I guess some of the words can be found,might not be ideal but its a start.
2 Likes
Ideally this DLC would also unlock Khitanguts and Jurchens for those who don’t own 3 Kingdoms.
I think giving Jurchens and Khitanguts their own language is a must. Muisca have their own, and their language is extinct. It is just peak lazyness by the devs.
This DLC may also have a Khitanguts split. I don’t agree with forcing people buying a DLC for a single civ but it’s not like it hasnt happened before.
3 Likes
At this point, I’ll buy any DLC for AoE2.
It’s the only game I play, so spending $60 USD a year on DLCs is no problem for me. I’m looking forward to good content in future expansions, but I’ll still speak up about issues that should have been addressed a long time ago.
I figured the best way to do it is sell Tibetan Tanguts and then give the 3K civs and chineses campaigns.
You can do the same thing for eastern Europe adding the Vlach, and giving Magyars, Slavs (Rename Rus) and Turks campagins
2 Likes
Ideally it’d be really nice if they threw in one more civ (maybe Tanguts to make Khitans fully just Khitan, or maybe Thais and then leave SE Asia as is) but i’d buy it even without that yeah.
Well, I’ll abandon that idea then…
Every end game scenario cutscene you build a mountain of skulls as Timurlane i think you can make a antagonist campaign
I think this is the third time I’ve had to say this, but Timur is not a good example here, haha… 
Please read my previous comments carefully.
Timur was a conquering ruler who expanded his empire and is remembered as a major historical figure.
That is not what I mean by a “tyrant” in this context.
What I am talking about is Kushluk, who
- was not a conquering ruler,
- was not even Khitan, and
- was so oppressive that when the Mongols entered the capital of Western Liao, the people welcomed them as liberators.
So my point is not “tyrants are bad characters for AoE2 campaigns.”
My point is that Kushluk specifically does not work well as a main protagonist.
Again, please read all of my posts before replying.
A campaign DLC for East Asia would definitely be well received, but I guess it might still be bundled with a new civ as a way to promote it. If the Tibetans were the new civ, everyone would buy it.
Also, of course, the Tanguts need to be separated from the Khitans, and the Khitans should really become their own civ.
From a practical standpoint, a campaign usually has around 5–6 scenarios. That means just 5 civs would already require at least 25 scenarios. Considering that V&V only offers about 20, and that people are hoping for the Tanguts or even other new civs, it might be more realistic to release two smaller, cheaper DLCs, each including 3 or 4 campaigns instead.
The following ideas about the protagonists are just my personal opinions.
Personally, I’d like to see Empress Xiao Yanyan (蕭燕燕) of the Khitans and Emperor Yuanhao (元昊) of the Tanguts each portrayed through the eyes of their own children, showing what kind of rulers and parents they were, which would create a striking contrast. For the Jurchens, Wuzhu (兀朮), and for the Chinese, Yue Fei (岳飛), could provide campaigns with rivalry, similar to those of the Burgundians and Joan of Arc.
I think that if Hojo Tokimune is the protagonist, the Japanese struggles against the Mongols wouldn’t be enough to develop five full scenarios; otherwise, the story would have to be split very thinly, leaving each scenario with few events.
As for the Koreans, if Yi Sun-sin were the protagonist, I can imagine the first scenario covering his early career against the Jurchens, with the remaining four scenarios dividing the Battle of Noryang into four parts. In my view, this is choosing a story that isn’t long enough would make each scenario cover little content, similar to Hojo Tokimune.
I think that with the right modifications, a civil war can still be very interesting, so I’m not opposed to choosing the Sengoku period and the Three Kingdoms of Korea as their campaigns.
That said, no matter who the protagonists are, it’s always great to have a campaign DLC for East Asia.
If you combine both invasions you should have enough material for 5 to 6 scenarios.
1 Like
Tbh as much as people hate the idea of adding new civs to Japan, I’m warming up to the inclusion of Emishi (not to mention Ryukyuans but I don’t need warming up to them, I’m already convinced I want them). The Emishi could be a cav archer civ representing the mounted warrior side of Japan that the current Japanese civ doesn’t: they could get Mounted Samurai and Samurai Archers, one of which could be shared with the team Genitour style to reflect how the earliest Japanese samurai descended from the assimilated Emishi who served Tenno and the Yamato who adopted their tactics.
Not to mention that the Emishi were ethnically distinct from the Yamato, so it’s not yet another case of 3K or the Burgundians.
If the Japanese campaign is based on one of the civil wars, the inclusion of Ryukyuans and Emishi would at least increase the opponent variety as they could be used for the southern and northern clans respectively (the culture of Kyushu had much in common with Okinawa, the bulk of Tohoku population consisted of assimilated Emishi, etc).
I guess Japan could make for a separate DLC, with two new civs (Ryukyuans, Emishi) and three campaigns (two new civs and the Japanese). For the Ryukyuan campaign I’d love to see something about the Wokou pirates and their escapades stretching from Korea to the Philippines.
There was this poll released by WE before TTK. I still feel guilty about answering I would like “a campaign set in ancient China”.
1 Like
Oh, that’s a very good idea.
Since Wuzhu and Yue Fei were rivals, it would be interesting to choose campaigns from both sides and experience the story from each perspective.
1 Like
Only if a new civs is released. I mean, V&V would have been a good DLC if only a brand new civ were included. A random one, like Iroquis with a Hiawatha campaign.
In this case, Tibetans.
I have already considered that, and I don’t feel that can work very well. In that way the content each scenario having would still little, like making an objective in a normal scenario become an individual scenario. But of course it depends on the writer in any case.
In my view, having the two invasions into a single historical battle-like scenario would be rich and decent. You have a few minute to prepare the defense, then you have to defend the coast and bases from the first invasion until the first storm coming. Then again, a few minutes for your repair and preparation before the second invasion, and the second invasion would be longer and stronger so being against it would be busier and more difficult. As long as you can hold on until the second storm coming, you win.
I’ve shared that concept in my old post, and I even named this historical battle-like scenario to Kamikaze, the name Japanese call the two storms.
1 Like
Japan alone might be a bit lacking in content.
Okay, let me give you an idea.
If I were to suggest a campaign for Yi Sun-sin, it could be structured like this:
- Battle of Nokdo Island (vs. Jurchens)
- Battle of Okpo (vs. Japan) – Joseon’s first victory of the Imjin War
- Battle of Sacheon (vs. Japan) – the first real combat use of the Turtle Ship
- Battle of Hansan Island (vs. Japan) – the famous “Crane Wing” formation
- Battle of Myeongnyang (vs. Japan) – defeating 133 Japanese ships with only 13
That would make five scenarios in total.
The story could end by mentioning Noryang as the final historical battle.
How about a campaign for Hōjō Tokimune like this:
- Battle of Tsushima (vs. Mongols and Chinese) – Defend against the sudden attack by Mongol and Chinese forces.
- Battle of Sawara (vs. Mongols, Chinese, and Koreans) – A guerrilla-style mission against the invading coalition that has landed in Japan, focusing on destroying their blacksmiths and farms.
- Battle of Hakozaki (vs. Mongols, Chinese, and Koreans) – A timed defense mission against waves from the three allied forces. After holding out, a kamikaze (divine wind) arrives and Japan wins.
- Battle of Iki Island (vs. Mongols and Chinese) – Build defensive lines to stop the second invasion by the allied forces.
- Battle of Hakata Bay (vs. Mongols, Chinese, and Koreans) – A very difficult mission with simultaneous land and naval battles. It overlaps with mission 3, but while mission 3 focuses only on land combat, mission 5 requires defending against both land and sea attacks at the same time. As in mission 3, Japan wins when time runs out thanks to the kamikaze.
This structure would make a challenging and dramatic campaign focused on defense against the invasions.
Yeah, their campaigns can even be narrated by a same men, similar to the Lithuanian and Polish campaigns, so that the entire story can be fluent. For example, a Jurchen veteran captain telling the stories to a new Han Chinese recruit in the Jin army at the eve of Mongol invasion. You play the campaign of Wuzhu first, like the captain tells how the Wuzhu lead their ancestors against the corrupted Liao rule and to conquer the north China. And then you play the campaign of Yue Fei, like the captain proceeds to tell how the poor peasant’s son became the hero, how he won the respect from not only Chinese people but also the Jurchen enemy, and why he finally failed.
The last scenario of this long story could be the captain leading the troops to defend the Jin capital from the Mongols. It would show that the history always repeats itself: The Chinese betrayed the northern ally and associated with new conqueror, and still be defeated by the new conqueror.
Looks okay. But 4 of the 5 scenarios are water games?
I feel the devs won’t pick General Yi for the campaign as long as the Noryang Point is still there. I mean, they don’t need to overlap the theme. There are other outstanding figure in the Korean history.
Well, they look like the objectives of a regular scenario that get turned into individual scenarios.
Depends on the writer’s work, it could be interesting enough, or blend and boring.
I mean, the actual fighting during the Mongol invasions of Japan were remarkably brief.
Tibetans need to be added.
1 Like
Oh, having four naval battles might be a problem… yeah, that worried me too, to be honest.
But since the current Korean civilization is already based almost 99% on the Joseon concept (Hwacha, Turtle Ship, Bombard Cannon), it might be better to look for a different hero from the Imjin War, or instead choose Yi Seong-gye, the founder of Joseon.
Right, and in fact, the Japanese forces suffered repeated defeats against the Mongol–Goryeo (Korean) allied armies.
Without the typhoon (kamikaze), the Mongol army would likely have reached the Japanese mainland.