Years before, I’ve heard rumors about adding Persians, Afghans, or Turko-Mongols to this game.
Will it ever happen?
Your guess is as good as anybody’s.
8 Likes
No, first we need every existing town in Europe to be a civ, because all of them matter and are important. Then we wont have space for any more civ, though the game will be pretty much complete in the most-important-players aspect anyways ¯\(ツ)/¯
3 Likes
We only have confirmed Poland and Denmark. After that, who knows. I hope so, but nothing guaranteed
it will, only after the 59th euro dlc
1 Like
I know you are joking, but to be honest, I don’t think there are that many “civs” in that time Europe. After Poles and Danes comes out, I can only think of Austrian or Hungarian. I’m not against more European civs, but European civs probably means no new architecture arts, no new tech trees and no new brand-new play styles.
2 Likes
I liked a lot KotD, but euro again is soooo “meh”. At the end of this year, half of the civs from the DE-era are from Europe…I dont like this approach, which is even worse in AOE2DE. I dont know which part of the team make these decisions, but it seems to be someone who rathers turn this into an Age of Europe and some Other Places. AOE2, for example, got silly splits (Franks-Burgundians, Italians-Sicilians, Poles-Lithuania) instead of adding civs from regions barely, if any, represented.
7 Likes
It’s funny that only opponents of adding European civs think so.
BTW. This is off topic.
1 Like
In my opinion, the most important thing is that not only Middle Eastern civs but also Central Asian and North African civs should be a completely new category of civs - Islamic Civilizations. I think it would be the best solution to present MENA civs as something completely new with new mechanics, instead of duplicating mechanics known from Asian or African civs. This way, it would be much easier to design new civs from this huge area because the creators would not have to limit themselves to the patterns we know. I think this would open the way to adding many interesting civs such as:
- Arabians
- Moroccans
- Persians
- Tatars
There are also even more possibilities to present this interesting area even better: Afghans, Egyptians, Kazakhs, Uzbeks.
It is worth adding that it is also possible to add a completely new Minor Civilizations category and maps from this megaregion. In the process, the Ottomans civ could be updated and transformed into an “Islamic Civilization” - already has a lot of its own stuff that it doesn’t share with other European civs: all their units are unique and have a Mosque instead of a Church (introduce them to a completely new Architecture Set, new mechanics and that’s it - it won’t be bad since they already got radical changes as part of the free update ).
4 Likes
None of these are silly splits.
Sicilians are based on the Normans that conquered southern Italy, Africa, and Levant, and attempted to conquer Byzantium. They were a transcontinental empire, not an Italian offshoot.
Lithuanians were a large, independent pagan nation that was very dissimilar from Poles. It’s only in the AoE3 time frame that they became politically united. If there was a split, it’s between Slavs and Poles, not with Lithuania.
France was a lot less centralized in the middle ages and the Burgundians were a very powerful independent faction that was as much proto-Dutch as it was French. Before that they were a Germanic tribe that was totally independent of the Franks.
AoE2 is also Eurocentric no matter what they do because everyone has the same base roster of primarily European units. They could branch out and do civs like Mississippians, Puebloans, Muisca, Tongans, Nubians, Swahili, Zimbabweans, and Bornu, but they’re still gonna use the basic European template that every civ has.
3 Likes
It is not allowed to go against proposals from new factions unless they are of European origin.
You can already consider that Europe is complete, so the next civilizations could surely be outside of Europe. Also if you look at the expansion history of AOE-3, and not just the definitive edition, no European expansions had been added until more recent years.
TWC Expansion: American Civilizations and more American maps.
TAD Expansion: Asian civilizations and Asian maps.
Expacion TAR: African civilizations and African maps.
Also two minor DLCs with civilizations of postcolonial origin.
After all that, a European DLC finally arrived, since we had never had European maps.
AOE-3 is the most representative AOE there is, there is no comparison with AOE-2.
AOE-2 is a saturated game, unlike AOE-3. There is no comparison.
2 Likes
All of them were already represent somehow inside other existing civs. Still, AOE2 released them instead of expanding its rooster with civs from somewhere else,
Cool how if I add a catch phrase magically the main point is forgotten.
Nice, now tell me: which region got two DLC about it in a row?
Adding european maps and royal houses is amazing, anyone can check my posts from KotD announcement to see that I DID want those maps and their locals. What I dont want to is focusing mostly in one region while the other are sub-represented.
1 Like
Yes, but that does not mean that the game has abandoned other regions, it will simply add two factions that people have been asking for for many years.
2 Likes
This is an extremely ignorant opinion. There was not a single references to these civs prior to their inclusion.
It’s fair to complain about ignoring regions outside Europe, but all the civs they chose to add recently are very solid options (except for Rome, that one is quite stupid).
2 Likes
I agree that Danes and Poles are vital addition to this game, to make European civs completed.
The only unreasonable European civ is Maltese, but it has already been in campaign, so add it won’t anger me.
But no splitting, yes, no splitting in the future. If they do something like split British to Ireland, Scotland and England, I will be against it totally.
Also, more new European civs in AOE2 not that unbearable, unless other regions are at least roughly represented. The fact is, there are so many major civs in Asia or Africa are not showing in that game, they still do nothing with them for years. I think the reason is the cost of adding a European civ is cheap, no need new designed system, no new architecture art, or something like that.
Just because most splits are bad doesn’t mean they all are. Germany and India are the only ones that should be split.
4 Likes
The addition of Malta with Italy, the fact we only got two African civs in the African Royals dlc and how the new civs are both European leads to one conclusion….
There just isn’t much money going into this game. And there is not enough money because there is not enough players to risk spending money. We might be a bunch of passionate people really keen on the game and I do believe we have developers that are interested and creative, but the lack of money hurts the game’s potential.
It is far more likely that the economic pressure on this DLC is “what sells” rather than “what is expensive to make”, design and balancing probably doesn’t cost more for say a Siamese civ than it does for the polish 1 since its the same people who would have designed both. Modelling is also internal as we can see from AOM, besides we don’t know how many units the new factions will come with. Voice acting is almost certainly more expensive in Danish than it would be in pretty much any other language short of something nearly wiped out (and even then the price is more finding the people who can help you).
2 Likes
Regarding this, I think that the Polish civ will receive the same voices as the Poles civ units from AoE 2.
1 Like