I would like to raise the point again that “ages” in AOE games are not essentially ages but tiers of your town, unlike civilization games.
You’re matching a “Tier 0” (not 8th century) English base from 14th century against a “Tier 0” (not 8th century) Ottoman base from 15th century in the “Dark age” of the game.
When you progress you simply get better equipments but not “later” equipments.
Otherwise you’ll have totally different unit rosters and looks in those ages.
1 Like
These are not hinting at any civs…
Until Morocco did exactly that.
That was true for AoE1-3 but AoE4 changed that.
It even added the linguistic changes though time.
But effectively it still is…the “early knights” are not wearng Norman armours or greathelms but a less fancy version of a high/late medieval armour.
No. Morocco is in West Africa too. Not too far by the much, much easier west coast. Completely different situation. Geography is our friend @Skadidesu 
are we still saying the emojis are more new civs??? I think that otto and mali are very unique and well done since they have many new unique units, I 'd rather revamp the others a bit so they are more unique
Morocco invade Songhai Empire, which was the successor of Mali.
They actually went though the desert with gunpowder weapons and defeated them.
Everyone seem to think that these icons have to be a reference to civ. Why though? Maybe I miss something but can’t this hint to other sort of changes? Ships, ship damage, fire damage or anything like that.
Maybe it was even allegorical for the gamescom presence. The team went camping 
(traveled) to extinguish (firefighter) the game’s wildfires a.k.a announce changes and free week and content.
Yes true, I never denied it. Morocco was pretty advanced then, as a semi-vassal of the Ottoman Empire it received huge shiploads of firearms and large cannons directly from Turkish foundries.
Let’s not forget than it decimated the Portuguese army in seminal battle of Al-Kasr Kebir 1578 (Alcácer Quibir in Portuguese) with Ottoman arsenal, Lisbon being one of the most technologically advanced powers that time.
What I am saying is that Morocco is in the West Sahara region, same as Mali - Songhai. Plus, the west African coast is full of paradise oasis. From El Smara oasis to Taghaza salt mines (the path Moroccan army travelled), it is a short distance and then on, full of caravan stops of the salt trade.
Therefore infinitely easier logistics for Marrakesh to invade Mali than Ottomans - the core of the Empire was today’s Turkiye, in distant southeast Europe and Anatolia. Istanbul is as far away from Timbuktu as from Siberia!
To march a huge army directly from Cairo to Timbuktu is impossible (certain DEATH 
), not mention Istanbul to Timbuktu. Mali would be nearly impossible for any East Euro / Asian power to invade by land. Much easier for Morocco.
Can’t hide from geography…
With the Ottomans being added to AoE4, they’re going to be yet another civ being split from AoE2’s civ versions which we’ve seen other civs being split from the AoE2’s civs (I.e., Delhi Sultanate being a split from AoE2’s Hindustanis and Abbasid Dynasty being a split from AoE2’s Saracens). Perhaps we may one day see the Seljuks being added to AoE4 as well. Also, it’s about time that AoE4 gets a DLC that adds new civs.
1 Like
Oh you were only talking about the Ottomans.
How is the HRE split from Teutones? The HRE was a lot larger then whatever the Teutones represent.
What do you even mean by split?
But you guys… if the emojis were about the DLC at gamescon announcement… they should have said something by now shouldnt they???
Maybe they were related in some hidden sense to these 2 new civs
Ok but you know what Austria was part of?
Ok I was confused. Holy Roman Empire is synonymous with Teutons from AoE2 and Germans from AoE3.
As long as neither of them sound like Abassid units when they die I’m all for it.
uuuAAAAUUUUuuuuughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
I take responsibility for improving communication skills.
Well, yes and so so.
As a history junkie who wrote the ‘First Context-Based AoE4 DLC Investigation’ to appraise the best DLC themes by historical context, interactions and storytelling, but also wrote the ‘Rise and Fall Civs Investigation’ to appraise and rank civs on their own merit based on a defined Criteria Set, I can say the reason to introduce these particular 2 civs together is… "why not"?
The logic here is not “the civs most people hype the most”. That damn sure ain’t Mali. But both Ottomans and Malians ranked very high in my ‘Rise and Fall’ study.
The Ottoman Empire ranked #1 and Mali ranked #5, both far ahead of public hype heavyweights like Spain #9, Aztecs #11, Chola #14 and Vikings #15. Persians ranked #2, Byzantines #3 and Japan #4 though; Inca was #6.
Indulging AoE fans in cheap, hollow hype is ok too. But gifting them the opportunity to open their eyes to different, less-known, often greater civs in history that shaped humanity, is far cooler and respects the tradition of a classic like AoE.
4 Likes
I’m more excited for the Malians personally, but the Ottomans are a welcome addition to see. Though I feel the latter would be better suited to a pairing with the Byzantines for obvious historical reasons.
1 Like
I’m very stoked for both civs too, they looking like devs could hit the right spot, too early to say.
Based on ‘Rise and Fall’ results, we’ll likely be seeing Byz soon. But Relic will definitely ride the hype to charge $$ for it.
I was thinking to write my early DLC analysis of what’s been shown so far, but I know more about the Ottomans civ, would you be able to produce an early analysis of Mali? @TyrannoNinja
I actually really like the design of the civs so far.
The only thing i am not a fan of is units being able to use stealth outside stealth forests, this was one aspect of aoe3 I really disliked when I played it, I really hope this doesnt start to become a thing in the future.