What existing civs design can tell us from the civs to come

Ok, I agree with most predictions, but here’s my verdict:

Fully agree, though I may be biased.

Disagree, Navarre just wasn’t important enough and the Habsburgs just feel redundant with both Spain and the HRE.

Agree, will probably call them Almohads.

Was on the fence, but since the Abbasids have nothing to represent the Ghulams, Mamlukes and Bedouins, it might be possible.

All three obvious additions that I fully agree.

I think we will most likely get Iranians through a Timurids faction.

Most likely they’ll call them Danes or something like that.

While I believe that we’ll get a Venetian faction, I believe the other will either be an umbrella “Italians” civ or a Two Sicilies civ.
I agree with all other choices, except maybe I would have the Poles and Lithanians as the PLC.

1 Like

It was not that different in year 900 when game starts. It would differentiate greatly after that for sure.

I’ve never seen a polish church that look like it was Muslim or Indian though.

Well the OP question was what civs Can be used as template for other civs and not asking for carbon copy.

I Just said that language and building design Can be used for both civs in age one. Thats All.

Mosques look like churches and Not other way around since they were inspired by ERE designs.

And indian temples look totaly different.

A Spanish civ seems like a no-brainer. You even have a political entity that evolved and organically encapsulates the four ages of the game:

Dark Age: Kingdom of Asturias (718-924)
Feudal Age: Kingdom of Leon (924-1230)
Castle Age: Crown of Castille (1230-1474/9)
Imperial Age: Hispanic Monarchy (1474/9- 1700). Obviously in-game you can make this age stop in 1556 or 1598 with either the abdication of Charles I or the death of Philip II.

I want Eastern Roman Empire so much, too. I’d say these are my two most wanted civs.


I would really like a civilization that does quality over quantity, or uses towers far more frequently compared to others. I incorporated both in this thread: Faction Idea: Teutonic State

I can’t wait to see what Relic will come up with for future factions! Thank you so much for listening to the community!

I doubt they will add so many Civs since AoE4 is more about gameplay changes between civs than some stat changes, unique upgrades and units. But I hope to see Norsemen, Polish, Japanese, Aztecs, Spanish/Portugal and Byzantines

1 Like

If there is Medieval Rus there should be Lithuanians and Poles, or maybe the union of these (aka Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth, Rzeczpospolita). But more civs we get the better.

1 Like

Polish-Lithuanian Union 1385-1569, 1569-1791

1 Like

Well, that’s what we call meta, there is no balanced multiplayer game and there won’t be ever, it’s impossible. If they add more civs, that’s fine. Like in Dota, there is always a pool of heroes who is more useful than others. Balance patch comes, and the pool changes. It can be similar here. These days most of the games are works in “live balance”. Dota has smaller changes every 2-4 weeks, other games 3 months, half-year etc. If the game will be successful then they can work in a similar way.

So it’s not that hard to add more civs to the game.

They had to include india and chinese cuz that means 2.6 billion potential customers.

Same with Russia, probably. A country with a rather big population (I mean, obviously not comparable with China or India, but still bigger than any European country, which isn’t weird considering its huge extension) and, a significant RTS playerbase probably had to have some representation.

i think that is a little much up rounding you are doing, that would make the game go half way into AOE3s periode and therefor should include mobile artillery and line infantry but neither is true.

well i want to not be made up to a stereotype and have 2/3rds of the periodes history forgotten because of this argument, people didnt even call the vikings at the time.


Agreed. Not only that, but if they’re aiming at including civs that lasted for most of the Middle Ages, vikings are way too specific. In the best case it’d be like adding “Carolingian Empire” instead of “French”. Maybe that was fitting in AoE2, where there were many civs that were more early Dark Age and even Late Antiquity like the Huns or the Goths. But here, a Norse or Scandinavian civ with, maybe, a “viking” early or early to mid game would make more sense. Not to mention some pretty sound arguments against a not very rigorous usage of the “viking” term.

Al-Andalus is probably incoming. (750-1492)

Al-Andalus is the muslim spagna lead by the Berbers (maghrebian people that peninsular arabian converted to Islam during the 7th century).

When the muslim Abbassid dynasty murdered the muslim Ommeyad dynasty of bagdad in 750, the last of the Ommeyad Abd Ar-Rahman exiled to Maghreb the Ommeyad converted to Islam before, then there he became something important and Maghreb and Muslim Spagna took over from Abbassid centralised in Bagdad. Al-Andalus was born as a Berber faction dominating the Spain and regulary attacking the french from the Pyrenee mountain.

Berber Spain became also a serious problem for the Holy Roman Empire. Charlemagne, the little son of the franks Charles Martel who stopped the berbers and the arabians during the Battle of Tour in France, regulary did operation against Al-Andalus. Charlequint did the same.

This faction was extremly powerfull, its economy was a real boom. Al-Andalus included the jews and the christians in its administration because it was more open-minded than the Abbassid traditional arabians.

Al-Andalus disapear during the Reconquista in 1492 when christians Kings of Pampelune and Asturies from the north of spain striked back.

However, several powerfull Berbers dynasties existed during Al-Andalus reign like the Almoravide or the terrible Almohade, these two were born in Morroco and Algeria.

In conlusion, I think the Berbers between the 8th and the 15th century have enough background to make one original faction the dev could named Al-Andalus.

What would be nice with this faction is that Spanish, Maghrebians, North African and muslims players could find their way in this faction.


I think al-Andalus could be interesting. Nothing against it. You could have mentioned that the decline of al-Andalus started with the Navas de Tolosa battle in 1212, when almohads were defeated by the Christian kingdoms. The fragmented taifa kingdoms were conquered by Castille and Aragon in the following decades (Cordoba, former capital of al-Andalus, in 1236, Valencia in 1244, and Seville, capital of the almohads, in 1248). But then the last significant muslim power in the peninsula appeared: the Nazari Kingdom of Granada, which lasted till 1246. Even though it was basically just the center and East of the current Andalusia region, their economy and culture were remarkable. Their best-known palace and fortress is the Alhambra. Of course, you can also say that al-Andalus had many internal problems that made them lose their predominancy since the XI century, losing Toledo to Castille in 1085, and that caused almoravids and almohads from North Africa to intervene. I’m telling this because I think it’s interesting how many changes al-Andalus experienced because of the pressure of the Christian kingdoms and the influence of their North African peers.

What would be nice with this faction is that Spanish, Maghrebians, North African and muslims players could find their way in this faction.

I’m not too sure about most Spanish players feeling represented by an Andalusi civ instead of a proper Spanish civ, though. I’d argue most Spaniards would rather play French or even Holy Roman Empire when it comes to representation. Not because they dislike or reject al-Andalus but because they clearly identify themselves with the European Christian culture. Not that I think it should be important when it comes to choosing which civilization to add, on the other hand.

What I find very interesting is that al-Andalus, in some capacity, are the natural counterpart of the Spanish. Both “nations” (for a lack of a better word) fought for 8 centuries and their evolution is basically intermingled. It’s almost like talking about the Greco-latin and the Persians, or Eastern Romans and the different arabs and turkish powers that ocuppied most of Anatolia during the Middle Ages, in a different scale.


You have nice skill in history!

I’m agree that spanish would prefer a christian spanish faction. However, a lot of spanish particulary in Andalusia and in central Spain could really identificate themselve to Al-Andalus (i really think). Its a part of their story (8 centuries) and the Islam of Al-Andalus was light. They got Ibn Rutsch philosopher Averroes, Jewish goldsmith, and a lot of Berber-Spain metis as emir.

I used to go in Spain, and people in Andalusia are really similar with Maghrebians, they are only differencie by the langage, the religion.

The problem of spain during the middle age is there is not a powerfull faction we can compare with the english or the french. They come with the Reconquista and the discovery of America.

The devs probably consider the hispanic community important, but I think this community is majority latino (colombia particulary), and ask for meso-america civilisation like Azeteca which might come later. Then I think this civilisation will come in first before an eventually christian spanish civ (which could be nice too, like Astrurie Kingdom, but which need to have gamplay difference with French, English and Romans!)

1 Like

Mmmh according to studies, most people in Andalusia are descendant of Leonese because andalusians mostly left the conquered land (sometimes following big revolts, like in 1264 and 1499-1501). However, it is true that there are some noteworthy North African DNA found in Spaniards, specially in the south. I can tell you my case because I’m actually Andalusian (from Seville, more specifically) and I had one of those DNA analysis made a year ago. I’m 84% Iberian, 8% North African, 3% Jewish and 4% Italian. For other cases I know, I’m a good representation of what you can find in the average Andalusian. And I can tell you I was surprised because I’m as pale as the average Irish! :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:.

The problem of spain during the middle age is there is not a powerfull faction we can compare with the english or the french. They come with the Reconquista and the discovery of America.

About this, I get where you’re coming from, but I don’t fully agree. Aragon was expanding in the Mediterranean since the 13th century and, with the definitive reunification of Castille and Leon in 1230 (and the already mentioned battle of Las Navas in 1212), I don’t think the christian spanish kingdoms were less powerful than France or England, at all. It is true that during the 8 to 11 centuries they were small, but the fact that they were able to survive against al-Andalus tell they weren’t powerless either. Furthermore, if you look at a map of 1100, by that time Leon-Castille was roughly the same size as England.

I honestly think both civs could mirror each other, if added to the game. Al-Andalus can be the “most European muslim civ” with the mozarab contribution while the Spanish could be the Christian European civ with some muslim flavour, for example a mudejar touch in some architecture and even units like almogávares.


Ah what a coincidence ^^ I believe you so.

The fact is in the mind of the common people, a christian state do not really include muslim or oriental units. Byzantin is different cause its a christian state in orient. The spanish are extremly famous for the conquistador; But the Astrurie and Pampulune, christian kingdom of aragon are unknow for majority of people, particulary outside europa. It’s the same for Almohade, Almoravide, but not muslim Spain!

So I think the devs try to synthetisis the concepts. If spagna come, they really need to differencie the faction with others christians. In Total War II Attila, Astrurie and Pampelune are very similar to the Franks for example.

Maybe they can do something for spain as a faction with very op mills … :joy: