Suggestion for the Next DLC: The Empty DLC

Age of Empires II: DE II - Discussion
1

I’m not against DLCs.

New civs, campaigns, and gameplay content are important ways to keep AoE alive. A good DLC can bring players back, create new strategies, and help the game continue to grow.

The Viking Sagas is also a very strong DLC theme. Compared to the previous two Ranked DLCs, the Viking theme is much easier for players to connect with and fits naturally into AoE.
If the previous two Ranked DLCs didn’t exist, The Viking Sagas would probably receive a much warmer reception.

However, the issue isn’t The Viking Sagas itself. The issue is the order of priorities.

The previous two Ranked DLCs are already part of AoE2. Once a DLC is released, it’s no longer just a product sold at launch. It becomes part of the game, and the devs have a responsibility to continue improving, balancing, and supporting it.

Players aren’t against new content. They just want existing content to be properly maintained.

This leads to a DLC idea:

The Empty DLC

A DLC with no new civs, no new campaigns, and no new units.

Of course, that wouldn’t make much sense from a business perspective. But I believe there’d still be players willing to purchase it, especially in today’s AoE2 community.

Because they wouldn’t be buying “empty content.”

They’d be supporting a message:

“Please invest more resources into improving the game we already have.”

Recent DLC experiences have also shown that more content doesn’t always mean more value. New content can bring new challenges, and in some cases create negative value if it harms balance, stability, or the overall experience.

The Empty DLC would not sell these improvements directly. Instead, the idea is that a content-light period would naturally create more room for:

  1. More time for balance adjustments
  2. Better support for existing civs
  3. More testing before major releases
  4. Improved mod compatibility

Empty doesn’t mean nothing

“Empty” doesn’t always mean a lack of value.

Sen no Rikyū (千利休), a cultural figure of the Sengoku period between the eras represented by AoE2 and AoE3, showed that empty space can have meaning.

The same idea applies here.

The Empty DLC wouldn’t add more content. It would create space for better balance, testing, and long-term support.

Empty doesn’t mean nothing.

Sometimes, leaving space is what allows something to become better.

The Viking Sagas can be a great new chapter for AoE.

But the future of the game doesn’t only depend on what comes next. It also depends on how well the existing content is maintained.

3 Likes
2

This is what monthly patches do.

11 Likes
3

I agree that balance patches already do some of these things.

But the bigger issue isn’t only balance. Some DLCs still have problems with their own design identity and long-term role in the game.

Regular patches can adjust numbers, but they don’t always solve deeper design problems.

Of course, this is just an idea. But it’d be interesting to see if players would actually support a DLC focused entirely on improving the game.

1 Like
4

People having to pay for fixes dosent seem fair to me.

5 Likes
5

I agree that basic fixes shouldn’t be locked behind a DLC. Those should always be part of normal support.

But after Victors and Vanquished, I don’t think this idea is completely impossible anymore. DLCs don’t always have to be new civilizations or ranked content.

The Empty DLC isn’t about charging for fixes. It’s more about testing whether players would support a DLC focused entirely on improving the game, polishing existing content, and preparing for the future.

Maybe it would fail, maybe it wouldn’t. The market would decide.

At least I’d be one of them.

6

And how successful is this DLC compared to others?

2 Likes
7

That’s Victors and Vainquisher, people hated it. Personnally I enjoyed it.

1 Like
8

The devs need to release a big patch that refreshes the older civs with second Unique Units and regional units/buildings. And a Chinese architecture set.

It would be a nice gesture. Like the patch with the unique castle designs.

7 Likes
9

Why add things or the sake of adding? If anything should be added its correct graphics for sails UI kings trade carts etc.

5 Likes
10

To refresh the older civs by enhancing their gameplay, variety and historical accuracy.

Franks and Teutons might be getting mounted crossbowmen for example. Byzantines might be getting Varangian guards.

1 Like
11

I’m not saying Victors and Vanquished was successful.

My point is that DLCs don’t always have to be new civilizations or ranked content.

After seeing different types of DLCs in AoE2, I don’t think a maintenance-focused DLC is completely impossible.

The difference is that The Empty DLC would be completely transparent.
You would know exactly what you’re buying before purchasing it.

That’s actually a fair comparison.

The difference is that Victors and Vanquished is still a content DLC focused on scenarios, while The Empty DLC would be focused on improving the game itself.

Of course, it could still include some small surprises or extra features. But unlike a normal DLC, those wouldn’t be the main expectation.

The funny part about the name is that it could even deliver exactly what it promises: nothing new. :face_with_tongue:

Those ideas could fit into an Empty DLC, but they wouldn’t necessarily have to be included.

That’s the interesting part of the name. Since players know it’s “empty”, anything added would become a bonus rather than an expectation.

Of course, it could even include a few “empty maps” as an easter egg. They could be truly empty maps, or maybe players would discover some small surprises hidden inside. :grinning_face:

Empty doesn’t mean nothing. It creates room for surprises.

12

These contradict each other right?

2 Likes
13

They don’t really contradict each other.

The point is that players know the concept before buying it. The DLC is called “The Empty DLC” for a reason.

It could include a few empty maps as an easter egg :egg:, or it could be completely empty. Those surprises are not the main expectation.

The more interesting question is what players actually want from a DLC.

Sometimes, when there is nothing new, players can better understand what they actually want.

Do players only want more civilizations and new content, or would some players support a DLC focused on improving and maintaining the game?

Empty doesn’t mean nothing. It creates room to discover what matters.

Overall, the Empty DLC has one unique advantage: it guarantees that there is no new content for players to dislike.

14

Well, that’s been happening in AoE 3 DE since its release… they used to release nothing but historical battles, and since KotM, not even that… just historical maps…:pensive_face:

2 Likes
15

One unique advantage of The Empty DLC is that you won’t be forced to accept anything you dislike.

Even if it includes small extras, they would only be optional additions. The removal is even cleaner than removing cilantro from food :shamrock:. If you don’t like something, you can simply delete it completely and immediately without affecting the main game experience.

1 Like
16

If anything the DLC should include region customised unit skins and building skins for more accuracy.

5 Likes
17

That’s actually a good example of what The Empty DLC could be about.

It doesn’t need to decide what players want beforehand. Regional skins, balance improvements, better mod support, and other quality improvements could all fit.

Sometimes players don’t just want more content. They also want to protect the game they already love and avoid being affected by changes they dislike.

A good game is not only about adding things, but also about preserving what players already enjoy.

1 Like
18

I agree they might reduce a bit the rythm if releases, even reduce the number of civs by DLC from 3 to 2 (we now have SIX new civs for 2026, is it sustainable?), and focus on other sides of the game: polish scenarios, UI, general design and features, new content like maps and new campaigns for existing civs.

In that regard, even if 15 scenarios feels too much for a personality (I’m looking at you Alexander), the presented solutions by Vikings Sagas is smart.

2 Likes
19

I agree that reducing the release rhythm and focusing more on polish could be a good direction.

However, I’m not sure we’re actually moving in that direction yet. The current DLC schedule still feels quite fast, especially with so many new civilizations planned for 2026.

DLC doesn’t always have to be about adding more civilizations. Improving scenarios, UI, features, maps, mod support, and existing content can also create just as much value.

I also think that transparency is an important part of this.

Players shouldn’t have to rely on Steam refunds as their main protection mechanism. Refunds are a useful safety net, and most refunds that meet the requirements will probably be accepted, but there is always some uncertainty because the final decision is not in the player’s hands.

More importantly, for a game like AoE2, DLC can influence Ranked and the overall game environment. Refunding a purchase doesn’t undo those changes.

A public test version or trial period would help players understand the direction before release, provide better feedback, and allow players to avoid supporting changes they don’t like.

Building trust before release is better than relying on refunds afterward.

20

This is a business, not a charity.

No content=no money from my pocket.

7 Likes