Armenians have therir own special history in Cilicia, which is pretty different from Georgians.
If we got Poles first, we might no longer have Lithuanians, so go to ask the devs rather than me.
So, the respective histories of the Malays and Javanese is enough to be their own civilizations? For example, what siginificant empires did each of them have? People only say that they are different ethnic groups, but no other reason is given. If only because the ethnic groups are different, hundreds of civs could easily be created in Asia and Africa.
I personally wouldnât really mind if we removed most of them and just introduced a âGermansâ civilization as a replacement. 11
Joking aside, Goths emphasize infantry, Franks emphasize cavalry, Burgundians emphasize gunpowder, and Vikings emphasize water⊠They are indeed Germanic, and their technology trees still have their own characteristics. What about the Malays and Javanese? Both emphasize water and infantry, and both UUs use karambit? May I have a blueprint instead of just words of âlook at other civsâ?
Hey, I even surpport Siamese, Chams and Nuosu and mentioned them just in this topic.
I can see the elephant cannoneers and elephant monks of Siamese, the Austroasiatic crossbowmen of Chams, and the jungle javelin throwers of Nuosu, but I donât know what the new civ split from the current Malays will be unique in the game. Literally, I really donât know. People propose to separate Javanese and Malays, but after doing a cursory search I feel that they are fairly well represented by the current umbrella of Malays. The Karambit is as suitable to the Malays and Javanese as the longbow is to the English and Welsh.
The Javanese could be a gunpowder oriented civ, and their UU could be called the Lantaka or the Cetbang, which is a light anti-personnel cannon similar to the Swedish leather cannon in AoE 3.
Iâd wish them to be a raiding civ with an amphibious raiding UU called the Mangpung or the Vijaya Raider. Their strength with crossbows could be reflected in one of their UT or one of their civ bonuses. In my civ proposal for the Chams I gave them the Castle Age UT Rukaiyah, which allows their crossbowmen to fire a secondary projectile that deals 1 damage, similar to the Hulâche Javelineers for the Mayan skirmishers.
I see. So basically the biggest function of the split is to make the Gajah Mada campaign far away from Malays vs Malays. Then who will play Temasek? Sunda? Even if we make the current Malays renamed Javanese and introduce a new Malays, in my opinion the campaign will still likely be Javanese vs Javanese.
Although the Cetbang Cannon in AoE3 itself is not similat to the Leather Cannon, but similar to Japanese Flaming Arrow. Just saying.
The current Malays have access to Bombard Cannons, which is already said to be based on Cetbang.
Such a unit using a swivel gun may be very similar to the Organ Gun in its role. I personally hope that the Portuguese can get a new UU that uses a swivel gun to replace the Organ Gun, rather than letting another civilization get a Organ Gun-like unit that uses a swivel gun. Personally hope.
I just like that their UU is a Karambit Warrior-like archer unit that uses a primitive, simply constructed Austroasiatic crossbow, which makes them cheap, fast, and only uses 0.5 pop. Fun, but not too gimmicky, and easy to maintain balance.
Japanese flaming arrow should be more or less similar to the Scorpion in AoE 2 historically speaking, and not similar to the Cetbang at all.
Medieval Japan had almost zero connection with Indochina or insular SEA, on the other hand they had quite strong connections with Korea (especially with Baekje or Kudara in Old Japanese language), North China (Tang), and Manchuria (Balhae).
Well thatâs just your opinion. I feel that such a unit works better as a regional unit for SEA civs or for insular SEA civs rather than as a UU of the Chams. Iâve already designed a poisoned blowgunner unit called the Sumpit, which could serve as the regional unit of SEA.
The Chams were quite active as pirates on the South China Sea in the middle ages particularly the 12th century, and it would be bad that they donât get such a UU. And I did not invent the Mangpung or the Vijaya Raider off the top of my head, there were historical records to back them up.
So your concern is more on tech tree variation and variation in civ design. I do agree that is a valid reason. I have no knowledge to make a statement on either side. But if others can make a good amount of variation in tech tree and design, would you still be against it?
Iâve said I do not know too much about the medieval Indonesia and Malaysia. I knew that the Malay language and the Indonesian language is basically same or pretty close, so clearly they have close interact and related culture in history. Additionally, some terms like âGreater Indonesiaâ, âMalay worldâ and âMalay Archipelagoâ notice me that people do regard the two as one sometimes for certain porposes. Therefore, I just thoght that why the Javanese (I regarded them as Indonesians) have to be separated from the Malays.
To be honest, I still donât think itâs a serious matter to keep Malays. Regardless, they are a successful umbrella in my opinion, compared to the others. I would prioritize bringing in other Asian civs rather than splitting them up. A good tech tree would make me less against it, but I still probably wouldnât be a fan.
I guess the separated new civ would still follow the features of good infantry, good water, and bad stables.
But obviously if the difference is just something like having Champions and lacking Knights, that is not enough.
Random ideas. They could be a âslowâ civ, to make the difference from the playstyle of current Malays having the age up bonus. Besides, having an anti-archer UU in Castles and a UT based on Cetbang to buff Hand Cannoneers and Bombard Cannons may be nice. A ship UU in Docks from the Feudal age would be nice too, although Iâve read that the military of Malays and Javanese seemed to still focus on land, and their navy were good at supply and transport the army between islands rather than naval warfare. If want more, maybe have a monk or siege bonus.
Pretty make sense to me. I want Jurchens, Khitans, Tibetans, Tanguts because I donât want to see the potential Chinese campaign would be reduced to Chinese mirror games or just Chinese vs Mongols. Not only they four but also Gokturks, Sogdians and Nuosu were the famous foreign groups in the medieval China.
Hopefully itâs not the only reason? All those civs can have very interesting things to do on their own rather than just be extras in someone elseâs campaignâŠ
Anyway, a split between Malays and Javanese would quite likely be a good thing for the game, but it should certainly not be limited to those two civs. Thereâs more than a dozen possible factions that could emerge from it, and while I donât think it should be we should include all of them, I think we could at the very least start with a DoI level dlc.
The potential SEA civs could easily be made distinct from one another. Although I donât have clear ideas about what their civ bonuses and UTs are just yet, I do have some proposals or ideas about what their UUs could be.
Javanese
UU1: Cetbang Cannon, a light anti-personnel cannon with bonus damage against infantry though bad against buildings and siege.
UU2: Djong, trained at the dock when Castle Age is reached, a slow and bulky warship that shoots out a volley of bullets at the enemy similar to the Persian castle after researching Citadels. And not only that it can transport up to 10 units max.
These two UUs would make the Javanese pretty distinct from the Malays game-play wise since both would be slow units.
Visayans
Not a common proposal as a civ though I did see them popping up in threads a few times. I think their UU could have a poisoned effect.
UU: Bagakay Warrior. The Bagakay was an ancient Filipino throwing weapon made from bamboo ( Bagakay - Wikipedia) , according to the Wiki article a max of five Bagakay darts could be thrown at a time to increase the chance of hitting the target. So this unit would be somewhat similar to an infantry version of the Kipchak or the Chu Ko Nu, with melee damage rather than pierce damage. It can throw 3 darts at the enemy at once, the first dart has an accuracy of 90% and a melee damage of 6 and is without any additional effect, whereas the second and third darts has an accuracy of only 50% and a melee damage of 3, however they carry the poison effect. If the enemy unit got hit with one or both of the last 2 darts it will continuously lose HP for 5 secs with 2 HP lost per sec for a total of 10 HP, regardless of their melee armor.
Chams
Like I mentioned yesterday their UU could be an amphibious raiding unit that carries the UU, Infantry, and Ship armor classes. This unit could be depicted as wearing paper armor, since according to Southern Song records paper armors were quite common among pirates active on the South China Sea at that time.
UU: Mangpung or Vijaya Raider, an amphibious infantry with two modes one for land and one for water. On land it would be a normal infantry wielding a Mak battle-axe and a wooden shield, but on water it would be a one-man raft somewhat similar to the Marathan Catamaran in AoE 3, and its attack method would change from melee to ranged, more precisely throwing fire bombs. The transition between these two modes would be automatic. It will have a bonus damage against eco units (villagers, trade carts, fishing ships, and trade cogs), ships, and monks.
Siamese / Tais
Their UU could be a gunpowder elephant, like an arquebus or a small cannon mounted on the back of an elephant, and it would have bonus damage against walls & gates, castles, and standard buildings.
This one has the least information out of all the potential SEA civs, but if I were to give them a UU I would give them the elephant javelineer or elephant skirmisher. Sounds kinda generic but UUs with generic names do exist in the game. Couldnât really find an image for this if anyone has an image please share it.
And last but not least
Kanembu
I know they werenât a SEA civ but an African one but Iâll post it here nonetheless since I have an idea about their UU. It would be called the Kanuri Guard, which is a medium cavalry with both the rider and the horse covered in cotton or linen armor.
I know it shares the name with an unit from AoE 3, which is where I took inspiration from, but rest assured that theyâre similar in name only.
This unit would have the special effect of increasing its attack or melee damage with decreasing HP. Its attack will be increased by +2 when it has 50% HP left and by +4 when it has 25% HP left and thatâs the highest attack boost it could get. This unit would have bonus damage against only heroes and nothing else, though it receives -20% less damage from unique units and from gunpowder units.
Very interesting! A lot more interesting than the unique unit I gave to the Filipinos in my concept, which was basically just a standard infantry unit that debuffed the attack rate of nearby units. This unit here is a lot more interesting. I may decide to replace my unit with that one, since it would be the third standard infantry unique unit in my Oceania expansion concept, and a ranged melee unit with an area attack due to multiple projectiles is a lot more unique.
@Lakan247 can probably tell me if itâs a good idea or not.
For the Mon I was thinking about an Armenia like Warrior Priest on an elephant. Can fight and and heal but can not convert and carry relics.
They are weaker than a generic Battle Elephant but enemy Monks need Atonement in order to convert them.
The Priest Elephant is with Fervor they are slightly faster than a generic Battle Elephant.
The Mon will of course lack Heresy and Faith.
Alternative I was thinking about an unique Archer Elephant that is the slowest unit in the game, so every unit will catch up to them. but this unique Archer Elephant can move and shoot at the same time.
Great idea, and it doesnât really conflict with mine. They could have two UUs, the castle UU would be the elephant javelineer, whereas the monastery UU would be the warrior priest elephant that you mentioned.
