Suggestion: going full Victorian

Now that the new civ designs (US, Ethiopia, Hausa, Mexico) are more 19th-century-ish than everyone else (maybe also counting Lakota), and the outlaws are very 19th-century-ish since the very beginning and continues to be so (American and African outlaws specifically), why not make everyone a little more 19th-century-ish now?

Europeans get some late-game tech upgrades like breechloading and steamships.
Asians get modern army reforms.
Native Americans get more advanced weapon deals.

Keep these very late game options so that they do not screw up the balance.

BTW at least Imperial Age unit skins for old civs plz.


I’m down for it. Anything before 1900 is fair game for the very late-game as far as I’m concerned. There is plenty of content and scenarios to be found in the Scramble for Africa, the Opium Wars, the post-Napoleonic wars in Europe…


Are you trying to give Sandy Petersen a heart attack?

Tbh we already have the Boxer rebellion card for China if Im correct

1 Like

TWC already did with Gatling guns, repeating rifle and the Battle of Little Bighorn.
Also vanilla with revolvers and winchester rifles in the “Discovery Age” which someone thought should only refer to 1492.

BTW Sandy Peterson didn’t design any aoe game after the conquerers. Next time google out someone else as your representative.


I think extending the time frame just another 24-25 years (1492 and 1876 AD) won’t ruin the game. But it should justify and expand the options such as imperial cards and buildings such as universities.

Also alleviate a bit how forced Mexico and the United States feel.
I hope there are no more civilizations of this type. The best thing would be to redesign the revolutions so that they can reach imperial and feel more unique and respectable in the end-game.


I guess no later than 1900s.
Or maybe we do not even need to extend the existing timeframe (which can be as late as 1870s with the Sioux War), and breechloaders and steamships already fit in.

From a historical point of view, the late Victorian era - Scramble for Africa, is very much the prologue to the modern age of WW1 and WW2, not an epilogue to the early modern era and colonization of the Americas. Your ideas are better suited to an AOE5. Let’s not shoehorn in unfitting concepts to a game with an established tone and setting.

I was talking about something ~1870s which is by no means “late” Victorian and already in the game.

See how they shoehorned the entire Asia into a game about colonization of the new world. You can have your heart attack on behalf of Sandy Petersen now, which is 13 years late though, but still not too late.

BTW from a historical point of view the entire western expansion is a prologue to the rise of the US in the 20th century. So even TWC should not have existed.


There are victorian references already in the game, there is a Nightingale card for the British.

Russian have references to the Crimean war in the Sevastapol card ( which is ironically available in age 2)

Needle gunners is also around that period

Meiji restoration for Japan

Boxer rebellion for china - thats even Edwardian (literally 1900)

Sepoy revolt which was 1850s

so the timing works

though looking back, the references in euro civs are a lot more lacking, which might explain the feeling that it doesnt go there. The new civs do go more in this historical fashion then old civs it seems.

French lacks nearly all references beyond napoleon that i could notice

1 Like

It seems like we’re stuck with an end date of 1910 or later with Mexico’s revolution theme. They should be updating the old civilizations to bring them in line with that if they want to radically change the scope of the game.

but it hasn’t change the scope of the game, the 1900s deadline has always been there as noted by the presence of the Boxer rebellion card.

The time scope has always been wide and its not a requirement that all civs need to fit the entire timeline from the discovery of the americas up to the 1900s, it just needs to be somewhere within that time

1 Like

I do agree that imperial age European civs should be a little more modern.


That’s my point. Victorian era is already covered in vanilla but under-represented. Even more so when compared to the new civs.
US, Mexico, Ethiopians and also Lakota units have explicitly more advanced weaponry than everyone else.
Adding a few techs or cards, or even unit aesthetics (like Imperial Frigate getting a steam engine) for the late game would make it look more consistent.

Not to mention China and Japan who were almost fixed in 16-17th century. And Aztecs and Inca who never even advanced.

BTW the age of cards or trchs is more of a balance consideration so I would not mind where they are placed. But in case not to entirely mess up the established gameplay for older civs, I’m proposing adding them in the late game.

1 Like

yeah but thats mostly by the nature of how the game was developed

the base game where there was lacking in references was developed first and so you have the bland vanilla.

the latest euro civ is actually packing with references, so its less of a problem

and I stated this before but i dont think that they all need to look like they have like more industrial aesthetics by imp, thats just not necessary for the game, they just need to exists within the timeline of aoe 3, which is early modern to 1900.

TWC added horse artillery, petards and the entire revolution mechanics to old civs. Also they just added quite a few new unique cards to Aztecs. I think there is much room for other old civs as well.

That’s why I think Swedes should be the new baseline for future European civ updates.


Technically the only limit to the game is the imaginations of the devs and the money bag of microsoft. As long as neither run out, there’s a decent chance we will get some reworks (extra cards) on vanilla civs.

1 Like