Turks: So far we got two battle scenarios. But again they were very influential player in shaping the history of world. Rise of Seljuks and conquest of Ottoman Empire in Eastern Europe could’ve got its own campaign series
Mongols: We got few campaigns but it barely covers the scratch of it. It is somewhat shameful that we didn’t got to see Mongols conquest of Iran, conquest of China compressed to one scenario and so on. Even continuation of Golden Horde, Ilkhanate, Yuan dynasty. Although it is nice that we got Tamerlane very recently. Even Tamerlane is not fully adapted.
Byzantines: We got Bari or seeing them supporting ally/enemy factions in campaign. I think covering Byzantines reconquista would’ve been quite more interesting than Bari. I wouldn’t mind seeing a repeated campaign series in future altho. Byzantine Reconquista is what made them an actual empire for the time in Middle Ages after Arab conquest.
Persians: It was originally added just because of continuation of factions of AOE1. It is still confusing what exactly they are representing. Sometimes it feels they are representing Sassanids. Another time they are just added as auxiliary factions to diversify gameplay like in Saladin campaigns. I don’t know what they’ll represent if they actually get a proper series. Ghaznavid Empire or Roman-Sassanid war?
Vikings: We still just got them as few scenario battles here and there. York just compressed multiple campaign scenarios into one. I still hope one day we’ll see them getting a campaign series. Let’s say conquest of England.
Sicilians: Altho we got Siege Of Antioch but again it was somewhat disappointing not to see entire First Crusade. Also entire Sicialins campaigns should’ve been a lot longer than what we got. Guess we got to be happy with what we got right now.
These are few campaigns got out of my head. I still think many introduced civ can get more chances. Like Saracens, Berbers, Hindustanis, Italians, Teutons, etc. What do you think campaigns that should’ve been in game at one format or another?
Im not as familiar with History as others are so i have no exact campaign ideas.
In my opinion we should get one campaign per civ (japanese, koreans, Maya,…) before we add more campaigns to others.
But im also not opposed to the Idea of more campaigns/scenarios for the other civs.
I would love a Vikings campaign about Ragnar Lodbrok and his son Bjorn Ironside (I swear I have this idea since before I was aware of the Vikings show, I’ve only watched the first 2 seasons of that anyway)
Maybe the first scenario about Ragnar (as an introduction similar to Gajah Mada) and all the others about Bjorn’s Mediterranean raids, that would lead to a lot of civ diversity, he’s said to have reached what today is Spain, Morocco and even Italy, so you can expect civs like Goths (Spanish woud be a bit anachronistic) Berbers (for both Spain and Morocco) and Italians (Maybe too anachronistic too, idk). I would also make it more focused on raiding as objectives rather than conquering or completely destroying your enemy
We got one campaign because thats what every civ get (and until every civ has a campaign we should keep doing that with maybe the exception of the Celts who could get something better than the tutorial campaign) and that campaign included a lot of stuff anyway
They are the Sassanids and they also represent the other states that appeared later in Persia
They had 5 scenarios like a lot civs, at best they would have gotten 6 and as a shortlasting civ which is just a French offshoot thats good enough
I think theres enough historical material to do an interesting Viking civ without having to use a legendary figure I think
In terms of what disapoints me, it disapoints me that they didnt add one more campaign in the last few DLCs. We could have gotten a campaign for the Persians or Chinese in dynasties of India, a Slav campaign in Dawn of the Dukws and maybe a Viking campaign in Lords of the West
Regarding civs that don’t have a dedicated campaign:
Mehmed II as a turkish campaign. Including scenarios like the Siege of Constantinople, Otranto or Valea Alba (if Romanians were added as a civ)
Alexander Nevsky for the slavs, with scenarios for the Battle of the Neva and the Battle on the Ice.
Canute the great for the vikings, featuring the conquest of England and the establishment of the North Sea Empire.
Matthias Corvinus for the magyars, with scenarios for the conflicts with the nobility, the Ottoman attacks and the wars with Bohemia and Austria.
I also woudn’t mind new campaigns for other civs, like Justinian for the Byzantines, Otto the Great for the Teutons and Kublai Khan for the Mongols (whicy could be great if new civilizarions were added in China, like the Dali or the Tibetans)
Hey, I haven’t seen suggestions for a Canute the Great campaign yet, sounds like a great idea!
In addition to what has been said so far, I think a few campaigns are a little bit too short. It was already the case when the standard was 6 scenarios (Gengis Khan’s campaign had a lot of events crammed together, the weirdest one being probably the combination of Russian and Persian conquests…) and I feel it even more with the new 5 scenario standard (Babur’s campaign in particular felt like we had reached the end halfway through).
For example: for Magyars I would like both John Hunyadi and his son Matthias Corvinus as a Hunyadis campaign like The Grand Dukes/Hautevilles where you start with John and end with Matthias.
I’m surprised Nevsky never got a campaign proper given that the hero unit has been there since vanilla.
As for a more spicy option, the Star war between Teotihuacan and Tikal for the mayan campaign. Spearthrower Owl has enough info on him to allow for a very compelling precolombine campaign.
I would still argue that campaign should’ve just covered the First Crusade. First Crusade itself is not enough to cover all in 5/6 unless they compresses multiple scenarios into one. I do hope someone in the community makes a custom campaign mod out of it.
Also I’m still not quite happy them ditching a single custom battle scenarios ever since African Kingdoms DLC. We still would’ve got a lot of contents. They could’ve covered many battles in that way.
You can make it about just Bjorn Ironside then, he’s a historical figure, we have records from the franks, normans and arabs about him and his Mediterranean expedition
I 100% agree with that. In fact for most civs I tend to favour the earliest figure who is fitting for a campaign (unless the civ is a gunpowder civ or something like that) and I would love to have more early medieval civs, I just prefer if we can use the recorded stuff if possible.
Bjorn Ironside looks reasonable tbh. I prefer Sigurd because the story is more clear but you can totally make a great campaign with him
Having watched and re watched “Last Kingdom” I think that a campaign based on the campaigns of Alfred the Great and his successors to unify England might be fun – sort of an answer to the York campaign or the custom campaign Ragnar’s Saga.
Yes, a campaign by Mehmet II would not be bad (1444-1481) (it would be contemporary with Dracula’s campaign)… then in AoE 4 they could make a more comprehensive campaign from Manzikert (1071) to Mohács (1526)…
Yes, maybe it’s not bad either; in AoE 4 they also skipped the conquest of Iran and put half campaign against the Rus and half campaign against the Chinese…
Of course, the campaign of Bari is very meh and resembles the original campaign of aoe 3, missing the opportunity to put a campaign of the sixth century with Belisarius and fighting with Persians, Berbers and Goths…
Yeah,maybe they are represent the different empires through the Medieval Persian history (from Sassanid to Safavid Empire)…
Sure,maybe Ragnar Lotbrok (865-886) (with the same events of AC Valhalla and ending with the Siege of Paris of 886) or Harald Hardrada (from 1030 to the Stamford Bridge battle in 1066)…
Yeah,the Hauteville campaign is fine how it is…you have one hundred years campaign,it too much for a average AoE 2 campaign…
Sure,one campaign of Lady Six Sky (Mayan queen and regent of Naranjo between 682 and 741 and Mayan leader in CIV6)…
Sure,maybe one campaign of An Lushan Rebellion (755-763) (similar to Ivaylo campaign but in China)
Italians would be fine,here we talk about the Italian people,not the Kingdom of Italia (or at least not the Kingdom of the Italy of the Risorgimento)…
Maybe they are saving these campaigns for future dlcs…
Sure,are too much leaders for future campaigns…we couldn’t end never with the all campaigns that we have in mind…
Yeah,i think they will not put new campaigns about the Third Crusade or any other…you have the Hauteville campaign with the First one,Saladin and Barbarrossa with the Third one and the Lord Edward with the Nine one…
Sure,then you could have a campaign from 1441 to 1490 with Magyars and maybe Croats too…
They already have a campaign with Rajendra,but maybe for AoE 4 not be bad…
Yeah,these part of the world not be touched too much in AoE 2 (Nevsky would be fine,Donskoi and the Ivan kings are already in the Rus campaign in AoE 4 and don’t feel that FE would repeat the same events in AoE 2)…
Maybe because Ensemble Studios think to put a Slavic civ and campaign in The Conquerors,but after drop it and Forgotten Empires because they put the Dracula campaign for Magyars and Slavs…maybe they change that in a future dlc in the Caucassus?..
The IV century it too early for the game…maybe something more later?
Yeah,the campaigns amount before 1000 CE are too slow,the good is the last dlc put one campaign in the IX century:Devapala (810-850)…these century were one that not had any campaign until now…
Yeah,with the dlcs of AoE 3 came more historical battles (six more) and the Mediterranean dlc came with historical maps (skirmish and multiplayer unique maps with objetives about the most famous European conflicts of the period of the game)
Sure,but the problem is that we already have the Lord Edward campaign…