Top 10 Must-Have Civs with Ranking Justification (please change the incomplete, meaningless future civs poll)

You just call them Abbasids and hope nobody notices.

More seriously, at least in theory there can be campaign only civs. There’s already some “Norman” civ that kinda alternates between English and French and retains elements of both. And some Rus enemies in Kiev with full stone fortifications. So Cordoba could be mostly abbasid units with a few spanish abilities and architectures.

They have to be pretty careful how many civs they add when they’re this assymetric, so I guess we’ll see. I’d love it if they did reverse AoE2’s blatant racism though… instead of Spanish, Portuguese and “berbers” and “saracens”, have Cordoba, Fatimid, and “iberians” and “visigoths”

2 Likes

Something to represent the Vikings, their impact on the early Medieval world was massive, and they could make for an intresting civilization based around sea, trade and raiding. I’m not expert on later medieval Scandinavia, but I’m sure there’s some way they could represent their changes over the time period.

My take.

  1. The Japanese Shogunate: I feel like this is a given - they fit the time period, weapon set, and fan demand almost perfectly.

  2. Poland-Lithuania: A pretty popular favorite that offers Russian and European appeal but is another “Knight” faction. The Lithuanian’s also have their own art - we see in the Rus campaign the Lithuania flag. Gives creedence that they will be in game.

  3. Inca / Aztec Empire: It has the fan and historical appeal but they’d have to do some major roster tweaking to cover their siege… maybe Saboteurs make a comeback?

  4. Spanish / Castilian / Portuguese Empire: Would fit the time period but I don’t know how they ‘sell’ this one… It’s somewhat of a generic European faction.

  5. Ottoman Empire: See above… Might be an Abbasid re-skin that focuses more on Gunpowder siege.

  6. Burgundy: Pretty dominant force around this time, though they started to meld into France… Could be cool to see a nation that could purchase Mercenary contracts like Age 3.

  7. Wildcards: Iroquois Confederation, Koreans, Malay, Norway Sweden Finland as Viking-ish, Papal States.

1 Like

time frame of 800’s to 1650’s atm, so prussia is definitely on the table as a successor state to teutonic order, also, HRE has no flavor granted through the Teutonic order, and also fails to separate bohemians, dutch, austria, and northern italy depending on when we discuss it. It’s best not to discuss the potential civs in that till later on.

In regards to the Teutons, I see them being called Teutons, focusing on heavy armored infantry and then having a castle or imperial age landmark that transforms them into Prussia, heavily focused on gunpowder at the cost of their heavy armor unique units.

but yeah, Lithuania or Poland-Lithuania are good as well.

A rough concept, focus on trade posts and map control, strong navy and anti infantry, mid/late game faction.

1 Like

This is why I still have hopes they will be added as their own faction down the line. I mean the Teutons are one of the most iconic Age of Empires factions, even being featured in the long lost AoE Castle Siege game. The the fact that they are not represented as a unit, skin, or even mentioned makes me feel like they are in the reserves to be used later. Granted, they might also not be mentioned due to them systematically oppressing the polytheistic groups of the Baltic. Which I understand is wrong and sad, but it is apart of history.

When I read these threads, I always have a feeling that we don’t even know how to play with the 8 civs that are already here, but we want more. :smiley: I think we won’t have any new civ until 2022 autumn, and that’s quite right. The game needs a lot of other functions and polishing before we receive a new civ.

1 Like

I have to somewhat agree. I actually hope no new civs are added and they just keep making the current civs more and more unique.

Realistically this would kill the game.

3 Likes

I don’t know why, in starcraft there is only 3 civ, and you still can play it.

1 Like

Well this is not starcraft.

4 Likes

Those literally sound cooler though… like Saracens sounds cooler.

It’s not AOE3 either.

1 Like

It’s closer to concept to AoE3 than it is to starcraft.

2 Likes

Iberians is an umbrella name same as asians.
Visigoths are way out of the timeline this is not AoE2.

1 Like

I guess you’ll have to take that up with the Iberian Union

You just proved my point.
Next time you try to low key bait me, at least read about the subject.

1 Like

Oh, that was your point? That it’s slightly less descriptive than Spanish and Portuguese?

Guess we can’t say British anymore, just not descriptive enough.

British is yet again an umbrella name.
You can day Iberian, as I can say Asian, it’s not offensive.
Dont know where you are trying to go with this.

But if you make a Civ called Iberians its the same thing as having a civ called Indians, which as we can see the game devs are avoiding.
Hence why you have the Delhi Sultanate instead of Indians, China and Mongols instead of Asians, English instead of British.

1 Like

I just said it sounded cooler, so most Europeans wouldn’t feel hurt by it, which was the intent behind using it.

They’d rather have Teutons than Germans. They’d rather have Britons than any of the countries in Britain. They’d rather have Celts than the Irish. They’d rather have Franks than French. They’d rather have Vikings than Danes or Norwegians… Just sounds cooler.

And no, it’s not like saying Asians, that’s obviously way less descriptive than Iberians.