From here we can deduce the timeframe of the game from 750AD to 1644AD.
We can round that up from 700AD to 1700AD to give us a nice 1000 years in total. But with a focus in the 500 years between the years 1000 and 1500.
We can surely discard some civilizations that lived before 700AD. So no goths, no huns, no rashidun, no sassanian persians, no gokturks, no merovingian franks, no vandals, no lombards, no avars. We can also certainly discard all the colonial empires after 1700 AD and probably other late empires like the Mughal, the Qing, or the Russian Empire. We can discard Edo Japan too.
We can also note that all chosen civilizations span for at least 500 years. If a kingdom or dynasty didnât live for 500 years it is grouped together with others to reach that minimum. That is the case of the Chinese dinasties, The Delhi Sultanate that seems to also include the Ghurids and the Rus that includes the Kievan Rus, the Golden Horde and the Grand Duchy of Moscovy. Then we can conclude sadly that we wonât have the Seljuk and the Ottomans as independent civilizations. Neither we will have Castile and Aragon as independent factions. Which I really wanted.
We probably wonât have civilizations that are already included in the existing ones. So no Saxons, Normans, Dutch, Bavarians , Bohemians, Swabians or Franks, since they are included under the Holy Roman Empire, English and French. No Yuan nor Golden Horde since they are included in the Chinese, Mongol and Rus. No Ghurid since they are included with Delhi.
So what are my predictions for future expansions?
Kingdom of Portugal (868 - 1580) - From the county of Portucale until the Iberian Union.
The Spanish (842 - 1516/1700) - They will have to include here the kingdoms of Asturias, Galicia, Leon, Castile, Aragon, and depending of the end date also the Habsburgs and the Iberian Union.
Kingdom of Navarre (824 - 1610) - An independent civilization in the Basque Country spanning for more than 700 years until they were absorbed by the Spanish and the French.
Habsburg Dinasty (1100 - 1700) - They may be part of the Holy Roman Empire and part of a possible Spanish civ but they could also be an independent faction like the Abbasid dynasty
Al-Andaluz/Amazighs (711 - 1492) - Aka the Moors and Berbers . they will include the Caliphates and Emirates of Cordoba, Seville and Granada, the Taifas and the Umayyad, Almoravid and Almohad dynasties. Maybe also some Morocan and Magrebhi dynasties if they go with Amazighs instead of Al-Andaluz.
Egyptian/Cairo Sultanate(868 - 1517) - Apart from the Abbasid many other dynasties ruled Egypt. The Egyptians will include the Mamluk, Ayyubid, Fatimid, Ikhshidid and Tulunid dynasties.
Ethiopian Empire (900 - 1523) - Including the Zagwe and Solomonic dynasties.
Eastern Roman Empire (717 - 1453) - Aka the Byzantines, from the Isaurian dynasty to the fall of the second Rome(Constantinople).
Turks (766 - 1640) - Including the Oghuz, Seljuk and Ottoman Empires.
Iranians (821/861 - 1501/1700) - Aka the Persians, from the Tahirid or Saffarid until the Safavid dynasty depending on the dates.
Norsemen/Scandinavians (700 - 1537) - From the Viking age until the Kalmar Union
Theyâre obviously not following any set pattern for the choice in civilizations.
I would hope they would include more unique German civilizations instead of just representing them all with the HRE though. Such as the Swiss and the Teutonic Knights.
How is that any different than adding the Abbasid Dynasty?
Personally I think the Habsburgs are already represented by the HRE landsknecht but I could see them being spun off into their own unique faction. Maybe just call them Bavarians or something?
I donât see the problem with it. What would you call the Abbasidâs? Iraqis?
The Bavarians I think could function as a reskin of the HRE if they were to rename them based on their ethnicity rather than their nation state.
The trouble with the North Germanic people such as the saxons is the fact that theyâre all historically very similar to the Scandinavians in terms of culture and people are more interested in the vikings so itâs hard to justify their inclusion. The symmetry is a lot more in this game than I was expecting (I thought it was going to be like company of heroes where everything was unique about every faction) so I think it would be fine if they started including a lot of redundant cultures with minor differences. Maybe make the Vikings a nomadic civilization since they resettled in so many areas but make the Saxons a booming civilization instead since they were ultimately more important in the long run.
The Vikings should be called Norse or Scandinavian. And being a nomadic civ would work. I would also have them have strong raiding units and made a loot or plunder mechanic
So itâs unreasonable for me to expect the English which were a minor power in the middle ages to be represented by the French but perfectly reasonable to represent the worldâs 2nd largest ethnic group that has populations spanning 3 continents that never had a unified government to be represented with a single civilization based off a fictional âArabian Empireâ?
I was noting the double standard that he presented.
I think the Abbasid Caliphate is a fine name but if they were to change to naming all the civs to a standard system then the appropriate name would be a regional one such as Iraqis or Mesopotamian rather than âArabsâ When the Arabs are such a massive and wide reaching culture in this time period. You had the Egyptians, Iberian and North Africans at the same time who all had separate Arab kingdoms that were very important in this time period.
Theyâre not like the Chinese at all who despite their various dynasties would be made up of the Han Chinese majority and located in the same region. The Abbasids ruled over Mesopotamia throughout the time frame of AOE4.
It seems to me that AoE 4 tries to focus on quality (asymmetry of civs, unique individual architecture, devotion to the climate and character of civ) civs and not their number - letâs face it, civs in AoE 2 have slight differences among themselves. It seems to me that the creation of such civs as e.g. Holy Roman Empire proves that the creators intend to create large civs based on specific empires and not like AoE 2 in which the names of civs alone testified to the national character of civ.
Now I would like to give you which civs on your list would make sense in AoE 4 and which unfortunately would not.
Civs that make sense in AoE 4:
Both of these civs from the Iberian Peninsula are quite a classic selection of European civs. These countries were also in a common union - the Iberian Union; but I think it would be better if both these civs were separate.
Kingdom of Portugal (868 - 1580) were the first to create a sea power that made great geographical discoveries - it was the first colonial empire. This civ would fit perfectly in tandem with Marinid Sultanate (Moroccans) civ - a shared DLC.
The Spanish (842 - 1516/1700) (I think this is the safest name for such a civ, because it is not based on one of the many Spanish countries, e.g. Castile and Aragon) is an interesting civ because it has a very rich history in the Middle Ages - from small princes that displaced the Moors from the Iberian peninsula to the great colonial empire. This civ would fit perfectly together with the Moors civ - a shared DLC.
The Moors / Caliphate of CĂłrdoba (711 - 1492) took control of almost the entire Iberian Peninsula. The Catholic Kingdoms (the ancestors of Spain and Portugal) declared the Reconquista against them. It would be a perfect civ for the new âReconquistaâ campaign. This civ would fit perfectly together with the Spanish civ - a shared DLC.
It would be fun to play Ethiopia in AoE 4 seeing how much fun she was entertaining this civ in AoE 3. I think this is a must civ for the African DLC - first candidate. This civ would fit perfectly together with the Songhai Empire (700 - 1591) civ - a shared DLC.
There is nothing to write about these two civs. THEY MUST APPEAR IN AOE 4!
A campaign about the Byzantine-Turkish wars would be something addictive. These civs are the perfect pair for a shared DLC.
I would definitely prefer the name Persians. This civilization is, in a way, the longest existing empire in the world because it dates back to ancient times. The presence of this civ in AoE 4 would be very important. Unfortunately, it is difficult for me to match the second civ with the Persians - the Mughals civ would be great, but it is known that they are already in the base version of the game. Maybe Koreans or Siam would be in shared DLC with Persians civ?
It would be hard to find a name for this civ, but itâs not hard to guess that the Vikings are one of the icons of the Middle Ages. I think Kalmar Union fits best as a name for this civ. This civ would fit perfectly together with the Polish-Lithuanian Union civ - a shared DLC.
I think it would be possible to present medieval Italy (at least the Northern Italy) in AoE 4 with one civ - the Italian Kingdom existing within the Holy Roman Empire.
Unfortunately there is no English so I provided it in Spanish.
Unfortunately, it is difficult for me to match the second civ with the ItaliansâŠ
Both of these civs could appear in the shared DLC. The campaigns of these civs would focus on wars with the Spanish civ.
I think their absence in AoE 4 complicates the pairs match for Asian civs. I think instead of the Mughals civs, the Japanese civs would be better suited as countercivilization for the Chinese civs. Mughals civ then could appear in a joint DLC with Persians civ.
Japanese civ would provide us with a lot of interesting content and a unique atmosphere of âthe country of the blooming cherryâ. Unfortunately, it is difficult for me to match the second civ with the Japanese⊠maybe Koreans or Siam?
Probably the least popular civs from this list, but as important as the other civs. They would offer a lot of interesting content that would distinguish them from other civs with their otherness. Both of these civs could also reflect the character of south-eastern Europe in a bit more detail - the Balkans and the Carpathians. Both of these civs could appear in the shared DLC.
The Bulgarian Empire was a really big empire. It covered the territory of todayâs Bulgaria, Romania, as well as large parts of todayâs Hungary, Serbia, Albania, Greece, the European part of Turkey and even Moldova and Ukraine. A really great empire. It was a serious rival to the Byzantine Empire.
The Kingdom of Hungary was a strong state created by the leader of the Magyars - Arpad, the founder of the Arpad dynasty. Before the Christianization of the Magyars, they raided other countries to sack them. King Saint Stephen, the first King of Hungary, converted the nation to Christianity - this initiated the formation of the power of the Kingdom of Hungary. The personal union with Croatia gave Hungary access to the sea. The kingdom covered a really large territory - Hungary, Slovakia, Transylvania and Croatia (including Bosnia). The greatest heyday of the Kingdom of Hungary took place during the reign of Matthias Corvinus. At the end of his reign (1490): The Hungarian Crown included Transylvania, Croatia, Moravia, Lusatia, Silesia, and Lower Austria with Styria and Carniola.
Both of these civs could also be the âfreeâ civs that have been talked about lately. They are important but not very popular. Who knows, maybe some civs will be added to the game as part of the update. Bulgarian and Hungarian civs are the best candidates for this. These civs are the perfect pair for a shared DLC.
In my opinion, both of these civs can be very easily presented with one civ in AoE 4. Anyway, it was only the common interests of both countries that ensured that Poland is famous at all. This civilization could be called the Polish-Lithuanian Union or the Jagiellonian Dynasty. This civ would fit perfectly together with the Kalmar Union civ - a shared DLC.
Civilizations that donât make sense in AoE 4:
It was not very relevant in the timeframe of AoE 4. Anyway the Spanish civ could cover them. Besides, it would be hard to make this civ unique and asymmetrical to Spanish civ.
Not that the developers called the base civ in the game the Holy Roman Empire to create the next civs that were part of it. My proposal from the Kingdom of Italy, which would break the HRE civ assumption anyway, is enough to present the Italians in this game.
I hope that Holy Roman Empire civ in AoE 4 will be able to worthily present this civilization - its diversity, wealth and culture.
More German civs is needed in AoE 2 (Saxons - Lower Germans; Bavarians - Upper Germans) and in AoE 3 (great powers: Austria-Hungary and Prussians), no in AoE 4!
It sounds good, but I donât think it would be necessary with the Abbasid Dynasty civ.
In AoE 2, one could break the Saracen umbrella into several new civs such as the Cairo Sultanate / Mamluk Sultanate.
This is a nice option, especially because England civ is simply English based. Iâd love to see some Celtic civ (nice if itâs universal enough to also represent Irish, Welsh and even Bretons), but there are civs with a higher priority to be added to AoE 4.
Never had a unified government? What do you call the caliphates? And I said Arabian Empire because people are all up in arms with some civs getting âAbbasid dynasty and Delhi Sultanate where others are just English and Mongolsâ
If I said Arabians, how would that be any different than English?
The early Muslim conquests, also referred to as the Arab conquests and the early Islamic conquests began with the Islamic prophet Muhammad in the 7th century. He established a new unified polity in the Arabian Peninsula which under the subsequent Rashidun and Umayyad Caliphates saw a century of rapid expansion
That would work if they were to simply change the name
Aom only had 3 civs at launch, 5 after 2 DLCs. AoE4 has 8 civs at launch
For once I agree with you. âArabsâ is a huge group. Thatâs nearly like saying Asians.
The Chinese are very hard to name with all their dynasties. Maybe they should be called the Chinese Dynasties or Kingdoms. Who knows honestly. Iâm fine with just Chinese.
During the AOE4 timeframe they were culturally similar enough that the difference was lost.
Even at its height the Abbasid Caliphate didnât control all of the Arab world. They werenât just missing a small portion either weâre talking about Spain and Algeria.
Because the English donât have enough of a distinct culture to form a single civilization. Where the Arabs have enough for at least 4 major civilizations from this time period.