the amount of people asking for completely out of period factions for this game is astonishing, earlier i saw someone ask for Sparta.
5 Likes
mapuches or araucans!!
Thats the Norse in the options I believe
That should be the Byzantines at the time period
1 Like
As a European I can confirm that the majority of them make no sense. Longbows do and so do Enclosures though. I wouldn’t say they’re a spectacularly designed civ, but they’re okay. Nothing more nothing less.
2 Likes
How were you able to name the Native Americans Civs and forget to put THE SPANISHES with El Cid’s incredible campaign?!?
To me: Byzantines, Turks, Norses(Vikings), Spanish and Celts
Campaings? Turks against Byzantines, Vikings against Wessex, ElCid and WILLIAM WALLACE but not a tutorial campaing! 
1 Like
THE SPANISHES
Did you mean the Spaniards?
I pretty much agree with your wishlist though, except for the other continents deserving some love too! ^^
2 Likes
You mean “The Spanish”? I don’t think that changes on plural.
If you want an easy civ, you can just pick the French. They’re also easy to play, and they are just better at everything than everyone for some reason, so they are the easiest to win with. If you are watching people on the internet playing this game (considering you don’t own this game), then you probably aren’t watching noobs. If the English are getting played at that level, then it’s not because those players can’t play other civs, and it’s not because they don’t know about the French either.
1 Like
I picked from Africa since I think they get even less representation than South America does.
I picked Ethiopia specifically because they need representation other than South Park.
2 Likes
Kingdom of the Kongo would be cool as well!
1 Like
Names are important, you cant use the arguement of weapon usage, its every bit as likely that the natives just adopted the invaders methods. And if thats the basis for the arguement that the gallowglas were norse then it isnt much of an arguement to lean on.
Also, the gallowglas came from the irish west of scotland, not the north.
Other: KOREA KOREA KOREA
Japanese / Norse / Persians
And about new campaign. My interests is Crusades , and Japan campaign.
Crusades from the First crusade to Jerusalem.
The Japan campaign is Mongol invasion and Japan civil war.
1 Like
I am not a fan of you Byzantium approach but I do really like your idea for the Turks, that sounds very cool.
1 Like
Why this hype for Byzantins seriously … because of you we are going to have them. Two Roman Empire in the game waow.
So original.
I want Vikings and Berbers Al-Andalus,
Because this is "Age of EMPIRES" and they were the longest empire, dominating whole centuries. Vikings / Norse, not even a country, much less an empire… Byz have Vikings as famed mercenaries.
Plus, Byzantines and “HRE” (not holy, not Roman, not an empire) are far apart in every way.
This game desperately needs the
Turks / OTTOMAN EMPIRE
an extremely UNIQUE, fantastically DEEP civ and the WORLD's most powerful empire in the last 300 years of AoE4, and also Mali, Inca, Persians (maybe Japan) because they’re cool, UNIQUE, historically significant.
1 Like
Japanese, norse, byzantine are my top 3. would have preferred byzantines at launch instead of HRE or alongside them tbh. also I feel like Norse should’ve been added in at launch too. 8 civs is just not enough.
1 Like
I dont care. I dont want to have them. It will be boring, its a mix between Indians and Abassid. Two low play civ.
And Byzantins are not Ottomans. Thats two different civilisation.
Ok, “I don’t want” Vikings either. Does it matter? Does it change history? Not really huh.
So now Byzantines are a mix of "Indian and Abbasid" huh? I thought I had seen idiosyncratic ideas in this forum but dude…
“Indians” proper are not in AoE4 yet, apparently they’re coming. The Delhi Sultanate is Indian population/economy, Persian language, Turkic sultans/rulers and Arab religion!…
Sure Ottoman Empire is a more asymmetric, more unique civ. But Byzantines are super deep and rich in content too.
1 Like