What would your list be?
I play with Ottomans and Germans, and I have only seen these places on television from a third world country. From that point of view I shouldn’t have even bought the game. XD
I would be very disappointed. If one day more postcolonial civilizations arrive, they should be at the end of the list.
I have heard that the AOE-3 DE DLCs have been more profitable than the AOE-2 DE DLCs. It could be assumed that new maps are coming.
Boneguard is based on them. Also, Order of Christ are the successors of the Templars. Maybe they could be a minor civ?
Ok, that’s your opinion and I respect it even though I don’t agree, but why exactly are you telling me?
I hope you don’t take it the wrong way. My point is that there are still new game themes to explore to turn the game into a constant recycling of Spanish buildings.
4 Likes
Ok, I won’t take this the wrong way, but please when you give an opinion like this, give me some context.
To be fair, the fact that developers do not change the buildings of Latin American civilizations is due to convenience and not impossibility. (They could imitate the style of the buildings they use for example in WOL)
so were usa and mexico. iro, aztec and sioux were minor civs before twc was released. worry not friend, we will have a playable egypt soon enough.
1 Like
Buildings is just one example, but in reality postcolonial civilizations are just exaggerated European civilizations. There is nothing original.
Mexico = An improved Spain.
United States = A mix of the best of each civilization.
The good thing is that these civilizations have not come in large expansions and for obvious reasons.
A big expansion should bring something really new like African Royals did.
4 Likes
I cannot agree, Mexico brought a new way of using revolutions and was a pioneer in imperial revolutions, thanks to Mexico we have revolutionary France and with respect to the United States, its units and way of playing is completely different from other civilizations.
I can understand that you think that they are just European civilizations if you base it on the superficial, but the way they are played, the things they bring and the unique mechanics they have, make them unique civilizations with their own flavor.
I may be wrong, but I think African Royals was a flop when it came out, I remember it had a lot of negative reviews.
Why do they require a lot of research and work to do?
African Royals wasn’t received warmly because it didn’t have a campaign. By the time KotM came out people’s expectations were adjusted although I’m sure if one looked they’d see the same criticism.
Tis unfortunate for all of 3DEs DLC but budget constraints are a thing. Both DLCs contained a wealth of content but people want their campaigns. Now some are assuming this upcoming one won’t have any maps because apparently WE/FE can’t be bothered to hire a map maker for whatever reason or the fact they weren’t mentioned in a tiny little teaser blurb for the event.
3 Likes
because the new civs were so ridiculously op on release day with too many features. I personally think Hausa is the best designed DE civ now but it was ridiculous before the balance patches and its definitely more complicated than it needs to be (true of all dlc civs)
2 Likes
It wasn’t a failure. He was criticized for the amount of technical and balance problems he brought with him, and for the lack of campaigning. But in other respects he was well received.
The kingdoms of Africa were much more elaborate than the United States, Malta and Mexico combined. Not in terms of balance or playability, but in terms of creativity and novelties.
hmmmm
maybe we can have some riddle with this 
would any of the upcomming dlc civs find the climate, attractions, or people the fair land of Lichtenstein desirable enough for a vaction?
Well anyone would love to go there… too easy
Prehaps, is there a specific food item of Lichtenstein that would remind them of a home dish? 
In terms of the design of African countries themselves, it is the most creative and innovative content mechanism expansion package among the DLC countries that have already emerged. For me personally, it was an excellent product of the production team’s enterprising spirit at that time. The negative reviews at that time were more due to the imbalance of African unit data at that time, rather than poor content; The updates of the Mediterranean Knights DLC on countries are actually slightly uninteresting, but more of a positive review brought by European maps and the European royal family
2 Likes
It was more elaborate because the developers wanted it that way, whether a civilization is more or less elaborate depends on what they want, not on the origin of the civilization.
Furthermore, African civilizations have mechanics that they share with other civilizations, for example their fourth resource is just a perfected version of the Asian export, their Age UP system is a variant of the federal system that the United States brought.
PS: this is directed to everyone.
Look, I understand that everyone has their favorite civs to ask developers for, but I wish people would stop trying to “rationalize” it. There is no civilization that deserves priority over others, everyone has the right to ask for what they want, there are obviously certain limits, but there is no priority.
We can all try to have fun, ask for the civilizations we like and stop seeing other people’s requests as a threat to our requests?
2 Likes
I completely agree with this last take. While there are some civs I would prefer more than others, there would have to be a serious tonal disconnect between the theme of the game and the incoming civ for me to turn my nose at it. As long as the civ concept is done well, and has some basis in reality during the timeframe of circa mid 15th century to mid 19th century, I’d be happy with it. I’ll admit, for example, Denmark-Norway (or any euro civ that isn’t Poland, and even they aren’t that high) isn’t on my list of wanted civs, but their inclusion would make other people happy, and perhaps maybe I’ll end up liking the civ on a mechanical level if it came to that. I certainly wouldn’t try to go out of my way to pick a fight with someone suggesting them. Let other people have their fun with civ building and what not. We all want this game to be better, and I trust FE not to do something that is obviously immersion breaking.
At the end of the day I just want well made, well researched civs. I have a few historical blorbos I’d like to see first (Haida, Korea, and Persia come to mind for me), but ultimately I just want more good content in general.
3 Likes
I agree.
I also think it would be a shame to limit these features/mechanics to two civs so I hope either in this DLC or a future (assuming this DLC may pave the way for more…) expansion to see some more African civs.
Cut content from the newly made add-ons ?
I’m sure they planned more civs.
I am almost sure that it will be PLC and Denmark-Norway. However, I would desire to see Persians at first.
Me too
However, I wouldn’t rule out Persia so fast. It’s been reworked in the most recent DLC for aoe2 and the focus of several recent DLCs for other strategy games.
And it’s also the most popular civ in the community.
3 Likes