There is no need to change it, it is a good match for Northern India, and the several sultanates there.
It is not just Rajput, but also the Delhi Sultanate and teh Mughals, at the very end of the Imperial Age.
Also, I do not want the precedent of changing civ names, or you will open a huge can of worms, and people will demand almost all civs to change name.
Prithviraj was a king from 1182 to 1192, so it has to be around that time. Muslims came after killing him though. Also Mughals were Tatars. 3 dynasties of Delhi Sultanate were Saracens and 2 were Turkish. So that part is already covered.
Leave Indians as Indians like they left Slavs after adding Bulgarians. They can remove some leader names for the new Indian civ like Rajendra Chola which would be fitting for a Chola civ like they did with Timur Leng for Tatars.
Civs often have items outside their campaign period.
Organ Guns were not actually used by the Portuguese in Africa or India at the beggining of the trade-post phase, and El Cid never saw Conquistadors, much less with Guns and Morion helmets.
Indians should remain as is.
Since people keep accusing other people that they donât speak for the majority, while implying that they do, there are some thing to consider.
it may be stereotypical, but ususally are onlyne player, and especially ranked ones that donât want new civs, while single players and âoccasional multi-playersâ want new civs, or so is what I hear on the forum.
The majority are single palyers
Not the ones that play online, and for sure not the ones that play ranked. And if is safe to assume that those want new civs and the ones that either play single player or are just occasionaly multiplayers (since balance doesnât really matters to them) then the mayority want new civs.
The number are all in the minute of video.
Just for you to know, Iâm pro new civs, just they should be added a few at the time, so to not offset balance too much. And of course fixes should in any case have the priority.
Their wonder (Tamil) and monastery (Oriya) should definitely change. I also want a Dravidian architecture.
No. Of course there arent 100 religions, but: Hinduism, Buddhism and Islamism were popular in the subcontinent. Sri Lanka was Buddhist. Pala Empire was Hindu. Bahmani was Muslim etc.
No, leave it. It works well enough for what it is, the Monastery is OK (not the only civ with a wrong one), and the Wonder almost never get built anyway.
At most, the Wonder could be changed, but I honestly see no point.
Until Aurangzeb (AoE3), Muslim population was less than 0.1%. Moreover, the rulers being Muslims doesnât mean the kingdom was Muslim.
For all threads similar to this, at least provide your approximate view of proposed civsâ tech trees, bonuses, units and techs. It is a lot harder to make a unique civ concept nowadays than many people think it is.
Stuff like this?
Hereâs the Tamil civ concept from the Civ Concept LLC mod:
https://sites.google.com/view/aoe2-civ-concepts-llc/civs/tamils
The Tamil Civ concept from the Realms mod (note: they just get normal Archers (no Crossbowmen upgrade). Also in this mod Elephant archers are a generic unit.:
Personally i want to see my civilization Punjabi with chakram (hoop thrower, there is nothing like that in game) Or how about the Gatka rotating knifes on ropes? So there you have it, a unique idea. But i think my civilizations fits better in aoe3.
and there is no limit to unique ideas.
We have charging knights for burgundy, how about charging bowman? First arrow = extra damage. Or some charging Spearman or Swordsman or Javelineer?
How about the Urumi flexible sword from South India? Or the Sword fitted on Hand? Or Tiger Claw?
And just like the Sicilian UU, how about we have a cavalry that can build buildings, or an archer that can build building?
And like villagers convert to revolters we can have some infantry convert to cavalry.
Kipchaks are mounted Chu Ko Nu, how about some mounted longbowman or rattan archer?
Is there ever a limit to civ concept ideas?
I donât think your excuse works.
Elephant Archer? War Wagon?
It would be OP, Longbows already push balance as it is, and need to be slow and miss Thumb Ring, yet still kill everything when massed enough.
Rattans the issue that they deal quite a lot of damage, and can actually raid because of their Pierce Armour, so a Cavalry version that is faster and has more HP, seems just like a War Wagon, which is already in the game, and has to miss Bloodlines.
Just a Cavalry Archer which has +2 range compared to generic CA, not with 12 range. Cavalry Archers fit Deccan region very well.
Maybe if they missed the Heavy Cav Archer upgrade, or Bloodlines + Husbandry.
Magyar Cav Archers get +1 Range, and already rival the Turks Cav Archer for the title of best Cav Archer type unit in the game.
They even soundly beat Mangudai at everything that is not attacking Siege units.
I meant UU, you just simply give the UU less hp, accuracy etc. than regular CA.
no expansion has seen more then what, 5 civs and you think 1 is going to add 13? more realistic to ask for 4 or 5, with maybe 2 or 3 of those being Indian Subcontinent focused.
that could work well.
It would work, but the civ would still have to miss some upgrades. Bloodlines and Thumb Ring, at least, since it is a Cavalry Archer unit.
u know if u dont want new civs then this thread is not for u
for some reason people like him insist on joining a conversation just to state a point no one in the conversation cares about.
Like me asking you if you like apples or oranges and he comes and says he likes bananas.