Unlike African royals and knights of the Mediterranean nobody was expecting anything more than just the two mains civs and maybe the inuit minor civ , I was thinking it would have been ecologically aware to add great auks as huntables but that’s it.
It wouldn’t have expanded into a new area of the world, just plugged up the ones we already covered.
It’s not like we were expecting new outlaws or mercenaries and half a dozen new minor civs and a pony.
To be fair.
To do both civs you would have to replace a lot of the Native Sites in Europe because a lot of them use units that had to go to these civs anyways.
Well, you’d basically just replace the affected with units that have the same stats and different names. Looking at the Inca replacement.
hmm, maybe 1 lithuanian and 1 polish units? I am not even sure what royal hunter is suppose to be and assumed there are so many other obvious Danish light infantry options that it wouldn’t really be an issue.
It’s pretty much just Winged Hussars that would need to be replaced.
Royal Hunters are super generic, Northern Musketeers are Russian, Shock Riders are Serbian, Royal Arquebusiers are Swedish. Maybe Lipka Tartars could also be used for Poland, but they could also just have normal Cavalry Archers and leave lipkas where they are.
There’s also the Pancerni and Folwarks potentially.
Granted though, those are techs.
I did want it. I was willing to pay whatever it took. There are some biomes that are not really European, and I was hoping for a rework in that aspect.
Not having campaigns always means that there is an expectation of enrichment in other aspects, so it is not an excessive demand.
If at all normal hussars are fine.
But that could have been Polands civ feature, being able to get multiple different types of cavalry.
consoderomg Uhlans could be polish as well.