Then why did you make a thread about splitting civs (German and Italian)?
3 Likes
Because–as I said–I assumke they are already creating new civs. Not sure they were thinking of splitting civs again.
You know what they say about assuming and what it makes you and me?
1 Like
As Japanese, I don’t want to split the Japanese civ. Surely there were many clans but they were in one country (unlike India that was actually splited into 3+ dynasties in Rajput age). Japanese clans had a common type army eg bushi,samurai.
9 Likes
We need more UUs for Italians and Saracens and some of the older civs.
1 Like
What UUs would that be?
I think most improvement would bring regional skins, which I would totally want.
1 Like
Venetian Galleass, Papal Swiss Guardsmen. They already have Condotierri representing the Milanese and Genoese Crossbowmen representing the Genoa city state.
Maybe the Balkans (Serbs, Croats and Vlachs) and Caucasus (Georgians and Armenians) (now it would be a bit controversial because of this week)…
The issue is that the civs are repeated in the campaigns…
Maybe never…otherwise you would have like 20 Indian civs…
Serbs, Croats and Vlachs and rename the Slavs into Russians…
No, in fact the Bulgarians suffered invasions from their neighbors, including the Serbs…
Late antiquity (320-550)… although they could enter the game (since they would be contemporaries of the Romans, Goths and Huns)…
Gupta Empire in 375 AD
Gupta Empire in 420 AD
Gupta Empire in 450 AD
Exactly, calculate that when the Guptas appear in 375, 2 years before the arrival of the Huns to Europe had occurred (which is seen in The Coming of the Huns in AoE 1 in 373), and 3 years later, in 378, the Romans lose at Adrianople (which is seen in the cinematics of Alaric’s first mission, which occurs 16 years later, in 394)… when the Guptas achieve their maximum extension between 420 and 450 (7 years had already passed since the last Alaric’s mission -313- and the entire Attila campaign occurs) and when they fell in 550 (occurs 7 years before Bukhara -557- and with the Byzantine Empire having restored its dominion in Italy thanks to Belisarius)…
Lastly, they can fit in RoR alongside the Mauryas, because we already have several Indian civilizations in AoE 2…
*394 AD…for the battle of the Frigidus River (Alaric’s first mission)…
They are not going to separate them because the Italians have a water bonus (Venice) and an economic bonus (Florence) and the Genoese crossbowman representing Genoa… the issue is that in AoE 3 the northern Italian cities are better represented…
Yes, the Japanese have maintained their culture uniformly for centuries…
The other would be Songhai, Swahili, Kongolese and Zimbabweans…the issue would be finding campaigns for them…
Only the Balkans remain… and at most the Caucasus…
Native Americans (from North America)…
The issue is how you do it without touching on controversial topics (cough cough Tibet and Uygurs cough cough)…
Exactly…I would tell you from 400 to 1600 AD (in 300 AD it would still be late antiquity that is AoE 1)…
Yes, besides the fact that the Habsburgs only became powerful in the 16th century (that is, they are better for AoE 3)…
I doubt they will be divided…the Persians already represent the Sassanids and the Turks the Ottomans…the Safavids would look better like the Persians of AoE 3 (let’s see when they get them in)…
Maybe they will give them better bonuses that represent the Persian dynasties and some more unique units (for example, the Sogdian Cataphract and the Zamburak, although it is anachronistic)…
The Venetian Galeazza for the Italians and the Ghulam for the Saracens, the Sogdian Cataphract for the Persians and the War Elephant for the Hindustanis…
Of course…that’s what I also thought…more Italian units; I would add the Elmetto too…
You did not answer the statement.
1 Like
How are they related to civ splits? OP was mentioning Italian city states and a Goths split while both Georgians and Armenians are different ethnic groups and not related to city states.
Also, I doubt it would be controversial even with current events, after Rus’ addition in AoE4 all the requests for a Kievan representation didn’t get into devs’ attention so they shouldn’t take current situations seriously and suddenly delete a civ just because of a current situation.
How are Bulgarians representing Serbs lol
I mean back then goths use to represent Rus so if you really want yes they can…
But Serbs had an empire and independent kingdom and duchy before that.
Hey you are not answering the statement either.
It was somewhat correct gameplaywise (infantry focus, large pop), but was not correct graphics wise and language wise. Neither was it correct proximity wise.
But if you take bulgarians and serbs they are easily correct in each of these points to represent each other. They are very very similar graphics wise, gameplay wise, language wise and proximity wise.
It was not empire size, nor did it last more than 25 years. Using the term empire is seriously a misnomer here and doesn’t create a ground for making yet another identical gameplay civ just for the name. You will be unnecessarily wasting civ slot.
1 Like
No, the Bulgars do not represent the Serbs, they would be represented by the Byzantines before 780…
Slavic principalities in ca. 814 AD.
For the split of the Slavs…
But the Rus were already there since the release of the game in 2021 (obviously no one predicted that what happened would happen)…
Yes, a short empire in the 14th century (1346-1371), but Serbia existed as a political entity from 780 until it was conquered by the Ottomans in 1459…
Well you can consider it as kingdom or people…
Its Bulgarians not Bulgars we are talking about.
Serbians had mini forts, cavalry and infantry. Their language is 99% the same with what the Bulgarians speak. Why do you need another civ?
1 Like
To have more civs from the Balkans and represent the Adriatic (currently you only have the Italians and the Byzantines representing the Adriatic)…
1 Like
That would justify adding other unnecessary civs.
Tell me why there is not my home civ Kalinga in the game? It existed as a political entity since before 600BC. Odisha state is still existing today. What should I use for its representation? We are not Bengali neither are we Dravidians.
3 Likes
Because they are classical antiquity (ergo they could be represented in RoR section by Mauryas or Guptas)…
The K4lingas have been mentioned as a major tribe in the legendary text. In the 3rd century BCE, the region came under Mauryan control as a result of the Kalinga War.
@MatM1996 Bro we are existing till today. Yes we axisted from Antiquity Age onwards.
Kalinga had major power in late medieval age as well. Go read about Gaj apati Empire (dissociated into two words to bypass stupid censorship, @DodoNotDoDo fix this) It is more than ten times larger than Serbian Empire in size.
3 Likes
You don’t have to sell it to me
That’s why it makes more sense to split those multicultultural enormous civs than getting city states and duchies as new civs
1 Like