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.
2 Likes
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 
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.
2 Likes
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:
- Arabians
- Barbary Pirates
- Egyptians
- Moroccans
- Persians
- Tatars
Ottomans?
As you can see, I would split these DLC into two separate ones DLCs:
- Sultans of the Sahara - Barbary Pirates, Egyptians & Moroccans
- Warlords of the Central Asia - Arabians, Persians & Tatars
2 Likes
My reason adding Canada as an option was because it already has an appearance in the historical battles and that I think that there would be a larger player base of AOE3de in Canada, than in a lot of the other new civ options (I’ve got no evidence to back this up tho). This could help sales of the game but I do agree for historical context it would be just an extension of the British civ.
I’d like the Canadian revolt to be reworked where it becomes the best faction possible for team games, with all its home city cards giving resources and techs to the entire team. I know there’s not a lot history to back this up but it would be cool to play up to the friendly Canadian stereotype.
I love the ideas but my goal here was to try and narrow down the communities DCL wishes. I think at the moment we’ll be lucky to get one more DCL, maybe two at most. I guess its best to focus in on the expansion pack we are most likely to get. 
Why do people think that living in a country would make people want to have that country be playable? I am Canadian and I’d hate to have Canada as a civ. During the time period no one actually identified as Canadian, they were British citizens, Quebecois, or various native peoples.
Representing Canada would be much better achieved via civs like Cree and Haida.
5 Likes
The whole notion of Zulu as a playable civ that spans the entire era of AoE3 is always silly to me and seems to be entirely fueled by pop culture such as the films that show the Brits making a brave last stand against the warriors. Whilst the Zulu were impressive, their movement was just a small blip in the AoE3 timeline. Whenever they’re brought up, I will always bring up the the Rovzi Empire or just the Shona States (to which Rovzi stem from). Hipster Shona were using spears, hide-shields and doing the bullhorn formations wayyyy before the mainstream Zulus (and had a long lasting, prosperous empire too!).
Zulu be a good Minor civ…
7 Likes
The Zulu people mainly benefited from the world-renowned war, after all, in a sense, this war, like the Battle of Adowa in Ethiopia, is a representative event of African resistance history. However, in terms of national strength, the Rozvi Empire or the Shona people are indeed stronger than them
In a sense, they are like an upgraded version of the Lakota people. as minor civilizations, they have successfully left their mark on a large part of world history
1 Like
I don’t know, maybe its a European thing but I got a few mates that will only main their home nation when playing this game and many others. I guess I can include myself in such a category. It might be this way because of the original vanilla civs all being European, so we’ve kind of grown up thinking that others want the same representation in game as us. What a European thing to think that everyone thinks the same you 
It’s a pity you only allowed to vote for 2. I also wanted to vote for the East Asian DLC 
2 Likes
Haha I had to limit it somewhat or I’d have to change the question to “which DCL do you NOT want to have?”
1 Like
Oh absolutely. A Historical Battle or scenario would do better justice for them, where you play from their point of view - Battle of Isandlwana would be great as the Zulu gained victory there. Zulu as a full-blown (non-scenario/minor civ) would be really gimicky as you would be stretching their very limited kingdom and limited troop type roster into a fantasty civ to cover all the ages with enough variey.
2 Likes
Yeah, people only know about the Zulus and want to shove them everywhere, whether it makes sense or not. I’ve even seen people wanting them for aoe2 as well. And also found someone on reddit who wanted them as a revolution for the Ethiopians. Yes, literally that
What is sad is that due to pop culture it’s much more likely we’ll get the Zulus before other much more interesting civs like the Shona, Malagasy, Songhai or many other far better options.
3 Likes
That’s hilarious! That’s bordering on the train of thought that Africa is a country. 
Shona, Malagasy and Songhai would make a wonderful African DLC2.
4 Likes
In fact, based on the existing content, the second African DLC may be most suitable for Kongo and Shona; The Sanghai people have been officially integrated into the Hausa people, and Zulu may also integrate into the Shona people in this way; During this period, Madagascar was too isolated from the world and had a certain degree of geographical overlap with the coastal areas of Southeast Africa. Most importantly, Central Africa needed a representative of civilization, and the Kingdom of Kongo, which was deeply involved in triangular trade, was the most suitable
Most importantly, this combination perfectly covers the four major blocks of sub Saharan Africa, Ethiopia in the Horn of Africa; Hausa in West Africa, Shona along the East African coast, and Kongo in Central South Africa
Of course, if the official is interested in producing a third African DLC, they can consider the African clans of Lake Victoria and Madagascar. However, for the second African DLC, it is better to prioritize the eastern and western African continent countries south of the Kongo Basin
4 Likes
I don’t think Songhai is a good option. Their empire was very short lived. Mandinka would be a much better alternative. They could represent the remainants of the Malian empire.
1 Like
Don’t think AoE3 DLC can contain more than 2 civs at once, especially when it usually comes with new maps, new minor civs, and even new changes for old civs.
My current options are:
- Revolutionary state DLC: Brazilians
According to the practice so far, revolutionary civs are introduced singly.
Of course, they are also suitable for combining with Mapuche to form a South American DLC. - European DLC: Polish Lithuanians + Danes
It will complete Europe, for the foreseeable future. - Middle Eastern DLC: Persians + Omanis
I don’t think the Moroccans have particularly more possibilities just because we designed a campaign civ for them. - Far Eastern DLC: Siamese + Burmese
It’s an interesting and fitting combination. In addition to being fierce rivals to each other, both have rich histories of interacting and fighting existing civs autonomously. - African DLC: Kongolese + 1 southern civ
- Tributary state DLC: Korean + Vietnamese
A valid combination, it’s just that I think they have a lower priority than the options mentioned above.
5 Likes
They could be an age-up alliance. Maybe that way the Zulu crowd can be somewhat satisfied.
Yeah, I agree. The Kongolese should a top priority for the next African DLC
I like your civ suggestion and I agree with all of them.
I would also add something from Central Asia, like Uzbeks, Afghans or Kazakhs.
And another South East Asia civ that could be quite interesting is the Malays
1 Like