There are multiple schools of thought about nationalism and nationstates, in the medieval ages for example the Scots had a very high nationalistic sentiment.
Besides that because it isnt really important as AoE civs have been people groups always (until now with AoE IV) and those people groups can be from a country but also from multiple countries.
Rus is a people group right.
Im pretty sure its not, doesnt it refer to the dynasty or something? Otherwise if I am wrong can you link where it states origin?
Its a people group vikings ruling over slavs.
Is there a reason to rename either of these two civilizations?
Turks represent the later ottomans and with tatars getting added seljuks can be represented by them.
India is a mix bag of things put together.tech tree is mughal/islamic language is north indian and wonder is south indian.
How about we call them Ottomans? Itâs better than Turks and a lot better than Seljuks.
Thats what people are suggesting here.
Sure, why not.
Imo itâs ok but letâs see what the devs decide after the next DLC is released. If they keep the current name, thatâs ok too. I donât think people will get salty for that.
They have to remove the polish and bohemian AI players anyway.
Of course, I hardly believe that they will rename the Slavs to Rusâ, but suddenly they read us and it will happen.
Turks donât only represent later ottomans, with FU cav archers + Sipahi unique tech and great light cav they also represent the earlier history of Turks.
And Slavs represent Balkan Slavs (well except Bulgarians) just as good as Rus, so I think they should keep them as Slavs. They also represent Great Moravia (though it existed for relatively short period of time) as well as Slavic tribes before forming states/kingdoms
Another thing which makes me give a strong suspicion that the Slavs will be renamed Rusâ : the latter is a Civ in AOE4 which covers the same time period.
Are they renaming teutons, saracens, and Indians then? You know the two games have different devs right?
I know that the dev teams are different, but that doesnât mean that they do things completely in isolation from each other. For the other ones, I canât speculate because the Slavs Civ & Civ name are actually relevant to the DotD DLC. Slavs is an umbrella term used for a civ that is effectively the Rusâ & no longer fits with 3-4 Slavic language Civs in AOE2 (Bulgarians, Poles, Bohemians & Slavs/Rusâ).
The Teutons, Saracens & Indians of AOE2 could all be umbrellas for the political entities which the HRE, Abbasid Caliphate & Mughal Sultanate represent in AOE4. Also note that Britons have become the English & the Franks the French in AOE4.
What if the devs introduced more expansions like Indian expansions or adding more Turkic and Saracens civs? Would you like to rename those too? We have 3 Turkic civs in the game, and ironically one of them called âTurksâ. If you suggest to rename the Slavs, then the same thing can be said about Turks.
The only other Turkic civ I know that isnât Turks is Tatars, whatâs the other one?
Turks, Tatars and Cumans; all these civs are Turkic, Tatars have mix with Mongols too.
In the future, if the devs want to add Caucasian expansion (Armenians and Georgians), they definitely need to add Khazars, Khazars were Turkic people too, same if they want to add more central/East-Asian civs like Uyghurs, which they were Turkic too, so keep the Turks civ name with having all these Turkic civs seems wrong like keeping the Slavs civ name with 4 Slavic civs in the game.
Turks refer specifically to the Ottoman ones, Turkic is the umbrella demonym which covers all the Turkic-speaking peoples in Anatolia, Caucuses, Central Asia & Russian Steppe.
This is the difference:
Turks doesnât equal Turkic, Turks are a sub-branch of Turkic.
Slavs do equal Slavic, but the Slavs Civ doesnât cover all Slavic-speaking peoples. This is even less so with Bulgarians, Poles & Bohemians (all of the latter 3 & âSlavsâ/Rusâ Civ are Slavs/Slavic speaking peoples).
Anyway they need a rename 