I understand it in the way that they’re relatively unique for the region they’re in, but I personally wouldn’t put them as urgent priority right now considering they’re rather small and there’s already a lot of civs surrounding which can cover them relatively fine (Byzantines/Persians). That’s my opinion though.
1 Like
You know Britain’s population is also very small. But despite Armenia’s small size, it was quite influential and powerful, so it truly deserves inclusion (certainly a lot more than a million tiny Indian states).
5 Likes
For some people, 4 civs in a highly culturally diverse area for roughly 20-30 % of the total medieval population is apparently already too much …
EDIT: Corrected percentage
7 Likes
Japan has been a very populous vountry since its inception lol. Its also bigger than the UK
3 Likes
Armenian population was historically larger tbh, but honestly they are pretty good civ to add even if I dont believe they are a must have nation like many people here do
1 Like
People it was not to shot on Japan… use any other example, the point is shall we stop with these sizes comparisons like we’re in a male prison shower or are we really back to “my nation is bigger than yours”?
4 Likes
Hu… Who cares what times Armenia is? It was far bigger in the time period relevant to the game, I’m pretty sure it surpassed both Sicily and Serbia combined at some point. Why should we care about modern day population? Does it mean we should remove the people who completely disappeared during the Middle Ages?
9 Likes
Reminder that Maltese civ exist in AoE3DE (I don’t like it either but that’s an example of an actual tiny-sized civ)
2 Likes
You are aware that Armenia’s population is small now because of the genocide, right? It was a lot more populous in the past.
Minimizing Armenia’s historical importance is kind of an issue because certain people want you to believe that Armenia was never important.
9 Likes
Because it is a Mediterranean dlc and except for Italy, there were no more Mediterranean European countries left to put in the game (also Malta had colonies in the Caribbean so it fit well into the game)…
It could have been a Mediterranean african civ like Morocco
2 Likes
I disagree. I think stuff like “this nation was very rich” or “this nation was very populous” are some decently strong arguments for adding civs sincd the middle ages is an age of regional powers since few nations had a global impact
However, I think calling Armenia small is dumb. It wasnt a massive state, but it was decently sized. I think we should give to other larger or more longlasting nations some more priority, but I think size isnt an argument against Armenia
1 Like
I would welcome an Orthodox DLC with Serbs, Armenians, Georgians and Vlachs (and persian rework).
3 Likes
Agree. Why do people use 21st Century arguments for a game set in the Middle Ages?
6 Likes
Armenians and Georgians they were, they are Coptic Christians (they still are) and not Orthodox.
It would be interesting to see the Judaic Khazars in the Caucasian DLC (with Nomadic Architecture Set).
4 Likes
Georgians are actually Orthodox
4 Likes
As per wiki they are under cumans.
The Cumans are a Central Asian civilization introduced in Age of Empires II: Definitive Edition based on the [confederation with the ################################################ Khazars, Pechenegs, and Kazakhs. They focus on cavalry.
1 Like
Morocco is more of an Atlantic civilization than a Mediterranean one…
And let’s not forget about Armenian diaspora. Allegedly less than one third of the world’s Armenian population lives in Armenia. And also current population should not be taken into account, AoE2 DE is not set in the XXI century…
6 Likes
The Barbary Coast then (Tunis, Algiers and Tripoli). And Greeks and Egyptians could also be considered, despite their long Ottoman occupation. I think the Maltese were picked because of their involvement in the campaign and the fact that they had colonies more than not having any other possible candidates.
2 Likes