What do you think we are gunna get in a May PUP?

I think it is for the best that large scale slavery is left out of the game as well. But lets not forget that the Janissaries and the Mamelukes are in the game. They used to be slaves that were trained to be soldiers.

Edit: When translated from Arabic to English the name “Mamluk” means “One who is owned”.

1 Like

We are on the same page here, but there are plenty of people who don’t think this is true, even when the Secession declarations explicitly said they were out because slavery.

Not many people support Inquisitors right now, but the confederacy has a lot of suporters. Why would they like an enslaver regime? Is up to them, but they are there

1 Like

*They give you the AoE World Domination Mobile game xd…

Yeah,we would have Chapultepec and Gettysburg or at least The Alamo…

Yeah…It’s a controversial topic,specially in the modern woke United States…in the other AoE games you can have entire genocidies but in Asia (Genghis Khan and Timur) because US buyers don’t give any importance…

1 Like

First of all I’d like to say that I’m glad we are all on the same page here when it come to the historically significant but sensitive topic of slavery - it’s an awful barbaric practice.

There has been something that has been playing on my mind concerning this very controversial topic - why did the devs choose to have USA troops both black and white when I’m pretty sure no other civ has this feature? - (bar Drummers)

From a purely historic point of view I’m quite sure that the USA was relatively conservative and behind when it came to the topic of slavery. The British Empire, for example, had introduced the ##### ##### Act 1807 which largely outlawed the trade of slave across the empire roughly half a century before the American Civil War. (Arguable it wasn’t till the Slavery Abolition Act 1833 which totally outlawed the act of slavery itself but this was still a good 30 years before the USA).

My opinion for how the game could be changed to better represent black soldier fighting for the USA is for a rework of the this home city card.

54th Massachusetts Volunteers

The 54th Massachusetts Infantry Regiment, to my knowledge, were the first ever all black regiment in the United States Army. To represent them with just unit shipment card feels a bit of an under-representation. I think this the card should act like the German “Scharnhorst Reform” card by removing all State Militia and replacing them with new unit called “The 54th Volunteers” in Age 4 (I know this a bad name :expressionless:). I recon this new (all black unit) could act similarly to grenadiers with a high siege damage against building (especially fortification - referencing their famous engagement at the Battle of Fort Wagner). I’m not sure if I’d give them a range attack with an area-of-effect but I do think changing there range attack to a siege attack would be a fair change. These are the maxed-out stats they should have … (in the Imperial Age)

The 54th Volunteers

  • Unit tags: Infantry, light-infantry, ranged infantry, gunpowder infantry, rifle infantry
  • Population: 1
  • Cost: 100 food 20 coin
  • Train-time: 35 seconds
  • Hit-points: 250 (half maxed British grenadier)
  • Range-resist: 45%
  • Speed: 4.95 (after drum arsenal tech)
  • Melee attack: 30 with 1 area-of-effect, x1.5 against infantry, 0.25 against hand cavalry and shock infantry.
  • Range attack: 50 with a range of 16, dealt as siege damage, same multipliers as melee (maybe a 1 area-of-effect too)
  • Siege attack: 60 with a range of 10, x3 against walls or defensive buildings
  • Ability: have all their stats increased by 50% when a Union Flag has been placed.

This should mean that “The 54th Vonunteers” should trade well against both heavy and light infantry, trade averagely against artillery, and trade poorly against cavalry. Its stand-out area should be in destroying walls as I feel the USA lacks this because of their Gatling guns (and lack of trainable grenadiers without Washingtons legion).

If this unit gets introduced, all other USA military units should be reverted to their caucasian / native American aesthetic. I think this will help with appropriate representation especially in the commerce age.

One of the many purposes of studying history is to learn from our mistakes. If we start re-writing history to abide by our current cultural views it will only doom us to repeat the blunders of the past.

Now here’s a bit of Hollywood history for you… :rofl:

Please feel free to challenge anything I’ve said above.

1 Like

I would also like more DLC, but I would really prefer that they fix and refine the online mode. Sometimes my connection drops, (or that’s what the game notifies me), but I can watch HD videos without any problem.

It’s also annoying that the game doesn’t stop when a player loses connection. This did not happen in the old game. In addition, the time to reconnect is very short.


As everyone seems to be speculating what new DLC we are going to get I’m gunna put it to a poll.

Which new civilisation(s) do you think will be add to AOE3de this summer? (choose up to 3)

  • Argentina
  • Belgium
  • Brazil
  • Burmese
  • Canada
  • Denmark
  • Egypt
  • Greece
  • Haiti
  • India (breaking into Maratha Empire / Sikh Empire/Khalsa / Mughal Empire / Nepalese Empire)
  • Indonesia
  • Korea
  • Malaya
  • Morocco
  • Omani
  • Persia
  • Pirate State
  • Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth
  • Polynesia
  • Prussia + Austria (with a divided Germany)
  • Siam
  • South Africa / Boer State
  • Vietnamese
  • A new African Civ I haven’t mentioned
  • A new American Civ I haven’t mentioned
  • A new Asian Civ I haven’t mentioned
  • A new European Civ I haven’t mentioned
  • A new Oceanic Civ I haven’t mentioned
0 voters

I’ve only listed countries that still have a representation on the world map today. I think it unlike that the devs will choose to make a civ that no-one knows about, apart from a few avid history buffs. Comment on which ones you think I’ve missed.

Personally I don’t have a DLC ced for now. I would prefer that they fix underused or unfeasible mechanics and aspects in the game.

I would think that some Asian civilization would be added considering that Vietnam has been added in AOE-2.

1 Like

Sorry accidentally wiped votes. Coz I wanted to add Vietnam as an option. So please vote again.

Maybe they do a Southeast Asia because the link Africa-Southeast Asia dlcs of AoE 2…


It seems we won’t get any civ until AOM retold is done. So, realistically, if get something new, I don’t think it will be until at least november

Yeah, hopefully. That region could bring several new cool civs for the game. I think that is one of the places with the most potential

1 Like

Every post goes into a civ wishlist.

Back to the original question of the post, maybe we get a summer patch, so june/july. IDK when the team goes to holidays.


Thought I’d post this map of estimated boarders in 1815 to semi justify the options I gave in the poll. I prioritised the nations shown in colour. The areas shown in sub-Saharan Africa and the Indian sub-continent have so numerous civilisations that I think would be hard to make all of these into full blown civs in the game. However, I do think they would make a lot of great minor civs, especially as I think Africa and Asia are already lacking native alliance options.


I have voted for Persia, Korea and Brazil.

I would like Prussia + Austria (with a divided Germany), India divided and Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or Zulus.

I think it will actually be Morocco (they have the civ in the campaign), Persia and Korea.


If we can only obtain a limited number of countries, I do not want some countries that are not important during this period to seize the position of important countries that should have appeared. I hope that countries like Malta only have this last one

And what is extremely annoying is that they are not even willing to reproduce the campaign of Malta using the new Malta as a template

The biggest fear is that the countries in the game are likely to be limited and may stop updating at any time. We haven’t received a new DLC in a year, have we? If the DLC updates in the future take longer, I hope to see the more important countries earlier, while the relatively minor ones should appear in the future


These are the most likely candidates, based on popularity.

And also the Zulus (why is everyone so obsessed with them? There is like a dozen of better civ candidates in Africa). I personally would only add them as a native settlement.


It does feel peculiar that Malta was added into the game over countries such as Persia and Brazil. The only reason I think it was added is because of its appearance in the first campaign with Morgan Black.

The poll has been active now for about half a day and the clear leaders so far seem to be Persia and Brazil but I don’t think both these civs could be released in the same DLC.

So I pose this question: Which DLC expansion pack would you buy?

  • Sultans of Arabia - Persia + Morocco + Omani
  • Kings of the Baltic - Polish Lithuania + Denmark + Germany rework (Prussia & Austria)
  • Dynasties of the Orient - Korea + Siam + Burmese
  • Settlers of the New World - Brazil + Argentina + Canada

0 voters

I’ve listed three civs for each new DCL expansion pack but I only recon there will be two. I’ve listed each civ in the order of priority for that expansion pack.

Ps. I do really enjoy polls :grin:

1 Like

I would buy any of these DLCs because in AoE 3 every civ has something cool to offer. There are civs that I dream about in AoE 3 since the release of AoE 3, and there are also civs that turn out to be a nice surprise.

In my opinion, the priority should be to break the two great umbrella civs in this game: Germans civ (Austrians civ in real) and Indians civ (a strange creation that most closely resembles the Mughals and the British Raj). Fortunately, the Germans civ umbrella can be broken by adding Prussians civ and making textual changes to Germans civ to make it Austrians civ. In the case of Indian civs, the matter is more complicated and some of the units present in this civ would have to be transferred to completely new civs. I think it could be done by adding two brand new Indian civs: Dravidians and Bengalis.

The Prussians civ could be part of the Baltic Sea DLC (along with Danes civ and Poles civ) or be part of the West European DLC (along with Danes civ and Swiss civ). Indian Umbrella split DLC would include Dravidians civ and Bengalis civ, in addition it could also offer Burmese civ or Siamese civ.

1 Like

I would pay money for a guarantee that Canada is never added as a standalone civ. Some content for the revolution that isn’t just shipments of bears would be great, but I sincerely hope it never is more than a revolution.


Middle Eastern / or Islamic DLC have great potential - especially since their absence in the game makes them a completely separate category of civs. They lived at the crossroads of Europe, Asia and Africa, so I think they deserve it. Also, ottoman civs could also get something new with the introduction of such civs into the game.

Here is a list of potential Middle Eastern/Islamic civs:

  1. Arabians
  2. Barbary Pirates
  3. Egyptians
  4. Moroccans
  5. Persians
  6. Tatars

As you can see, I would split these DLC into two separate ones DLCs:

  1. Sultans of the Sahara - Barbary Pirates, Egyptians & Moroccans
  2. Warlords of the Central Asia - Arabians, Persians & Tatars