Roadmap for 2026 and beyond

After The Last Chieftains reveal, this is my wishlist for the next DLCs in the coming years.

Yes, I used AI only for the covers and nothing else. I already posted this on Reddit a few days ago, and it wasn’t particularly well received because of that. If you don’t like AI art, that’s fine, but it’s not my problem. I’m not an artist, and the focus here is the concepts, not the artwork.

Demons of the North – This DLC will rework the Vikings into a more raider-focused, semi-nomadic civilization, similar in playstyle to the Huns, while introducing the Danes and Norwegians as new civilizations. It will also add a new Scandinavian Europe architecture set. The title “Demons” will refer to the Vikings’ thematic role within the DLC, rather than to the Scandinavian peoples themselves.

Kingdoms of Britain – This DLC could split the Britons and Celts into new civilizations. The Britons could be divided into the English (retaining the Longbowman) and the Saxons, while the Celts could be divided into the Scots (retaining the Woad Raider) and the Irish.

Three Kingdoms (Free Update) – After significant community feedback, this update could move the Wei, Shu, and Wu civilizations to Chronicles, while adding the Tanguts and Tibetans as new ranked civilizations alongside the Jurchens and the reworked Khitans. It could introduce the Nomadic Steppe architecture for the Mongols, Huns, and Khitans.

Lords of the Sahel – This DLC could add three new African civilizations: Songhai, Kanembu, and Swahili. It could introduce a new West African architecture set, used by the Malians, Songhai, and Kanembu, while the Swahili could retain the existing African architecture, which could be renamed to East African.

Empires of the Sun – Returning to the Americas after The Last Chieftains, this DLC could add four new civilizations: Purépechas, Zapotecs, Chimú, and Tiwanaku. The Mayans could receive the Holcan Javelineer as a second unique unit, while the Aztecs could gain access to the Stable in the Imperial Age, including the Xolotl Warrior as second unique unit. Additionally, all Mesoamerican civilizations (Aztecs, Mayans, Purépechas, and Zapotecs) could receive the Atlatl regional unit line, replacing the Skirmisher line.

Lords of the West (Free Update) – This update could add the Dutch as a new civilization, along with their own dedicated campaign.

Sultans of Egypt – This DLC could split the Saracens into three distinct civilizations, following a model similar to the Persian split introduced in Mountain Royals. The new civilizations could include the Ayyubids (replacing the Saracens), the Fatimids, and the Zengids. The expansion could also rework the Saladin campaign, adapting it to the new civilizations and introduced units.

The African Heartlands – This DLC could add four new African civilizations: Nubians, Hausa, Shona, and Somalis. It could introduce also a new regional architecture for these civilizations, or alternatively split them between West African and East African architectural sets, depending on their historical and geographic context.

Victors & Vanquished (Free Update) – This free update could add the Iroquois and Polynesians as two new civilizations, each with its own unique architecture (North American Longhouses and Oceanic, respectively). It could also introduce new campaigns for both civilizations.

2 Likes

Maybe your ideas are terrible?No company in the right mind will give free content.

I would suggest you read the ingame history section before posting nonsense like this.

5 Likes

If you think people who disapprove of so-called AI art simply “don’t like” it, you should go and educate yourself on the objections.

No it’s not, there are barely any concepts there. For the most part, all you’ve suggested is names of new civilisations with no detail. The closest you come to a concept here is this:

Mostly what you’ve done is posted some AI slop and described Scandinavians as “demons”. There’s nothing of any substance to discuss here. Your post reads to me like a troll post intended to provoke those who disapprove of AI image generation.

8 Likes

we have about 10 civs too many, and you are proposing to add another 10 or so.

FYI: if anything Saxons would be a split from Teutons, not Britons

It used to be that this forum was a lot more technical than Reddit, but the past couple years they’ve been the same.

We do not need these civ splits.

Europeans or not, they’re all bad since we already have Saracens, Vikings, Celts (maybe a small rework can fix them rather than having to split to multiple nonsense civs) and Britons and having bizzare dynasty civs like we unfortunately got with the 3 Kingdoms won’t add anything special no matter how hard you’re going to try and add a “new” unit.

Everything else is fine, even Dutch as much as I’m not a fan of adding them but with all the suggestions for a more late 16th century content and civs they’ll make more sense than meaningless civ splits…

1 Like

Since Vikings could be the center part of the DLC is why I’m calling it “Demons from the North”.

3 to 4 each year, depending of how many DLC we’re getting for core AoE2 without counting Chronicles.

If I give technic or specific details regarding each civ would be worst, but only with the concept, the civs and some regional aspects is fine for a concept.

Very nice concepts
I like them!

1 Like

A bit off topic from me, but I hate how Scandinavia gets all the attention during the AoE2 and AoE4 timeline because of Vikings as many got mad in the AoE4 forums that they’re not called “Danes”, while AoE3DE got so much backlash when Denmark was announced for being a relevant civ during the 17th-19th century timeline with an overlooked history compared to Vikings…Usual AoE community double standards thanks to pop-culture history.

I dont remember there being backlash

I don’t know what you’re talking about I’m afraid. I wouldn’t say Vikings get “all the attention” in AoE2 – the attention they get is in competitive play, since they have a good eco bonus, but that’s nothing to do with them being Vikings. They don’t have an official campaign and they’re only playable in two official scenarios. They’re also not in AoE4 (unless the wiki’s list of civs isn’t up to date, which seems unlikely). I don’t know anything about AoE3. ‘Danes’ and ‘Vikings’ aren’t synonyms so I don’t understand that complaint either.

there was a DLC announced for aoe4 which contains vikings:
What’s Coming in 2026 for Age of Empires and Age of Mythology - Age of Empires - World's Edge Studio (you need to scroll quite far down, or use Ctrl+F to seach for “what’s next for Age of Empires IV”)

I think a point can be made that both games focus on the Vikings when looking at the people of Scandinavia. However the Viking age ended in the 11th century, so there is no representation for anyone after that.

However I think not having a Viking civ would also be a rather bad option, considering how iconic they are.

5 Likes

Oh, ok, thanks. My understanding is that AoE4 normally has specific political states for civs, and that it takes the idea of ages as representing specific time periods more seriously than AoE2. If I’m right about that, Vikings don’t seem like a good fit.

2 Likes

It’s a bit early to talk again about new civs before we even got the announced ones.

I’m not a fan of AI pictures and there’s not much to say about your post considering no concept are posted and just names dropped. The only thing I’m going to say that if we’re lucky to get yet another civ DLC, I just hope they focus on Africa as this is the place now which most direly needs new civs. Maybe we could get even one or two new architecture for this underrepresented continent.

I’m excited about new civs, especially those coming with new architecture sets and new unit lines from new regions, and I hope that this DLC is the return to more classical DLCs.

I personally don’t mind to pay a little bit more if the content is of good quality, and from what it seems at first glance this DLC is quality content. Been a while since I’ve been excited for a new DLC to be honest.

4 Likes

I was referring to AoE3DE 2 years ago (got cancelled sadly and now the game is not even touched by the devs) but anyways I dislike the endless requests for civ splits of AoK and Conquerors civs with weird concepts without even having bonuses and no unique units by just throwing an empty concept.

2 Likes

Thanks. I never got into AoE3, so don’t follow it, although I was aware when support got dropped.

I found the AoE4 thread about Vikings/Danes as well, so now I understand about that. I didn’t bother to read much though – it’s just the same old misconceptions about what the word Vikings means from people who don’t understand how language works.

2 Likes

Finns would be more interesting than Norwegians imho. You could add Danes and Finns, and rename Vikings into Norse to represent Norwegians and Swedes.

These are dynasties, not civs. It’d be 3K all over again.

A more sensible Saracen “split” would be adding Andalusians/Moors.

An architecture sets shared by Nubians, Hausa, Shona, and Somalis? Have you even googled to check if it makes sense before posting? (Tip: it doesn’t.)

For African arch sets, I imagine it could go like this:

  • Sahelian: Malinke, Kanembu, Hausa, etc
  • East African: Ethiopians, Nubians, Somalis, Swahili
  • Rainforest: Yoruba, Igbo, Congolese, Rutara
  • South African: Shona, Chewa/Maravi, Nguni