates (selected form among over 30) on the poll include Spain, three DLCs include Persians.

I support both Persia and Spain. Show your support, vote on the DLCs poll :arrow_up:.

Another heavily biased poll.


This investigation and research is the first systematic community effort to look into AoE4 DLC themes (not possible ‘DLC civs’, considered individually) from the perspective of objetive criteria and principled historiography. Since the basis of this initiative is technical standards and criteria, criticism is extremely welcome within this Topic. You are welcome to share your - meaningful - critical views here.

As you can tell, it took some serious effort and dedication to build this. I trust that you will treat our effort with fairness and constructive observations. The DLC themes investigation & poll is still a work in progress, and there will be an expanded version after analysis of preliminary results. So, in what sense is the poll “heavily biased” Mr @TalVheet ?

Latest Poll and Ranking snapshot from July 29! We’ve had 96 voters, 353 votes

1. Battle of Empires (Byzantines + Italians vs Ottoman Empire)

2. Clash of Titans and End of an Era (Roman Empire vs Ottoman Empire)

3. Where the Sun Rises (Japanese & Goryeo / Korea )

4. Crossroads of the World (Persians & Seljuk Empire)

5. The New World (Inca Empire & Aztecs)

6. Eternal Civilizations (Persians & Indians)

7. The Reconquista (Spanish vs Caliphate of Cordoba)

8. The Northern Forces (Poland-Lithuania & the Norse)

9. Superpower (Armageddon: Ottoman Empire vs all-Europe+Persia+Russia)

10. Ends of the World (Japanese & Empire of Mali)

11. The Crusades (Byzantines vs Seljuks vs Crusader States vs Caliphate)

12. Southeast Kingdoms (Khmer Empire & Dai Viet / Vietnamese)

1 Like

Okay this is fun and awesome and all…

But do they PLAY well in multiplayer and competitive?
At the end of the day… this is a question a lot of us, if not the majority, are asking.

My vote for Civs: Spain, Turks or Ottomans, Norse, Incan/Aztec/Mayan.

1 Like

Timurid Dynasty (new civilization for AoE4 instead of Persians?)

Age of empires 4 , it seems to be very difficult to put the Persians in the game, because they were conquered by other peoples at the beginning of the medieval period.

So for those who want a Persian-style cavalry, with elephants and chariots… Perhaps the most correct solution might be The Timurids?

The Timurid Dynasty received a strong influence from the Persian culture. The Timurid cavalry resembles the model of heavy cavalry common in West Asia, due to the great Persian influence that the Timur empire suffered, but without abandoning the Turkic and Mongol roots.

Could make ideas and suggestions for such a civilization?

I think Timurids are an interesting Turkic civ, but they’re very short-lived, like the Mongols. Also, Timurids can be represented by Turks, they competed with the very young Ottoman Empire for leadership of all Turks, then fell behind and disappeared when the musket was invented, probably by Ottomans.

Short-term military genius of Timur (Tamerlane) cannot compare with amazing Persian civilization, one of the most important and unique in the history of the world, from 2,600 years ago to today’s Iran and surroundings.

If Persia had some Turkic dynasties in the Middle Ages, that doesn’t really matter, because they didn’t change Persian civilization, Persian civilization changed them.

Most cultures in West Asia, Central Asia, Hindustan, the Subcontinent, Caucasus, even some in SE Asia were influenced by Persia, maybe one of top 3 greatest civilizations in AoE4 timespan.

1 Like

I think your civ choice is excellent @CPTBL1TZ .

But this is the first realistic, context-based AoE4 DLC theme investigation and poll, it’s not a civ poll. Please vote on up to 5 DLC choices on the poll, if you wish to suggest a DLC that’s not on the list, you’re more than welcome to, my friend.

Regarding individual civs,

yes I think they have the potential to be way, way more interesting than some current civs like French or English. So yes, they’d be lots of fun to play multiplayer and competitive.

Some of the civs included in candidate DLCs have their civilization concept as a classic Topic with extraordinary ideas here in this forum:

PS. The DLC poll is celebrating its 100+ voters, with 397 DLC votes cast so far :tada: :balloon: Check the beautiful ‘Tribute’ Topic:

So, one of the reasons Persia may not make it into the game is because the developers may have already decided against it. Take this with a giant grain of salt, because I can’t remember where I saw it, but there was either a rumor or a discussion where a dev said they originally wanted Persia as the “elephant civ” until they realized Persia had no unified empire during the Middle Ages. So they deliberately picked Delhi to replace them. If this were true it seems unlikely that devs would go back to Persia.

Fun anecdote :smile: I do not believe devs with decision power are ignorant. So this is probably a rumor. There are elephants in India, not Persia, an immensely different region of the world. By the way Delhi is in India, and Delhi Sultanate was an Indian / Hindustani state. They borrowed administration and statecraft from Persia, as most peoples did then.

Realized what?? It seems they forgot to inform History :smile:ha (see below). Basic fact, AoE4 is not a Middle Age game, it stretches very much into early Modern Age. So no, devs would never say that in the first place.

Year 627 - Classic Superpower Duel: Rome vs Persia, Turks Defeat China and Conquer Mongols

Most important civs: Roman Empire (Byzantines), Persians, Turks, Chinese, French, Korea

Year 970 - Persia & Rome Revive their Glory, HRE is a ‘Temporary Empire’

Most important civs: Persia, Chinese, Roman Empire (Byz), Caliphate, Turks, HRE, Khmer

Year 1550 - ARMAGEDDON: All of Europe + Persia + Russia TOTAL WAR vs Ottoman Superpower; Hollywood-like Re-revival of Persia; Ottoman-Persia Wars Slow the Empire’s Advance; Istanbul / Constantinople is Center of the World Yet Again

Most important civs: Turks (Ottoman Empire), Chinese, Persia, Spain, Austria, Russia, French, Inca Empire (not shown), Japan, Mali Empire / Songhay, English


Therefore again, I do not think decision-making high-level devs are ignorant, I believe they’re cool knowledgeable people. So obviously they would never rule out Persia, which not only is the criteria-wise #3 or #4 most worthy civ in the world not yet in AoE4, it’s also one of the very most popular, most voted civs in EVERY civ poll / DLC poll on AoE forum. Devs would never ignore that.