What do you think should be the focus of the next dlc for AoE2?

[NastyHigh]

@Horapallas

Indeed: do we want eventually 50 civs? 75? 100?

Yes, yes and yes. Why not?

[HelpfulGosling3]

Japanese campaign should be added with Asian Dlc also with new factions and campaigns for them. Regards.

[Lesrot8259]

I dont think there gonna be more dlcs this year (maybe one on november or december), theyre making aom retold.

[MatM1996]

@StoreyedPlate74

Culturally European, mostly because they are Christians, which is an Asian religion ironically.
The Caucasus has always been considered Asia until the 19th Century. And the Greeks, well,the considerd themselves #### Europeans and Asians, they created these words after all.

@StoreyedPlate74

Yeah, I agree Cumans can cover many Turkic peoples (mainly Kipchaks) from the Pontic Steppe and Central Asia and the Tatars cover Chagatai Turkic peoples, especially those who converted to Islam.

Sure, but there is a certain representation…

@StoreyedPlate74

However, there are still other important peoples not covered, like all the Iranian (but very different from the Persians) peoples that dominated the area. First, we have the Sogdians, which were one of thr key players of the Silk Road, and would be a mercantile civ. Since they are also the ancestors of Tajiks, one could argue they could cover later empires like the Ghurids (although I’m not sure a trade focus civ could represent them) .

Yeah, could it be…

@StoreyedPlate74

And of course, we have the Alans, the Last Scythians, which participated in the Barbarian invasions of the Roman Empire and ehose Caucasian kingdom lasted until the Mongols

Yes, I think that the Alans will put them in at some point…

@StoreyedPlate74

Yeah, that won’t happen. But not because of what you said, but because this is a game with a Western audience.
If this game had been made for an Asian audience, we would have 20 Indian civs and Europe would just be covered by 4 umbrella civs, most likely Franks, Byzantines, Slavs and Vikings.

That’s true…

@NastyHigh

Yes, yes and yes. Why not?

Because it would be hell trying to balance 100 civs…

@Lesrot8259

I dont think there gonna be more dlcs this year (maybe one on november or december), theyre making aom retold.

I think they will put a dlc in June-July for AoE 3 and then there will be nothing else until AoM Retold comes out in October…

[Darkness01101]

That’s ridiculous, we always need more civs

I don’t     

[Apocalypso4826]

@MatM1996

Yes, I think that the Alans will put them in at some point…

I think the Alans should be added in a future Caucasus expansion, alongside the Armenians, Georgians, and Kazars. The Alans themselves would be involved in several campaigns, both new and existing, but their campaign would be all about Goar, the leader of the Gaulic Alans during the last days of the Roman Empire.

[Akos]

Alans don’t have any major historical significance.

[Apocalypso4826]

Actually, they do. They helped the Romans fight off various barbarian tribes. That’s pretty significant to me.

[Akos]

Did they have an empire?

[Apocalypso4826]

No, but they had a kingdom. You wrongly assume that every civ in the game has had an empire. That is simply not true. Not having an empire is not a disqualifier for being in the game. Historical relevance is the real test, and the Alans were definitely relevant in multiple ways. Thus, they are a good fit.

Honestly, the argument that the Caucasus is not relevant at all to medieval history is one borne of ignorance and lack of knowledge.

[StoreyedPlate74]

They had a Caucasian kingdom and were one the constituent peoples of the Vandal kingdom of North Africa.

However, since when has that been an requisite? Many civs in the the game don’t fullfil it anyway.

[Akos]

According to Wikipedia, they couldn’t even protect themselves from nomadic raiders so they were forced to seek for Georgian or Byzantine help.

There is not even a notable history figure of Alania.

[Apocalypso4826]

Just to name a few civs that didn’t really have empires:

• Bohemians
• Celts
• Cumans
• Italians
• Japanese
• Koreans
• Lithuanians
• Poles

[Apocalypso4826]

They were still extremely relevant to Roman history. And that’s what the campaign can be based on.

Do some research next time before sounding ignorant.

[StoreyedPlate74]

@Akos

According to Wikipedia

I suggest you try to dig deeper that a quick look on wikipedia.

@Akos

There is not even a notable history figure of Alania.

@Apocalypso4826 already gave you one. Even in wikipedia you can find more.

And this civ could also be included in several potential campaigns, especially those from either the Late Roman Empire or the Mongol conquests

[Apocalypso4826]

And the Alans also helped the Georgians fight off the Seljuk Turks in the Battle of Didgori.

Anyone who claims they’re not historically relevant doesn’t know what they’re talking about.

[StoreyedPlate74]

@Apocalypso4826

historically relevant

And I don’t even know if that would an argument to rule them out considering we’ve had civs like the Celts since 1999. Ensemble made it very clear that they were thinking first and foremost about making fun civs, with historical relevance being secondary

[Apocalypso4826]

Participation in campaigns should also be a factor, and the Alans have a ton of potential. If there was an Alexander Nevsky campaign for the Slavs, they’d even be there too. So yeah, they were super relevant to a bunch of civs in the game.

[Akos]

@Apocalypso4826

They were still extremely relevant to Roman history. And that’s what the campaign can be based on.

Is this game based on Roman history or history in general? The campaign you suggested isn’t even Medieval.

@Apocalypso4826

Battle of Didgori.

500 Alans, which is equivalent to a city garrison.

@StoreyedPlate74

Ensemble made it very clear that they were thinking first and foremost about making fun civs, with historical relevance being secondary

Then add Samis and Aboriginals because they are fun too.

[StoreyedPlate74]

@Akos

Then add Samis and Aboriginals because they are fun too.

historical significance being secondary doesn’t mean it’s absent