Eventually, we like it or not, most of the civs from Ensemble Studios and Forgotten Empires will be touched. We know there’s already A LOT of potential civs to be added but Indians, Persians, Incas, Chinese and Koreans already were updated, splitted and/or reworked to match the newest ones by adding new units or buildings (most regionals) and aesthetics stuff like architecture.
Which should be next?
Potential choices:
Saracens → Renamed and splitted? I’m not related with the arabian civs but some are suggesting it.
Celts → Splitted into Scotts, Irish, Picts?
Aztecs → Reworked similar to Incas if a mesoamerican DLC is released to match with Zapotecs and Tlaxcaltecs.
Vikings → Renamed to Norse maybe? Then add new scandinavian civs like Finns and Danes?
I’d almost say Slavs but not chop them into pieces just name them something else and add a more steppe influenced horse archer and infantry type Russian civ to blend European and cav archer focus which we don’t see anywhere else
Neither vikings or aztecs. I’ve suggested scandinavian and meso DLCs, not vikings or aztec splits though despite today a rework or split is inevitable if any of both DLCs is ever maded.
Celts was the only civ I’ve specific asked to be splitted because “Celts” reminds me more the Roman Empire era celts from the Gallia and Britannia than the medieval ones, but like I’ve said, eventually all the ES/FE civs could be reworked, splitted or updated in order to bring new civs and balance.
Slavs could be splitted as well, a russian DLC or something similar but I don’t see that happening in the short time. A Balkans DLC is more possible, but which civ could be splitted in that case?
My position is that civs should only receive major changes if there is a major problem with them, and that any changes should align with the problems they’re intended to address. I’m therefore opposed to reworking or splitting civs just because they’re old.
I’ll be honest, I am pretty annoyed with the recent changes to Koreans. They had been my favourite civ for 25 years, and prior to the rework they were probably in the best state they’ve ever been in gameplay-wise. Then they had massive changes made to their gameplay for non-gameplay-related reasons.
I don’t see any reason to make changes to the gameplay of any of the civs listed here – Saracens, Celts, Aztecs, Vikings. On the other hand, I’m totally open to superficial changes to things like architecture and unit skins.
You’ve opened dozens of threads about similar topics, it’s getting tiresome. Also each of the four civs you mentioned already has a relatively new thread about potential split/rework.
People are getting tired and annoyed, even if otherwise they wouldn’t be opposed to (sensible) splits. And you almost never go into mechanical detail of what and how would be changed.
More the question I’d be asking is; what if there are conflicting civ designs? I know more than one person has opinions on different civs, so if multiple people have multiple threads on the same civ, does that mean that they’re all breaking ToS?
Honestly, that’s probably the main reason I’ve been saying away from posting concept threads of my own… my amateurity or lack of balance sense notwithstanding lol.