I’m all for a Scandinavian DLC. The Vikings are one of my top three medieval periods anyway.
And since I play Age of Empires for a completely different reason than what it was originally programmed for, I wouldn’t mind a split at all. Quite the opposite, in fact. What I find lacking in the game is flair, especially visual diversity. Personally, I can’t get enough of regional elements. The more the merrier. But I can also understand every single counter-argument.
I’d love Age of Empires 2 to be a kind of city-building simulation, but I know that’s not the game’s purpose. However, with DLCs like these, I can at least continue to indulge my passion: map design. A regional DLC would surely come with a ton of new objects that I could add to my current Viking map. Whether units, buildings, or eye candy. I’d definitely love that. It wouldn’t solve my main problem, which is that the game lacks realistic depth for my liking, but it’s simply not the core concept behind the game. However, if there is a Scandinavian DLC, I’d definitely pre-order it this time. No doubt about it.
2 Likes
Also, the raven pagan flag and viking architecture may include Saxons as a possible civ for the DLC. It might be a 3 civs DLC: Danes, Swedish and Saxons, and Vikings renamed to Norwegians
1 Like
If that were to happen, I’d be happy. Three new Nordic peoples, a Nordic architecture set (currently I’m using the feudal slawic architecture for my map), new units and matching objects… I’d be absolutely thrilled.
2 Likes
I’d go with “Swedes” for the Swedish and “Norse” for Norwegians, sounds more old-time-y 
1 Like
Am I the only one not wishing a Nordic DLC? It’s tiny cultures in the middle ages, not necessarily very distinct, especially looking at the global scope of the game, and there is already many civs, especially European.
11 Likes
No, you’re not the only one.
I’m sick of the endless requests for a medieval Denmark when the enthusiasm for them in AoE3DE is low where they really shine there as they got cancelled 
I’d rather have an African DLC instead of scrapping the bottom of the barrel with a Viking split…If the devs ever thought about Europe then only the Balkans is the meaningful region compared to Scandinavia, anything else in Europe is just nonsense.
10 Likes
I do find it weird that a pro player asks for it, and now it seems 2 DLCs later, it looks like it’s coming into existence.
6 Likes
Yeah… Kinda why I wish they had made the champi a less “region-specific” unit
If we get Southern African, North American or Polynesian civs they will need more scouts too and thats a lot
2 Likes
European civs always will get unreasonably granular because a lot of people arent able to grasp the variety amongst non western cultures
Like how someone from the US can call lumping two peoples who speak the same language “offensive” yet not batvan eye when language family groups get lumped into frankestein civs
Personally I just hope East Asia and Europe start getting 3 campaign + 1 architecture set +1 civ DLCs
1 Like
No you are not. A Nordic DLC is a non-starter for me and many others.
If they split the Vikings into three factions, then why not split the Teutons into its two hundred entities or Byzantines into their dynasties? It will be the AOE4-ification of AOE2 and I would simply go back to HD.
We need more ACTUAL civilizations.
6 Likes
I think we shouldn’t always be so dismissive of everything. Considering how long the developers have kept a game running with such an old engine and graphics, it’s truly commendable.
This game is played for countless reasons. Many people don’t play it solely for the gameplay it was originally programmed for. Many people aren’t interested in build orders, balance, or the advantages and disadvantages of individual civilizations/peoples. They simply want to immerse themselves in the Middle Ages through gameplay, based on a game whose hardware requirements are also quite manageable.
Over the decades, the developers have managed to cater to these diverse motivations. Everyone finds something of themselves in it. And if they hadn’t gradually relaxed the limitations of its original release, the game would have disappeared long ago.
I agree with you, Africa definitely deserves one, if not two, DLCs. But I think the Viking theme is so steeped in legend and so crucial to the historical development of Europe that a look beneath the surface in a new DLC is worthwhile.
Last Chieftains wasn’t for me. But I don’t see that as a bad thing. The New World is and never has been my thing, so I didn’t buy the DLC. But I think it’s not bad. Nor was the previous one.
They’ll never please everyone, but they’re absolutely right not to ignore any group of players when selecting and designing their DLCs. And their success has proven them right for more than two decades.
7 Likes
I’m not negative about a Scandinavian DLC, but I hope it at least include some non-Germanic stuff too, like a Finnic civ and Slav/Rus campaign.
1 Like
A Scandinavian DLC would inevitably include Germanic, British, and Slavic content. Simply because Vikings were absolutely formative for all these regions. If you want to delve deeper into this topic, you can’t avoid including these cultural spheres.
Furthermore, every cultural “detail” DLC is also an opportunity to gradually introduce more regionality (even with generic units) and thus more depth into the game overall. You avoid having to create a purely visual DLC; you can combine the two very effectively.
In my self-designed Viking scenario, for example, I placed a second UU in the castle: the Ulfhednar. There weren’t only Berserkers (which simply means bear-skin wearers), but also wolf-skin wearers. Hence the Ulfhednar. I used the Hadrada as the unit and adjusted its stats.
Only Hirdmann and Huskarl can be trained in the barracks. The Hirdmann is a renamed Serjeant, the Huskarl a renamed and adapted Rollo. My intention here was to depict that the Vikings had very few professional soldiers. Following this logic, they have longhouses (manors) in my game, where up to 10 units can be stationed and trained as Vikings (Nordic warriors) and Fyrdes (ancient spearmen unlocked via a trigger). My aim here was to show that every Viking was essentially a warrior when needed.
The stables contain only Ridders (Thracian chieftains) and Ridmadrs (Jarls). The archery range consists only of basic archers and skirmishers.
I also gave them Kreposts (called Bolvirki), where Jomsvikingar (elite Serjeants) can be trained. Admittedly, I only did this to include this mythology as well.
The Vikings are now encamped in the Viking army. I would never expect something like this to be even remotely implemented in a DLC, but it shows how much potential this DLC – if it actually comes out – could have. So far, they’ve only scratched the surface. And I won’t even mention the completely inappropriate architecture.
This seems like a substantial rework… I assume the old Vikings would still exist as another civ, just renamed?
1 Like
My hope is one of the DLC is Chronicles. And other one is 1 Nordic Civ + Old Vikings rework (Remove Fire Ship please) + 3 new campaigns = New civ, Vikings and Romans (?) + 1 new architecture set.
I don’t get why. I just see it as a chance to save some money hiring yet another voice actor or 2 because female villager
If the civ added is Finns, it’d be possible to make a Slav (Rus) campaign instead of Romans. Nevsky as the Rus campaign hero would fit thematically with a Northern Europe -themed DLC.
Yes, a Norse + Slavic DLC would be great… a Viking campaign by Harald III in the 11th century fighting in Scandinavia and the British Isles, a Danish campaign by Margaret I at the end of the 14th century unifying Scandinavia, a Swedish campaign by Gustav Vasa at the beginning of the 16th century fighting against the Danes and the Rus’, and finally a Slavic/Rus’ campaign by Alexander Nevsky in the 13th century fighting against the Swedes, Teutons, and Tatars. So, in order it would be:
-
Harald III (1030-1066) (End of the Viking Age)
-
Alexander Nevsky (1240-1259) (Swedish-Novgorodian Wars)
-
Margaret I (1387-1412) (Creation of the Kalmar Union)
-
Gustav Vasa (1518-1555) (End of the Union of Kalmar and the war against Ivan the Terrible and that’s where you connect with AoE 3 and 4)
1 Like
Splitting Vikings into 2-3 civs seems excessive and pointless. Other than that, a Northern Europe DLC with some tweaks to Vikings, Slavs and 2-3 campaigns would be very nice. And the “regional flavour” for Danish/Swedes, Moscow/Novgorod etc. could be achieved via campaign-specific units.
4 Likes
That would also be a sensible option. A new architecture for the Vikings, some meaningful innovations/adjustments for the Vikings, Britons, Teutons, and Slavs regarding units and perhaps specific buildings, new campaigns, and at most one new/additional civilization from one of the four regions. That would actually be a really cool DLC.
Especially with architecture, it would be a chance to blend styles across different eras and individual civilizations/regions. That could lead to a cool result, especially since the four civilizations mentioned had so much mutual influence, at least in some aspects. But I suspect that something like that would then impair readability too much.
1 Like