Some talk about Prussia and Austria

[CanineCrown7153]

@MatM1996

Brandenburg

Will Berlin be the capital of HRGE or Prussia?

[HoopThrower]

No, it’s very much not a good part of the community. They just explicitly told me to not come into this threads to remind people that there’s no need to have both civs as they are extremely redundant. There’s nowhere near a “concensus” of having an absolute need of having two German civs.

[ArrivedLeader22]

The definition of “remind” in your dictionary must be a funny one:

@HoopThrower

I have seen absolutely no one do the same job for any european civ here and my argument, which somehow everybody is ignoring, is that you can’t.

@HoopThrower

OH! Of course! You’re so right. How could I have been so foolish? Portuguese military units are totally unique and special and unlike anything in the world!

In fact, I’ll give you a hand and show you the true and real official:tm: Portuguese unit roster coming next patch:

The consensus has always been you have already determined what the community is allowed to want, and violators will be publicly executed. So there is no need to waste your time, which could be better attributed to your researches on everything that is not European which nobody has done for anything European, in telling people that over and over again.

[HoopThrower]

I don’t even know what’s your point here. Other than demonstrating exactly what I alluded to, every time I post in one of these threads people go out of their way to harass me.

Those are completely different threads. You’re not even proving me wrong, people didn’t put actual effort into research, you can’t just say these two units are unique because they came from some random town.

[ArrivedLeader22]

This is to show what you have REALLY been doing is jumping into European civ related threads and accuse them for not doing the same research as you so they are not qualified to speak, and when people do the research you neglect them, and if both failed you just try to pollute the whole discussion.

But that does not prevent you from jumping into another thread acting innocence.

@HoopThrower

you can’t just say these two units are unique because they came from some random town.

Fact:
Most existing “unique” units for non-European civs are designed in this way. They have been using direct transliterations of the most generic name of weapon or the unit. They have also been doing “some random region/people/image” + “unit role”. Do all Inca runners come from Chimu? Or Indian skirmishers come from Nepal? Or do you really consider the Fulani as part of a “Hausa civ” and all Hausa archers are Funali? Or is “qiang” so distinct from any other pike both in reality and in gameplay? Heck they even invented names out of no where like “coyote runner”, “plumed spearman” or “cetan bow”.
So there are only two paths before you:

1. All civs including Europeans could be designed this way.
2. All civs including non-Europeans shouldn’t be designed this way. Then all civs need to be standardized and 80% of all their “uniqueness” is removed. Aztecs and Inca would have the same “runner” and “slinger” unit. Lakota, Japanese and Chinese would have the same cavalry archer as Russians and Ottomans, etc.

Most of the existing uniqueness are forced with horrible names. If you gatekeep people’s proposal because they are forced, you should also neglect most of the uniqueness that are already in the game. You cannot ban people from wanting Europeans to have the same level of uniqueness by saying “it’s impossible otherwise you will be forcing units from some random town to be unique” because they have been doing this since TWC.
BUT you cannot do it for Europeans! The god has spoken!

[ArrivedLeader22]

@HoopThrower

people didn’t put actual effort into research,

This op contains research.
But the committee has made the decision:

@HoopThrower

So… you actually expect people to buy all those books or…?

That thread I quoted also has research.
But of course:

@HoopThrower

OH! Of course! You’re so right. How could I have been so foolish? Portuguese military units are totally unique and special and unlike anything in the world!

Coming up next: these do not count as research.

[MatM1996]

@CanineCrown7153

Will Berlin be the capital of HRGE or Prussia?

The HRE had many capitals throughout its existence:

Rome (de jure)

• Coronation of the Holy Roman Emperor

Aachen (800–1562)

• 800–888 (as capital) 800–1562 (Coronation of King of Germany)

Palermo (1194–1254)

• (from inheritance by Henry VI of the hereditary title of the Kingdom of Sicily to the fall of the Hohenstaufen)[2][3][4]

Innsbruck (1508–1519)

• Seat of the Hofkammer and the Court Chancery[5][6]

Vienna (ca. 1550s–1583, 1612–1806)

• Seat of the Habsburgs[7][8][9][10] (seat of the Aulic Council since 1497, Imperial Residence since 1556)[11]

Frankfurt (1562–1806)

• Election and coronation

Prague (1583–1612)

• [12][13]

Regensburg (1594–1806)

• Imperial Diet from 1594, perpetual from 1663[b]

Wetzlar (1689–1806)

• Imperial Chamber Court

Its thing would be to change Berlin for some other city, like Vienna and the IA to Charles V…

[DonHabsburg]

AoE3 names can be broken down into one of three categories:

• Functional: The name describes the units weapon or role (e.g. Pikemen wield a pike)
• Cultural: The unit is a reference to the civilization’s culture, using a name or term from the culture, or their term for a weapon (Yumi, Streltsy, Janissary)
• Ethnic: The unit is implied to come from an ethnic group (example: Fulani, Gurkha, Mongol Scout, Cossack)

Sometimes names are a combination of two categories.

Most civilizations, after after TWC, have a combination of all three naming conventions. Hausa, for example: Fulani Archer (ethnic and functional), Javelin Rider (functional), Maigadi (cultural):

[ArrivedLeader22]

Exactly. I was just writing a longer analysis on this:

An analysis of how existing "unique" units are designed in the game

The reason why I’m writing this: I’m bored. Some mod creators or civ concept writers might find it helpful, especially when they got stuck, or not sure about whether to make something unique. I’m tired of the “no it’s not unique” argument. Some people, including myself, might dislike some of the categories listed here. I’m not personally judging any one of them, but just listing them out. However, if you want to criticize other people who “force uniqueness”, think twice because that may have …

[SirBarnzy1]

@DonHabsburg

As far as it goes, I’m open to an Austrian-Prussian split, but only as the last major change to the game. We need to be cognizant that the developers have only limited resources, which will only become more limited as the game ages and FE requests their help on newer projects.

I think this is a really sensible approach to the whole Austria/Prussian thing.

It would be wonderful to have all the big European players in there however, as the Germans are in already and by the original Devs, it would be the last thing they touch (if that, as they’ve gone on record to say it ain’t going to happen!) - for the current Devs having to ‘unpick’ the Germans up and separate them, regardless if any armchair Devs feel that it’s an easy job, will be quite an undertaking of time and resources when it could all be pushed into large updates and whole new civs.

I think you have to look at the Germans through the perspective of the lowest common denominator - the folks who love RTS games but just a passing knowledge of the nation’s an histories involved with in a historic RTS. They would wonder why the German civ they’re playing with have suddenly changed to ‘Prussians’ and ‘Austro-Hungarians’!

Again don’t get me wrong, I’d love tough, martial Prussians and the wide culturally-encompassing Austro-Hungarians but I don’t know how it will work if the Devs have fundamentally said no. I’d love to be proved wrong though!

[TouchierFiend53]

As I have had this discussion before I shall only say this once, Germans is clearly a representation of the HRE and the German states in general after its dissolution. There are too many cards and units to say it is merely one or the other (or in this case just Austria and Prussia).

AoE III is culture groups not states. So Germans represent all Germans, of which all lived within the HRE, explaining why the main inspiration is the before-mentioned HRE.

[TouchierFiend53]

@pwaopwao

The fact that there are so many people in favor of the German split shows how absurd the union of Austria, Prussia and other many other States into a single civ is for a good part of the community

Only for people who do not know German and in general European history.

History favors their combination in so many ways, not to mention culturally.

@pwaopwao

It is for this reason that until this split does not take place, there will never cease to be those who ask for it.

And the devs have justifyingly ignored them.

[M00Z1LLA]

@TouchierFiend53

Germans is clearly a representation of the HRE and the German states in general after its dissolution. There are too many cards and units to say it is merely one or the other (or in this case just Austria and Prussia).

No one’s saying it doesn’t include Prussia or Austria. The point is the Prussian references are only superficial and would be trivial to change. The civ is getting too bloated by trying to shove 2 civs worth of content into one so at this point a split would be good for gameplay.

@TouchierFiend53

AoE III is culture groups not states.

Yes because American and British or Mexican and Spanish culture was so different in 1500

@TouchierFiend53

So Germans represent all Germans, of which all lived within the HRE

What are you talking about? There were a lot of Germans outside the HRE like the Prussians, Transylvanian Saxons, and Volga Germans.

The current Germans also has Czechs, Poles, Slavs, etc and a potential Austrian civ would encompass a population that is 3/4 non-German.

[Bleed]

I’ve vacillated about how this would take shape for a while, but I eventually settled on perhaps a common model for Germans and Italians for representing their “unification” so to speak. For Italians, you pick an Industrial Age Politican, and the selection represents which of the states leads YOUR Risorgimento, so to speak–giving you different Royal Guard units plus the normal Age Up Bonuses. Say, the Savoyard RGs your Grenadiers and Dragoon, (though I’d prefer the Chevauleger just be the standard German and Italian ranged cavalry) the Sicilian RGs your Pikeman and Hussar, the Pope RGs your Halberdier and Culverin, the Venetian RGs your Bersagliere and Falconet (not my ideal selection, I’d give Italians access to a unique Lancer or even just the normal Spanish Lancer), and the Florentine RGs your Mortar and Pavisier. You could do the same thing for Germans, but in the Fortress Age or Commerce Age. Like, for example, you pick from the Austrian, the Saxon, the Prussian, the Hessian, and the Bavarian for your selection of Royal Guard units.

[Bleed]

The Union Army had two cavalry regiments formally designated as Hussars in the Civil War: the Benton Hussars and the Butterfly Hussars. The Confederates also had at least two. Then you have the Georgia Hussars. So I’m fine with the choice.

[JiMMy12013]

I usually just sit back and eat popcorn while reading these forums, but I am really curious and wanting feedback on my portrayal of the Prussian/Austrian split. Personally I would want a German split so you can have 7 Years Wars or Napoleonic Wars reenactments. Just fighting against two German opponents doesn’t work as it just feels like two armies from the same nation. This may seem like a shameless plug for the mod but I am really wanting feedback on the mod.

Mods Single - Age of Empires

[HelpfulGosling3]

I hope for , German Update" someday in tthe future with ,Germans" reworked to ,Germany" and Austria Flc faction. But after Poland & Dennmark , Korea & Persia Dlcs and maybe Brazil & Morocco will be time for it. Then maybe Zulu , Mayans , Crimean Khanate , Siam and Ukrainian Cossacks.

[HelpfulGosling3]

Some talk about this subject. https://www.quora.com/Why-are-Austria-and-Germany-separate-countries