and it should include Dutch, Thai and Somali.
The final DLC should be North American Native civilizations: Lakota, Sioux and Cherokee.
1 Like
They dont fit the timeline.
Really no Venice?
17 Likes
Literally all except, maybe Thai and Somali, are wayy too out of the timeframe (plus Dutch being already covered with Burgundians and Franks).
14 Likes
i disagree for these civs. dont look important enough. maybe thai
instead NA maybe add 1 more from south america
1 Like
No. The Dutch do not fit the AOE2 timeframe whatsoever. They held independence for no more than 80 years in a 1100 year long span of time, and their rise to prominence didn’t start until the mid-17th Century. I understand the war for independence spanned the majority of the 1500s, but before that they were not any type of unified cultural force, rather they were a collection of city-states, bishophorics, and duchies that had outside influences calling the shots and spreading their influences since the fall of the Kingdom of Frisia.
In fact, if you’re going to do a Lowlands civ, do the Frisians. They are what the Dutch essentially were up until roughly the middle-to-late High period of the Middle Ages, did have a decently influential Medieval kingdom that relied on slave trading and other commercial channels, and had a pretty long and infamous history as merchants, pirates, warriors, mercenaries, etc you could easily draw up civ concepts for. Just because they have the name brand recognition does not mean you should advocate for a wholly anachronistic civ. We already have enough of those… coughCeltscough.
This I’d be fine with, but I also agree with Mahazona:
Especially in a Maritime powers DLC, that would be disingenuous to the most prominent maritime and mercantile power of the Mediterranean for the majority of the Medieval Era.
Also, no for NA civs. We still have Mesoamerica and the Andes Region in South America to better flesh out before we look anywhere else. I can name at least one DLC’s worth of civs each that deserve representation before any NA civ.
11 Likes
This would be an interesting civi to have ingame.Chivalry mod already has them so it’s pretty viable.
2 Likes
Imo it would be the best way to have the Lowlands represented in an actual medieval faction (Burgundy only covers the Belgian portion, I’m specifically talking about the Netherlands area).
Also, what is the Chivalry mod? I’ve never heard of it… Nvm, I looked it up. I see what you mean, it… looks pretty freaking cool tbh.
2 Likes
i support all u wrote waffles 100%
1 Like
We just got 3 civs wtih water bonuses…
2 Likes
One of them is as good as Huns Atheism imo. 11
I think this DLC can be easily said a naval DLC though.
5 Likes
By 1477 they had pretty much completed the set, the seventeen provinces. After this point it became the Habsburg Netherlands, but that was pretty much a continuation of the same thing.
More to the point, the Burgundians have been added specifically to make the Dutch and Belgian players happy. It was a compromise between something that was relevant at least on the scale of some of the existing eurocivs and being Dutch. We’re not getting another one. We shouldn’t get another one. The choice has been made, this is it. And personally I’m starting to regret that they even added Burgundians for us at all, because now the limits for what you can suggest seem to be gone almost completely. Who’s hyped for 7 Balkan civs? And at least 4 or 5 Italian ones? Let’s go!
10 Likes
2 Balkan civs and Rumania plus 2 more Italians is more than enough with one more Vikings civi.
2 Likes
For a total of 4.
Because Italy is clearly more interesting than say the entire Middle East.
6 Likes
This DLC also focuses on maritime powers: Bengalis and Dravidians.
Next I want a South African DLC featuring Shonas, Kongolese and Swahili, the latter as a Naval civ.
2 Likes
Who is left from that area?
On the detail level of four Italian civs? Kurds, Mandeans, Yazidis, several flavors of Arabs, a whole bunch of Turkic and Göktürk civs (if you’d split up the current Turks ones you’d still be left with what we would designate umbrella’s in the European context) like the Seljuk empire or the Azerbaijanis. And you know, lots of stuff I’ve never heard of because I’m by no means a historian of the region.
I quite like the current 3 civ setup in the Middle East, but I do think it’s a good thing to keep in mind that putting all the Middle East in these three groups is like having Europe as Germanics, some kind of Romance language umbrella (Goths?) and Slavs. It’s not at all on the level of “let’s have four Italian civs and we also need another Dutch civ and Serbs”.
It’s fine to want those things, just be aware that you’re thinking at quite a detailed level, a level aoe2 hasn’t gone anywhere close to outside of Europe.
5 Likes
Turks are not middle eastern.Rest of the faction named here did they have independent kingdoms that lasted for centuries?
Italians are a different story anyway they had independent Citi state’s through out the middle ages.Even if you consider all Lombard kingdoms as current Italians Venice and papacy were not under Lombards or the HRE.
3 Likes
Then we definitely need to split them up, because they might count as a eurociv. Even just the Ottomans would be a much too large umbrella for that.
1 Like
We already have cumans Tatars and Turks(Ottomans+Seljuks).
6 Likes
I don’t see how you can turn them into civs, they are an ethno-religious minority and didn’t have their own kingdoms. I think the only civs missing from the middle east are the peninsular arabs, they can be represented by the omanis and yemenis, or an umbrella “Arab” civ, this way they can also represent the pre islamic arab kingdoms such as the Lakhmids and Ghassanids.
8 Likes