That’s the thing with opinions, they don’t have to be the same 
I think we can all agree upon that this game is great
3 Likes
This is one of the reasons, where I am afraid that we are starting to cross a line. From game balance perspective, of course, there has to be a way to give such civilizations a chance to compete with the rest. All I ask is: why do we want to add tribes and banana nations?
Dear players, think before you ask for more. Do you really want to see a North American civilization (21%) or from Oceania (excuse me, 26%???) beating French paladins just for the sake of adding more options? The immersion will be gone. Please, respect the authenticity of the game.
As @Szaladon also reminds us, there are also other aspects, like the unique technologies and the conservative/bold civ design that matter more.
2 Likes
These civs have been planned to add to
“The Conquerors” - Swiss, Habsburgs, Tibetians
and “The Forgatten” expansions: Scythians, Lombards, Tibetans
Source: https://ageofempires.fandom.com/wiki/Cut_content
They have good chances in my opinion.
2 Likes
I don’t know why are you asking it especially to me. I think we love the game that’s why we always love updates and new content. But we have added enough civs. 1 + 3 + 1 = 5 (CD/HD/DE) Total expensions. I think about 20 civs added, I could call it incorrectly. That’s enough. I don’t think there will be new expansion and 2 civs made total 37 civs with selection UI (Random, Mirror, Full Random) it is exactly 40.
We will always love and buy new DLCs because we love the game.
Yes, they planned them, but It was last year of the XX century. Now things has change. They can not realease Tibetans since game would be banned in China. Same thing in AoE III, they are banning word “colonialism” which means Belgium has 0% chance to get in to the game since in AoE III time frame in Africa they did bigger massacre of Africans than Hitler or Stalin during World War in Europe.
The Lombards were already scrapped into Italians.
1 Like
its unlikely they will be re-added only because they were dropped earlier. the conquerors was created by ensemble studio devs who actually preferred about 8 civs from indian subcontinent as stated by one of its devs in an interview.
HD and later developments have been carried over by forgotten empires studio who have a different design vision. FE expansion introduced many huge umbrella civs like slavs and indians because they were afraid that that it was the last expansion they can add. they never thought they will one day become more than a mod team.
6 Likes
I think we already have enough civ. But if we really need more, I would vote for European civ.
Civ based on the other part of the underrepresented area would be fun. But devs sometimes cannot make properly to fit in AoE2. Because basic tech tree of AOE2 is based on European army (Knight, Pikeman, Crossbow, Arbs etc.)
We have to give amazing farm to Khmer because civ only good at Elephant and Scorpions are nearly unplayable in 1v1. I think American civs are well designed for not having entire cavarly but give them proper bonus and eagle which make them both balance and unique. But I think Khmer mainly using Hussar/knight line is questionable design. (Ofc it is tough to design they only good at elephant and siege and it is balanced…)
Also, European civs generally have more data and architecture left and it is not hard to design for tweak the bonus and give some new architecture.
3 Likes
Forgatten Empires can create two things:
- remakes
- DLCs for the remakes
They have no other choice, they will create new DLCs for the remakes or close the company. AOE2 will have 50 civs and 7 new DLCs soon. It"s a goose that lays golden eggs.
5 Likes
You already have lombards, they are named italians, but are the same thing.
I’d love swiss and habsburgs in the game
I don’t think we will ever see tibetans, that may be a ban to the game from China
Then you should pick Central Europe if you’d like to see that.
Can anyone explain to me how Habsburgs can be civilization ? I mean, I don’t know if this is language barrier or something, but I’m highly interested in history and never heard about them. I only heard about Habsburgs as German dynasty.
1 Like
You are right, they are a dynasty which after 30 Years war started de facto to build its own realm - Habsburgian empire, later Austria-Hungary… But this is well beyond the time frame of AoE2.
4 Likes
Thanks. I thought I miss understood something. IMO it is kinda lame to introduce dynasty as civilization. The Habsburgs did not rule only in central Europe in HRE but in other countries too like Spain and they tried in Poland too.
2 Likes
Question:
Why did you put Bohemians (as Slavic nation) into Eastern Europe while geographically they are more western than the State of Teutonic order (for example). While they were part of HRE and I would say a very important member of HRE. While they were so linked with France, Italy, Germany (culturaly, dynastically) like no other Slavic nations.
I would prefer to pick Central Europe, but you say I have to pick Eastern… I am just curious… Or in another words: I want to vote for Bohemia. What am I supposed to select 
1 Like
Yes, you are right. Spain, even in Brazil they had an emperor of Brazil for a very short time. I would say they were very versatile dynasty 
1 Like
Nice polls I was thinking to add do smth like that but yours has more options anyway.
Few remarks. I would like to see some more civs but I do not want us to go crazy and get 50 or 60 for example thats why I voted “We have enough for now”. I think there are people who do not want more civs and most of them didnt want for a long while even before DE. Than there are people who are open to the idea but would like to see some limit . And there are people who think the is no need for a limit if we end of with 60 or 70 civs even better.
On the question about concervative and bold designs I voted concervative as I see some things planned for LotW that are too much for my taste. At the same time I never had problem with feudal 2nd TC for Cumans but sergeants building and first crusade tech is a bit too much for my taste. I hate the instant spawn in general the same with the new tatar sheep bonus. My point is most of us would prefer some mixture of concevative and bold designs ( as shown by the poll) . May be this question could benefit of being only two options (now knowing how the results look like).
Other than that great job for the topic and the polls.
1 Like
I feel the same way! Given they said that changes are possible before release perhaps we could try to convince the devs to give up on some of the mpre crazy things there.
I still remember the original Cumans, when DE was released - those Kipchaks give me PTSD…
Anyway, for me it is clear that there are two new civs and there is no going back. Let them have an OP introduction and see how we can balance them with good suggestions to the developers, even though as you say, we still have a bit of time to ask for a reduction in their UTs. I think that we can live for 3 months with the new changes after 26th January.
Warning - speculation ahead ! ! !
I think that the Sicilians will be the first civ, which will not have a castle, because of the Donjons. Now, this could be an outside of the box thinking.
1 Like
Sicilians have castle. I will post a picture. Burgundians and Sicilians got unique Castles. Donjon is not a castle and it won’t work as a castle. Donjon is defensive tower where people can live too. ( in game Donjons have 2x2 size like houses )
1 Like
Pick both. The choices are already very specific.