Or maybe just a whole germanic redo.
Add a Saxons civ for northern germany + eastern netherlands + ancient lower Jutland + early medieval england.
Keep the Vikings as how they are, since they represent an early era and smaller tribes.
Add the Danes and Norwegians, and maybe add the Swedes (im not that well known with their early history).
(Add Finns).
I’d suggest a shared germanic melee unit like Berserk as a new barrack unit. Feudal age unit. Fast, light, high attack, regen, and can gain gold by raiding.
Add the Huskarl as a shared germanic melee unit in the barrack as a castle age unit. Also for Teutons, Burgundians and Bohemians. And probably historically also the Franks, Spanish and Portuguese.
Honestly i’d prefer to also add a southern german civ for better representation.
Then add a shared ‘german’+‘dutch’ Gothic Champion as upgrade to the champion unit. And Gothic Halberdier. As their shared heavy infantry units. For better ‘late timeframe’ representation.
And probably the Mounted Crossbowman for them and maybe also other european factions.
From there out i would make new civs:
Danes, Norwegians, Swedes.
Saxons, Southern Germans.
Redo Teutons. Redo Goths or change them into Alans.
Keep Vikings as they are.
That would be a very mad overhaul for northern europe. To give them more representation for ‘middle’ and ‘late’ medieval times. Because currently they’re really ‘early’ medieval times with ‘vikings’ ‘goths’ ‘celts’ ‘franks’ ‘huns’. Only the Franks and Goths stayed alive longer than the others. The Franks split up into three main powers. And the Goths evolved into Spanish, Portuguese and late Franks. What we lack is the ‘later’ representation for the HRE and Scandinavia.
Just a HRE faction instead of Saxons + Southern Germans would be awesome on its own too.
Ah and if we add Southern Germans they should also include Swiss and their pikery.
I’m only up for Huskarls being turned into a regional unit if Goths lose them, and they get a model not based on Goth soldiers. Because Huskarls are not a Goth thing.
With respect, I wouldn’t really think of Swedes as divergent from the Norse culture during the early/high period, and judging from your bonuses for the Swedes you’re focusing hard on the late /post Medieval period, which I’d argue is already represented well in AOE3.
This is true. But in that case I don’t think you should split the Vikings. The Danes weren’t divergent enough from the general Norse culture and society either. Maybe that’d be for the best (to not split). But if you had to do a split, it’d be strange to only add the Danes as a single civilization. Perhaps it’d be better to split the Slavs (can include the Finns in this expansion instead), and leave the Vikings alone.
Well, there are a bunch of civs in the game currently based on the late medieval period or even later. Poles and Portuguese are two that comes to mind. Hussars weren’t used in Poland until the mid 1500s, for example. And really, when castle age hit the Viking age was already on its last legs. So I wouldn’t be opposed to have Scandinavian civs based on the later medieval period after the Vikings were all gone and the region had been split into different nations. Castle Age apparently symbolizes the years 1000-1350 and Imperial Age from 1350-1600, and before 1600 both Denmark and Sweden were distinct nations and both growing powers. Both kind of peaked in the mid to late 1600s, so they’re not really far off from fitting well into the time period. Many other civs already in the game would be more questionable.
Yes, I agree. Furthermore, renaming the Vikings as Norse maintains the continuity of names throughout the saga: Norse in AoE 2, Norse in AoM, and Norse in AoEO (in AoE 4 it is not yet known if they will be Vikings or Norse)…
That could be for a barbarian DLC up to the time of Charlemagne (from 378 to 814)…
Yes, a Germanic DLC would be needed: Saxons, Swiss, and Austrians…
Yes, it could be a purely Norse DLC (793-1523): Norwegians: Viking Age (793-1100) (connects with York, Hastings and the Viking settings of VaV), Danes: the Kalmar Union (1397-1523) (connects with Jadwiga’s campaign) and Sweden: the Swedish War of Independence and the rise of Gustav Vasa (1523-1557) (connects with the Protestant Reformation and the rise of Ivan the Terrible in AoE 3)…
Yes, we already have a fixed DLC for the Balkans, even the new Rus could have a new campaign: Dimitri Donskoi (1359-1389) and that way you connect with Algirdas and Kestutias in the west and with Tamerlane in the east…
Technically yes, but the Goths covered a lot of ground and something more specific is expected (just as we already have Spaniards and Italians, I don’t see why we couldn’t have Swedes, since it doesn’t cost the devs anything to reinsert civs from AoE 3 into 2)…
Yes, but that’s how it is. It’s a shame because we could have seen the Danish empire at its peak with colonies in Greenland, the Caribbean, Africa and India, and its centuries-long struggles against Sweden (1523-1814) and then Prussia (1848-1864)…
Yes, we should make a post about civilizations that would require a change of architectural set. I wouldn’t really include the Incas anymore because they already have the new South American architecture and it’s not so bad anymore…
Yes, I agree… you can even use them as enemies in the Swedish Crusades (1147-1293), fighting also against Novgorod (there you can connect with a Slavic/Rus campaign of Alexander Nevsky, grandson of Mstislav, who in turn fought against the troops of Subutai) and the Teutonic Order itself…
Exact…
Yes, that sounds good…the question would be what the UUs of these civs would be…
Yes, we would have to find a way to accurately represent medieval Sweden (970-1397/1523)…since early modern Sweden is basically that of Age of Empires III with the Vasa dynasty (1523-1654) and the Carolingians of Charles XII (1697-1720) who brought the Swedish empire to an end…regarding the Dutch, including the Burgundians would already be somewhat adequate (both are civilizations with strong economies, but the Dutch are strong at sea thanks to the Fluyt and the Burgundians have excellent cavalry with the Coustiler)…
Yes, but that’s because the devs are already adding more exotic civs that go beyond what a “typical AoE 2 civ” is…
And the Haudenosaunee and Lakota in AoE 3 (they are basically endonyms, since Iroquois and Sioux, in classic AoE 3, were what their enemies and Europeans called them)…
Yes, I agree, the longship and the huscarl should be regional units, and the unique units should be several from Retold (Berserker, just like now, Hirdman, Raiding Cavalry, Jarl, Hersir, Godi) (I would add the Portable Ram, but I would give that to the native civilizations):
Hirdman: Unique Norwegian Spearman
Raiding Cavalry: Nordic light cavalry for rushing (although it would be similar to the Hunnic Tarkan or the Mapuche Kona)
Jarl: Heavy cavalry like the Knight. Basically the same as the editor
Hersir: Man-at-arms that repair buildings (although this would make them very similar to the Sicilian Sergeant)
Godi: Warrior Monk that throws javelins
If you include AoE Online, you can add 2 or 3 more unique units:
Chief: Warrior that boosts the health of nearby units by 20% (although it would be (Similar to the Spartan Polemarch from Chronicles)
Seer: Scout Monk who trains Ravens to scout the map
War Dog: The same one they’re going to add in TLC
Unique Buildings:
Longhouse: Gives 10 population instead of 5 (although it would be similar to Inca houses)…
Fortress: Wooden building similar to the Bulgarian Krepost, can deal fire damage (basically burn them) to nearby units (although it would be similar to Tupi castles that deal poison damage to nearby units)… Damn AoE 2, you’re leaving me without ideas xd…
Yes, I like the idea, that would be good.
Yes, basically archers on skis/sleds, although since they were used in the 18th century, I see them as AoE 3 units…
Basically, the Finnish wars of the 18th century, the Napoleonic Wars, and even the Continuation War during WWII…
Yes, it’s enough for two DLCs: one Nordic and one Germanic, set in the middle of Europe…
We also have Norse Warrior, from the scenario editor…
Yes, I like the idea, and if they expand into North America we could see bison, but that would be more for the central and western United States…
That’s right, for me it’s:
Dark Age: 450-800 (from the fall of Rome to the rise of the Carolingian Empire) (in AoE 1 it would be the Iron Age)
Feudal Age: 800-1050 (feudalism, the Viking Age, and the establishment of the HRE, Hungary, and Poland)
Castle Age: 1050-1300 (the Crusades and the rise of the Mongol Empire)
Imperial Age: 1300-1550 (the Hundred Years’ War and the Renaissance, plus the beginning of the Age of Exploration) (in AoE 3 it would be the Exploration Age)…
I’d go a bit broader: Iroquoians (a grouping that includes both Haudenosaunee and other Iroquoian speakers) and either Mississippians (an umbrella name for various polities in the Southeast that spoke various languages) or Siouans (a bit narrower term that covers only the Siouan speakers such as the Lakota).
@MatM1996 I gotta say, it’s better than when you made an individual post for each post/point you replied, but you really don’t have to respond to everyone in a thread. It actually makes it kinda hard to go through your posts.
There was a madman who attacked on D-Day with a longbow…
Ah, okay, it’s just that I’m trying to catch up and there are a lot of them, so I’m trying to answer them all with a general message to speed things up…
Well, the headline is completely wrong, as Khevsurs have never been related to Crusaders (I’m guessing that misconception is why the Armenians have Warrior Priests instead of the Georgians), but it’s still a very cool and bizarre piece of history.
Nah, I was referring to Mad Jack Churchill, who landed on D-Day with a longbow, bagpipes, and a Scottish sword (it’s the right soldier with a sword)…
Nicknamed Mad Jack, he is credited with the phrase: “An officer who goes into battle without his sword is not properly equipped.” He is credited as the last British soldier confirmed to have killed with a bow, with which he is said to have shot a German sergeant in May 1940 near Pas-de-Calais during the Battle of France.
