Splitting civs

[SamePorpoise303]

There are many possible splits but Saracens are one of the most obvious.

[Siegelad4112]

Entirely new civs >>>>>>> Unnecessary civ splits
Personally I’d rather see civs that aren’t related to the current ones than having this whole headache with forcibly trying to split Saracens.

[Temudhun]

@KarstHillFort77

And apart from that I’d also hope to see a Malay split into Malays and Javanese.

Chams would also be a Malay split, and I’m pretty sure they fit in the game. Other possibilities include Sumatrans, Acehnese, Sundanese, Moluccans, etc. but I don’t expect to see the Malays be split to the point of having several civs per island.

[KarstHillFort77]

@Temudhun

ould also be a Malay split, and I’m pretty sure they fit in the game. Other possibilities include Sumatrans, Acehnese, Sundanese, Moluccans, et

Chams aren’t that closely related to the Malays, they diverged from the ancestors of the Malays a few thousand years ago. They are both part of the Austronesian family but speak different languages. Hence I would consider the Chams to be a new civ rather than a Malay split.

The possibilities are many but the spaces are limited. I’d suggest focusing on the main SE Asian civs that are missing, and IMO those are the Chams, the Javanese, the Siamese, and the Mons.

[KarstHillFort77]

Yeah areas around China would be more suitable I agree with you.

I’d like to add the Khitans if we have enough space, but the thing is I feel that they’re a bit too similar to the Mongols.

[RatcicleFan]

@Nebular905647

As for civilizations of Mongol type - theoretically, of course, it would be possible to add the Xiongnu (they are enemies in a couple of campaigns), but I very much doubt they could be any different from the Mongols.

What do you mean Xiongnu? I think there’s literally 0 mention of them in the game. Not to mention they lived before the middle ages.

[Tyranno13]

@KarstHillFort77

I’d like to add the Khitans if we have enough space, but the thing is I feel that they’re a bit too similar to the Mongols.

The main difference is that they lack honor

[Temudhun]

Well, we probably won’t get 4 civs in one dlc anymore, there could be one for Indochina and another one for Insulindia. Though depending on when they come out it could include East Asian campaigns, which would probably change the amount of new civs.

[MatM1996]

@SamePorpoise303

There are many possible splits but Saracens are one of the most obvious.

Yes, maybe put the Abbasids in and turn the Saracens into Ayyubids like in AoE 4…

@Siegelad4112

Entirely new civs >>>>>>> Unnecessary civ splits
Personally I’d rather see civs that aren’t related to the current ones than having this whole headache with forcibly trying to split Saracens.

That’s true, preferably they put in new civs and then we’ll see about dividing civs…

@Temudhun

Though depending on when they come out it could include East Asian campaigns, which would probably change the amount of new civs.

Yes, I still don’t think they’ll add more East Asian civs…at most they’ll make a DLC with campaigns for China, Japan and Korea…“The Asian Kingdoms”…xd

[Mahazona]

@MatM1996

Abbasids in and turn the Saracens into Ayyubids

These are dynasties not civilizations.

[Nebular905647]

@RatcicleFan

What do you mean Xiongnu? I think there’s literally 0 mention of them in the game.

[Edit. We talked here and found out that there is confusion in the game with similar races in different language versions, which is why players see different things: Huns, Huna, Xiongnu. This is very confusing and needs to be reworked in at least one of the languages.]

[RatcicleFan]

@Nebular905647

Play the game. Don’t ask stupid questions.

I player literally every campaign scenario outside of RoR. There’s no mention of Xiongnu in any of them.

Also, stop being rude.

[Mahazona]

@Nebular905647

Play the game. Don’t ask stupid questions.

Why dont you show the stupid players where they are ingame?

[Nebular905647]

@RatcicleFan

I player literally every campaign

Ar ye player off Devapala cmpgn?

[RatcicleFan]

You mean the Hunas? Because they’re not the same thing as Huns, which are not the same thing as Xiongnu.
White Huns are a completely separate entity as well.

[Nebular905647]

They could be called differently in several translations. In Russian they are called “hunnu” which is “Xiongnu”. At the same time “hunas” would be “huns” for us, and they are not those in Devapala campaign. However I was specifically checking Wikipedia and things seemed to be correct.

[RatcicleFan]

Oh, I did consider the possibility of a translation error. The translation makes mistakes. So does Wikipedia, in fact.

[Nebular905647]

I double checked that.

Xiongnu

Here is a page about the people. For me, this word is “hunnu”, it is not equal to the word “huns” (Attila’s people). The Xiongnu inhabited exactly the territory that interests us, but at the wrong time. This was from -2 to 2 centuries. So it’s still in our Era, but certainly not in the 800s.

In the end, the translator is to blame. You know, the Russian translation is actually very poorly done, especially in the factual part. I’m collecting material to make a big post about this.

[RatcicleFan]

@Nebular905647

In the end, the translator is to blame. You know, the Russian translation is actually very poorly done, especially in the factual part. I’m collecting material to make a big post about this.

I’ve also complained about translation errors in the Brazilian version. RoR is the bigger problem, but regular 2DE has some problems as well.

[Nebular905647]

Oh, my language is not the only one problematic? Then I welcome you to participate in my post when I make it. Needs a couple of days. I am going to ask for the big correction of the text and even offer myself for this job.