fella, next time you ban evade you may want to try to be a bit more subtle about it.
You’ve got like 30 lines to describe the amazing, beautiful, unique, deep, philosophical, tolerant, good smelling, ambitious, majestic Ottoman empire and 2 lines to describe the other civs. That’s a bit of a dead giveaway
? I find this remark very entertaining. Thanks for the chuckle. 
Do you like facts, history? This is our fact based ranking, that’s all. History and AoE, our passions.
You can create a thread catering to sensitivities if you like. We support freedom. Appreciate your reading the OP.
This guy giving Vinifrss vibes to anyone else?
@MatCauthon3 Our AoE community would benefit if you only tried to contribute a fraction of what this dude has contributed to this forum (quick glance at the OP to have an idea, no?), instead of talking about the dude.
AOE4 seems more about nations than cultures, so I strongly disagree with Spanish or Iberian union since those countries didn’t exist until late or after AOE4 timeline. I would agree something from the peninsula should be added such as Castile or Portugal.
Same thing with Persia, all of the Persian empires were either outside of the timeline or quite shortlived and they have a spiritual successor in that Delhi ruling class was descended from Persian culture.
Unsure on how I feel about native civs. The devs for aoe2 always considered adding the NA natives a mistake for that game, up to relic if they want to add them tbh.
Strongly disagree on combining Italians although adding a specific italian nation or 2 would be great IMO for the game since AOE4 again is more about nations than cultures.
I want Japanese above all else.
There is a ceiling on the usefulness of threads focused on amplifying the good qualities of specific potential civs. There are dozens and dozens of potential civilizations for any Age game. While obviously the Devs should choose civs with good characteristics, choosing a civ to make isn’t just about choosing a good civ. It is about choosing which civ is best. Civ selection is one giant trial by elimination.
For lack of a better list, here is what wikipedia tells me are the most populated civilizations in 1000 CE and 1500 CE. There are a lot of civs on these two lists that are above some of the names above. If the 10 civs above truly are the best 10 civs to be made, then they need to each be better than everyone left off the list. I am far less curious why the 10 civs in this thread are good and far more curious why they are better than all others.
I really, really don’t want Japan at all. Japan depictions are incredibly boring, super hyped, fake. Medieval Japan actually got nothing, it mostly didn’t even exist. I would never include Japan.
Yet lo and behold, Japan is on the list at #7!! Because this list is an attempt to be fair to the major facts, Japan has a big population. Facts, not my opinion. Japan is on the list.
Let facts be the guide as much as possible. Everyone wins together.
Hyped? Funny you say that because nobody is more hyped on these forums than the Ottoman Empire.
Honestly, they’d be awesome. They’ve had a huge impact on Asian History and are quite iconic. Typically I don’t like Japan in most games because it’s just the stereotypical ‘cool samurai big katana’ thing over and over again. Samurai were essentially mercenaries under the Daimyo, who is like the county sheriff.
One big problem is their economy. Japan lacks natural resources and is highly dependant on the little they have. They were also hesitant to trade. The Emperor at one point agreed to trade with Europe, but this sparked a civil war leading to a definite no. Not sure what could be done there but I’m sure the developers or fans could come up with something.
For a campaign, Japan has a lot of different wars to go off of. Infighting, Korea, China, Mongolia, the list goes on. Defense of their homeland or the unification would be my favorite idea for that.
did you just compliment yourself?
Japan would have one of the more interesting campaigns and their mechanics (lack of resources/hesitancy to trade) could open up new gameplay mechanics.
I want byzatines, turks and spain.
I am not sure what you are saying, so I am not sure that I disagree with you. I think I may agree.
Can you read?
Abbasids is not Delhi
Delhi is also the Northern Moslim part of India, India is a big subcontinent.
Timur is Turko-Mongol leader.
He considered himself as a Descendant of Chinggis Khan and that is why he started wars against other civs.
Another thing is that his Mongolian mother told him about his descendants who conquered and united all nomadic tribes on the steppe. And he did the same thing. But after his death, his warlords divided his empire and it disappeared. The Mongol khanates lasted until 1800 in which they were very weak and most of them sinicized into Turkic religion and turned to Turks.
Man the way how this is written, especially with the random yellow text, is giving me some dejavu.
Perhaps but largest empires by size is also kind of a fake metric, like do we really want to consider the kalmar union or portugal as massive empires despite large portions of it being uninhabited and sparsely inhabited wasteland claimed by the crown. Going by population gives a sense of importance in the number of people influenced and under it’s domain.
Consider them by the impact they had.
Portugal with 1 million people were the pioneers of globalization, effects of which are still felt today.
I think it’s safe to say its importance and influence are far reaching and long lasting.
Its was a Thalassocracy, the first of it’s kind in size, scope and ambition. For me it makes then interesting enough to make the cut.
Unfortunately Portugal does not have mainstream media exposition, with swords crafted of meteorites that can cut trough anything (sarcasm btw), but their achievements are there, if you dare to open a book and turn a page.
An history of first contacts, of opening the world to the world, and with it its consequences.
Perhaps, but the Kalmar union or Tibet or the central asian hordes did not have the same impact as medieval England despite being larger. There’s no real one metric for importance of an empire, size, reach, population are all important but it’s mostly about how that is used and the impact. Italian city states despite being relatively quite small had huge impact as well.
