Rename the Three Kingdoms factions

In all honesty, we all know the Three Kingdoms factions are not civilizations. They are very much chinese, short lived polities who also are wildly out of the timeframe, in a small brief time window in the ancient era. They do not represent anything else, this can be easily seen in their AI leader list, or history sections.

I understand people wanting them ‘‘gone from the game’’, i really do, but i do not think it’s fair for people who want to play with the civs to do so, or cutting them off in Chonicles mode.

Reception of the civ names has been almost universally mixed or poor. People either dont care, or they hate it quite a bit. but this has already happenend before in this franchise; and in fact until this announcement it was the last time i was active in these forums. Because i like many others care about historical authenticity of the game’s setting. There are those who are excited for them mechanically, and i think a rename preserves their enjoyment in the game too. There are already rename mods and posted rename suggestions on other websites, but i want to bring it up here because i genuinly think its the best way to go about it.

When it happened? When AoE4 announced the civ variant concept, people were rightfully very upset with fantasy names like ‘‘The Sultan’s Army’’. The devs of that game took that feedback to heart, renamed them, and Sultans Ascend became an extremely sucessfull and well recieved DLC. I think we as a community must stick to reasonable requests, rather than wanting content stripped from the game in any way, even if said content might be wonky.

Renaming the civs as such, for example:

Wei → Xianbei

Shu → Bai

Wu → Wuyue

And other small localization changes would genuinly adress most people’s concerns and allow for a much more sucessfull DLC and a better future for AoE2 as a whole. These are actual peoples with long histories, true civilizations in AoE terms, and more more fitting of the game as a whole.

As it was said back during the AoE4 renaming request discussions: If you personally do not care, do not dismiss people who do care; let people care about things!. Because it affects their enjoyment of the game, will affect reviews and sales of the game, and affect everyone in the end. People who care love AoE2 and Age of Empires as a whole. We do not want the very concept of civilization shattered. And this will not affect the campaigns; civ rename triggers have existed for decades. Would this make this DLC be perfect? Not for many people. The patch still has major bugs after all. But i think it would be very helpful in a way that woudlnt affect anyone negatively.

That’s just my two cents anyways.

As a last note, i’d like to mention that the Wei civ already is almost entirely Xianbei themed (hence the term ‘‘Xianwei’’); its castle is built in Northern Wei style, its wonder was built in the Northern Wei dynasty, and the Tiger Cavalry is designed in a late medieval way rather than the Three Kingdoms tiger cav (Whose design you can see in other games, including AOM). None of the civ names are vital to their design or closely linked to them in gameplay.

14 Likes

Really? What civs got renamed to what

The ‘‘Sultan’s Army’’ got renamed to ‘‘The Ayyubids’’

The ‘‘Jade Empire’’ got renamed to ‘‘Zhu Xi’s Legacy’’

Both also got their flags (the AOE4 equivalent of Civ emblems) changed.

10 Likes

Shu needs some serious changes to be able to represent the Bai, not just merely a name change.

The Nanzhao and Dali kingdoms weren’t known to have used Ji halberds and war chariots, plus they weren’t known for using rapid fire crossbows with bolt magazines either. Instead they had agile infantry and cavalry wearing lacquered leather armors.

And the hero unit Liu Bei needs to be removed as well.

Moreover the architecture probably also needs to be changed.

2 Likes

Still more accurate than the Armenians.

Specific unit rosters are rarely that accurate, and specific adjustments can be done later

I think the main issue here is the names and themeing, not units.

2 Likes

if they get a rename.. i would prefer them to rename what the community actually wanted since the beginning of the topic: Tanguts, Tibet, Dali/Bai. change a few units from them maybe and i would be fine with the civs.
they need then ofc campaigns with the Jurchens-Khitans-Chinese in the future.

Well that’s probably just ur opinion.

As someone whose ancestors actually came from that region of China, if they really wanna change the Shu into the Bai, then I demand more than a name change. The unique units, the unique techs, the architecture, and perhaps even the language all need to be changed.

You might wanna check my civ proposal here to see how a potential Bai civ may actually look like, based on historical records of course:

User blog:MNOPSC1b/Bo / Baipu (potential new East Asian civ for AOE 2) | Age of Empires Series Wiki | Fandom

3 Likes

Did any non Han Chinese people use a lot of crossbows tho?

If not the Bai, then Shu still needs to be renamed to fit into a medieval game; then whats your suggestion for it?

Repeating crossbows, no (except maybe the Korean Sunogung which was Joseon’s version of the repeating crossbow, but I’m not sure if it was a real battlefield weapon or simply an experimental weapon, maybe someone with better knowledge in Korean history may help)

But normal crossbows as well as siege crossbows yes. They were used by the Vietnamese, the Zhuang and Yao natives of South China (and likely used by Nanzhao/Dali as well), the Chams, and the Khmers. In the north the Jurchens, the Khitans, the Mongols, and the Koreans also used them.

My suggestion is to move the Three Kingdom civs into the Chronicles, and add the Tanguts, the Bais, and the Tibetans into this DLC. I know this will probably never happen, but it’s always good to imagine.

1 Like

Meant more repeating crossbows yeah, my bad

I guess the Chams would fit better for the Shu (?) with Carroballistas and the such

There’s no evidence indicating that the Chams ever mounted siege crossbows or ballistas on chariots or if they ever used chariots at all, but they did mount them on the back of elephants as well as on walls and forts. And plus no evidence indicating that they ever used repeating crossbows.

And if you want to rename the Shu to Chams then even more things need to be changed, not only the unique units or the unique techs but also all the architectures and the language and the AI player names. Tech tree needs to be changed too, it would be absurd for the Chams to have the Hei Guang cavalry (a North China cavalry unit from the Age of Fragmentation in the 4th century AD) for instance.

Shu (as well as the other 2 TK civs) doesn’t really fit in AoE 2 and cannot easily be name swapped with any other civ, that’s my honest opinion.

Again, my civ proposal for the Chams as reference, based on historical records of course:

User blog:MNOPSC1b/Chams (potential new SE Asian civ for AOE 2) | Age of Empires Series Wiki | Fandom

1 Like

Don’t worry, they won’t do anything, their only hope is for you to accept everything.

2 Likes

Another possibility is to combine the 3 civs into one Xianbei civ. The Xianbei existed from the 2nd century AD to sometime around the 7th or 8th century AD before being fully absorbed into the Sinitic population of North China, so timeline-wise they fit better in AoE 2 than the 3K civs.

In terms of units I’d say the Tiger Cavalry can serve as their UU without much change, and the Xianbei Raider also fits perfectly (might even give it an elite version). But a lot of the Wu and Shu units need to be abandoned. The war chariot, ironically, may still exist since chariots and wagons were used by the Southern Dynasties’ armies to counter Xianbei cavalry, so the Xianbei should be at least familiar with it, though its stats and appearance need to be tweaked a bit.

The idea is to preserve the civs in multiplayer, combining them doesnt help that much.

That said, the Wei civ is pretty much entirely Xianbei by itself. The other two, not so in my opinion.

2 Likes

Even the official website calls them ‘‘Forces’’, and the other two ‘‘Medieval Civilizations’’

11 Likes

In all honesty, the 3K thematically fits right into the european feudal middle ages, remember that SoTL video where he concluded that like 75% of researchable techs or so originated in China?

The more I read about the 3K period the more the idea to include them grows on me. In a game where Romans, Byzantines, Italians and Sicilians exist next to each other simultaneously (same as eg Poles and Slavs) - why not 3K and Chinese? Just for perspective , look at the estimated population:

Lithuania (1260 AD) - 400.000
All of Italy incl Sicily (1000 AD): 5.2 million
Han dynasty (0 AD before splitting into 3K) : 55+ million
Song dynasty (1100 AD) - 90 million

Sources

Grand Duchy of Lithuania - Wikipedia
Population - Our World in Data
Song dynasty - Wikipedia
Han dynasty - Wikipedia

There is already a Chinese civilization in the game.

My points are about making the civs represent actually meaningful periods and peoples of chinese history rather than a 30 year blip before the Western Jin.

7 Likes

There’s already a roman civilization in the game (Byzantines).
Remove Italians, Sicilians, and Romans then (by your logic)…

Population estimates

Well do you have more accurate ones?