Renaming Turks to Oghuz

It made sense to call the civ “the Turks” when AoK came out, because it was the only Turkish civilization represented in the game. With the introduction of other Turkic peoples like the Cumans and Tatars in The Last Khans, though, this name has become confusing.

The original Turks civ is plainly meant to represent the Ottomans and Seljuks, at least primarily – that’s clear not only from the civ design, but also from its campaign appearances. And since both of the empires just named were established by the Oghuz Turks in particular, “Oghuz” would seem to be the logical replacement for “Turks” as the civ name.

We wouldn’t call the Aztecs “Americans” with Mayans and Incas also present in the game, nor would we call the Spanish “Iberians”, since the Portuguese are also represented. Hence Turks should be renamed Oghuz, just as Slavs should be renamed Rus’.

(Excerpted from another post of mine.)


Did they actually refer to themselves as Oghuz back then? The name sound vaguely anachronistic to me, maybe because I’ve encountered it mostly in the context of modern linguistic. I agree that the name is a little bit confusing now that there are other Turkic civs in the game, but Turkoman sounds more medieval to my ear and would probably be more easily recognized.


People don’t even realize this all the time though. Turks is fine as a name, I also think it sounds better than Oghuz. It just feels like renaming something when it’s not actually broken. Sure, maybe it’s confusing for anyone who cares about having various civs with historical Turkish roots, but it feels like you’re swapping out a 20 year old name for something no-where near as recognizable. Not a fan.


Two questions:

How difficult is it to make a text mod that changes the name of a civilisation? I’m guessing not very, although I’ve never done it before. A few people seem to want to change certain civ names (e.g. Slavs to Rus, Mayans to Maya, Byzantines to Romans, etc.) and it seems to me that the best solution is simply for those people to make a mod according to their preferences.

Is anyone actually confused by it? Note that you clearly are not. Bonus question: do you think changing the name of a civ that has been in the game for over 20 years to a word that most people have never heard of would be less confusing than leaving it as it is?


It’s about 10 minutes, maybe less if you’re fast. Add an extra few mins for every civ you want to rename.


It is historically accurate naming. Seljuks are Oghuzs and their state is named as “Oghuz Yabguluğu (766-1055)” but they changed their name as Seljuks which is name of leader of Oghuzs similar to Ottomans (from first Ottoman Sultan Osman I).

Today, of course, the use of Oghuz as a tribe name has been largely abandoned. It is mostly used as a male name among Turks. Some Turkish peasant or nomads say they belong to the Oghuz tribe. Apart from that, Turks in cities naturally forgot their tribal names to a large extent.

“Ottomans” name for game Turks is more accurate. Some argue that Turks Hussar-line represent Seljuks effective Light Cavalry units but Ottomans had also very good light Cavalry and Horse archers just like Seljuks until 1750s.


Thanks, I didn’t know about that.
As for renaming Ottomans, I’m not a huge fan of naming civs after dynasties. What if we started splitting Franks into Metonvingiens, Carolingiens and Capetiens? Not mentioning the Teutons and Italians.

Turkish and Turkic are two different things so turks and tatars are perfectly fine as it is.Cumans are the odd choice as they are a turkic people which should be under tatar umbrella,they even speak the same language.


Ah, but did the others build extra TCs in Feudal?
Taps Head GIFs | Tenor

1 Like

The Tatars speak Chagatai, the Cumans speak Cumanic

And Tatars mainly represent Timurids (who called themselves Gurkani, btw)

Not exactly… Tatar is a Kipchak language and so is Cuman. Chagatai was a Karluk language, just like Uzbek and Uyghur… Wich are both represented as Tatar in campaigns, though.

Admitedly, Tatars are currently used as an umbrella for actual Tatars, Timurids, Chagatai people and pretty much all other Central Asian Turkic people aside from the Gokturks.

Cumans - Tengri, non mongolised Turks

Tatars - Muslim, mongolised Turks

Yet both use the same buildings.

Thats because theres no building set fittinf for Cumans rn

And I dont see how it proves much

Franks and Celts use the same architecture set
Ergo, Franks are Celts

1 Like

Religious difference has nothing to do with this game.

Vanilla game byzantines saracens turks persians all had the same building.Now byzantines have a italian building set not a balkan set.

Franks are a germanic tribe celts are not.



Religion is cultural and cultural diferences lead to civilizations

And I dont get the point you are trying to make

People with different culture or religions share the same buildings in game.we cant apply historical logic 100% in aoe.

Regardless of religion both tatars and cumans are turkic peoples they also share a islamic building set.Having 2 civis for a very similar people is just a waste and cumans are a bad civi choice.

On the celt fank “joke” this is one time the buildings makes some sense as all of the factions are influenced by french culture.