True, but Moctezuma and Francisco de Almeida occur in the 16th century and serve as a nod to what is later AoE 3: Moctezuma’s narrator is Cuauhtemoc, who is later the IA of the Aztecs in AoE 3 and the Portuguese of AoE 2 take many things from AoE 3 (the Feitorias and the Organ Gun), even one of their AI is Henry the Navigator, who is the AI of the Portuguese in AoE 3…so it’s quite a topic, let’s say that between 1400 and 1600 AoE 2 and AoE 3 coexist at the same time (the Renaissance of AoE 2 occurs at the same time as the Exploration Age of AoE 3), just as between 400 and 800 coexist at the same time AoE 1 and AoE 2 (the Iron Age from AoE 1 ends during the Dark Age in Europe from AoE 2)…
However, when looking into studies on them, they are at least different from Koreans in Korean lands on many ways, like architecture, clothes, government type. They have many Manchurian elements.
Tibetans
Jurchens
Tanguts
Khitans
Nanzhao
Gokturks
Sogdians
Chams
Siamese
Javanese/Malays split
Moluccans
Visayans
Oriyas
Sinhalese
Tamils/Kannadigas split
Kashmiris
Sindhis
Assamese
5 Likes
Historical Tibetans seems fine but Bhutanese would be a nice substitute. I would love Jurchens, get a slow but heavy tank of a cavalry and for the Siamese either a cannon elephant or battle elephant with 2 range.
Of course, anyway, I was talking about the geographical area, not the ethnicity itself…
Pretty sure this would be in the same situation as tibet.
Sikkimese will question why not them?
I guess we’re going to back to Old Tibetans which I believe is okay as long as it doesn’t antagonize China in a separatist way.
1 Like
In my opinion the Siamese civ is the most missing civ from Asia. Next are Tibetans and Jurchens civs.
1 Like
Among those three Tibetans are the most unique as they cannot be represented by anyone. Siamese and Jurchens can be partly represented by Khmer and Mongols respectively.
Apparently so, but the Siamese seem to be a large blob on the SEA map, while the Jurchens would cover a really large area of northern China and even further north.
Additionally, the Siamese are the most popular candidate for a new civ from Asia.
2 Likes
Which among the three is more important is subjective preference from person to person.
I wouldn’t argue against such vague statements.
Lets add a maldivian civilization to complete south asia.
Jurchens are not Nomad in that era, should be Chinese rather than Mongols, Khitans could be represented by Mongols, and Tibetans, should work as a standalone civ, which cannot be represented by anyone, and Tanguts should be another standalone civ, with half Chinese and half Tibeatans.
Actually there were a mix of jurchens, some sedentary, usually the more southerly jurchens, and some more nomadic, usually more northerly.
As a Tai Lue, Tai Yuan, Siamese would be the closest to me so I am bias in having a Tai civilization. I seen many civs who were represented by others like Armenians (Byzantines), Romans (Byzantines), Burgundians (Franks) and etc. who are now are their own civilization so I am hoping the same can be done for Tai.
1 Like
At least Jurchens who found Jin and Qing were sedentary, they are also what we suggested as a civ. For the nomad Jurchens, they were called Yeren(野人) by other Jurchens, means Savage in Chinese.
1 Like
Even the Wild Jruchens, the “nomadic Jurchens” you guys called, are semi-nomadic at best. Pastoralism and hunter-gathering are not exactly the same as nomadism.
Yes, I feel that at least Siam could enter the game, and to that you add another Asian civ and that’s it…
1 Like
Who fits with them thematically is the question,siam is the only one which is not there from that region.