Which factions could be added to RoR in a Bronze Age dlc?

  • Akkadians (Akkadian Empire)
  • Amorites (Mari, Qatna, Yahmad…)
  • Canaanites (Kingdom of Edom, Kingdom of Moab)
  • Colchian/Kartvelian (Kingdom of Egrisi/Colchis)
  • Eblaites/Kish (Kingdom of Ebla, Kingdom of Nabar)
  • Elamites (Old Elamite dynasties, Elamite Empire)
  • Gutians/Guti (Gutian dynasty of Sumer)
  • Habiru/Apiru
  • Hurrians (Mitanni Empire)
  • Hyksos (15th dynasty of Egypt)
  • Kassites (Kassite Empire)
  • Luwians (Purushanda, Luwiya)
  • Lycians (Lukka)
  • Lydians (Kingdom of Lydia)
  • Magans (Umm Al Nar)
  • Sea Peoples
  • Suteans
  • Bharatas
  • Harappans (Indus Valley Civilisation)
  • Purus
  • Dongyi/Yi/Yueshi
  • Jomon
  • Liangzhu (Guangfulin)
  • Xiajiadian
  • Quanrong/Qiang
  • Bantu
  • Libu/Libyans (Meshwesh)
  • Nubians (Kingdom of Kerma)
  • Cycladians (Keros, Phlakopi, Syros…)
  • Mycenaeans (Mycenaea, Menelaion, Pylos…)
  • Pelasgians
  • Olmecs (San Lorenzo)
  • Mayas
  • Caralans/Caral (Caral-Supe civilization)
  • Valdivians/Cotocoalloans/Machalillans (Valdivia, Cotocoallo and Machallilla cultures)
  • All of them!
  • None
  • I don’t know
  • I don’t care
  • Other(s)
0 voters

Additionally, how many of those civs would you like to see in such a dlc?

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • More
  • None
  • I don’t know
  • I don’t care
0 voters

Since I finished doing polls for regional RoR dlc’s, I can now go to the next step: Age centric dlc’s. Obviously I won’t do it for Stone Age and Tool Age, as it is far too early in the timeline for any civ to be defined enough or have even second hand contemporary records, but on the other hand I think Iron Age will be split into several parts.
Bronze Age is full of poorly documented civilisations, so it’s quite possible a lot of those won’t ring a bell for you. Some of them don’t even have an endonym that we know of or even an exonym used by their contemporaries and have instead be named by archaeologists. You can do some research on them if you have any hesitation (I even included the names of states, dynasties or archaeologic sites when relevant) but if it can helps you know that I grouped them geographically.
From Akkadians to Suteans you have Middle Eastern civs (including Mesopotamia, Egypt, Syria, the Caucasus, Iran and the Arabian peninsula), then Bharatas, Harappans and Purus stand for South Asia, civs from Yueshi to Quanrong are from East Asia, Bantu, Libyans and Nubians are from Africa, Cycladians, Mycenaeans and Pelasgians are Bronze Age Greeks and their predecessors, Olmecs and Mayas are early mesoamericans and Caralans and Valdivians are the first known Andean civilisations. I hesitated to include more options for Europe, Central Asia and East Asia as we have many cultures mostly known trhough archaeology, but I ended up deciding against it as all of them would get better candidates from later time periods.

Now I have to admit I think this poll is a special case because, in my opinion, there’s the potential for two entirely different dlc’s. One would be about the very first agricultural and urban civilisation which are not already in game, such as Harappans, Caralans, OImecs and maybe Mayas, and could be called Forgotten Cradles as a nod to both Forgotten Empire and their mod turned dlc the Forgotten, and the concept of cradle of civilization. Obviously it should include new architecture sets (at least two, ideally three), and the new campaigns may focus on already existing civs with more recorded history. The second one would be a half age half regional dlc and would focus on early Middle Eastern empires, probably with the Akkadians, Hurrians (Mittani) and Elamites, as most other candidates all over the world are either arguably less relevant, have less known information about them or were still powerful enough during the Iron Age to be featured in other dlc’s (though the Elamites had some revivals at later time periods and could maybe be replaced by Amorites or Eblaites). It also means Sargon’s campaign would have to be turned from a Sumerian campaign into an Akkadian one.

Now you obviously don’t need to agree with me and you can vote for whatever seems more logical to you without being influenced by what I said, you can even vote for no Bronze Age dlc, or no RoR dlc for that matter.

EDIT: I just realised I didn’t clarify this point, but for this poll’s purpose the Bronze Age is considered to start in the late 4th millenium BC and end in the 12th century BC with the Late Bronze Age collapse, even though in some parts of the world it’s considered to have lasted longer or to not be a relevant historiographical and archaelogical classification.

I think late ancient civs would definitely be more interesting. By the way, in this game I really miss 5 Age, which would represent the classical era of antiquity.

Of the civs available in this poll, I chose Harappans (Indus Valley) and Nubians (land below Egypt) because they are the most lacking.

1 Like

The game was clearly meant to stop in the 4th century BC on release (aside from some oddities such as the Yamato) which make even the civs from Rise of Rome stand out as kind of anachronic. I don’t know if the solution would be a 5th age or an entirely separate game, but I agree that Late Antiquity is a fascinating period.

I would definitely love to see Nubians in game, but I did not vote for them myself because I don’t think a Bronze Age dlc would be the best way to introduce them. They already existed but were more relevant during the Kushite period than the Kerma one in my opinion.

1 Like

If AoE 2 smacks of antiquity (Romans, Goths, Huns) then I think AoE 1 (now RoR) should also have late antiquity/Dark Ages references.

Germanic peoples, Celts, Huns etc should be part of RoR.


I agree, but I have other polls to talk about those :smile:
Celts and Germans are pretty popular in the European poll, though they have the advantage of being relevant earlier (I would even dare to say that Celts are mostly relevant before the Roman Empire). Huns tend to receive around 20% of the votes whenever they are an option, but they are systematically behind the Xiongnu whenever they both appear together.

1 Like

Celts and Germanians are such huge groups that they could easily be two separate DLCs. At the moment, the game focuses almost exclusively on the Mediterranean + a bit of the Far East. South Asia, Africa and Northern Europe are missing the most.

Huns and Xiongnu could be the most important civs in Nomadic DLC. In such a DLC, even the Slavs, who were nomads who came to Europe from the steppes of Asia, could appear.

1 Like

I think the Scythians would make more sense than the Slavs, but a Nomadic DLC would definitely be welcome. I would of course be overjoyed with every dlc ideas you mention, but I don’t think the Middle East is bloated to a point of not needing additional civs or generating as much fatigue as Europe for AoE2.


Fun fact: The language of the Scythians presented in Civ6 somehow sounds a bit Slavic to me xDDD

As a Georgaboo, I’ll have to do more research on the kingdoms you mentioned, but I associate them more with the Middle Ages anyway.


That’s strange, Scythian is supposed to be closer to Persian and other Iranian languages x)

Colchis was a small state founded in the 13th century BC and it covered the western part of modern day Georgia and all of its coast. It seems to have been subjugated several times by different peoples but to have retained some form of autonomy or recovered independance at several points until it was finally annexed by the Romans. It’s present in several Greek myths, especially as the destination of Jason and the Argonauts’s juorney as well as Medea’s homeland.
The Kingdom of Iberia was formed later, around the end of the 4th century BC, and covered the Eastern part of Georgia. It was successively a subject state of the Seleucids, Romans and Sassanids, I don’t think it was ever fully independant.


If aoe2 is going to represent late antiquity I don’t think it’s a good idea for now to double it since aoe1 already has a lot to represent anyway, starting from the stone age lol! And I say this as a late antiquity fan.
But the early part of late antiquity which remains uncovered in aoe2, mainly from circa 160 to 300 ad, could be covered in aoe1 since palmyrans for example are already there. How cool would a Zenobia campaign be by the way?

Note: In Age of Empires we (usually, not always) have civilizations rather than polities/states.

Oops, forgot to reply! Thanks for that, it would have saved me a lot of time had I known about this page I think xD

1 Like

IMO the ancient Bashu people (the ones who made those weird bronze masks at Sanxingdui) in Southwest China are a must-have if there’s a Bronze Age DLC. At that time the Ba and Shu regions hadn’t been sinicized yet.

I definitely want Harappans and Hurrians. Nubians would also fit. Maybe Olmecs but i dont think so.

What i miss besides those are: Scythians, Etruscans, Celts (Boii, Iceni, Thracians, Dacians), Pontus, Armenia, Iberians/Celtiberians (Iberians/Lusitanians).
Then you could also add Axum, Cherusci, Seleucids.

I would prioritise it to Scythians, Etruscans, Boii, Iberians and Cherusci.
Scythians are most famous for their bronze age, it was their peak. They should definitely be added.

But with civs like Etruscans, Boii, Iberians, Cherusci you might want to add more light infantry and skirmisher/peltast.
And with Scythians, Cimmerians and Boii you want to add more chariot variations. Like the skirmisher chariot or a skirmisher cavalry unit. Or add an upgrade unit for the Scout unit. As in more light cavalry.
Historically the skirmisher chariot is the first version of the chariot.
And with Scythians you might want to add a wagon/cart system like the Mongols in AoE4 have, but only for the first few ages. With Bronze age the would settle down.

For this poll’s purpose, Bronze Age ends with the Late Bronze Age Collapse in the 12th century BC. None of the civ you mentioned were really relevant (or, in some cases, existed) by this point.

Honestly, there are a lot here I’ve never heard of, so I had to pick don’t know (as well as picking some actual options).

Harappans stand out to me as the must-have civ in this list – but I don’t like the name, because it’s too specific, singling out one settlement within a much larger civilisation. Obviously calling them “Indus Valley Civilisation” would be weird. I would actually just call them Indians – if I recall correctly, that’s how Herodotus referred to people from around the Indus Valley (admittedly, much later than the Indus Valley Civilisation).