Where do the fans want the next DLC to focus on?

Help me out guys. Not sure I can figure it out on my own.

5 Likes

It seems that fans now want the African DLC, but no specific region is specified.

I think there should be a DLC focused on the Sahara and Sahel first. Then the next DLC should be about West Africa.

Bantu DLC should be in the later future (with its own Architecture Set).

Recently it seems like they have been going for what most people want.

Everyone was shouting for Poles and Bohemians, and we got it.
Then everyone was shouting for Georgians and Armenians and we are getting that too.

The Indian split was a bit more debated in the community since there hasn’t been a civilisation split before.

For AoE4 it’s similar.
Ottomans, Byzantines and Japanese are certainly in the top 5 most requested and Malians kinda are the civilisations for the ones that wanted anything that is not Eurasian.

1 Like

Most of the civilizations in Africa have already been mentioned in other posts. Let me put forward some other ideas

China can actually separate Jurchen and Tibetan cultures, which are closely related to China, but for some reasons, this may be a dangerous decision

The Saportec and Chimu peoples of Central America and the Andes can serve as complementary civilizations to the Aztec, Maya, and Inca civilizations, which can improve the ethnic conditions of the old American campaigns

The indigenous peoples of North America and Mapuche were independent of the ancient American civilization and later entered the world’s view, but they were still optional civilizations. However, their most influential events were during the American colonial period, which may be closer to the requirements of Age of Empires III

Africa would be very desirable with 3 Civs. The continent still has some outstanding CIVs to offer from this continent. just 2 civs is simply not enough.

5 Likes

I wouldn’t mind an African DLC the size of The Conquerors :wink:.

4 Likes

yeah two is the bare minimum. I’ve said it before in other posts but for primarily geographic reasons (Read Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond) Sub-Saharan Africa didn’t lend itself to “civilization” (read largescale farming and governance to distribute the produce from that farming, not some antithesis of savagery), but if we can add the bohemians and the sicilians, I think we can find a few more examples somewhere in half a continent over 1000 years of history.

2 Likes

Yes, I think it’s very possible for Africa to get geographical markings as well, so you could easily have at least 3-4 DLCs from Africa. But that’s likely not going to happen, and I doubt they’ll do a mega-DLC (or at the very least, 4 civs like pre-DE DLCs had) again. Perhaps they should focus on one region in Africa and take civs from there rather than some sort of ‘general’ African DLC, which would fit the DE’s style of DLCs that focus on a small region (Lords of the West, Dukes of the East).

But honestly, even just two civs feels a little lackluster. If there’s space for 3 DLCs, I wouldn’t mind it being like one region in Africa, then a Chinese split or Americas DLC, and then Africa again. I think that’d at least alleviate the very ugly empty spaces in the ‘world map’ of AoE2’s civs right now.

3 Likes

The candidates for African Civs by region I would think as most likely would be:

West Africa:
Soninike (Ghanans)
Songhai
Yoruba
Edo
Kanembu

Central Africa:
Kongolese
Bugandans/Kitarans (they are a bit mythical in the nature of what is known about them, buuut would act as the perfect second civ in Central Africa; one historical, one semi-mythical)

South Africa:
Shona (Zimbabweans)
Swahili

East Africa:
Somali
Nubians

So, in total, 2 great candidates for modern DLCs by the region, one semi-shaky candidate for a modern DLC by the region, and 1 near-Conquerors level DLC or 2 Modern DLCs by the region. It’s a pretty nice, comprehensive level of possibilities that could be interspersed with other American or Asian DLCs. One could also argue that FE could mix and match these at will, or choose different options entirely. But, if they focus on regional combinations like they have been then I reckon these might be some good options for those types of DLC.

2 Likes

Guns, Germs and Steel has long being considered extremely suspect and being debunked in many regards.
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/wiki/historians_views/#wiki_historians.27_views_of_jared_diamond.27s_.22guns.2C_germs.2C_and_steel.22
http://www.columbia.edu/~lnp3/mydocs/Blaut/diamond.htm

4 Likes

I wouldn’t mind new civs in east-Asia or in southern Africa (south of Sahara, Indian Ocean). But what I want the most is campaigns for existing civs missing them.

Hausa and Mossi are good candidates too.

Hausa has a decently recorded history and a campaign potential with Kanta Kotal. Devs could give us Songhai and Hausa together and their campaigns would be connected like Jadwiga and Algidras and Kestutis.

An East African DLC with Kanembu, Nubians, Swahili, Somalis and a Turkic campaign would be awesome.

3 Likes

Yes, I agree…anything can be…

I know the main criticism of Guns, Germs, and Steel center around a belief of whether the factors Diamond cites are actually deterministic. Also I think you overstate the position of the criticism against him.

But I really don’t want to get into anthropology or literature on an aoe2 forum. I thought if I briefly described the framework by which I was making these generalizations, I’d avoid anthropological discussions, not encourage them as I’ve seem to have done.

All I was trying to say is that while sub-Saharan africa doesn’t have the same density of options as the non-desert and non-tundra parts of Eurasia, that I don’t think that justifies the current ratio of African to Eurasian (while technically not included in the term north africa (mediterranean coast) are functionally part of Eurasia in this context) representation in the game.

2 Sub-Saharan African in-game civs < ideal number of Sub-Saharan African in-game civs < number of Eurasian in-game civs. All I was trying to say.

1 Like

Siam/Tai (Tai because it is more inclusive to Lao, Northern Thai and the Lue of Sipsongpanna), Mons and Chams if it were to be Southeast Asia again.

1 Like

Damn didnt know about Kanta Kotal, I always thought that Amina or some king of Kano would make the most sense for a campaign but Kotal has just a much bigger variety for enemies and in general just dounds like a much more interestibg campaign

Why is every cool african campaign in the 16th century…

1 Like

This name sounds like kotal khan backwards.

Also Shan and Dai of Dehong/Daehon.And I am hoping for a scenario of Phaya Chueang.

1 Like

The East Asian DLC is more pressing than the African one. The African Kingdoms came out some years back but nothing as been added to East Asia since the Conquerors in 2000! Tibetans, Jurchens and Thais/Siamese. And the campaigns for Korea, China and Japan. Charge this DLC about $30/35 bucks as it would be a mega one. Market it aggressively to the East Asian market especially!

New Tibetan and Chinese building sets introduced as well

Campaigns

  • Tang Taizong/Wu Zetian (strong silk road focus theme)
  • Korean unification by Silla
  • Sankoku Jidai for Japan
  • Wanyan Aguda’s conquests for Jurchens
  • Rise of the Tibetan Empire for the Tibetans
  • The story of Ayutthaya for the Siamese
4 Likes

I mean, saying this is like saying that Asia is fine because since African Kingdoms we’ve had several Asian DLCs (Rise of the Rajas, Last Khans). I’m also not sure how effective aggressive marketing even is, RoR seemed to fail hard at getting Vietnamese players to play it for example.

1 Like