Definetily yes for the first question, sort of yes for the second
No I don’t like your priority on representation alone.
And it is possible in more asymmetric game
3 Likes
Technically they are
3 Likes
Out of this list, in this thread, I’d like to see Wari, Tlaxcala (so that would be a good american DLC?)
Armenian, Georgian (so that would be a good caucasus DLC?)
and maybe Saxons and Bavarians, since we started splitting the HRE apart already
They split the HRE apart, not the Germans. Bohemians were a lot different from them especially in the (early) Middle Ages.
1 Like
don’t forget the AUSTRIANS. They appear in:
Kotyan Khan, Scenario 5.
Barbarossa, Scenario 1
Either Austria or Bavaria would be ok but not both.All three teutons austrians and bavarians would be similar to each other.
For me adding swiss bavarians/austrians venice and serbians completes all of europe.5 more slots left for other parts of the world even if these get added.
No “representation alone” but representing civs at the level of Venetians in other region makes more sense than to add an Italian civ clone. And theres A LOT of civs left to add on the world that are better than Venetians more wars and/or a more powerful state but arent represented at all
Lol thats extremely unfair. 5 more civs for the rest of the world and the already extremely overrepresented region of Europe gets 9 civs in a row. Like, seriously?
And those are bad civ choices considering whats outside Europe. Nubians are better than all of those
Like, that’s just your opinion though. I’d personally find the inclusions of Saxons or Bavarians more interesting. There’s certainly no shortage of Campaign material there.
but I think adding the Tlaxcala and Wari would be a good compromise for almost everyone (except for those who want more Euro civs)
2 Likes
I dont mean it in a “they are more interesting”. I mean it in the “they were more longlasting and more powerful”. I mean, Nubians singlehandedly stopped the Arab advance in Africa for like 700 years
Well, Bavaria exists as a state in Germany, and so does Saxony (and there is also Saxon diaspora still influencing places, e.g. the current president of Romania is a Transylvanian Saxon)
2 Likes
The timeline ends in the 16th century. Stuff after that doesnt matter
Yeah, well Bavaria and Saxony were still a thing in the 16th century too… as were transylvanian saxons
2 Likes
Saxons are a bit more complicated than Bavarians so I wont get into that argument, but in the case of Bavarians (which is what Mahazona wanted) they existed for a shorter time than Nubians in the middle ages and were always just part of the HRE without doing anything as important as what Nubians did (yes, stopping the Arabs is more important than whatever influence on Europe Baviarans had imo).
What do you mean by shorter time. Bavaria existed during almost all of the middle ages.
1 Like
They were (sorta) independent only after the HRE was formed.
Meanwhile Nubians started earlier and the last Nubian kingdom fell to the muslim Sudanese only by 1512. If we include Sudanese as Nubians they lasted the entire time frame of the game
Except “Teutons” mean Germans, both Saxons and Bavarians are Germans. Bohemians are Slavic. Italians were part of HRE too.
1 Like
Except that it (also) represents the HRE in the game.
List them please, ha
1 Like