A vague and incoherent choice. Choson was bad. This is ten times worse.
Also, the new D3 game mode is probably the deathmatch-like game mode which is played in Vietnam (2x speed, infinite food farm bug, …).
1 Like
They’re adding that civ to “attract” Vietnamese players like AoC did with Koreans 11
6 Likes
Hey, a Korean civ isnt that bad. Sure, they were better choices, but they had a few lasting ancient kingdoms.
Also, Vietnam had a few kingdoms too so its not that bad either.
I prefer them to Gauls or whatever the hell Palmyra was
1 Like
And I doubt its going to boost sales that much either tbh
4 Likes
The choice makes sense considering the popularity of the game in Vietnam, if the DLC sells well, I’m sure we will get more civs and campaings in the future.
6 Likes
Also as we expected they are adding Romans. I hate it. I hate it so much.
7 Likes
Burgundians-Franks, Sicilians-Italians…Romans-Byzantines doesn’t look that bad.
I don’t really see why Gauls would be a bad choice, as long as they come together with other civs such as Germans or Dacians. But if only ONE civ had to be added, it makes sense that it would be a Vietnamese one, the only other option I could think of would be the Maghadis.
Palmyrans were an extremely weird choice, though.
1 Like
The Romans are within the AoE2 timeline, because they appear in the Goths and Huns campaigns.
I’m glad they’re adding something to base AoE2, because I wouldn’t buy the DLC otherwise. This is AoE2, not AoE1.
2 Likes
Lac Viet wasn’t a kingdom. Mauryans were. Nubians were. Even the Hebrews were.
2 Likes
The Byzantines are a Roman civilization. We already have Romans
I would have prefered Vandals, Nubians or something like that
10 Likes
Yes, but the name doesmt matter, the Vietnamese had kingdoms and the new civs will represent such kimgdoms.
3 Likes
The Byzantines are not Romans. They called themselves the Romans, and considered themselves the continuation of the Roman Empire, but when it comes to what the public considers the Romans…that ended in 476 AD.
1 Like
Microsoft knows business. There are 10x more AOE1 players in Vietnam than rest of the world combined for all 3 AOE games. (Maybe an exaggeration? IDK, need to check the number).
Money comes first bro. And if MS gets enough sale, they can add more civs later with the money.
They absolutely are the continuatiob of Roman civilization. The diference beetwen the west and east roman empires were neglegible, they were the same civilization.
Exactly the fall of Ronan civilization in 476 is a myth. We shouldnt just follow what people believe
2 Likes
The Byzantines are not called the Romans, and they don’t portray the Western Roman Empire at all. The Italians don’t cut it either, as they’re based on various medieval Italian city-states, like Genoa and Venice.
Point is, until now, we had no civs actually representing the Western Roman Empire. Now we do.
2 Likes
Ironically I also think so.
AOE1 is far more popular than AOE2 in Vietnam so it makes sense to add them for free. They are also quite isolated (let’s be honest, East Asian civs feel isolated compared to the Classical World civs that are all around the Mediterranean and Fertile Crescent) so it would have been hard to make a regional DLC including the Vietnamese.
I want European Barbarians (Gauls Germans Scythians Britons Dacians…) much more, but they are surely keeping it for an expansion. This sounds like the obvious move to do.
2 Likes