Yes the Goths were in alliance with Alans, Huns and other nomadic tribesmen so composite bow horsemen apply to them. Crossbows didn’t exist anyway then.
1 Like
It doesn’t say that those regional units are necessarily accessible to all 3 of the new civs. The Mounted Crossbow makes no sense at all for Vikings, Danes and Varangians.
Leverage the 6 new units across these new civilizations, including 3 shared units
While I agree that it does not explicitly say that the new units are available to all of the new civilizations (and Ive made the point of noting no varagian guard have been seen with the saxon unique unit). The quote does make explicit that those 3 units will be available in some capacity to at least one of those 3 factions. The mounted crossbows will be available to at least 1 if not more.
Also,
And because I don’t like relying as wikipedia as a direct source, heres the text from the translated Konengs Skuggsja directly
I also doubt the varangian guard are exclusive to the varangians as we have multiple action shots depicting them being use by the Vikings and Danes as well.
Not ruling out the possibility of the byzantines also being granted availability. Im just not holding my breath.
They are fighting Italians there though.
I should have said “action shot” as I was refereing to the picture depicting a mix of purple byzantine buildings with neatly orginized varagian guard in purple as well as teal (which is obviously the players color) as well as some additional purple clad varangian guard training in the corner.
I would like them to make it this way:
- The Pyrrhic Wars (played as Epirus).
- The First Punic War (played as the Roman Republic).
- The Second Punic War (played as Carthage).
I would like it more to Switch civ for the different Wars then Play all out the view of Roman Republic
To achieve this, they require four new civilisations: The Roman Republic, Carthage, the Gauls and Epirus. It should be clear why the Roman Republic and Carthage are needed. Epirus is only needed if we play as them. The Gauls could be created using Editor units and objects, but it would be better if they were a complete civ for a mission enemy with their own architecture set. For a mission in Iberia, an Iberian civ can be created much easyer with some editor units and the Carthage architecture set then the Gauls.
1 Like
Mounted Cavalry will very likely be available to the Saxons so one civ is checked.
They look fitting for all of them so I wouldn’t complain. I hope they will be available to the Byzantines too, people have been asking for that for a long time. They are shock Infantry so basically the Norse version of the Firelance or Eagle Warrior.
But isn’t that basically just Macedonians. Epirus is definitely not that important and unique in the great picture. The other Macedonian successor states are far more important.
We’ll wait and see. Seems like most people agree that Romans, Carthaginians and Guals are the 3 most likely civs. Not that unlikely we will get 4 civs this time because it seems like the next Chronicles DLC will be delayed until earlier next year.
out of all of the new factions, I don’t think the Saxons would have them as they ceased to exist as a funtioning state before the mounted crossbows adaptation as a typical weapon.
However, as described above, they did see use in Scandinavian late medieval armies. Their inclusion there is not out of place if maybe not as well known as the German and/or French usage.
I have taken them because of the idea that there will be three camps, each of which is played with another civilisation. For this, they have to create the Epirus civilisation if they want to tell the story from their side.
And a played can’t, nor should it, come out of another DLC. For enemies it is okay. But as I said, I don’t really want a DLC with campaigns where I only play as Rome. But ther could just Tell the Story from Rome point of view.
2 Likes
First Roman chronicle (rise of the republic):
Civs introduced: Roman republic, Samnites, Etruscans or Gauls.
Focus: conquest of Italy, sack of Brennus (though it needs Gauls) until the arrival of Pyrrhus.
Points of interest: late iron age Italian tribes and early classical Rome are not often depicted.
Second Roman chronicle (mare Nostrum):
Civs introduced: Carthaginians, Iberians and Numidians or Gauls.
Focus: from the pyrrhic wars to the 2nd Punic war.
Points of interest: kinda obvious.
Third Roman chronicle (Greece conquers Rome):
Civs introduced: Pontus, Seleucids and Parthians or Armenians or Germans (only to represent the first incursion of Cimbri and Teutons).
Focus: 3rd punic war, Macedonians wars, first Germanic invasion, expansion to the east.
Points of interest: you’ll fight Macedonians, Athenians and Spartans here thus giving a connection to old chronicle content.
Fourth Roman chronicle (rise of the empire):
Civs introduced: Roman empire, Gauls, Egyptians (Ptolemaic) or Pontus or Parthians or whatever they didn’t add before.
Focus: crisis of the Republic, Caesar’s conquest of Gaul and civil wars, Augustus ending at Actium battle.
Points of interest: kinda obvious, despite being technically still a republic at this point Rome was de facto transitioning to a more autocratic state and the legionary system was introduced around this time so it’s more convenient gameplay wise to put here the cut.
Fifth Romans chronicle (pax Romana):
Civs introduced: Germans, Parthians (if not yet added), Dacians, Britons or Illyrians or Sarmatians.
Focus: failure to expand in Germania and the Arabian peninsula, conquest of Britannia and Dacia, the year of the four/five emperors, campaigns against the parthians, you can fight against Thracians too and the Illyrians, could end with the marcomannic wars or Septimius Severus’ death.
Point of interest: the most classical Roman experience.
Sixth Roman chronicle (military anarchy):
Civs introduced: Palmyra/Syrians, Sarmatians and Alemans (though they step a bit over Germans).
Focus: early barbarian invasions, crisis of classical Rome, split of the empire and early reforms that will lead to the late empire (aoe2).
Points of interest: allows some aoe2 civs to appear like Franks, Goths, Persians (Sassanids), maybe even aoe2 Romans in scenarios set after Valerian. This would be a very interesting DLC making you play everything from Goths defeating Decius, Persians defeating Valerian to the Gauls (Gallic empire) and Odenathus and Zenobia (Syrians) until Aurelian reconquer everything. You could fight Germans/Alemans in crucial battles to save Italy with Gallienus and Aurelian, Claudius defeating Goths and Carus defeating Persians, ending just before Diocletian when the crisis is over and aoe2 begins.
Though since they will definitely not add this much I think if I can pick only 3 the most interesting would be the second, fourth and either fifth or sixth.
1 Like
“Vikings” and “Varangians” stop existing as a faction too though. Still more fitting then Hand Cannons for sure though.
They have only been seen with the Saxons on screenshots so far so they are likely available to them.
They recently told the story from that side in RoR though.
2 Likes
They had Pyrrhus and elephants, but I guess it can be portrayed by giving Macedonians elefun units in scenario editor.
A crossover is a great idea! If Chronicles ever add Scythians/Sarmatians/Alans, they should be included in Attila 1 (Scythians represented by Mongols feel a bit silly with that Japanese architecture)
1 Like
You already get Elephants as Macedonians in the Alexander Campaign anyway. That campaign makes heavy use of scenario editor exclusive units to get more variety out of the 6 existing civilisations.
Eventually the time lines of Chronicles and AoE2 will touch. Currently there is too much of a gap to really have a crossover.
Still really hoping for regional unit skins for AoE2 which would make that a lot less silly looking. The Huns also really need a different architecture set. They are currently looking like Germans with their central European buildings and Knights.
3 Likes
What if one of the steamdb file is Viking themed animated profile icon?
As the only two steamdb depot added together where the Viking Saga and the one that will be the 3rd Chronicle, it’s probably not the case. They updated the animated profile icon packs within the past monthes so those packs will probably receive new content related to the new dlc.
I’m curious to see what will be the steamdb codename for the Viking Sagas, as Alexander was codenamed Paris, and so far… Nothing will feature Paris in the Viking Sagas.
If the name is not randomly picked, it may hint about the last unkown one, relating to a more central european focus.
With a codename Paris foreshadowing content, it could hint about the house of bourbon (but it would be strange), which could be added alonside some sub-italian group like venice / milan and the Swiss…But then why not also adding the Savoys.
We already got the franks, the burgundians, the britons, and the vikings who are directly tied to “paris”.
So the question is, what historical group / king went to paris, and could be eligible to represent a frank sub-civ ?
It’s hard because we got the Britons to represent the English, and now the Saxons are coming. The Franks were invaders that settled in France, as the Norman went into Sicily after moving from Normandy which was also something they invaded in the first place.
If we think about the civ identity of a new french sub-civ, the only identity I can see would be related to Cardinal Richelieu and the Musketeers, late-middle age / early renaissance era, which matches Venice but also the Frisen (flanders / netherland).
My honnest guess on that is that the name is not a foreshadowing at all, or not the type we’re thinking about. But we’ll see once the Viking Sagas codename will be revealed / datamined.
Philadelphia, Portland, Palma, Pittsburgh, Padua
It’s a shame the Minnesota Vikings aren’t based out of a P city.
1 Like
You are overthinking it too much, it doesn’t have to be so literal, the city may not appear or be owned by vikings in the new campaigns, but “The Siege of Paris” is one of the most mainstream thing about vikings, so connection is already done. The siege is already featured in V&V
After the first 2 DLCs - LoTW and DoTD, code names don’t foreshadow anything.
“Peru” is the codename of TTK, not Alexander. The next main DLC after TTK is TLC - foreshadowing or coincidence, I don’t know. What does “Plymouth”, the codename of TMR, imply?
2 Likes
Funny thing, if you look up “Plymouth” in Wikipedia it says “it is located on the county’s south coast between the rivers Plym and TAMAR”, the DLC had a ruler called “Tamar”, I don’t know if it is just a coincidence or they really are that convoluted with the codenames, but it is pretty funny
5 Likes
Wow I wasn’t expecting that. It’s indeed funny. So we have to scrute Wikipedia to guess codenames.
3 Likes
Only thing I can think about the Paris hint is the new chronicles having Gauls, but yeah most likely was just referring the siege of Paris by Vikings.
2 Likes