Rus will likely have Shock Infantry, a bonus to hunting, and maybe making Gold out of Hunters, because of the massive Fur Trade, even back then, and a wide selection of Cavalry, both Heavy and Light.
HRE will be the Armour faction, with Panzer-style plated Knight and Infantry, rounded out be cheaper and lighter Pikemen and Handgunner/Crossbowmen Infantry divisions. I imagine tehy will play into the slow and steady stereotype, and have some great lategame Heavy Infantry + Bombard Cannon compositions.
These are my predictions.
3 Likes
which civilizations, according to you, should be on the list before the Russians?
There are three objective answers: Turks, Byzantines, and Spanish.
But I’m not picky and I wouldn’t have mained those civs anyway so whatever.
1 Like
In all honesty, the Byzantines would have been more important to the period, but it is clear the devs wanted civs that could all go into the 4 campaigns, and for that they needed the Rus.
I agree with Byzantium, but the Turks and the Spaniards became significant only at the very end of the Middle Ages, the Spaniards did not even exist as such for most of the Middle Ages
4 Likes
I think the only reason the Russians found themselves in the top 8 was the campaign with the Mongols but the Spaniards and Turks were no more significant
3 Likes
They did get their own campaign, so I am not too sure about that.
Russia is also set to become a massive hegemonic economy in the next 20 years, so the marketing department is likely thinking ahead, aswell.
2 Likes
Fair enough. For me, relevance during the Late Middles Ages (the best part of the Middle Ages) is enough to justify a spot. I think you’d agree though that the Ottomans were certainly more important to world history than the Rus.
2 Likes
yes, but what you are talking about does not concern the Middle Ages, but from the 16th onwards
And eastern slavs became significant even later so what’s your point
Constantinople fell in 1453. It was just as “middle ages” as the Hundred Years War. And of course the Ottomans were a rising power for a while before that.
2 Likes
This game does go into the 16th century, however.
Contrary to AoE2, where the common units only upgrade at most to late 1400s tech, AoE4 will have full on 1500s tech, as seen by the Carrack being a common unit.
1 Like
they existed had states and developed throughout the Middle Ages Spaniards did not exist in the Middle Ages, the Turks were nomads for most of the Middle Ages cultural prosperity reached only the Renaissance when they established the first states
don’t get me wrong i would rather play like byzantium for example but qualifications are given too easily here
They just had different names tho. They didn’t just magically appear in Iberia out of thin air in the XV century. Uniting them under some umbrella name will be fine imho, although I actually don’t really want them to be in the game lmao
That fits the AOE 4 timeline i guess? I mean Turks literally ended the Middle Ages by taking the Constantinople.
1 Like
believe me i don’t mind but you didn’t convince me that they are more significant than say the russians in that period both have only a local character. as for Byzantium it was far above medieval Russia I agree…
when I think about the campaign with Byzantium, the Turks would be a good choice, but the Spaniards would not
Well, “russians” didn’t even exist in that period 11 the medieval guys are called “ruthenians” or “rus’”
eastern slavs were just too undeveloped (socially and technologically) and too local (they had big territory for sure, but they barely had any conquest before like 16th century. That’s definitely not an “imperial” thing to do)
Turks on the other hand went expansionist earlier
It doesn’t take a lot to realize that the highlight of this game are the Mongols. They have emphasized them a lot. It is the only civ that plays fundamentally different and offers assymetrical gameplay. Everything else revolves around them. Rus, Chinese, Delhi, Caliphate, all interacted, fought and had significant campaigns with them. It’s a very conscious choice or else Rus can’t be explained.
4 Likes
they were not developed as the Frankish or Holy Roman Empire yes but I did not even compare them to them. socially I don’t know how you made the assessment it was a feudal system 99% of europe was illiterate, the clergy and nobility were engaged in science and the like. I again compared them to the Spaniards and the Turks. I wrote that the Turks are the catalyst for world processes, the Russians have only a local character. I’m telling you that with the choice of civilizations so far, Russian is a good choice, because it fits the concept. if we had Byzantium, we would have to have Turks, Persians, Bulgarians, I think that was not feasible at the beginning, but that it will happen in one of the dlc. the Mongol campaign is here to connect the Far East and Europe and the north of the Indian subcontinent. in your writing I see that you experience this too personally and you shouldn’t
really huge exaggeration
however the rus’ was actually much closer to this than western or central europe that’s for sure
Well, I also don’t mind them in the game. I was just speaking about the history and the importance of the rus’