Man are you serious? There are no romanians in the game yet. You are confusing them with the Romans. This is a ridiculous confusion in the English language, it could confuse many but I don’t understand how it can be so confusing for an AoE player. These are completely different peoples who lived in different times.
Thats right we are discussing about adding them.
3 Likes
Look, I want to tell you smth. When I first appeared on the forum, you attacked me personally and expressed your contempt for me and AI, proving how much smarter you are. But weeks have passed and I see that you do not understand simple things about history. First, you tend to confuse Romans and Romanians. In English these words are similar, but in mine lang they are completely different:
Romans (who battled with Greece and believed in Jupiter and Hercules) = rimlane (Roma = Rim)
Romanians (who also called Vlachs) = ruminy
Secondly, I have already explained several times that the Rumanians are about a third Slavs, therefore it is possible and necessary to talk about them in the context of division of Slavs. You’ve seen these answers but don’t remember them.
Now you also say that Romanians should be an umbrella civilization for the Vlachs, Transylvanians and Moldovans, but at that time they were absolutely honestly one people, then the Romanians = Vlachs. There is no sign of artificial “umbrella” civ, they were one civ naturally.
Man, you could find out all this yourself if you just talked to the AI. Seriously.
I think, I should create a separate topic to explain this to users, as many don’t understand some things about Slavs, Vlachs, Rus, Ukraine. I will likely do that.
Agree with u,so that we’ll get a dlc like DoI.
In next year in my opinion we should see American ( Tarascans , Zapotecs , Mapuche , Mayan Campaign) and African Dlcs. In 2025 Asian Dlc ( I hope for Tibet in that time) and Dlc with Romanians , Serbs and Slavs to Rus rework with campaign about Yaroslav the Wise character. Number of potential new content is bigger - Swiss , Venice , Papal States , North America Tribes , more Asian Dlc’s maybe some faction should be splitted like Saracens , Britons or Vikings. Now we expect speficic nations not only general cultures like in 1999.
2 Likes
No. I can tell you that the Mapuche don’t fit in this game; they didn’t build anything nor conquer anyone.
1 Like
Is there anything preserved in written history to base American campaigns on? As far as I know, almost nothing was recorded there.
Also, make the boyar a knight replacement for ruthenians, lithuanians, romanians and bulgarians. Ruthenian unique unit could be a cossack or something else.
From wikipedia:
A boyar or bolyar was a member of the highest rank of the feudal nobility in many Eastern European states, including Bulgaria, Kievan Rus’ (and later Russia), Moldavia and Wallachia (and later Romania), Lithuania and among Baltic Germans. Boyars were second only to the ruling princes, grand princes or tsars from the 10th to the 17th centuries.
Honestly, they’d also have to be renamed, since, as you can maybe tell from the description you posted yourself, “boyar” wasn’t a military title.
1 Like
Boyar shouldn’t be a combat unit at all. The boyars were the ruling nobility, businessmen and managers. Few of them personally went into battle. The existing unit is good but should be called Vityaz and should be one of the unique units of Rus. Yes, he probly should be placed instead of knights. Other slavs must have Ratnik instead (it’s a more simple variation of slav horseman).
Cossak should be a unique unit of the Ukrainians.
There are a few options for a Romanian UU:
Viteji (melee & range heavy cav) → Literally “Brave Men”. Viteji form a versatile corps of cavalry in the armies of the Romanian principalities. Their name means “brave ones” and they form part of a social strata that has gained lands and property through bravery in warfare. The viteji are therefore, as expected, among the most resolute and brave warriors a ruler could ask for. Like many elements of Romanian cavalry, the Viteji show influences both from the East and West, and their style of warfare imitates that of Cuman or Tatar armored horse archers, or that of Ottoman spahis. By their nature they are very versatile cavalry. In battle, the voievod would use these troops to counter the enemy’s cavalry flanks, either by engaging light cavalry in melee or harassing and exhausting heavy cavalry in range, then providing the decisive charge into the enemy’s flanks.
Calarasi (melee & range light cav) → Literally “riders”. Călăraşi form a part of the “oastea cea mica” (small host) and are part of the “slujitorii” (servants of the lord). Their name implies they fight on horseback. These soldiers were given land in exchange for military service, and retained their land so long as they remained as a readily-available force for the voievod, and exclusively in the service of the voievod. They are lightly armored, comparable to their curteni, and wield a composite bow. They were a very successful military instrument, remaining a significant part of the Wallachian army up until 1600, and form a potent counter to other horse archers.
Curteni (lance & shield light cav) → Literally “men of the court”, these are the retainers of the boieri, whom he takes into battle on horseback. Historically, they acted as a small mounted detachment under the direct command of a boier. They are not as competent as the viteji, nor as fast as the calarasi, but given the tradition of light cavalry in Wallachian armies, they are form a versatile screen for the calarasi. Their armor is very light, though this aids in their speed. They wield a spear or a lance in battle, omitting the benefit of a ranged weapon in favor of a large shield. They can perform devastating charges repeatedly due to their light equipment, but should not be expected to hold off a well-armed opponent.
Nemesi (lance & shield heavy cav) → The equivalent of the Wallachian Viteji but armed with spears instead of swords. This will be the strongest cavalry unit before the Boyars and the Princely Bodyguard.
Princely Bodyguard (heavy cavalry) → The Voievod of Wallachia keeps at his side a bodyguard of warriors paid from his own coffers, either consisting of native troops or mercenaries. Only the most loyal boiers, often those serving on the princely court, were entrusted with protecting the voievod. These men are equipped with the finest arms and armor money can buy, often with platemail bought from Venice or other Italian cities. It was even said in a chronicle that the Wallachian voievod Vlaicu bought 10,000 suits of Venetian plate armor in anticipation of warfare against the Hungarians. These form the elite of Wallachian heavy cavalry.
Wallachian Boyars → The boieri form the elite of Wallachian society and Wallachia’s heavy cavalry. They are the Wallachian nobles, who own vast swathes of land and rule over dependent peasants. Dressed in heavy armor, atop powerful mounts, and fighting in a style reminiscent of Western knights, they are a powerful force on the battlefield. The boieri however, are very accustomed to the game of political intrigue, and it is a telling fact that most of the Wallachian princes died of Wallachian swords and assassination than of old age, or on the field of battle. It is more telling that 20 princes were quickly cycled onto the Wallachian throne from 1418 to 1456, averaging to short and ineffective two-year reigns. The state of chaos caused by the boieri during this time was so great that when Vlad III the Impaler came to power he immediately had many of then killed (some of whom had actually assassinated his father and his older brother Mircea), deposed others from the princely council (replacing them with obscure or foreign nobles) and tried to promote the land-owning Mosneni as a counter-weight against them. Even so, the Boiars would rebound after Vlad III’s death, becoming a powerful force. If a voievod can keep them satisfied and loyal, the boieri will form a decisive force on the battlefield and a much-needed unit of heavy, melee-based cavalry.
Portar (armored pikemen) → Literally “gatekeeper”, the Portars are heavily armored pikemen. The Romanian principalities relied mainly on hit and run tactics with light cavalry and archer units so the Portar were a valueable defensive unit.
2 Likes
@BOBBYKYNG Half of the civs you mentioned are in the game.
Daha çok harita hikaye eklenmeli aeo2 bir başyapıt:clap:
I’m not a specialist but I doubt Romanis and Romanians are the same thing
Romanians and Rumini is the same.
Romanians and Vlachs is the same.
Romanians and Romans are different.
1 Like
That’s like, not true?
False. The Romani are Indian. Specifically, Gurjara.
3 Likes
Not true WHAT? Try to read what I wrote. Aha?
Your first message I quoted seriously makes it sound like you’re equating Romanians and Romanis.
Dude, you can just say “Rumini are different from Romani, because…” Without being a prick about it. Can people get back on topic to discuss what a slavic split could be like please?
Would Rus have to spilt into a more Ukrainian/Russian differentiation, or is both fine when represented by one civ?
Vlach/Romanians as a separate civ seems completely justified.
South Slavs should also be separate. The question is if (serbo)croats/albanians/bosniaks are best as their own dlc, or if one can be picked along with a more general slav split.
Considering they did release Bohemians/Poles, I suspect a South Slav dlc would be most likely. However, 3 civs in one is not their usual dlc policy. So, I suspect they will not split Ruthenians from Russians, and go something like Croats + Vlachs and add a campaigns for the Magyars and Turks to replace Dracula’s campaign slot.
There is also a Venetian civ that could be considered for a Balkan DLC, but that would fit better with a Papal/Merchant(Venetians) split from Italians.
Either way, I think making the game more representative and diverse is always better, and the AoEII team does an outstanding job at developing the DLC imo. I would expect an African DLC befor a Balkan one, but I do see the need for it.
3 Likes