Ingame civs are (mostly) not defined by dynasties
Italians General post when
2 Likes
Yes, that’s why I say it… it’s an alternative to intersperse with the regional dlcs of AoE 2 and for the game to continue receiving dlcs and civs without breaking the balance of the base game… there are unknown stories that can never be told in AoE 2 because they happened in ancient times and that’s where RoR can shine…
Nubia (Kush in RoR/Makuria-Alodia in AoE 2) dlc confirmed xd…
Yes, it would have to be a Middle East dlc renaming Saracens into Arabs or Ayyubids and adding an Arab/Nubian campaign apart from Saladin’s one…
Yes, Ethiopia received a lot of influence from Kush to the west when Aksum invaded Kush in 350 AD destroying and dividing the kingdom into Makuria and Alodia…
Yes, I agree…we need more divisions in Asia and new civs in Africa…
Polinesians makes me noise, they are kind of out of place regionally speaking…
At this point I doubt they will put in Vandals…they used Gaiseric with the Goths…for me they will put in Vlacs, Serbs and Croats and rename the Slavs into Russians…
Yes, I agree, although the Olmecs can also enter in RoR, since they are from 1500 BCE…
But that happened in the 16th or 18th century if you count James Cook…the Tongans could enter in AoE 2, but you would have a campaign like Pachacuti…
Yes, it would be difficult to put the Polynesians in the game, I would like to see them, but there are no records of them except oral legends…
Yes, but it is understood that they chose Aztecs over Nahuas, it is a more recognizable name…
Yes, I don’t see the Mapuches in AoE 2, since ##### ###### was from the 16th century onwards…even occupying all of northern Patagonia in the 18th century and just as the Lakotas fought against the Americans in the 19th century the Mapuches did the same with the Argentines and Chileans…
I doubt they will make another split India…the Hindustanis represent the north, the Gurjaras, the west, the Dravidians the south and the Bengalis the east of the subcontinent…
The Dravidians represent the Cholas (850-1280) and Vijayanagara (1336-1646), also Sri Lanka…
This umbrella term in its original form (drāviḍa) is attested at least as far back as classical Sanskrit literature from the 3rd century BCE. In these sources, the term “Dravidian” generally denotes Southern Indian regions and their inhabitants. In later centuries, the term was also used to explicitly describe languages.
While ########## ### ######### civilization, the immense variety and intricacies of ethnographic, linguistic, and geographic groups were carefully explored and evaluated to represent the millions of people under these subgroups. For example: the inspiration behind the Rajendra campaign comes from the period of the Chola Dynasty (4th century BCE to 1279 CE). Although the ruling class of the Chola Dynasty spoke Tamil, a member of the broader Dravidian language family, this region was filled with diversity in languages, cultures, identities, and more.
Other significant aspects behind the Dravidian civilization design include but are not limited to the Urumi, a weapon that was developed in modern-day Kerala; a Castle based primarily on Golconda Fort in Hyderabad along with some influences from fortresses in Karnataka; and the numerous military, scientific, and technological advancements of the Vijayanagara Empire (14th – 17th centuries CE).
It’s the same…they could be Dravidians or Bengalis…
SL+EA civ?..
They are represented by the Hindustanis…
The Hindustanis are a South Asian/Indian civilization introduced in Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition - Dynasties of India as one of the splits of the Indians, based on the Persianized sultanates located in northern India, Afghanistan, and Pakistan such as the Mughal Empire , the Delhi Sultanate, Mamluk Dynasty, Ghaznavid dynasty, and Ghurid dynasty that covered different ethnic groups including Punjabis and Pashtuns.
Well, not everything is possible…they can always put more AIs of Kannadigans for the Dravidians…
Well in that case you would have the Tatars who had Herat in their power…
That’s true, when the time comes they would have to finish doing the last remaining splits…
Those would be Malays in AoE 3 (I mean Aceh and Johor)…
Maybe for AoE 3…
I see it as probable as civs variants for AoE 4…
Besides the fact that the Seljuks already have AIs from the Turks…
Maybe never considering that we already have 3 Italian civs: Italian (the city states) to the north, Romans to the center and Sicilians to the south…
1 Like
Their success in sacking Rome was a big enough achievement.
Their alliance with the Alans can be represented in the game similarly to the relationship between the Cumans and the Kipchaks.
Having naval power was also rare among Germanic barbarians.
If there are any potential civilization of late antiquity that are needed for promoting a DLC for RoR, it would be the Vandals.
That would be great with a Vlachs civilization coming with a remade Dracula campaign, as well as new campaigns for Rus (if Slavs will get renamed), Magyars, and Turks.
The Sclavenis would be a good placeholder for a South Slavic civ. I think we’d be hard-pressed to get any South Slavic civ, let alone 2 or more, namely Croats and Serbs separately, so finding an umbrella would be a decent solution when we could have a rare slot for them.
I would like to give a special mention to Songhais. While I put them in the nice-but-not-so-needed bracket, the more I thought about it, the more I thought it would be a fun image to train the horned bulls to rampage against enemy units.
They are the candidate I think are least needed among the ones in brackets on my list.
I usually don’t mention them whenever I make a list of potential civilizations. They were mentioned here purely because they have been discussed above.
But since they’re in my bracket, it also means I wouldn’t be so resistant if they came true.
I was not asking that the Aztecs should change their name, but I wanted to emphasize that this civ is actually intended to represent a Nahua civilization than just a city-state alliance composed of Tenochtitlan, Tetzcoco, and Tlacopan.
Tatars shoud be the Turkic people infulenced by Mongols and Islam in Central Asia from the 10th century in my opinion. Personally I think it starts at earliest from 934 with the Kara-Khanid Khanate when their sultan converted to Islam at the year, which leading to mass conversion of Karluks in that century.
From my point of view this is indeed a clever arrangement by the devs, using the different geographical locations (and religions) of the civs to always have a (even if not perfect but still) acceptable placeholder for the peoples of the subcontinent.
I won’t deny the possibility of their further splitting up, but I also don’t think it’s something that’s going to happen in the next few DLCs. I think in the Old World we need East Asia and Africa more, and then Southeast Asia and Central Asia, sorted by the last time those regions got a civ.
Before the Germans and Italians split, those Indians will come first.
2 Likes
1 Like
What has trade centers got to do in AoE2? Even the borders in that map are irrelevant to the discussion.
1 Like
And what does population number matter for AoE 2? Even less…
Man the borders in that map are relevant to the above discussion for gap in Deccan (Kannadigas and Odias)
I just clarified what the numbers are to avoid further confusion because I anticipated someone might ask.
May I ask what is the purpose of you posting that map of yours?
1 Like
Okey.
As a curiosity. Since you sent the map from this game, I did the same.
The map I sent also shows the borders, but in Europe.
But the borders are arbitrary as they are neither political nor cultural. And thus irrelevant to AoE2 discussion.
1 Like
They are political. These are black lines that mark the borders of European countries.
You yourself just wrote that you wanted to show the borders in the Deccan.
Seriously?
…
Yes.
You do not see it? Outside the Trade areas, you can also see country borders.
Very hard to see in the map with all the colours.
Here’s a better map I found for you. It will serve your purpose better. It is made by r/Brennanthenerd
Next time you find anyone posting a Non European Map for a Non European Discussion, throw this map on his face. Ask him to see this instead for no reason, or in other words “out of curiosity”.
2 Likes
I’ve seen this map on reddit before.
This is a discussion about the new DLC, there are no regional restrictions. Besides, don’t get too offended xDDD
They are not. They are the empty space between Bengalis and Dravidians.
SL = Steppe Lance
EA = Elephant Archer
I know. And I want them split.
It could be said that the ######## (as well as the Assamese and, to some extent, the Sinhalese) are currently part of a Bengali umbrella representing all eastern Indo-Aryan civs. An umbrella that could eventually be split.
They’re definitely not Dravidians, though.
2 Likes
Doesn’t seem accurate.
That picture shows ingame malays under chola empire,should that mean they too are covered under dravidians?
3 Likes