I just don’t like these tiny DLCs with only 2 civs - I hate chipping. It would be quiet if these DLCs contained 4-5 civs. If the Lords of the West would include Aragonese, Venetians and Irish, and Dawn of the Dukes would additionally include Serbs, Croats and Romanians, I would be pleased. Not that there would be a lot of Europe, you would just feel completeness in these regions.
You think I’m a Eurocentric. Let me show you I’m not that fanatic:
and why does Europe need to be COMPLETE before we move onto other areas that don’t have nearly the exposure Europe does?
maybe so, but when Europe already has so much exposure and inclusion in the game, as opposed to other areas, its hilarious to think we need to COMPLETE europe by adding the likes of the croats/serbs, the romanians, and the saxons and Bavarians. you’re so focused on breaking up Europes umbrellas into each and every small piece that you say “well Indias okay to only have 2 or 3 civs” and screw the Saracen Umbrella and Chinese Umbrellas while were at it. heck - pretty much every European civ in the game has its own campaign (sad vikings noises), meanwhile the only original Asian civ for AoK/AoC that has a campaign is STILL the Mongols. from the AoK days. Meanwhile China, Japan and Koreans have no campaign to speak of. nor does the persians who are technically asian as well.
and furthermore - if we do have a hard limit of 50 civs, by say the game engine, then yes, adding 4 more EU civs is absolutely a slap in the face to the rest of the world.
by the standards you use for Europe do you know how many civs you would have to add to africa and asia as a whole? it’s utterly mindblowing.
yeah like the serbo croats were SO FAMOUS. and the Romanians too.
source please? I haven’t seen any requests for Bavarians, Venetians or Aragonese until recently with the recent flood of “INSERT MY EU group that is currently under umbrella xxx”. meanwhile i have heard calls for More Asian african civs left right and center.
I just hate the business model of this series - lots of DLCs with little content.
You would cover all of Europe in 3 DLCs of 5 new civs.
Not that the European DLCs would be released one after the other. In my opinion, the first DLC for AoE 2 DE should be the African DLC (in my opinion, by far the worst represented region in the game).
If there were still large DLCs, it would be possible to afford a huge love for virtually every region, e.g. Sahel DLC, India DLC or Mesoamerica DLC. Then the civs would be better balanced, because let’s face it, the new civs from the DLCs try to be asymmetrical, which causes an imbalance. The old civs are similar to each other, but at least they didn’t outbalance the games - and they had new architecture sets…
The new DLCs add more “super extra” civs because less is better - in AoE 2, however, it did not work.
DLCs containing more civs could definitely please everyone more and add more civs from around the world.
Yeah uh. If it wanted too China could have taken over all of Europe easily. Especially during the dark ages. It wasn’t until late in aoe2 time frame that European civs finally started rising to prominence.
Go look when most European campaigns take place chronologically.
Just a reminder that lotw and dotd are considered failures in aoezone. They want african and american civs. Some don’t want any kind of dlc, just want the devs to fix the game.
Here, people seem to want indian civs more.
On Steam forums, people want indian, american and caucasus civs.
It’s pretty clear they don’t reject european civs like haters, but they are tired of that region and want something fresh. I myself want tibetans.
But seriously, I know it. The Islamic world and China made great achievements at a time when Europe was struggling with the burning of witches and heretics (people who think against the teachings of the corrupted church).
Nor do I mean that I need all of Europe to be particularly well represented. When buying AoE 2 DE I did not count on any DLC. It is true that one Slavic civ irritated me because I knew perfectly well that it was based only on Rus, but I played nevertheless. I will say the same about the Teutons who only remind me of the Teutonic Knights. I am used to it being a game of umbrella civs based on the most iconic nations.
Everything changed after LotW. Now, every nation with a greater influence in the kingdom can have its own civ. Now what used to be an umbrella civ is a base for some new ones.
I think you will agree that since the Western Slavs have 2 civs, the South Slavs also deserve independence from Rus.
Romanians are the only civs that do not exist in the game, but have their own civ - absurd.
The Teutons are a similar case to the Slavs. A huge umbrella that should receive at least 2 new civs. 4 could also be done. Germany is the essence of the Middle Ages - numerous rich countries in which the economy and culture flourished. Germany is the heart of Europe. Teutons, and rely too much on the iconic Teutonic Knights.
These are my European priorities. Breaking down two huge European umbrellas (similar to Indians) and creating a Romanian civ. The rest of the European civs are cool as well, but not as high-profile as the ones mentioned above.
Just because I am talking about Eastern Europe the most does not mean that I am Eurocentric. After all, each of us has our favorite region - mine is Eastern Europe in which we live. I have a feeling that they want to talk about it and share it. This does not mean that I am closed to other regions of the world.
If the first DLCs for AoE 2 DE were non-European DLCs, I would be happy and cheer, but since they started from Europe, I want to share my thoughts - after all, it’s about the topic.
Teutons are the HRE, the Teutonic Knight is just a unit. Saying that a Crusade order is a civ is just wrong. And if Germans are fine with it and most civs are similar in military, whats the problem (same goes for China and the diferent Chinese-led dinasties)? India is just a far worse problem than either of these two umbrellas, because the civ isnt even based on an actual Indian state and its including two diferent peoples that dont even share the same language family.
And Hansa and Westphaleans are just bad civ choices.
And yes I know you get that Europe wasnt always the most powerful kingdoms around, but you are not being fair.
