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

[ScalierCactus96]

How about fix the lamer civs

[Etarm369]

I want a skin inspired by the character of Machete (Danny Trejo) for the Mexican general.

[matazombis4087]

i hope a better system to rate the ability of a players comes, im tired of dont know how good is someone on a lobby games.

[MatM1996]

@StoreyedPlate74

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

Yes I agree…

@StoreyedPlate74

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

True, it could be something like this in June:

"Visit Southeast Asia in the early modern age with “The Rajas Warriors” with Burmese and Siamese including 3 new historical battles:

The Fall of Ayutthaya (1767) (Burmese): After almost two centuries of successive wars, the Burmese finally have the Siamese capital before their eyes, but they must also face Qinq invasions from the north…(Burmese vs Siamese and Chinese)

Liberating Siam (1584) (Siamese): Three years after the death of Bayinnaung, his empire collapses due to the inability of his son Nanda to keep it together due to constant rebellions. One of those rebels named Naresuan must free the Thai people from the Toungoo oppression…(Siamese vs Burmese)

Uniting the Mekong (1802) (Vietnamese): Centuries after liberating themselves from the Ming thanks to their leader Le Loi, the Viet peoples live in a certain harmony, only broken by the internecine wars between the different feudal lords and the rebellions against the Le dynasty But that is about to end when an ambitious young lord from the south, Gia Long, seeks to unite the entire Mekong under a modern, unified nation…(Vietnamese vs Vietnamese)

@Jamesagraham5

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.

The issue is that this map leaves out the Polish-Lithuanian and Danish-Norwegian commonwealths…

@Nevonidas

campaign

Not even that, just a historic battle…

@WildIce34250301

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

I agree…

@WildIce34250301

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

It is not the same civ…the Knights of St John in the campaign are a mix between Spanish and British…If you add the Maltese civ to the campaign, you break the entire balance of it…

@WildIce34250301

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

I’m calm about that… I think they’ll release a dlc around June…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Fortunately, the Germans civ umbrella can be broken by adding Prussians civ and making textual changes to Germans civ to make it Austrians civ.

And change Frederick the Great for Maria Theresa xd…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Dravidians and Bengalis.

The Dravidians may just be Marathas (with Mysore -renamed ######### rockets as artillery) and the Bengalis were conquered by the Mughals in 1576…

@MUTYLATOR5553

Indian Umbrella split DLC would include Dravidians civ and Bengalis civ, in addition it could also offer Burmese civ or Siamese civ.

I think they will divide dlcs into regions… first Southeast Asia and then South India, like in AoE 2…

@M00Z1LLA

I would pay money for a guarantee that Canada is never added as a standalone civ.

@Jamesagraham5

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.

They won’t add it, it’s a very late civ (1867) for AoE 3…

@SirBarnzy1

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.

Or make them like WoL and make them like the zergs of SC2 xd…

@WildIce34250301

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

I agree Shona and Kongo would be a very good dlc…

@UpmostRook9474

• 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.

I agree…I’ll sign it for you now…Korea+Vietnam also serves as a competitive hook and to connect with its predecessor civs in the saga (Choson-Koreans/Lac Viet-Vietnamese)…

@StoreyedPlate74

I would also add something from Central Asia, like Uzbeks, Afghans or Kazakhs.

Uzbeks would go with Crimean Tatars…Kazakhs with Afghans…

@StoreyedPlate74

And another South East Asia civ that could be quite interesting is the Malays

Hard, the Malays were conquered by the Portuguese in 1511 and then divided between Dutch (VOC) and Ottoman control (Aceh Sultanate) throughout the early modern age…

@Etarm369

I want a skin inspired by the character of Machete (Danny Trejo) for the Mexican general.

Machete…Machete…Machete…yeahhhh…

[StoreyedPlate74]

@MatM1996

The Dravidians may just be Marathas

Marathas are not Dravidians though.

@MatM1996

Hard, the Malays were conquered by the Portuguese in 1511 and then divided between Dutch (VOC) and Ottoman control (Aceh Sultanate) throughout the early modern age

And the Aztecs and Inca were both conquered by the Spanish.
However, only Malacca fell in 1511. Other Malay states continue to exist for centuries, like Brunei, Johor and Pahang. Even Aceh was heavily influenced by the Malays.

@MatM1996

Uzbeks would go with Crimean Tatars…Kazakhs with Afghans…

Why those combos?
By the way, the Crimeans were also an Ottoman protectorate, and under tighter control than Aceh. I think they would be better as a minor civ.

[MatM1996]

@StoreyedPlate74

Marathas are not Dravidians though.

Well yes, they are more from the center of India, but they both occupied the south of India…

@StoreyedPlate74

And the Aztecs and Inca were both conquered by the Spanish.

Well, but they are better known empires and they are related to the conquest of America that AoE 3 was originally about…

@StoreyedPlate74

Why those combos?

Yes, you’re right, put Tatars with Kazakhs and Uzbeks with Afghans, since they are neighbors…

@StoreyedPlate74

By the way, the Crimeans were also an Ottoman protectorate, and under tighter control than Aceh. I think they would be better as a minor civ.

Good point…

[StoreyedPlate74]

@MatM1996

Well yes, they are more from the center of India, but they both occupied the south of India…

The Marathas focused much more on the North, even taking Delhi. However, if India were to be split, I wouldn’t do it to cover the entire geography of India, but rather to cover the most important empires of Early Modern India: the Mughals and the Marathas.
And maybe also other significant powers like the Sikhs or Mysore

@MatM1996

Kazakhs and Uzbeks with Afghans

Both Kazakhs and Afghans bordered the Uzbeks. However, the Afghans can easily be bundled with the Persians or even a rework of India. So, there can fit several DLC

@MatM1996

Well, but they are better known empires and they are related to the conquest of America that AoE 3 was originally about…

Well, but the game now has a much wider scope than in 2005

[MatM1996]

@StoreyedPlate74

The Marathas focused much more on the North

Yes, North Central…

@StoreyedPlate74

Both Kazakhs and Afghans bordered the Uzbeks. However, the Afghans can easily be bundled with the Persians or even a rework of India. So, there can fit several DLC

@StoreyedPlate74

Well, but the game now has a much wider scope than in 2005

Of course, I think that AoE 3 still has a lot of untapped potential…with the European dlc it just achieved the basics that the starting game had to have (Italy and the European maps)…

[vitorcxb20]

eles deveriam dar essa carta para todas as civilizações europeias

35%mais rapido para cavalaria e infantaria

e removerem essas cartas antigas e que ocupam espaço, e claro com seu tema pra cada civilização

[MatM1996]

Sim, eu também não uso…

[SirBarnzy1]

@vitorcxb20

They should give this letter to all European civilizations

35%faster for cavalry and infantry

and remove these old and space-taking cards, and of course with their theme for each civilization

Yep, agree with that, in fact I had just mentioned that some HC shipments should just tbe combined!

[H3LLGHA5T]

they should, but they need to look out for civs that don’t have much space in Age 3 for another shipment since liberation march is an Age 3 card unlike fencing school and riding school.

[vitorcxb20]

pode ser uma carta idade 2 ou idade 4 ou ate mesmo ficar na idade 3 pelo seu alto valor 2in1

[MatM1996]

@vitorcxb20

pode ser uma carta idade 2 ou idade 4 ou ate mesmo ficar na idade 3 pelo seu alto valor 2i

Claro, isso também funciona…

[Jamesagraham5]

@MatM1996

The issue is that this map leaves out the Polish-Lithuanian and Danish-Norwegian commonwealths…

Yes I agree but it’s hard to find a reliable sources for world maps from this era as boarder weren’t quite as rigid as they are today. Both Polish-Lithuania and the Danes were mentioned in my original new civ poll. I only used the map for ideas more than anything.

@MatM1996

They won’t add it, it’s a very late civ (1867) for AoE 3…

Honestly more of a personal wish than anything but I did go on to mention a possible rework of the Canadian Revolution mechanic, which could be fun.

@Jamesagraham5

Settlers of the New World - Brazil + Argentina + Canada

Maybe a Grand Colombia or Peru civ could be added in my hypothetical “Settlers of the New World” DCL proposal. Although I haven’t checked the proper historic context of this yet. But these seem quite fun as revolutions at the moment anyways.

[matazombis4087]

that would create inbalance, that card is given because of a 21 card civilization, but sure it would be good to have it that 2 cards in one.
but take in count that if you giving that 2 cards merge in 1 you are nerfing the civilization that already has those 2 cards in 1

[MatM1996]

@Jamesagraham5

Yes I agree but it’s hard to find a reliable sources for world maps from this era as boarder weren’t quite as rigid as they are today. Both Polish-Lithuania and the Danes were mentioned in my original new civ poll. I only used the map for ideas more than anything.

Yes, a more correct map could be like this…

Between 1500 and 1900 is 1700…

@Jamesagraham5

Honestly more of a personal wish than anything but I did go on to mention a possible rework of the Canadian Revolution mechanic, which could be fun.

@Jamesagraham5

Maybe a Grand Colombia or Peru civ could be added in my hypothetical “Settlers of the New World” DCL proposal. Although I haven’t checked the proper historic context of this yet. But these seem quite fun as revolutions at the moment anyways.

Yes, it could be like that…

[Jamesagraham5]

@MatM1996

Yes, a more correct map could be like this…

Haha but we haven’t got USA shown in that map as they were still the thirteen colonies back then. I think it is impossible to find a map that is perfectly historically accurate and fits with all the AOE3de civs. Just think of the Aztec Empire and Mexico which in real life were centuries apart.

[MatM1996]

Yes, I know… I put 1700 because it’s in the middle of the timeline like in AoE 2 it’s the year 1000…

[Player155479418]

No crimes committed by Conquistadors, and especially Inquisitors, in my books.