As long as they provide fun mechanics…yes
Keep in mind Age of Empires is about playing with our digital toy soldiers and buildings. Unfortunately cultures are just for flavour and curtain dressing.
5 Likes
To be honest I prefer Koreans to be added than Malta. Atleast we get more historical units like Turtle Ships and Hwachas not some fantasy Templar units. Also there was a “Korean Empire”.
2 Likes
Hospitallers were real tho. Where’s the fantasy?
4 Likes
What are you talking about?
6 Likes
AHEH…
They still exist you know ( granted they lost power in Malta but still)
7 Likes
Yea it’s an order of knights, not a civ. That’s a fantasy civ when adding to a game that should consist of “empires and kingdoms filled with unique cultures”.
2 Likes
you DO know for a time that said order of knights controlled Malta. For a time that order of knights WAS Malta… who do you think was defending the Island against Ottomans when it laid siege against Malta?
4 Likes
But it’s not a civ. The civ is Malta.
Are you drunk?
5 Likes
In fact Mexico had two empires… that of Agustin Iturbide (Agustin I) (1821-1823) and that of Maximilian of Habsburg (Maximilian I) (1863-1867)…
Of course, I wouldn’t have said it better…it is not a game of only empires, but an age with empires,kingdoms and peoples of diverse indole that fought each other…
4 Likes
Yes, that’s why each expansion had its respective intro… the original game was similar to that of the DE (Columbus arriving in America, the Spanish conquistadors arriving in Yucatan and so on until reaching the combat between British and French in the seven years’ war), then the warchiefs showing the lakotas in the high plains and finally the asian dynasties showing the Asian civs (the Chinese ships, the ninja on the Japanese rooftops and the Indian elephant)…
1 Like
That particular opening cinematic was for the original vanilla game. Which focused on that theme mostly, but with every new expansion that theme gets wider in scope.
Also how boring would the game be without all those new civs.
1 Like
The game is made by English speaking developers. They would use the term emperor in English and apply it to whoever had “emperors” in their parlance.
Of course, what I mean is you can basically apply that “the civs in the game follow xxxxx criteria so yyyy should not be added” argument at any time point and rule out the new addition.
1 Like
And even in English the same word can have different meanings. “Kaiser” “Augustus” “Tsar” “Imperator” can all be referred to as “emperors” and some even have the same root but they refer to very different things.
Not to mention most factions in the series never had an emperor or anything called an emperor in English.
They had empires. Even Venice(Italians) had a maritime empire. Similarly the Dutch and Portuguese. A Paramount King of Kings in the case of African civilisations.
Kaiser, Augustus, Tsar and Imperator are not English btw.
But when we talk about Roman “emperors” or HRE “emperors” those are what we are talking about. Not so much with Tsars though.
Again “empire” is an ambiguous umbrella word. Maritime empires function very differently from say “Roman empire” and they also function differently among themselves.
And we’re talking about emperors not empires.
Most factions in the series never had an emperor.
Japan can hardly be called an “empire” in any definition before the Meiji Restoration despite having a monarch called “emperor” in English.
In the late 19th century Korean monarchs decided to call themselves emperors but neither the influence nor the political structure was vastly changed at the time.
3 Likes
Oh right right, sorry, got your point there! Kinda read it without context of the conversation.
2 Likes
I think the most important is that they fit within the timeline and can be fun to play as. If we limit it to only ‘important empires’ in that period we are left with less options to chose from.
9 Likes