Yes I know, I’m a bit of a grammar-nazi XD
1 Like
Turks and Byzantines…with campaigns spanning from Belisarius and the rise of Islam (526-717) to the rise of the Ottoman Empire (1071-1566)…the other would be the Aztecs with the creation of the Aztec empire (1325-1520) and the Spanish (1469-1571) or the Koreans (668-1598) and the Japanese (1185-1592)…
4 Likes
depends what you mean with templars, the Knights Hospitalers survived until napoleon and actually did get to the new world for a short time.
also just saying but there are 4 europeans: english, french, HRE and Rus.
1 Like
define swedish.
also at large this is considered an overstating of swedish influence, where they there? yes, did they found kiev? very unlikely.
danes and gotes and even norwegians also where in the guard, the svea was just one component.
want to point out that finland at the time consisted of maybe a few 10.000 people almost all living in small villages with no central authority.
perhaps you should be a bit more upfront about sweden being a junior partner of denmark in the kalmar union
there was no norwegian rebellion to danish rule, the closest was the war for religion where catholic priest tries to break away from denmark after the counts feud because denmark had become protestant, it wasn’t as much about independence as it was about religion.
the weapons we have in game are firelances, not muskets, its a little ridiculous to include early line infantry, you wanna play with that then AOE 3 already has sweden in the game.
other european powers break off around their reformation to protestantisme, why should sweden magically be different not to mention the insane technology gap in europe in those 150ish years. china goes to 1644 because chines technology hadn’t improved much for 100s of years.
1 Like
AoE 3 came out with 8 civs and in two years I already had 14 civs from all over the world…Take it easy…
Well,during the Middle Ages,in the Iberian peninsula the Reconquest was fought that ended the same year as the Discovery of America in 1492…
2 Likes
Well, the battle of alcazarquivir is already in the aoe 3 DE…but I do not rule out that the Turks will put in later…Take it easy…
The Ottomans were not present at Alcacer Quibir.
Indications of the presence of an Ottoman force accompanying the Moroccans to the battlefield vary between sources. Historian Stephen Cory, in reviewing relations between the Saadians and Ottomans in this period, states that the battle was won by the Saadians “without direct Ottoman assistance.”[11] Abderrahmane El Moudden, in a large study of Ottoman-Saadian diplomacy in this period, notes that some modern Turkish sources attribute the 1578 victory to Ottoman forces led by Ramazan Pasha on the field – though he also notes that some of these sources are liable to exaggerate Turkish military history"
Nationalistic Revisionism.
1 Like
First of all thanks for your reply!
Definition of swedish:
the people from Götaland/Svealand or approximately the people where Sweden is today
This might be a bit exaggerated but they seem to be the people, from who the Rus originally developed "The scholarly consensus holds that they were originally Norse people, mainly originating from Sweden, settling and ruling along the river-routes between the Baltic and the Black Seas from around the 8th to 11th centuries AD. They formed a state known in modern historiography as Kievan Rus’[…] " (Rus' people - Wikipedia)
The earliest members were Rus “The Rus’ provided the earliest members of the Varangian Guard. They were in Byzantine service from as early as 874.”, but later they consisted also of Danes, but the largest part of them were Swedish “Immigrants from Scandinavia (predominantly immigrants from Sweden, but also elements from Denmark and Norway) kept an almost entirely Norse cast to the organization until the late 11th century.” (Varangian Guard - Wikipedia)
I know that there wasn’t much in Finland at this point but I still thought I’d mention it because they got troops from Finland later on
Junior?
There were some tries, for example from Knut Alvsson you can look it up if you want and again I have to admit that I formulated it a bit exaggerated
I would like to see it and we have things like the streltsy in the game so I thought it would be cool.
Not sure what you mean with this
Thanks for your clarification on the Chinese time frame 
Yeah and? What has that to do with anything?
1 Like
Well, I don’t remember if the sewdish princes of Novgorod founded Kiev, even if I think so (I think it is also said in the Age IV Rus’ campaign by the way, should check it), but they, alast, founded Novgorod, the first great Rus’ city, that, ultimately allowed the foundation of Kiev, and so of the Kievan Rus’
Well, we have Ivan the Terrible’s Sterlets, so, why not ? XD
I’ll assume we want to keep the total number relatively low, if each is going to be as different as Delhi or Rus.
- Byzantines. Clearly missing hole in the AoE roster, and not really similar to existing civs.
- Turks. Can’t have Byzantines without Turks. Also rounds out the Middle East/Islamic roster, and can be used to represent states like the Golden Horde, Timurids, or other Islamic steppe societies. Maybe they could have a Mongol-like early game that transitions into a more conventional late game?
- Chola Empire (or some other Indian). India is 1/5 of humanity, and deserves two civs, especially if in-game Delhi is going to be more representative of Iran than Indian sultanates (even peasants speak Persian, gimmick is based on scholars…). The Tamil Chola Empire covers the opposite end of India and the other major religion of South Asia, and it had a maritime empire in SE Asia that could be a great setting for a campaign.
- Khmer (or some other SE Asian). SE Asia is another unique and distinctive region, and Rise of the Rajas was a popular AoE2 expansion. Khmer had the biggest/wealthiest empire of the era and the best name recognition, but Srivijaya, Thais, or Burma could all work.
- Japan or Korea. Fan-favorites in strategy games, and East Asia could use another civ.
- Ethiopia, or at least one other African civ.
- Aztecs. If you have any American civ, they’re the obvious choice.
- Spanish, as another popular AoE2 civ and natural enemy for an Aztec campaign.
If we can add a few more civs, Mali and the Incas should be shoe-ins. Italians, another East Asian country, Al-Andalus, Berbers, or even Vikings would also be reasonable additions, but with the design of AoE4, the game needs to be sparing with how many civs it ultimately adds.
5 Likes
Gael civ.
civ specific units could be: Gallowglass for heavy infantry, skirmishers/javelin throwers for archers.
and civilization specific economy buff on either farming or gold.
druid=priest.
just an idea.
I see the Japanese are 1st on the poll. A Civ that would pair well with then so they can can matchlock ashigaru and samurai would be the Portuguese.
Tanegashima (種子島), most often called in Japanese and sometimes in English hinawajū (火縄銃, “matchlock gun”), was a type of matchlock[1]-configured arquebus[2] firearm introduced to Japan through the Portuguese Empire in 1543.[3] Tanegashima were used by the samurai class and their ashigaru “foot soldiers”, and within a few years the introduction of the tanegashima in battle changed the way war was fought in Japan forever.[4]
Still well within the game timeframe.
As Campaign, you can have the early Mongol invasion of Japan, or Portuguese Campaigns in Asia of Francisco de Almeida and Afonso de Albuquerque.
First Europeans to fight the Japanese too.
4 Likes
I think Scots might take the spot while Irish could be an option tho, nothing wrong with representing other civs in the Isles instead of having the English only.
Byzantines, turks, spanish.
6 Likes
Most upvoted reply in the forum… Says a lot. An Age of Empires poll without the Ottoman Empire? Cute.
No, Byz are. Turks not in the poll… 
1 Like
So many irrelevant civs, or ones related to existing civs. Dark Age Rus are vikings, later Scandinavians are close enough to Germans. Persians barely ruled anything in Middle Ages, they’re represented through influence on Delhi (who are more Persian than Indian in this game).
Gaels are completely irrelevant, so are Anasazi and Zimbabwe. This game will have less civs than AoE2, choice needs to be more selective and based on distinct and important civs.
Byzantines, Turks, Khmer, Japan, Vietnam, Ethiopia, Mali, South India, Aztecs, Inca, Spanish… all good choices. I would like Al-Andalus or Moors, but Abbasids are close enough, so they should not be high priority. If you want Vikings or Portuguese, play earlier AoE game.
1 Like
