Europe had about 20% of the world population in the Middle Ages, while the game has 20 European civs now with Romans which means 47% of the civs are European, which is a clear overrepresentation when you compare it to the world population in the Middle Ages. Not to mention 58% of DE civs (7 out of 12) are from Europe. Asia is a much bigger continent and was more developed while Africa wasn’t far behind Europe.
Africa is criminally underrepresented with only 3 civilizations and Asia had more than half of the world population, so logically Asia deserves more civilizations than Europe. There is not even an arguement against more Asian and Africans civs, because the game is missing many great civilizations such as Tibetans, Jurchens, Tanguts, Gokturks, Khitans, Nanzhao, Somalis, Nubians etc. East Asia never received a DLC while being the most advanced region in the world
But you see, Venice, Genoa and Papal States are not represented by the Italians, unlike the dozens of different cultures under the Dravidians. Or like Saxons in the Teuton civ, which are much different from the HRGE, unlike the cultures that the Hindustanies represent.
Also, Crenellations and Ironclad clearly represent only the Teutonic Order, not the HRGE, so they should be split too. That’s way more noticeable than Malians UT’s.
I don’t think its this games mission to “represent” the world according to population distribution.
I think first of all most of the civs being from europe comes down to european history being:
The native history of the developers and their main market / audience
Being the most influential in world history
Being the best documented history
Being most welknown from other (pop)culture
Europe being on the cutting edge of technology and warfare (sure the middle to a certain extend and far east were as well, but these civs are in the game as well)
The original civs were more or less in contact with and influenced each other, whereas america (up to the arrival of Culumbus), sub-saharan africa and oceania were kind of in their own secluded bubble.
Being the most influental in the world history has nothing to do with the Middle Ages, where Asia was clearly more influental than Europe. East Asian history is as recorded as European. Many European civs are not popular like Sicilians, Burgundians. Asia was technologically more advanced than Europe, Europe was in Dark Age while the Arabic World, India and East Asia fluorished. My post has nothing to do with Oceanian and American civs. Africa was in contact with the rest of the world as much as Europe via world trade.
Who where “majority of European powers?” Because the strongest Asian civilizations were clearly stronger militarily and economically than Europeans. Even civs like
In any case, Eurocentrism or not, the developers and most of the people playing the game are going to have a very European perception of the Middle Ages, so it makes sense to focus on Europe. There are also only so many non-European civs you can add before they start to become noticeably much weaker than European civs (Meso civs notwithstanding). I don’t think it’s really all that controversial to say that the majority of technological and cultural development during the Middle Ages occurred in Europe, even if a lot of that technology originated elsewhere.
Thats a bad argument. Europe did become the most powerful region of the world, but that was afyer the kiddle ages. The Europeans want to say they always were that important but thats mot true.
Either way, I think most of the interesting medieval powers were European, and like I said, consider the audience, which is going to be more familiar with Europe.
Europe is naturally more divided due to geography, that’s why for example no one managed to reform the Roman Empire while China was always reunited by different dynasties.
But yes I don’t think some civs like the Teutons or the Italians should be split, even if they might feel like umbrella civs that’s nowhere near what the Slavs (who should be renamed) used to be. If we try to fill the gaps on the map, Europe would need a slavic civ from the western Balkans (covering the Serbs Croats…) but future expansions should be focused on Asia, the Jurchens are on the top of my list.
It would be cool if more non-European civilizations joined the game, since it would help me learn about those cultures more, but to Western players like me, Europe IS the Middle Ages, and that’s why I don’t have a problem with so many European civs.
Buddy, I understand your point of view. But this is not UN general assembly. This is a video game which has to make money. Their patrons are mostly based out of Europe and Americas.
The only non controversial civs in your list are Nubians with an archer specilization campaigns against islamic arabs and Somalis who fought with the Nubians.
I would like to see the swahili as a ############## But we have to wait another year at least.