While we can probably mostly agree that the concept of variants is a good idea and would have been good if done well, we also all know that the specific variants chosen are extremely unpopular among the community - polls have consistently shown that an overwhelming majority of players dislike at the very least the names of the variants, including a poll on this forum that shows a whopping 91% disapproval.
Note I’m not talking about variant names specifically - this has been the focus of the criticism (which comes down to the fact that apart from Jeanne, the names are all the info we really have) but ultimately the theming of the variants is really the core issue that manifests itself in their names (although the names could certainly be a LOT better).
But why exactly are the variants so unpopular? I think we really need to get to the heart of this problem to provide good feedback here. And I keep seeing people talk about “historical accuracy”.
This is problematic partly because it’s easily defeated by all the many ways the game is already historically inaccurate that we happily accept (“you play as France vs China in Arabia”), partly because it makes it easy to paint all those who oppose as a small minority of history nerds, but mostly because it just isn’t true.
It’s not about historical accuracy. It’s about the player fantasy of the game.
The point is that in this game you embody a great power of history - you attach yourself to it - and for a moment you become immersed in it. Hundreds of years of its history, culture and military become one with you. You field unique units that represent the coolest aspects of its military structure, even if they’re somewhat fantasised at times. You use unique mechanics that represent interesting facts about that culture’s society and governance as it developed through the ages. You research unique techs that represent that civilization’s own notable innovations.
And then you duke it out with other players representing other great powers of the past, throwing all the great feats of your very civilisation at an enemy who is doing the same to see who comes out on top. It’s an extremely appealing, epic concept and one that has propelled this series to popularity. I mean heck, it’s called Age of EMPIRES for a reason, right?
And these variants utterly destroy that fantasy. They obliterate it. The moment you pick up your favoured Delhi Sultanate, a powerhouse of a state that conquered most of the Indian subcontinent, click the queue button and find yourself doing glorious battle against… wait… the Order of the Dragon? A short-lived group of a few aristocrats? Jeanne D’Arc? A peasant who was historically relevant for 3 years? Zhu Xi’s Legacy? What does that even mean? That’s the moment it all comes crashing down - suddenly you find yourself in a nonsensical parody of the series. Feeling like at this point it may as well just say “NASA” or “The BTS Army” on the other side of the screen.
To illustrate the point further, imagine a historical RTS (maybe even an AoE game… AoE V?) that’s similar in general gameplay, except instead of picking up a nation, you play as a hero, and everything else revolves around that hero. On release, the lineup of playable ‘leaders’ includes the likes of Jeanne D’Arc, Richard the Lionheart, Saladin, Wu Zetian and Barbarossa. The game, in turn, is designed around representing these leaders, rather than representing the progress of a nation. This would actually be really cool, and may well end up a very popular game. Why? Because it’s a different fantasy. There isn’t an awkward mismatch between two fundamentally different concepts. Now, you can embody a character, and compete gloriously against other great people from history. See how different that is? (see: civilization series)
The point is, the issue here is player fantasy and immersion, and that fantasy is based on theming and thematic consistency. And this is the point that needs to be addressed. It’s not historicity at all, really. Jeanne D’Arc could have ended up wielding a hand cannon if she lived a bit later, just like the Abbasid Dynasty probably would have used cannons if it was around a bit longer.
“Ayyubids” is a reasonable fix. That name at least somewhat addresses the thematic consistency of the game. Order of the Dragon, while real historically, is incredibly niche, minor and generally unimportant relative to every other civ that’s in the game. It’s straight up bizarre having them square up against the Mongol Empire in a game that still doesn’t have the Khmer, Norse, Aztecs, Cholas etc. “Zhu Xi’s Legacy” isn’t really anything and Jeanne D’Arc… I mean we’ve all heard enough about Jeanne D’Arc.
Some people just want ‘fun’ RTS mechanics and don’t care about the core fantasy of the game - I think the devs may well be this camp, but I’m not convinced that even a majority of the actual playerbase are. In fact, I have a sneaking suspicion that the developers aren’t taking this problem seriously because they don’t understand it. The fact that they don’t understand it is evidenced by the fact that this bizarre decision was made in the first place, but on top of that, the way the problem is being communicated by the community is in my opinion inaccurate and that’s making it even harder to reach a solution here.
We see exactly where this forum lies