In the classic pre-roman conquest period they weren’t, they had something in common, but were really different for the most.
But if you are talking about the byzantine period, so the one of aoe2, there weren’t many differences, and all of them were considered (and considered themselves) greeks. Some differences remained of course, especially because they weren’t always under the ERE.
They worshipped the same gods, that’s pretty much it…
For military, Macedonians used some sort of hoplite form, but not at the level of the polis of greece, and instead also heavily used cavalry. And let’s not talk about the military reforms of Philip II, since they were completely another thing from the hoplites of Sparta or Athens.
As for language, they spoke a dialect that differed enough from greek. They had different customs (like drinking undiluted wine, which was barbaric in eyes of the greeks) and had a different eco, more pastoral than the southern neighbors.
As for ruling, they were an absolute monarchy, while the polis always had some sorts of democratic/oligarchy form. Even spartan kings in reality were just 2 glorified generals, with no power.
But this is getting out of topic, so let’s close it here, if you are more interested go to the aoe1 section of the forum.
I would be completely surprised by such choice, I think it would be a terrible idea for the same reason as adding Bohemia; Teutons already represent the HRE, so might as well use ‘civ slots’ on civs that aren’t yet represented at all.
who cares if they are useless or not, your statement is we won’t see new ones. there are new ones and corporation + money will always be good enough reason we’ll see more, even if they are crappy ones like the DLC.
It would be stupid. We would not have West Slavs and South Slavs, but we would have three Ruthenian civs…
Novgorod Republic and Grand Duchy of Moscow are already represented by Slavs (RUTHENIANS !!!) civ. During the reign of Yaroslav the Wise, Kievan Rus was a power.
The best Wonder for Ruthenians civ, by the way, would be Saint Sophia Cathedral of Kyiv.
So we don’t need any more Ruthenians civs. Better to add Poles, Czechs and Serbo-Croatians. The fourth civ could be Romanians (Wallachians). If we got these civs, East-Central Europe would be complete.
Much like your argument to not split slavs, this one falls into the not split the HRE umbrella
Aside from Poland, which is probably going to be in the upcoming DLC, and pretty much expects it, the best choice out of your list is probably the Serbo-Croatians, but might basically just end up having to split ‘Slavs’ into multiple factions, and maybe it is the one rare case (along with Indians) where I would agree that splitting an existing civ to its factions would make sense.
I think the most sensible choice (aside from Poland) would still be to either add a Baltic civ, or to add one of the early Russian duchies. Slavs is just way too generic, and although I really dont like the idea of splitting civs, it would make sense because Slavs (and Indians) were added by by a team of modders who added some big umbrella civ to cover some of the unrepresented areas. I would also not have any issues with Indians getting split into 2 civs.
Croats, Slovenes, Czechs, Moravians, Slovaks, Poles, Silesians, Pomeranians and Lusatians in the times of AoE 2 were Catholics (of course after Christianization). Orthodoxy, onion domes, Boyars do not fit them.
It is also worth noting that Serbs and Croats use the same language (Serbo-Croatian), their religion is simply divided, and with it the culture of these nations. Croats are Western culture and Serbs are Eastern culture. The same goes for Bosnians, but that’s a different topic. It’s just that Serbs and Croats can have a common umbrella civ based on a common language.
Yes, that is why I’m saying that splitting slavs would make sense because the closest civ for most of these would be slavs right at this very moment in time.
I know. I can more or less understand Serbian/Croatian. But again, the only civ that you can use to represent either of these right now is… drumroll … Slavs.
At the time when slavs was added, there was probably just less budget, less fanfare and such, so the team doing it probably had less resources. I think it’s great that they added Slavs, because the good itnent of covering an unrepresented area/culture is obvious
Now that we know that Eastern Europe will receive love, I am praying for the best representation of it.
Hopefully this representation will be so good that this region won’t need any more DLC.
This DLC could contain 4-5 civs, followed by the Caucasus DLC with 2 civs.
Then the next DLC’s could be for Asia, America, Africa, and maybe even Inuit and Oceania natives.
AoE 2 is so popular that in the future, the developers are sure to add another DLC for Europe. Several German new civs? Iberian new civs? Venice new civ? Scandinavian new civs? Irish new civ?
Of course, these are not my personal propositions, but I had such considerations now.
This game will continue to develop for many years to come. Returning to Europe is obvious (not soon). We will get new civs from all over the world but then we will come back again.