There’s a popular claim that it derives from “سارق”, meaning “thief” or “robber”. Most likely it derives from “شرق” instead, meaning “east”.
Regardless if they’re split or not, renamed or not, whom they are supposed to represent and whom not, they still need some adjustments, because it’s embarrassing they are the worst performing civ on Arabia 
I am tempted to make some campaigns I’ve been conceptualizing. I work too much though, not enough time for modding 
even wikipedia has a huge article about them. With Knossos alone having a population of ~100 000 at its peak. I don’t know why you are asking for a source here, this is stuff that’s taught in high school where I live.
some of them were Teutons, which is fair as they represent the HRE. Picking Britons was certainly a choice. I think they picked the civs mostly for gameplay though. The in-game history for Goths is pretty clear about who they are meant to represent.
no argument there. the current devs are incompetent.
nope. I said “in Europe the game doesn’t really include much 16th century stuff”. I didn’t say “it includes no 16th century stuff”. It’s still objectively true that the focus of aoe2 lies before the 16th century. Understandable, as most people would agree that the middle ages ended in Europe around that time.
at no point.
you don’t “self-identify” an ethnic group. that’s not how ethnic groups work. what you are thinking of are cultural groups.
sure. from your perspective.
they didn’t though, you are projecting modern borders and identities on medieval kingdoms. they viewed themselves as belonging to the local kingdom they were from, of which there were more than just 3.
the in-game season changing is precisely what I mean, admiteddly those don’t fully remove the newly added enemies, but they reduce their spawn rate significantly. I have been catching up on season 1 and 2 and, haven’t I don’t think I’ve had a single core stone appear in the entire time of compeleting the season passes.
Also DRG advertises itself as a live service game, so content changes are to be expected. aoe2 is never advertised itself as live service, yet is objectively worse at this.
the others literally all have version select on steam. don’t accuse me of lying.
it’s a game that focuses on online multiplayer. But even if you find other games that are forcing shit down their players’ throats, other companies being shit doesn’t excuse or justify this games’ devs’ shitty behaviour.
first of all, this is an MMORPG, so everyone needs to be on the same version. the same is not true for a mostly single player game like aoe2.
second of all, THEY DO PROVIDE ACCESS TO A CLASSIC VERSION, so thank you for providing an example of a game that treats its players better than aoe2 does (at least in this regard).
you accuse me of making bs up, but are doing it yourself. A quick google shows me that in SC2 you can play custom games with older data sets.
I am not expecting MMORPGs or fully online games to have this, i never claimed they did.
having content added or changed to this extent without an opt out isn’t. Of course there are other bad actors too, but I am mindful not to give them any business.
Aoe2 changed practice here: they provided this option in aoe2HD, and then downgraded for aoe2DE.
don’t drag this discussion down further with pointless ad hominem attacks.
when promoting aoe2 there is an interview where they are saying that “The Last Khans” will be the last civs they are adding, that they are “done adding civs”. Don’t twist my words
Can you two take your lovers quarrel elsewhere?
the topic has shifted to building a team to make a mod for Middle Eastern theme and we will not let the conversation be derailed
So back on topc
I like the idea of the Andalusians being the more blended Euro/Arab/Morocco civ. There is a lot of potential in this design.
I also think if Yemen is also the Jewish Himdari then we can have a fun campaign against Aksumites in the year of the elephant. Also could be the early Omani who had learned from the Sawaran and used heavy cavalry.
Egypt exists too. I know little about their post Cleopatra days however. But a connection to Romans means Dromons are possible.
I don’t like Blasts design for the Kurds because it feels very haphazard and with not much cohesion but sure maybe the civ can work
If we need a 5th… I dunno. Maybe extend the Berber influences south into Songhai? This feels like it’s less of a Middle East and more of a spread of Islam expansion although many Songhai Moslem kings did pilgrimage to the middle Eastern cities
So… recruitment is open… don’t be shy about being about something big
Nubians would make more sense than the Songhai. Their history is closely linked to medieval Egypt, with their influence felt before, during, and long after the Crusades.
One issue: this means there would indeed be a shared NE African set. Egypt Nubia and Ethiopia and suddenly there’s this lonely west African architecture used by one lonely civ and that… I don’t like that. Make no mistake if this could have 6 civs I’d have both
Sorry friend I didn’t quite catch that. I meant that having Nubians instead of the Songhai would have been better for your DLC: Andalusians, Egyptians, Yemenis, and even Kurds could share the Saracen set, but Songhai couldn’t. With some adjustments, the Nubians could, even though their architecture looks more like the Byzantine style.
That doesn’t necessarly mean AoE2 dlc would be middle east themed, you should see it with a step backward.
AoE3 middle-east timestamp is basically ottoman era, and eventually some malta related content, as the game early campaign is arround them.
If you take this into account for an AoE2 themed dlc, the content could be either crusader related or more widely north africa-middle-eastern themed.
Combine that with Chronicle definitly going for early Rome, which include Carthage, and you can try guessing where the art / history team is actually gathering infos with their budget.
AoE2 had some middle-east(ish) content with the mountain royal, the persian rework, and also with Alexander the Great for the regions covered in the map design. But that’s been a very very long time since africa received content coverage in the dlc scheduling.
What I’m saying here is that the next dlc will probably not be a middle-east one, but maybe the one after could be.
If we’re taking into account the AoE3 timestamp covering, they could definitly add some arabic related content, which means some mediteranean naval warfare civ involved. That’s hinting also toward Venice, the famous battle of Lepanto, insane clash between occidental ships and oriental ships, galleass, galley, etc.
Venice is a civ that could be added to AoE2 easily, so having the team working on the topic for both games is kinda legit. Model making, historical researches, it’s always better to spare money by gathering infos for all at once. I can easily see an AoE4 dlc also arround that, even if many of the content are already in AoE4, they can do some sub-civ system without any issue.
AoE4 also lack tons of civs like the Spanish, another naval power involved in the galley warfare, related to the venician power on the sea.
So now back to AoE2 speculation.
A crusader stat civ ? Probably not going to happen in AoE2.
A crusader stat campaign ? Could definitly happen in AoE2.
The only crusade related group that is not already featured in the game is kinda Malt, and Chyprus which are tied to the order of St John.
Maltese could be a legit civ to be added, alonsige with Venice, and to that you could add the Swiss as third civ to make a late middle-age themed dlc with one crusader campaign, one naval campaign, and one land mecernary campaign. They would all match the same period and all have kind of focus arround gunpowder.
The order of St John is one of the famous crusader group that survived up to the gunpowder era and used firarm in combat. Venice mastered the sea with galley and was part of the Holy League that resisted the fury of ottoman fleet at the battle of Lepanto. Swiss fought for their neutrality in the italian wars and also against the burgundian duke we’re playing in the burgundian campaign.
Maltese unique unit could definitly be a knight with a pistol as charged projectile ability and high melee damage.
Venecian unique unit, well here I don’t know venice land warfare enought to speculate, but probably infantry related.
Swiss unique unit, their famous pikeman, of course, with mobility and range boost.
Then you can have the venecian galleass as a regional unit, spanish adopted this vessel type after venice used them with success to counter their own combat rowing galleys called the bastardas, so maybe a mediteranean regional naval unit.
What’s interesting about the Knight of St John, aka the Hospitaliers, is that they also went to the carribean during the late middle-age, which inspired AoE3 campaign so they could be a very interesting civ to be added as a campaign in AoE2.
The Swiss early history is also very special, first they fight for their independance against the Habsburg, which by the way are originated from a now Swiss owned area, then fighting in the Italian war and then became neutrals.
Venice history is also interesting, the allaince with Milan, and later the Holy League, thre is a mix of land battle and naval warfare on their topic.
If we think of a purely middle-east themed dlc, there is couple of interesting group not yet in the game, such as the Fatimids that are not exactly in the game. There is also lots of nomadic groups that could become civs, such as the Seldjuks, and others that I can’t recall the name but I know in the early crusades they were present in the middle-east before all the crusader-stat mess.
But here you should keep something in mind, politic matters. Making a game content featuring past history of this region is very very very controversial. There will always be some people that will accuse developpers to do content to promote things blah blah blah. It’s one of the hard topic to cover sadly, so maybe it’s not the “right moment” to release a levant themed content, due to the today situation on this region if you see what I mean. I’m not saying it’s a good or bad thing to act like that, but money wise, public thinking is a key driving element for what is or is not risky to produce.
On the other possible coverage, Ireland history is currently not covered by the game, that could be a dlc candidate someday too. There is also some part of the French history that can be added, we already got Joan of Ark, the Burgundian, but we can add to that the Savoy which also were in conflict with the Swiss.
The Habsburg history is not yet in the game too, also tied to the Swiss, but also many many other groups in europe, such as the Frisen (Flanders) which could also be an area to tell story about.
As we’re already seeing three more unkown dlc in the steamdb, one of the mbeeing a chronicle one, they definitly are already working on future content, for sure. Only time will tell us on what they are working.
I got that completely. But Mali would be isolated while the eastern African civs would be with new architecture. I’m a fan of a Nubian civ for sure. I just hate how isolated Mali is
Heck I’d rather we work on an expansion like This: https://forums.ageofempires.com/t/riches-of-the-sahel-dlc-idea
This would be an interesting dlc as this would be imperial age based civis.
Yes but not only. Early swiss history is during the templar era, 1291, same year as the siege of akre.
But yes, that’s been a very long time since we had a “late middle age” themed dlc, like the Bohemian campaign etc.
That’s more like a balance issue than design issue. Unless devs decide to make Camel Archer as regional or add SL. Or remove gunpowder as you said they represent Rashidun and Ummayad who collapsed long before gunpowder invention.
The simplest change is add scout camels to Saracen and give them an HP bonus but they have less bonuses than Gujara and take longer to train
For a supposedly “A camel civ” they only have 1 non camel UU and it’s healthy but the two other camel civs have more camel
I had an idea for a “Naft Grenadier” / “Naphtha Thrower”(1) unit for some of the MENA civs replacing the Hand Cannons. Its regular form, available in the Castle Age, would be much weaker than its Jurchen cousin, but the Elite upgrade in the Imperial Age would match it (perhaps longer range?). Naphtha grenades were developed quite early, possibly even before the end of the Rashidun, so they’d fit.
(1. Not to be confused with the “Naffatah” / “Naft Siphoneer”, an Islamic version of the Byzantine Cheirosiphon and potential Iraqi UU, acting like a Fire Ship on land!)
Lets get Egypt designed
A camel civ
Team Bonus: Stable Units +3 vs monks
Regionals: Camel, Camel Archer, Dromon
UU: Abtal - Means brave Warrior. These Camel Riders when defeated stand back off their camel and turn into frenzied invulnerable infantry who attack way too fast but are gonna die after 12 seconds no ifs ands or buts.
UT1: Mamluk Uprising - Camel riders, Camel archers and militia throw a scimitar with a cooldown before charging into battle. This attack doesn’t interrupt their normal actions or attacks and never misses.
UT2: Haflz - Universities, Siege Workshops and monasteries build and work 66% faster.
Missing Techs
Dromons remind you that yes, Egypt is indeed an ancient civ that had large long ties to the Romans, with ancient roots and powerful lineage and just because a few Arabs come in doesn’t mean this ship can’t have a new home elsewhere! Perhaps their army is a tad too camel.
Fun fact this is the one civ without any boat pierce armor bonuses
My take looks like this:
Egyptians
Navy and Cavalry civ
Overview: Covers Egyptian regimes after the Muslim conquest – Tulunids, Ikhshidids, Fatimids, the Ayyubid sultanate, and the Mamluks. Mamluk soldiers had been a crucial component of Egyptian armies since as early as the Tulunids, hence their Royal Mamluks will probably be one of the most powerful Scout-line upgrades in the game. One of the largest drawbacks Egypt faced was the lack of forests, which prevented it from growing its otherwise formidable navy, and as such they’d be the only civilization without access to Bow Saw. Their naval techs are effectively cheaper however and the trade units provide an alternative way to get wood.
Language(s): Coptic (Villagers), Egyptian Arabic (military, Monks, and Kings) (Egyptian commoners continued to be majority Coptic and Christian until the High Middle Ages)
Unique Unit:
(Making grenades is the most common usage of naphtha in Muslim warfare, attested in Egypt as early as the Fatimids (and infamously utilized by vizier Shawar to burn down Fustat) and still in use during the Mamluk period. Al-Tarsusi’s military manual written for Saladin recommends throwing them from horseback.)
Regional upgrades, units, & buildings:
Civ bonus ideas:
Team bonus: Farm upgrades are 20% cheaper (Egypt was the granary of the Mediterranean)
Unique Tech ideas:
Wonder: Al-Azhar Mosque
Castle: the current Saracen castle is (supposedly) inspired by the Cairo Citadel so they can keep it, but ideally it’d be reskinned so that it doesn’t look like Castel Nuovo.
Campaign: Shajar al-Durr and Baybars
My one biggest issue is that akin to JomsVIKING in that it’s a unit or civ name too similar to another thus between Mameluks and Mamluks even if they named them like Dervish like they were originally planned
Not entirely, or ultimately we could call them Levantines…
Of course, at this point whether or not they include a Crusader civilization in the game would be the least of our worries, but rather when (and it would definitely be in the aforementioned Middle East DLC)…
Yes, SC2 ruined modern RTS games… but it’s true that this 2DE is a 2019 game with 2019 thinking…
That’s why it’s a waste that they haven’t touched the Kalmar Union period…
Yes, but it was used by the Timurid and Safavid empires during the 16th century…
Yes, let’s say it was the size of present-day Rio de Janeiro (the city, not the state)…
Are you saying that in the future they should bring in the post-Viking Swedes? (The Danes would just need to be able to develop gunpowder and that’s it)…
Yes, at most I suppose the Danes of AoE 2 will be purely from the Viking Age and the Kalmar Union onwards (1397-1814) will be left for the Danes of AoE 3…
It’s just that the devs want to make money off of nostalgia, ergo it’s time to divide classic AoK civs…
They already had it with VnV, in AoE 3 with TAD, and in AoE 4 with DotE…
They might be real, but it doesn’t matter because they’re from ancient Kyushu and wouldn’t fit in AoE 2, and anyway, in AoE 1 they were conquered by the Yamato in 397 by Takeru Yamato (the Assassins’ mission in the first game)…
Yes, that could be for later on, to divide Teutons and Italians…
Yes, I was actually planning to do campaigns for Age of Empires 3 for its 20th anniversary last year, although I postponed it until the 250th anniversary of the United States due to university commitments, and now I’m going to continue it for the Baltic DLC…
Yes, cheap DLC if ever there was one…
Ah, that’s a good one, besides, his reign coincided with Attila…
That would be good…
Yes, the last scenario of the last European campaign (Dracula), chronologically speaking, takes place in 1476 (Lepanto in 1571 doesn’t count because it’s a historical battle) (Almeida starts in 1476 but it’s more of an African campaign since it’s on that page)…they saved the entire 16th century for AoE 3 (historical maps of the Italian Wars and the Eighty Years’ War)…
Yes, ideally it should be optional, if possible.
Yes, but at least you still have the PhotoS expansion to vary your weapon usage a bit…
Abbasids confirmed?..
Yes, at least one Imjin War campaign is playable in the mobile version of AoE 3 TAD, playing as the Japanese against the Koreans (who use the Chinese tree)… and in EDotMW you play an entire Korean campaign with Yi-Sun Sin…
Yes, at least in AoE 4 they correct it by including the Scots instead of the Celts in the next dlc…
That’s right, the Goths represent the Visigoths (as seen in Tariq’s campaign) and the Ostrogoths…
Yes, back in 2017 when they were announced, I kind of suspected that at some point they were going to include new civs in the DE editions (like they were doing with 2 HD and AoM EE), but I didn’t think 1DE would die so quickly and that 2DE would last so long… I thought that by now they would only be focusing on AoE 4 and that AoE 5 would already be announced for 2027…
Yes, Andalusians can go with an Iberian DLC with Aragonese and Navarrese (and the Spanish renamed as Castilians)…
Yes, if they ever rework the Celts, they should at least add Gallowglass as a second UU so it doesn’t feel so anachronistic with the other civilizations…
Yes, it’s “Age of Empires” but the playable factions are civilizations (from small tribes like Tupi or Sioux to large continental empires like Mongols or British)…
Yes, it’s time…
Yes, a campaign of Mehmet II (1444-1481) from Varna to the wars against Venice…
X2…
Yes, I studied them for Greek and Roman history last semester… now I’m studying Medieval History with the fall of Rome, the Carolingian Empire, and the Church…
Yes, strictly speaking, the Middle Ages ended in Europe in 1453 (with the fall of Constantinople - seen in Constantine XI and Fetih - and the end of the Hundred Years’ War - seen in “A Perfect Martyr” -) (or 1492 if you count the end of the Reconquista and the discovery of America, where AoE 3 begins in its intro)…
Yes, at this point it would be better to have an “AoK Classic Edition” by 2029 (within two DEs as a separate mode like RoR and Chronicles, after they finish Chronicles)… and that way they can rework the classic civs in peace and even give them a second UU…
True, but from the Middle East you still have Persia (as the only gunpowder empire you’re missing), Oman, and Morocco… they could even group them together in a single DLC…
Yes, I know someone who is porting Lepanto to AoE 3…
Yes, Age of Empires 4 could benefit from having a DLC featuring Venice and Castile…
Nah, I don’t think so. In AoE 2 Malta was part of Sicily and then Spain… in AoE 3 they included them as civ as a nod to the Blood campaign…Nah, I don’t think so. In AoE 2 Malta was part of Sicily and then Spain… in AoE 3 they included them as a nod to the Blood campaign…
Yes, in fact, in AoE 3 I included the Maltese in the Blood campaign to make it more historically accurate…
Yes, those are good options: a Middle Eastern DLC and then an Alpine one (Swiss and Austrians)…
Yes, Naft grenadier sounds good… you can reuse the grenadier unit but with an Islamic reskin…
Yes, the Byzantine Cheirosiphon in AoE 4 is a battering ram, but it shoots fire like the Fireship… they could use the Chinese flamethrower unit from the editor and make it a Iraqi UU…
No, it’s not necessary to have the Dromon; if it’s the Mameluke civilization, you could use the Galleon Cannon…
Yes, it sounds strange…
But it’s not just the Mamluk civilization. Much like how Franks have Throwing Axemen despite mostly using them vs Rome and stopped using them by the 100 years wars and crusades, or how Celts have some of their more ancient roots in the same sort of naked warrior even Hannibal hired to march in the alps with him. (Side note they’d be a good contender for Dromons too especially if their siege bonuses could apply to them)
Persians have pre millennium change Savaran soldiers alongside cannons!
Turks are both Seljuks and Ottomans despite their differences in time period and military composition.
Ergo Egypt with a bit of the stuff from their time under Rome wouldn’t be so illogical
Malta is not part of Sicily, it’s the Hospitalier Knight order of St John that had Chyprus and Malta, and later some islands in the Caribbean.
