I think Morrocans are a bit of a blend between Arabs and Berbers, right?
They could also be called Moors to represent both Andalusians and Morrocans.
1 Like
Agree this is more recognizable.
1 Like
Saracens, Berbers, Moorsā¦ fundamentally, all these terms are problematic because they are names given to these peoples by Europeans.
If one wanted to rename and differentiate them, one could rename the Saracens Arabs and the Berbers Amazigh. This is essentially the term by which they understood themselves.
Even Saladināalthough actually a Kurdāsaw himself as more connected to Arab tradition and heritage than, for example, to the Seljuk (pronounced Turkic), who already played a crucial role and wielded considerable influence in the Middle East during his time.
2 Likes
If they are meant to stay in ranked, I hope that at the very least they are reworked to encompass wider time periods than just the 3K (they already kinda do given the ahistorical wonders and units, but only partially).
- Rework the Wei into Xianbei (or even Khitans if current Khitans are renamed into Tanguts, but not necessary, Xianbei and Khitans are related but so are Goths and Spaniards, Goths and āVikingsā, or Goths and Teutons).
- Rename the Shu into Ba-Shu or Sichuanese. Ideally remove the chariot because it was ancient already in the 3K period, not even mentioning the medieval era.
- Rename the Wu into Wuyue or Jiangnanese, make it represent the wider South Chinese culture thatād eventually spawn the late medieval Ming Dynasty. Include wokou pirates etc.
- Given the existence of other Han Chinese civs, rename Chinese into Zhongyuan (a name referring to the mainstream imperial culture of the Central Plains). Remove the camel as itās no longer an umbrella for all Chinese.
- Add historical character names from medieval period, and either remove the heroes or allow every civ in the game to train heroes. Preferably at Wonders instead of Castles.
2 Likes
Could a civ reasonably represent both Saxony and Anglo-Saxons? The Saxony civ from Age of Chivalry: Hegemony is nothing like Anglo-Saxons.
Also how would Saxons and Suebians differ from Teutons? Iāve seen similar suggestions before from other people but (like this one) never with any civ design detail.
So thereād be no civ representing England from the 13th century onwards, and Edward Longshanks would no longer have longbowmen and Warwolf, but would have serjeants and First Crusade. I donāt get it ā what would be the motivation for this?
Maybe how they fought would be similar?Chivalry tech tree is anyway different from the base game so I dont think its a good comparison.For me personally goths are more than enough to represent saxons.Im more interested in seeing a austria/bavaria civi with a different play style to teutons.
1 Like
Not sure about Saxon gameplay, but the Suebians could be quite distinct if they got a unit based on the Swiss mercenaries (called āReislƤuferā, either at Castle or as a unique upgrade to halbs).
Norman England would be represented by Normans. Longbowmen could be a regional unit available for both Britons and Normans. The motivation is simple ā Britons as a mishmash of Vortigernās Celts, Anglo-Saxons, and Normans, feel off.
Anglo-Saxons in real life never got the chance to reach high medieval period, so we canāt know how theyād differ from the Duchy of Saxony if they did. In the early medieval period up to the Normans conquest the differences werenāt that large, I think? The seax was a thing both on the continent and in Britain, the Saxon Steed / white horse of Kent symbol was widely used, etc.
That said, Iām not adamant about keeping them together, might as well split them into Anglo-Frisians and Low Germans if the distinctions were too great.
Not sure I agree about Goths representing (Anglo-)Saxons, they came from a very different area of the Germanic world and spoke a separate branch of Germanic.
Im mainly looking at the tech tree,anglo saxons fought mainly with foot soldiers and so does the ingame goths.Initially franks represented normans but now we have a proper normans civi so having a better saxons civi is not out of the picture.
I would very much like to see more civis using the german buildings get added ingame regardless of what they are.
2 Likes
Maybe rename current infantry Goths to Saxons and remake Goths as a cavalry civ? Ofc adjusting other stuff (dromons and the Alaric campaign would go to the proper Goth civ, Saxons would inherit the infantry focus)
Goths are fine as they are no need to do anything.
1 Like
Same question here. I have said in a different thread Iād like to see Saxons in the game at some point. But I also have no idea how can I differentiate them from existing Teutons. Same thing if we talk about Anglo-Saxons which is represented by Goths in game.
Bavarians and Saxons can be good Teutons split Central European DLC if done right.
Huns split then? Okay White Huns (Hephthalites) with that architecture. 11
1 Like
Wow look at it, perfect.
Can always add Vandals or any migration era people.
Still hoping finns will get added someday.
I was really meaning that in Age of Chivalry they seem to be focussed on cavalry and trade, whereas Iād expect Anglo-Saxons to be an infantry and monk civ with terrible cavalry.
Yes ā Goths without gunpowder is a pretty reasonable representation. If I was making a scenario/campaign involving them (which is the only time this kind of thing would matter at all), Iād use Goths but tweak the tech tree a bit.
Thanks. Thatās only one unit, though, and Teutons do have a good spear line and an infantry unique unit already.
Sure, but what would represent post-Norman England? The Norman period in England ended in the early 13th century at the latest (arguably earlier) ā Edward Longshanks wasnāt Norman.
Britons seem solidly based on Plantagenet England and Wales to me. Possibly the Town Centre bonus is based on Anglo-Saxon burhs. What part of the civ design is based on Vortigernās Celts?
Oh, I see, youāre one of those people who cares more about language than any gameplay elements.
Yes, I donāt like these kinds of arbitrary suggestions for change, where the only justification is essentially āthe developers did this slightly differently from how Iād do itā.
1 Like
Were they or was it just Alans/Sarmatians/Hunnish cavalry they accumulated through their migration? I imagine Goths similar to Vikings, they came from the same place and fought mostly with infantry, then they added cavalry after the contact with steppe people. If Goths should have good or bad cavalry depends on whether you consider āmercenariesā part of a civ or you consider a civ something very homogenous, but that doesnāt work very well in the middle ages and especially with early Germanic tribes who were very heterogeneous, so yes they could have good cavalry but then you wouldnāt need Alans as a civ probably, specially if Vandals too are added. They could actually share a regional Sarmatian Cataphract or something.
Saxons totally deserve a spot (mostly Angles, Saxons and Jutes but I think you can refer continental Saxons too in the tech tree) no idea how they would play but I guess they should get the huskarl or the huskarl should be renamed. Thereās Vortigern and Gaiseric scenarios and they both miss two of the most important civs in the European dark ages.
Normans were essentially Frankishized Norse and step a lot on the toes of Sicilians more than on Vikings. Iām not sure if they would have something interesting to play apart from Hastings (maybe transforming it into a William the conqueror campaign?). Swedes and Danes would be more interesting to split from Vikings/Norse. Also Sicilians are a mess of a civ, if they more clearly represented Sicilian kingdoms even after the Normans rather than just Norman Sicilyā¦ but then again Sicily and South Italy were always subjected to other European powers (Romans, Vandals indeed, then Byzantines, Lombards (another missing dark age civ), Muslims, Normans, Swabia with Frederik II, french with Anjous, then the Aragonese) so not the way to go eitherā¦ it would have probably been better to just add Normans instead of Sicilians, even if that meant sacrificing a bit of flavor in the hauteville campaign (different, less iconic emblem but again which wonder? Which castle? Which architecture for these non-exclusively-Sicilian Normans?).
1 Like
How will they differ TT vise from vikings?
There was a thread here a while ago about a Scandinavian split, basically Norse/Vikings and Danes would be based on the Viking age and Swedes later with more of a gunpowder (better cavalry?) focus but Iām no expert tbh. They would all be naval civs (sharing longboats?) but with different focuses on land, Norse will retain the economic and somewhat archer focus. Danes could be more about raiding and ācontrolā to address Danelaw in England (against Saxons if added) but also later you have Queen Margaret and the Kalmar Union against the Hanseatic league (arguably again Saxons but this time continental, you really need Saxons imo if youāre gonna make a Scandinavian DLC)ā¦ One of the civs could even have some religious theme and a campaign focus on their Christianisation Vs pagan resistance.
Just spitting ideas but itās not hard to imagine a DLC about those northern European wars, either in the dark ages (Danelaw, Vikingsā¦), Christianisation phase in the high middle ages and finally wars for the control of the Northern sea trade in the later middle ages.
1 Like
I would bring the developers of the chronicles architecture sets to do it because they seem more compotent.
1 Like
What would we like to see for aoe2 in 2026?
- Disallow smurfing via Steam family sharing feature.
- Automatically remove rating-droppers as per this.
- An option to exclusively match with people who agree to mutual random.
1 Like
I think matchmaking could be improved so much in general.
-Sometimes I want to play arabia, sometimes nomad, sometimes arena, sometimes megaRM, sometimes something new. why am i forced into this stupid system where i donāt even get to choose the map?
-let me limit the civ pool (both mine and the opponents). I donāt want to play the 15th game against spanish on Nomad. I donāt want to play against janky af civs with shwarma riders, fire damage, poison, auras etc.
Until lobbies are fixed we ARE forced to play ranked, as itās the only game mode thatās at least close to functional