You can have Rajpoots in the North fighting the Delhi Sultanate (Turks). The Delhi Sultanate (Turks) and Rajpoots allied fight the Mongol invasion.
The Cholas in the South can be the 2nd choice controlling and conquering Malay region.
There you go, you have 2 native Indian civs both with a story and proper region. For reference, Europe will have much more civs. Rajpoots can come with the game and Cholas with an expansion.
The key is to get 1 civ, at least temporarily, that can cover India, at least until a DLC comes out. When adding both Rajputs and Chola, the devs would have to sacrifice a popular civ that nobody wants to lose from the game, like the HRE.
Donāt get me wrong, I am desperately waiting for an Indian AoE2 expansion instead of plugging small holes in Europe, and Iāll be overjoyed when a DLC comes to AoE4 adding Rajputs and Cholas, but considering how few civs the game will have, I think the Dehli Sultanate was a smart move.
Interesting so he ruled the whole Indian subcontinent from Pakistan to Sri Lanka? Any maps of the lands he ruled would be great.
If there is delhi sultanate then there will be other indian civsā¦ thats the whole reason to name them delhi sultan not india
Wow just wow I have no words for this emperor. Itās almost the whole Asia lol I hope someone would make a custom campaign about this guy. Indian history is so rich.
Cultural identity of the sub-continent wayy more bigger factor when it comes to India, than it affects the other civs.
There is a reason its the ONLY SUB-CONTINENT in the world, It has a:
Population - Equal to China
Diverse - Almost more than whole Europe Combined, that too in percentage not for namesake only
Meanwhile some of Major Rules are:
DISCLAIMER : Some of these MIGHT ONLY appear small in size ! but u have to consider the extra ordinary, high density of wealth , Culture and technology for the time periods. as the subcontinent reffers to more than 1/4th of worlds GDP at that time.
Indian kingdoms never Invaded other lands or never intended to (Except for Cholas) and Most of the invaders were fended off.
Its always the Invaders from West/Arabs/Turks/Mongols always trying to, Loot and Constantly trying to Invade the land and sometimes eventually they have succeeded too! but that Doesnt mean you dedicate the whole civ to that, Ignoring all whats native to the land.
Also, back in Medieval time, there was no Chinese. It was separate dynasties or the Ming Dynasty (which took over the Mongol Yuan Dynasty that conquered all Chinese Dynasties). Therefore, devs must remove the Chinese and add a specific Chinese dynasty. They must not have a dynasty system because those dynasties were not united at all. They were conflicted and divided dynasties with different visions and each had its own emperor.
There are many things we just donāt know yet, maybe the Delhi Sultanate in the game will have many things representing the hindu, like villagers, some house models, techs, units and maybe the whole dark and feudal ages representing the hindu culture, while also having more important buildings and units representing the islamic rulers, just speculating. Delhi Sultanate seems good to me as an initial Indian civ, considering that is fits with the other initial civs like Mongols and Chinese, with campaigns showing the history between these. If it were a Chola civ, and a campaign showing their expansion to indonesia, against which civ would they be fighting? probably a simplified version of the same civ. Having fewer civs makes that new civs should have some relationship with the other civs in the game, so itās easier to make interesting historical campaigns.
On the chinese side, we also donāt know how exactly the dynastic system works, but having these dynasties fought constantly with each other doesnāt seem to be enough to make them separate civs, considering the fewer, asymmetrical civs there are. The game just seems to represent medieval chinese culture in general, with a name everyone knows, and this mechanics showing the different dynasties without necessary implying that they are working together.
All iām saying is that there are many thing we donāt know yet, and maybe the devs have done a way better job than we think they have.
As such, would be outside of the scope of this game entirely.
@Chekardhar :
All of the games started with European focus, and quickly branched out. There is little reason to have that focus in AOE4, and they are showing that to not be the case as only one of the 4 revealed civs are European. The other four might all be European, or they may have some Native American civs, Japanese, Russia, Africa. Africa seems likely as they are also working on an Africa expansion for AOE2.
Tell that to the Chinese who have one of, if not the, longest recorded history. They were all Chinese the entire time, and identified as such.
The Dynasty system portrays that decently well as you get to pick which dynasty is in power at any given time to get the bonuses you are wanting to have. The emperor of China was based on which ever dynasty held the imperial capitol at the time.
It would be cool if they were setup to be a very defensive civ to reflect the defensive nature of this area.
Its funny how the age2 community hates having one umbrella indians to represent all of the sarrc region but here its the opposite 
YEah now they argue that all or none should be in the game at same time.
NOO WE WANT MUHGAL NOT DELHI
NOOOO CHOLA NOT MUHGAL
NOOOOOOO!!! GUPTA NOT CHOLA
Tbh it feels unnecessary whining to me. Historically Delhi Sultanate is fairly accurate and remember that Delhi Sultanate != entirity of India. Iām pointing it to those who are thinking this way.
It seems like AoE4 going through the route of exploring every part of Indian regions instead of vanilla it with just a civilization and itās a good thing. Iām happy we have Delhi Sultanate as it should and I really hope we get other Indians factions down the route. Like Chola, Bengals and others. Atleast Delhi Sultanate is much better representation than what we got in AoE2.
It seems AoE4 got Chinese dynasty system as technologies. I guess it kind of gotten umbrella due to this. I can give it a pass since it just didnāt go off the route like AoE2.
True having this faction leaves room for others like bengal sultanate vijayanagar empire etc.
While Huns did not exist in the Middle Ages, Goths absolutely did, and shaped the whole beggining of the period. Lombards, Visigoths, Vandals, were all Goths.
Not Medieval.
I never know why people ask for a 17th century religious movement, in games set in the Middle Ages (500-1500).
From the Iron Age, so AoE1.
