[Polls] With regards to new civs II

[Szaladon]

@Player870583437

Overall, there’s plenty of civs, and I don’t think that 48 is a “hard cap” as the word commonly gets on the forum.

The thing which worries me a bit more are potential eco boni and game niches. That’s why I would prefer if they’d focus on the big players first instead of keep adding minor factions in regions which got already a lot of DLC love to be honest.

[MatCauthon3]

@Player870583437

As for the Slavs (therefore making Serbs and Croats obsolete) we already have the Poles, Bohemians, Bulgarians) so the Slavs should be renamed the Rus for logical consistency. One could make the case that the Swiss are already as Teutons, but still, the Swiss were kind of their own thing and weren’t only German

So you’re gonna make all sorts of arguments to further break up European umbrellas but ignore logical arguments to break up non European umbrellas?

Makes zero sense.

There is no reason we can’t break up the other umbrellas too.

[TungstenBoar]

Eh tbh outaode of his take on Jurchen I think hes not being too unfair

Although I think he doesnt know Asia very well.

[MatCauthon3]

He’s not being unfair as he sees it but he lacks a huge understanding of anything outside or Europe.

[SMUM15236]

Same opinion. It will literally be a dream coming true for me. Tamils (Chola), Siamese, Champa are the biggest candidate for that imo.

[TheConqueror753]

I’m just going to link one of my posts from another topic, because I think it’s very relevant to this. Also, I’m not going to write it again.

https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/are-you-tired-of-european-civilizations-in-dlc-poll/196891/58?u=theconqueror753

[MUTYLATOR5553]

Castles for everyone!

The Lords of the West DLC added 2 civs to this game with a unique castle appearance. Now comes “Dawn of the Dukes” adding another 2 new civs also with a unique castle look. In that case it would be appropriate to add a new unique castle look for each civ in the game. Proposition of unique locks for each civ in this game (no unique model): Britons = Default Western European Castle Celts = Default Central European Castle Franks = Mont Saint Michel Teutons = Default Eastern European C…

[MUTYLATOR5553]

Settling the question of European civs

Settling the question of European civs

• Yes for new European civs
• No for new European civs

How many new european civs would please you?

• 0
• 1-2
• 3-4
• 5-6
• 6+

Which regions of Europe do you think are missing civs?

• Balkan
• Central Europe
• Eastern Europe
• Mediterranean
• Northern Europe
• Western Europe

Combine popular civs options to save slots (like Serbo-Croatians, Bavarians)?

• Yes
• No
• Maybe

Which civs would you like to see?

• Croatians
• Serbians
• Serbo-Croatians
• Romanians
• Albanians
• Bavarians (Southern Germans umbrella - mix of Swiss and Habsburgs)
• Saxons (Northern Germans umbrella) (potentially Eastern German umbrella)
• Westphalians (Western German umbrella)
• Hansa (trade German civ)
• Habsburgs
• Swiss
• Swedes
• Dannes
• Silesians
• Pomeranians
• Novgorodians
• Venetians
• Catalans / Aragonese
• Moors
• Basques
• Irish
• Dutch
• English

[MatCauthon3]

Seeing as your poll leaves a lot to be desired I’ll just answer without voting.
No European civs without at least 2 dlc outside of Europe first. (3 prefered)
If 48 civs is the cap, no more than 1 more Europe civ.

[KingofQuebec368]

I think it would be better to make another post.

[SMUM15236]

@MatCauthon3

If 48 civs is the cap, no more than 1 more Europe civ.

Caucasians included?

[MatCauthon3]

I dont considse them European.

[Mahazona]

@MatCauthon3

no more than 1 more Europe civ.

Just curious what would you pick as the last euro civi?

[MatCauthon3]

Idk, but it wouldn’t be Albanians or Romanians.

[TungstenBoar]

Tbh even then I would rather just getting 8 non euro civs + Georgia

[TungstenBoar]

Why are you doing this? The poll above is totally functional for any purpose. We also have the Temudhun poll

Im not voting on this

[Szaladon]

@Mahazona

Just curious what would you pick as the last euro civi?

Swiss

Pro:

• They would use the last Euro set which hasn’t gotten a new civ (Central European) since DE.

• They have a sufficiently enough niche to not feel like yet another Euro civ (probably mostly focusing on Pikeman and maybe also Monks (Switzerland was one of the center of the Reformation).

Contra:

• They’re really a minor civ and I would really just consider them if we absolutely have to get another Euro civ which we really don’t consider there’s already 19 options which is more than any other world region and almost more than any other world region combined.

• I don’t know but by no means are they anything like an empire and thus adding them would really be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

@TungstenBoar

Why are you doing this? The poll above is totally functional for any purpose. We also have the Temudhun poll

Im not voting on this

So will I to be honest. All the options you have are already votable in the poll above except the Euro civ poll which is plagued by the issue to be vague considering the community can’t agree upon where the Caucasus belongs to.

In the way I voted, I always assumed there was a limit anyway in how many civs we’ll get. Even if it isn’t hard-coded, there’s the factor of design space, design possibilites and the fact that I doubt they’ll release 20+ DLCs à 2 civs each just from an economical point of view.

I agree with @TheConqueror753 with his post which for simplicity I’m just going to quote here:

@TheConqueror753

The problem that I personally find with it is the 48 civ limit. I’m not sure if this still exists, but until the devs confirm it can be changed, we have to assume it is. Because we have 39 civs currently, this leaves space for 9 more civs. If we look at the use of different architecture sets as an easy measure of where civs come from:

• Eastern European, with 6 civs, about 15% of the civs use this.
• Mediterranean, with 5 civs, about 13% of civs use this.
• East Asian, with 5 civs, about 13% of civs use this.
• Central European, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
• Western European, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
• Middle Eastern with 4 civs, about 10% of civs use this.
• South East Asian, with 3 civs, about 8% of civs use this.
• Mesoamerican, with 3 civs, about 8% of civs use this.
• African, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs use this.
• Central Asian, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs use this.
• South Asian, with only Indians, about 3% of civs.

Now, if we condense this into continents/larger areas, we get:

• Europe, 19 civs, about 49% of civs are European.
• Asia, 11 civs, about 28% of civs fall into the Asian continent.
• Middle East, with 4 civs, about 10% of civs are from the Middle East
• Central America, with 2 civs, about 5% of civs are from Central America.
• Africa, also with 2 civs, once again 5%.
• South America, with only 1 civ, about 3% of civs.
• Indian Subcontinent, which I’ve counted as part of Asia, but I’ll also put it here, because it only has 1 civ, making up 3% of the game.

Now lets say we add some of the most common European civ suggestions, such as Romanians, Wallachians, Serbians, Croatians, Venetians, Swiss, and probably a few others. Let’s just say we add those, over 2-3 DLCs. Now we have 3 civ slots left if we assume the 48 limit is correct, and Europe has now changed to 25 civs, giving it 55% of civs. Asia, as the next highest now only takes up 24%, and South America and India now only account for 2% of total civs. The entire African continent would only have about 4% of civs in the game. Lets say we add Georgians and Armenians, another popular suggestion. Now the Caucasus accounts for 4% of civs, the same as all of Africa. But we only have 1 civ selection left. Where do we put it? It isn’t possible to put it somewhere that will fully be able to represent the neglected areas, India, Africa, America, at least two significant areas will be left out.

Now, let’s use a different hypothetical scenario. Lets say that instead of adding those European and Caucasus DLCs, we add a DLC to South America, adding 2 civs, such as the Chimu and Wari, diversifying it, justifying a new architecture set for South America, to which we can add Incas, as well as increasing the civ diversity in South American campaigns. Now South America takes up 7% of civs. Now, we have another 7 civs we can add. Lets say we add 4 to Africa, probably over 2 DLCs, lets say the Zimbabweans, Nubians, Congolese, and Swahili. Now Africa has been increased up to 13% of civs, and Europe has balanced out a bit more down to 42%. And now, we are in the same position we were earlier with 3 civs remaining. This time though, Europe makes up 42%, as opposed to 55%. That’s a pretty major difference, and allows for a lot more civ diversity. Now, with our last three slots, lets visit India/Southern Asia, the final neglected area. Let’s say we add two civs to India, for example the Rajputs and Chola. This breaks up the Indian umbrella, allowing different parts of India to feature. Our final civ could then be anything, it could be another Indian civ, it could be Nepal, or Tibet, it could be a European civ.

Another key argument to consider is how we differentiate civs from one another. Some of the popular suggestion for the European civs listed above include Heavy Cav unique units, focus on booming, Cav Archer units, Swiss pikes. Most of these either aren’t hugely unique, or cross over quite heavily with civs that already exist. Swiss Pikes from example might just be a Kamayuk/Teutonic Knight hybrid unit, which isn’t very unique. Lots of the European suggestions revolve around knights, of which most of the European civs already do. About 10 of the 19 European civs are typically played as a cav civ, just over 50%. If we add civs from other areas we can diversify this more. We can have more elephant civs added from India, Camel civs from Africa, not to mention the fact that entirely new regional unit lines can be created for these areas.

In summary, if we add more Euro civs, we throw away the potential for greater civ diversity, as well as filling up most of the slots with civs that probably won’t really bring anything new to the table in terms of units, gameplay, mechanics, or architecture. That’s my view on it, we really need to prioritize other parts of the world than Europe as long as the 48 civ limit remains in place.

[Mahazona]

@Szaladon

I don’t know but by no means are they anything like an empire and thus adding them would really be scraping the bottom of the barrel.

Well we do have the hussites so not that much of an issue.Im very surprised you picked swiss as you were really against having them.
I too would pick swiss if it was only one euro civi we could have.

[Szaladon]

It’s the option they added in the Realms mod with plenty other civs. Hopefully they’re going to focus on some of the other non-Euro civs the mod added. In Italics are all civs in Realms which aren’t in AOE2:DE, disregarding their home continent.

A list.

• Armenians- From Yerevan to Cilicia, defend your lands from a multitude of foes.

• Bamars- Command the rise of Pagan, Ava, Hanthawaddy, or Taungoo*

• Balts- Form a mighty commonwealth to subdue the encroaching crusader.

• Bohemians- Forge an invincible army powered by innovative tactics and the fervor of your people.

• Bulgars- Carve out a domain under the hooves of your armored cavalry.

• Burgundians- Raise a varied army from Europe’s finest mercenaries.

• Chichimeca

• Chimus- Challenge the Inca for supremacy of the Andes.

• Dravidians- Control the land and the sea in the struggle for South India

• Dutch- Protect your economic interests with powerful militia armies.

• Helvetians- Revive the discipline of the phalanx in battles once ruled by mounted knights.

• Jurchens- Contend with the Han, Khitai, and Mongols for a Golden Dynasty.

• Malays- Establish a grand thalassocratic state across the islands of the Southeast.

• Mandinkas- Build an empire upon gold and salt.

• Moors- Strive with foes all across the Mediterranean.

• Muisca- Lead the armies of the Zipa or the Zaque to victory.

• Khmers- Dominate Southeast Asia with vast armies, cultural strength, and mastery of war elephants.

• Turcomans- Rule Khanates from Anatolia to Manchuria.

• Tufans- Descend from the Himalayas to forge an enduring empire.

• Viets- Drive out would-be conquerors with relentless guerrilla tactics and subterfuge.

AoK: Realms mod for Age of Empires II: The Conquerors

[AllHailWaffles0]

I personally don’t think the Dutch fit into the timeframe of AOE2 very well. They were more like Northern Italy for the vast majority of the Middle Ages, independent duchies, bishophorics, or city-states without the legitimacy bonus of actually having a realm uniting them at one point, unless you count the Kingdom of Frisia (which I don’t). The Dutch Lowlands were subjugated under the Franks, Vikings, and Burgundians all in succession since the fall of the Kingdom of Frisia, and really didn’t develop any kind of unity until the Revolt and the 80 Year’s War, which is essentially only one century of the entire timeline for AOE2.

My opinion on the matter is that if there should be an Independent Lowlands civ, it should probably go to the Frisians (or Flemish, but that one’s a bit tough since Burgundians took them under with the Flemish Militia…). Yes, I know that they didn’t really go on to create a massive empire or anything, and they too were under subjugation for nearly the full period of time, but unlike the Dutch they have a few reasons that I think they deserve the Lowlands spot for a civ:

-they were fairly active and renowned throughout the Middle Ages; with the Frisian Freedom under the HRE Friesland flourished during the Middle Ages, both economically and culturally.

-they were renowned for their mercenary culture, which dated back to Roman times. Frisian mercenaries are often regarded as equals with their Swabian and Swiss competitors, often considered the premier mercenaries of Europe during the Middle Ages.

-they were also well renowned for their prowess in piracy in the Channel, the pirates under Pier Gerlofs Donia were a great example of them (Donia himself is a great character for a Campaign idea, the guy is the Frisian version of Robin Hood, William Wallace, Joan of Arc, etc.).

-Resisted against outsider intervention fairly regularly, particularly against the Dutch, in which spawned a sense of cultural unity unlike the contemporary Dutch realms of the time.

-Continued even after perpetual occupation to keep their culture alive, in the same spirit as the Cumans or the Byzantine Greeks.

It should also be said that, honestly, the Dutch don’t belong in AOE2. At best, you could try to make a case for Holland, the dominant Dutch Duchy, or the Bishophoric of Utrecht, but the Dutch as a whole were not considered any type of “united” group of people from the fall of Frisia to the Rebellion. They were a culture whose allegiances lied more with their local towns than the culture itself via the style of Italy. The Dutch imo are where they belong, in AOE3, where they were not only a major colonial power, but at their best point in history. Frisians in AOE2 would make far more sense given their people’s apex hit squarely within the borders of AOE2, and they have little relevance elsewhere in any other game of the series.

If you’ve read all of this, thank you. I mean no offense to the Dutch as a civ, honestly, but I just don’t believe they belong in a game that focuses on the entirety of the medieval era when they really started kicking off at around the tail end of it and became a powerhouse in the beginning of the next game’s timeline, the colonial era. It doesn’t feel right including them here to me, that’s really it.