Which civs would you like to see added first in DLC?

Age of Empires IV IV - Discussion
367

We call this fallacy: tongue in cheek. As you pretend not to see, I put the link back

*In an industry predicted to be worth more than 178 billion U.S. dollars by 2021, the Asia Pacific region was a top contender for years. With the number of video gamers approaching three billion globally, *Asia Pacific is responsible for over half of it**. Within the Asia Pacific region, China, Japan, and South Korea lead the gaming markets.

So there is no point in making people believe that I am talking about the 48 countries, while this study is talking about Asia Pacific, an area which strangely includes Mongolia and China. But also India Asia–Pacific - Wikipedia How weird eh?

No. Thats false.

Cet ordre fut créé à l’occasion du concile de Troyes (ouvert le 13 janvier 1129a), à partir d’une milice appelée les Pauvres Chevaliers du Christ et du Temple de Salomon (du nom du temple de Salomon, que les croisés avaient assimilé à la mosquée al-Aqsa, bâtie sur les vestiges de ce temple). Il œuvra pendant les XIIe et XIIIe siècles à l’accompagnement et à la protection des pèlerins pour Jérusalem, dans le contexte de la guerre sainte et des croisades.

Translation

This order was created on the occasion of the Council of Troyes (opened January 13, 1129a), from a militia called the Poor Knights of Christ and the Temple of Solomon (named after the temple of Solomon, which the crusaders had assimilated at the al-Aqsa mosque, built on the remains of this temple). He worked during the 12th and 13th centuries to accompany and protect pilgrims to Jerusalem, in the context of the holy war and the Crusades.

I don’t care. They are not templars at all. Templars died with the Concil de Vienne. You are talking about an spanish esoteric new order made by eventualy some people who belongs to templars. This is not templar and I dont know why we are talking about this total off topic.

The French wiki say this

L’action de l’ordre du Temple dans la péninsule Ibérique fut donc secondaire, car l’Ordre tenait à privilégier ses activités en Terre sainte.

Translation

The action of the Order of the Temple in the Iberian Peninsula was therefore secondary, because the Order wanted to privilege its activities in the Holy Land.

In short, you don’t know anything, and you don’t cite any source. Same things, Hospitalier are french born. Off topic. Why are you talking about natives french order to justificate a faction no people care about : Spain before Age of Discovery. Look at the survey, nobody care about this faction, they want Byzantine, Meso America, Japonese and Vikings.

Your words are laughable, you add nothing, you argue about nothing, you answer for nothing. Not even the sources I am giving you that reveal your abysmal ignorance of marketing and history. Yes you are right, stay behind and come back after having learned to inquire.

368

1 - I am not insulting, I respond with patience to people who dont knwo anything about French history, have wrong references, and know nothing about marketing in the video games business.

2 - Moi aussi, et j’espère que tu ne l’es pas car de un tu n’es pas capable de contredire ce que je dis sur les gendarmes, et tu confonds les Français et les Francs. Tu dis que Charles Martel est un français alors que c’est un franc. Tu dois être canadien pour dire une énormité pareille car Charles Martel c’est un franc et pas un français.

3 - It is you who is trying to avoid the question of francs. Not me. A surfer even pointed it out to you look

Because you are unable to understand that the Battle of Tour was Charles Martel the king of the Franks, and not the king of the French, against the Moors whom they beat with swordsmen wall against cavalry.

4- Absolutely not, you say that you are French but obviously you do not understand French. Because the article says that it is a troop of Modern Times (16th) and it is an elite troop which is totally absent before the 16th century. The French campaign of Guillaume the Conqueror is 1066.
We understand that you are going over all the arguments to which you do not know how to answer.

5- Your source is a random guy replying to a random guy on the Reddit forum. Great. We understand why you have such a hard time with history.

369

We call this fallacy: tongue in cheek. As you pretend not to see, I put the link back

Great. Except that’s not the question. He asked why, if the goal was to get as much as buyers as possible, they would choose a country that invaded much of the countries in wich are these buyer located. Not a great marketing strategy.

Wich source ? You only have put one and single source until now. A source that only talks about pure marketing, while the debate is not on what is marketing, but rather if the devs are making a game for money.
Another argument, more than the fact that the devs made a lot of researches and published a lot of their results both on the AoE website, discord server and… Well, the game itself. Why would you make so much researches and spend so much money on it, only to put pop-culture mix-ups in the game ?
So, I was saying, another argument is that, simply, there are some things that could eventually be in favor of a “cliché for money” game, but there are too many that are against this possibility to make it true.

No, there were four in Europe, four in Asia. You did played the game, right ?

Except that I have never talked about french nor cavalery. And secondly, I first thought it was charlemagne because some dozens of years later, he fought the same ennemies in the same region of Pyrénées/north iberia.

Again, great, but it’s not the question :smiley:
The question was: You say that it was the french (while I never said that) that fought the moors with heavy infantery at Poitiers and that so the french have great infantery. So, here you will have to admit either that you were wrong, and that, as it was the franks that fought there, your sole argument on french infantery being supposedly better than french cavalery is invalid, either that you were wrong and that the franks and the french indeed have much in common.

Also, let’s watch the whole post, will we ?

Did you simply erased the part that bothered you ?
Because, indeed, the fact that you are talking about franks that are even older than the great-father of the first king of france is going against your arguments.

Look at the time periods of the game’s civs, it still applies.

So, you say the opposite of what the source (wich you never give the link) says ?

First, I never said that Charles Martel was french. You said that. As you said that it was the french that fought at Poitiers. Taking this as an “proof” that they had infantery. You are, once again, projecting you bad argument on me, while it didn’t come from me.

Secondly, why would the canadians be bad at french history ? If I wasn’t the type of people allowing the benefice of doubt on internet, I’d say that’s racism. Being Canadian is not a reason to be less educated.

Yes. This source is not on a great encyclopedic book, but, if you watched it really, you would have seen that there are sources in this article. The exact same way does Wikipedia articles can be built and trusted when the sources are numerous enough.

And finally:

  1. “We” ? You are alone on your position dude, accept it :smirk:
  2. So, you talk one source. Great. But I posted 6 sources (that I found in matters of minutes, give me hours and you will have 30) and you only mention one ?
    6 = 1
    I don’t think it is mathematically correct.
1 Like
370

This guy is not only bad at history, he also has vision problems.
The answer were there

Have you already forgotten this part? Nah. You do not want to see because you have no argument at hand.

You get tripped up in what you say. Not only have I cited sources on the history of France, but I have cited some on marketing, which is a strategy for developers. But since you don’t know anything about all that, you try to evacuate the subject to talk about history :wink: Which is incomprehensible because your historical culture looks as bad, if not worse, than that of video games commercial strategy.

Yes, the gameplay is based about synthesis stereotypes. But you don’t understand any of this. You don’t understand that 15-16th century cavalry nobles have nothing to do with the “France” of 1066 which is present in the game :joy:

It depend if you consider Rus’ totaly in Europe. Then 4 civ in Asia confirm the fact that this is an important market, what you dont apparently believe.

To be so crushed in a debate is sad.

I dont know your nationality, but if you are french, you confused charlemagne and charles martel, and tell as much enormity about the history of france. I dont think you are.

I looked, this is a debat between two random guy with random sources. Nothing scientifics, nothing known. This debat wasnt enough heavy to product a wikipedia article.

Thats the only sources you find. Your critical sense is typing on google “French best in cavalry in the middle ages” on use the first Reddit link to argue. That’s terrible (or funny).

You have never released any source that supports your words
You use discussion forums.
You are using a Wikipedia article that does not exist in French, the language of the country of this civilization, and whose content has nothing to do with what you are saying.

I used 3 sources.

Pick yourself up, man. You showed that you didn’t know anything about history, you mixed up people, you don’t know who are the francs, who are the French, you are not able to interpret an article, and you answer next to protect your ego. But in the end, you’re completely lost and ready to answer again later because you have time to waste and a thread to troll.

371

I think anyone who knows basic Scandinavian history is not clamoring for “vikings” but instead for just the Danes or Norwegians (which would fit the time period), since viking would be a type of pirating unit from the barracks and not the whole faction. However I agree with your statements. The bulk of the game should be about history and uniqueness along with covering the bases not yet hit by the game, and not about some marketing quota because it appeals to a majority.

2 Likes
372

Yeah I was just addressing his mention of the Vikings.
Unfortunately I feel like AoE4 team are going for the marketing quota Civs.

You can compare, I made a post about Portugal suggestion, got a reply back, despite Portugal being a civ that would fit perfectly for late game.

You compare it to a Japan post, and you see a big difference in interest. It’s just media exposition really.
Samurais are well know, there is a lot of movies and games with ninjas, anime and what not.

What do you hear from Portugal? You might hear about Vasco da Gama and Henry the Navigator.
I had people saying to me with a straight face they the Dutch introduced matchlock in japan, and that the Discovery Age only started because Ottomans conquered byzantium. By 1452 Portugal was exploring Gana.

They are not romanticized in the media, and it’s a shame.

2 Likes
373

Yeah… the Japanese also copied the Portuguese breastplate and made replicas for their samurai armies because the design was just better than what they had. Honestly though tv shows from the “history channel” and poorly researched media are also to blame with their bad info. I for the longest time, thought butted mail and horned viking helmets where historically accurate for a while. Granted some things in media improve over time, like how total war went from inaccurate horned helm blood thirsty vikings to the actual thick cloth, mail hauberk, and hornless helmets of med2, or how shows are finally depicting how to actually hold a nordic round shield. Also there are more online resources to help regulate the community from misinformation. Such as Metatron and Skallagrim.

1 Like
374

Well, at least, as we’ve seen with Age II, the devs still love the various peoples of middle-ages
We might have to wait 2024 for Portugal, but we will probably have it

2 Likes
375

Turks, Italians, Japanese, Spanish, Byzantines and Aztecs.

3 Likes
376

Well me too to be honest. I do not known Metatron, will have a look. Love those channels. In kind, since I assume H.E.M.A might be a thing that interests you I recommend checking the Iberian montante, especially Dom Diogo Gomes de Figueiredo.

I could wait 2 years. :wink:

2 Likes
377

I have it listed in my bio on here lol, yeah I have been looking for local groups so I am not just doing pollaxe training by myself, and I want to get into buhurt just for fun. Been using my quarter staves since pollaxes use a similar fighting style, and they are cheap.

I have a custom painted Cold-Steel pollaxe but its more of a wall hanger and not meant for training. So I am in the market for a training pollaxe.

image
image1920×2560 574 KB

It even has the Rabbit Clan crest from Armello!

image
image1920×2560 519 KB

2 Likes
378

That’s awesome! Without further going off topic I buying a synthetic Montante next year for some solo training.

1 Like
379

Nice! Yeah I will digress… you convinced me though. I was originally wanting the Moors to represent the Iberian Peninsula, but I think Portugal would be far more interesting as a gunpowder rival to the Chinese. So my current “wanting these civs to be added to the game list is:”

  • Danes or Norway or Sweden
  • Portugal
  • Lithuania
  • Kingdom of the Congo
  • Aztecs
  • Inuit
  • Japan
4 Likes
380

Well, Moors shouldn’t be representing the Iberian peninsula anyway

381

I share your opinion on a Norse civilization, but why are you not including swedes? While Norway and Denmark also have their reason to come to the game swedes have as good if not even better reasons to get in.
Starting with the viking age:

  • In contrast to Danish and Norwegian vikings Swedish vikings sailed east and raided modern Russia and the Baltic states and even partially became the rus (the name rus comes from Swedish vikings rowing their boats through Russias long rivers, so the name rus comes from the word roðr which means something like rowing in old Norse language)
  • Swedish vikings even came to the byzantine empire and formed the majority of the Varangian guard (special lifeguard of the byzantine emperor)
  • one of the largest pagan temples from the vikings is located in Sweden in Uppsala

After the viking age:

  • just like Norway, Sweden had not much going for them in this time
  • they were part of the kalmar union
  • they conquered parts of Finland

Late medieval age:

  • Sweden was no harmless kingdom, managing it to break free from the kalmar union (Norway also tried but failed)
  • Gustav Vasa defeated the professional soldiers and even Landsknecht (used as mercenaries) from the kalmar union with simple farmers, so Sweden got independent 1524
  • they did this with guerilla warfare in the forests and heavy use of the crossbow
  • at this point the Swedish army was the first documented army to use water canteens in their equiptment
  • they also were the only army to use staff swords, which were very effective against pikes

At this point there are already a ton of unique things and possible bonuses/techs you could make for them

Since the time frame of the game even includes the beginning of the 17th century (Chinese reaching to 1644) you could even include Gustav II Adolph (also called the father of modern warfare) and at this point Sweden was superior to almost all other European powers at the time in terms of military tactics and so on:

  • He made large reforms regarding logistics military and other things
  • He invented Swedish brigades which where such a large tactical advantage that every other major European power had adopted it by the second half of the 17th century
  • he was the first torecognize artillery as it own kind of unit, professionalized it (before cannons were seen as specialized weapon and often only used during sieges while stationary)
  • he introduced new innovative cannons like the leather Cannon and later the regimental gun
  • 1611, when he ascended the throne, Sweden fought in 3 wars at once (against Denmark-Norway, Poland-Lithuania and Moscow) and won 2 of them (against Denmark-Norway and Moscow) 10 years later
  • he used his experience against the winged Hussars to appreciate the usefulness of shock-cavalry

This might seem a bit late for a medieval game but according to the time frame it’s still in it and one of Sweden strength was that they were ahead of time and the innovation of many things which should be used in warfare for the next decades or even centuries

So why are you not including Sweden? I don’t want necessarily want swedes alone as a civ but I certainly don’t want them to be excluded only because the Norwegian and Danish vikings raided England and are more known (Looking at the timeframe vikings are only of importance in age I or II).

2 Likes
382

I think it would be better to have both Portugal, Leon/Castille and Al-Andalus to set up in Iberia

2 Likes
383

I agree, I had more ideas on the Danes (see under here), but Swedes and Norwegians are also a needed.

1 Like
384

I think Ottomans fits really well in the game era

5 Likes
385

Actually, I think the “Ottomans”, specifically, are a bit too limited to very late middle-ages and early modern periods, but indeed, the Seldjukid Turks for ages I and II, then sultanate of Rum for Age III, then Ottoman Empire for age IV (with, like, Sterlet-like janissaries and Great Bombards superior to french’s canons) would be great.

3 Likes
386

@LordBelou3 Yes technically you’re very correct, it should be a mega-civ called Turks and encompassing a few major Turkish empires like Oghuz, Ghaznavid, Great Seljuk, Anatolian Seljuk and Ottoman Empire, with Timurid elements perhaps.

But we could just as well use the exact same naming convention of Delhi Sultanate already in AoE4 (in fact it’s several states in timeframe) and simply call the civ Ottoman Empire. I believe this would be better, I like the name ‘Delhi Sultanate’ too. Naming conventions in AoE4 are more than flexible enough.

3 Likes