Romania/Wallachia in AOE 3

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
1

What about Romania / Wallachia as a new civilization? :romania:

I think Wallachia could actually be a really interesting addition to AoE3: DE, especially because it could bring a gameplay style that we don’t really have yet.

The civilization could be represented by Michael the Brave (Mihai Viteazul) as its main leader. He would fit the game perfectly, considering his campaigns in Wallachia, Transylvania and Moldavia around the turn of the 17th century.

The main gimmick could be the Hospodar system. Instead of simply having a standard European monarchy, Wallachia could revolve around choosing and empowering a Hospodar. Different Hospodars could provide different bonuses, military reforms, diplomatic options or access to special units.

The roster could include things like Călărași, Roșiori, Dorobanți, Pandurs and Wallachian cavalry, with a strong focus on mobile warfare and fighting on the frontier between the Ottoman, Habsburg and Polish spheres.

The Hospodar mechanic could also make the civilization feel politically unstable but flexible — changing rulers could completely alter how your economy or army develops.

Another interesting mechanic could be a Dependency system. Wallachia could voluntarily enter a temporary dependency relationship with one of the major powers in the region — Ottoman Empire, Poland, Austria, or Russia (Austria should be added to AOE 3 DE). In exchange for spending gold and having a slower gaining points progression. Player could receive temporary economic and military benefits from their chosen patron, such as unit bonuses, special technologies, or reinforcement troops. The relationship wouldn’t be permanent - player could break the dependency whenever they wanted, or simply choose to remain completely independent with avoiding this mechanic. This could make Wallachia diplomacy a real addtional strategic choice.

I think Romania/Wallachia would be a pretty fresh concept for AoE3.

2 Likes
2

What in God’s name is a standard European monarchy in this game’s terms?

1 Like
3

I would say that the 1856+ Romania makes more sense. The Michael the Brave version is basically a primitive backwards feudal state that makes more sense in aoe2 tbh.

While there are some civs featuring 17 century units, aoe3 sits more at home with 18th-19th century civs.

4

Michael the Brave fought last battle of Guruslau in 1601 (soon after that victory he died in Austrian’s asssination). So he doesn’t match to AOE 2 DE period.

5

They were still a feudal state at the time. It’s better off giving french or polish style revolution decks to countries like Romania or Hungary than making them full civs

1 Like
6

This ain’t Wars of Liberty where every Balkan kingdom needs to be a civ.

The only Euro content that should be added is more revs like Greeks, Irish, Scottish/Jacobite, Norwegians, Belgians and Bohemians and some maps that weren’t included/implemented (not only Gibraltar and Balearic Islands) in KoTM and Baltic Powers.

6 Likes
7

I would rework all revs to have a way to advance to a limited form of imperial age like Germany, French, Polish and Mayan revolutions do.

If they wanted to add a meaningless civ to the game, they could have added Romania instead of Malta, at least Romania had some influence in its immediate vicinity once it became independent.

1 Like
8

I wouldn’t mind a Romania civ per se but saying it should be entirely themed around the 1850s+ sounds more like a really good reason to no make the civ at all.

Weren’t Poland and Russia feudal as well anyway?

6 Likes
9

Italy as represented in the game isn’t a monarchy. I think Germany/HRE isn’t either.

This would require the devs to not restrict Euro civs to Politician age ups. People asked for federal aging up for Italy (and Germans to be reworked to have it as well), and it obviously didn’t happen. Morocco was even dropped because it didn’t fit the age up system they already made for Africa.

10

IIRC it wasn’t so much the age up system the problem but that the Livestock Market is kind of an awkward fit there.

But more importantly Morocco felt a tad bit too european and they didn’t have the budget for 3 civs so it was the weakest link.

1 Like
11

Morocco wasnt never started.

I would prefer non-Euro/Euro colonies civs.

Probably Romania (and Hungary) revs needs a rework at the level of French or Prussia revs

1 Like
12

The Euro Roster is full all the colonial powers are included now, The rest could be revolutions.

But I think the Romanian Revolutionary deck is a bit sparse…How about a card that make enemies cower in fear (move at half speed) when near outposts and forts.

If you don’t get the reference then clearly you don’t know your history about a historical figure whom was named after a dragon and later associated with a different mythological creature.

4 Likes
13

Sure, but for a Balkan dlc with Greece or Serbia…

14

They really should update the Romania revolution first. It’s still pretty barebones and shares that outpost gimmick with Hungary.

1 Like