Future New Factions

[Arnoldo Boczelli]

I think that this factions should be added to the game :

Nubians
Kongo
Somalis
Pueblo
Iroquois
Chimu
Muisca
Zapotecs
Chanka
Tanguits
Tibet
Hephthalites
Serbs
Tai
Delhi Sultanate
Wallachia
Moldova
Sorbs (White Serbs)
Switzerland
Venice
Swedes
Tarascans
Mississppians
Vlachs
Papal States
Polynesians
Melanesians
Khazars
Chams
Makurians
Vandals
Old Prussians
Croats
Tlaxcallans
Austria
Republic of Novogorod
Grand Duchy of Moscow

Slavs should be renamed to Kievan Rus

What do you think about this?

[James3157]

Publicado originalmente por chaoticbalrog:

You say that, but a future Chronicles DLC including native civs such as Zapotecs might happen just to spite you.

Zapotecs are more likely to be added to the normal AoE II: DE timeline than from a Chronicles dlc involving Bronze Age/Iron Age. It is also too early to tell at this point if World's Edge plans on adding more civs in the future that are based on the Middle Ages to AoE II: DE with Forgotten Empires. If more Chronicles dlc is going to be added it is going to be Capture Age, but if if more Middle Ages dlc is going to be added it is going to be Forgotten Empires.

[Soully]

Publicado originalmente por James3157:

I highly doubt that any future Chronicles dlc would ever add any Native American or Pacific Island civs regardless of whether or not these civs existed during the Iron Age/Bronze Age; although, I will admit that Bronze Age and Iron Age only is perhaps what the original Age of Empires game and ported RoR should have been based on, because there is too big of an age gap between the Stone Age (also known as Tool Age and Ice Age, but apparently according AoE Tool Age and Stone Age are different ages) and Bronze Age. If Capture Age and World's Edge were to stretch things out more they could also include Africa, but it would be limited to mostly just North African civs.

You are correct, but that's why I'm hoping they do Side-stories that reach outside of the main narrative/s. I mean not only could we have the dramas of Classical Mesoamerica, but we could have a return to East Asia with a proper 3 Kingdoms Period (And with so many scenarios, and as many as 4 civs!), or a foundation of the Mauryans and all of those dramas...

Chronicles clearly takes a 3-esque approach following nations and that gives us some flexibility. We can get real specific and we can get real generalist. In light of that I'm not adverse to having several Euro groups that are part of the same peoples! I just disagree with Dynastic naming- like Nanda to Maurya, or Roman Republic to Roman Empire. It feels horribly inelegant, un-narrative.

[James3157]

Publicado originalmente por Soully:

You are correct, but that's why I'm hoping they do Side-stories that reach outside of the main narrative/s. I mean not only could we have the dramas of Classical Mesoamerica, but we could have a return to East Asia with a proper 3 Kingdoms Period (And with so many scenarios, and as many as 4 civs!), or a foundation of the Mauryans and all of those dramas...

it would be good to clear up some confusion as to whether or not World's Edge plans on adding more dlc in the future based on Middle Ages civs or if they are only going to make more Chronicles dlc from now on with Capture Age. I already mentioned from a previous comment that Zapotecs could potentially come with a dlc made by Forgotten Empires (based on Middle Ages) instead of Capture Age (based on more Chronicles dlc and before the Dark Age).

Publicado originalmente por Soully:

Chronicles clearly takes a 3-esque approach following nations and that gives us some flexibility. We can get real specific and we can get real generalist. In light of that I'm not adverse to having several Euro groups that are part of the same peoples! I just disagree with Dynastic naming- like Nanda to Maurya, or Roman Republic to Roman Empire. It feels horribly inelegant, un-narrative.

The next Chronicles dlc if there is going to be another one is probably going to add more civs from Asia, Europe, and/or North Africa and not from the Americas. Assuming that each dlc only adds three new civs it could potentially take a while before Native American civs even get taken into consideration by Capture Age and World's Edge.

[Crossil]

AoE2- wise, what about a Swahili-Sinhalese-Javanese expansion, as an Indian Ocean oriented DLC? With the Javans taking over the existing Gajah Mada campaign and the Malay getting a new one, probably based on the Srivijaya empire.

[Lilim]

Publicado originalmente por Crossil:

AoE2- wise, what about a Swahili-Sinhalese-Javanese expansion, as an Indian Ocean oriented DLC?

Every civ in that DLC would have a different architecture (African, Indian and SEA). That's nice .

[jonoliveira12]

I want Swahili and Sinhalese, but think Javanese are not necessary, since Malay cover them quite well.

[jonoliveira12]

I was never one for getting the Tlaxcallans, since they were basically a copy of the Aztecs when it came to military, but Admiral Wololo convinced me with this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kykKHRxxWY&ab_channel=AdmiralWololoAoE2

I was just thinking that would remove Platemail Armour and Halberdier from it, and introduce another bonus:

-Non siege units benefit from both Infantry and Archer Armour upgrades

It may seem like a lot, but in reality all it would do is give all Tlaxcallan units +1 Melee Armour, after all techs are researched, when compared to base variants.
It would also make introducing Cavalry Armour techs in Imperial not necessary, which feels a lot cleaner on the design front to me.

Also would be cool to get a civ that can actually get Xolotl Warriors in a non conversion dependant way.

[chaoticbalrog]

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I was never one for getting the Tlaxcallans, since they were basically a copy of the Aztecs when it came to military, but Admiral Wololo convinced me with this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kykKHRxxWY&ab_channel=AdmiralWololoAoE2

I was just thinking that would remove Platemail Armour and Halberdier from it, and introduce another bonus:

-Non siege units benefit from both Infantry and Archer Armour upgrades

It may seem like a lot, but in reality all it would do is give all Tlaxcallan units +1 Melee Armour, after all techs are researched, when compared to base variants.
It would also make introducing Cavalry Armour techs in Imperial not necessary, which feels a lot cleaner on the design front to me.

Also would be cool to get a civ that can actually get Xolotl Warriors in a non conversion dependant way.

If I were to take anything from Tlaxcallans, it would be Elite Eagle Warrior and Illumination. Losing out on Halberdiers would be a major nerf to their anti-cavalry play.

[jonoliveira12]

Publicado originalmente por chaoticbalrog:

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I was never one for getting the Tlaxcallans, since they were basically a copy of the Aztecs when it came to military, but Admiral Wololo convinced me with this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9kykKHRxxWY&ab_channel=AdmiralWololoAoE2

I was just thinking that would remove Platemail Armour and Halberdier from it, and introduce another bonus:

-Non siege units benefit from both Infantry and Archer Armour upgrades

It may seem like a lot, but in reality all it would do is give all Tlaxcallan units +1 Melee Armour, after all techs are researched, when compared to base variants.
It would also make introducing Cavalry Armour techs in Imperial not necessary, which feels a lot cleaner on the design front to me.

Also would be cool to get a civ that can actually get Xolotl Warriors in a non conversion dependant way.

If I were to take anything from Tlaxcallans, it would be Elite Eagle Warrior and Illumination. Losing out on Halberdiers would be a major nerf to their anti-cavalry play.

That would completely cripple them, every american civ needs Elite Eagle Warriors.

Their only way to get Xolotls is with an expensive Castle UT, in the Imperial Age, and even then they have tp upgrade those to Elite too.

The whole Tlaxcalla theme, that Admiral made, was making do with less, but still getting great options.

[Crossil]

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I want Swahili and Sinhalese, but think Javanese are not necessary, since Malay cover them quite well.

The Malay are, imo, same as Slavs. But perhaps even more so. Overreaching in many aspects, and encompassing unrelated states and empires. Right now they serve to encompass all of Indonesia, Philippines and Champa.

Javanese being a first break-off point makes sense to me, as they are the most numerous ethnic group separate from Malay.

It would make the campaigns in Indonesia have more than just Malay in them, which would be pretty solid to me, even if it doesn't go further than that.

[Flakstruk]

^i think thats reasonable as well

[Soully]

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I want Swahili and Sinhalese, but think Javanese are not necessary, since Malay cover them quite well.

They really, really seriously do not. There's basically no comparison between Malayans and Javanese, they hail from entirely different areas, with an entirely different culture that just so happens to have followed loosely alike religious traditions.

Publicado originalmente por Crossil:

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I want Swahili and Sinhalese, but think Javanese are not necessary, since Malay cover them quite well.

The Malay are, imo, same as Slavs. But perhaps even more so. Overreaching in many aspects, and encompassing unrelated states and empires. Right now they serve to encompass all of Indonesia, Philippines and Champa.

Javanese being a first break-off point makes sense to me, as they are the most numerous ethnic group separate from Malay.

It would make the campaigns in Indonesia have more than just Malay in them, which would be pretty solid to me, even if it doesn't go further than that.

Literally never thought I'd find myself agreeing with you of all people but, yes, you're correct here. SEA alone is good for at least a dozen civs just on its own. Nusantara spits out... Malays, Acehnese, Sundanese, Borneans, Malukans, Javanese, Balinese, and potentially Bugis and Makassarese if we want to look at groups that only have an entry point late-late in the timeline (Though they would probably be better for 3).

SEA has Mons, Pyu, Meiteis, Chams, and Thai effectively unlisted... for now. That can change, too!...

[jonoliveira12]

Publicado originalmente por Soully:

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

I want Swahili and Sinhalese, but think Javanese are not necessary, since Malay cover them quite well.

They really, really seriously do not. There's basically no comparison between Malayans and Javanese, they hail from entirely different areas, with an entirely different culture that just so happens to have followed loosely alike religious traditions.

Publicado originalmente por Crossil:

The Malay are, imo, same as Slavs. But perhaps even more so. Overreaching in many aspects, and encompassing unrelated states and empires. Right now they serve to encompass all of Indonesia, Philippines and Champa.

Javanese being a first break-off point makes sense to me, as they are the most numerous ethnic group separate from Malay.

It would make the campaigns in Indonesia have more than just Malay in them, which would be pretty solid to me, even if it doesn't go further than that.

Literally never thought I'd find myself agreeing with you of all people but, yes, you're correct here. SEA alone is good for at least a dozen civs just on its own. Nusantara spits out... Malays, Acehnese, Sundanese, Borneans, Malukans, Javanese, and potentially Bugis and Makassarese if we want to look at groups that only have an entry point late-late in the timeline (Though they would probably be better for 3).

SEA has Mons, Pyu, Meiteis, Chams, and Thai effectively unlisted... for now. That can change, too!...

The Malay campaign is made to be completed with the Malay civ, downright to Harbours being necessary in one of the maps.

It would be very awkward.

[Soully]

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

Publicado originalmente por Soully:

They really, really seriously do not. There's basically no comparison between Malayans and Javanese, they hail from entirely different areas, with an entirely different culture that just so happens to have followed loosely alike religious traditions.



Literally never thought I'd find myself agreeing with you of all people but, yes, you're correct here. SEA alone is good for at least a dozen civs just on its own. Nusantara spits out... Malays, Acehnese, Sundanese, Borneans, Malukans, Javanese, and potentially Bugis and Makassarese if we want to look at groups that only have an entry point late-late in the timeline (Though they would probably be better for 3).

SEA has Mons, Pyu, Meiteis, Chams, and Thai effectively unlisted... for now. That can change, too!...

The Malay campaign is made to be completed with the Malay civ, downright to Harbours being necessary in one of the maps.

It would be very awkward.

REGIONAL BUILDINGS, HOOOOO!.... *Ahem*, besides, I never found them that necessary.

[jonoliveira12]

Publicado originalmente por Soully:

Publicado originalmente por jonoliveira12:

The Malay campaign is made to be completed with the Malay civ, downright to Harbours being necessary in one of the maps.

It would be very awkward.

REGIONAL BUILDINGS, HOOOOO!.... *Ahem*, besides, I never found them that necessary.

Meh, buildings already have regional architecture, so Regional Buildings is not a great asset, look at the Caravanserai, everyone wanted it to go to Turks, Saracens and persians, but when Persians got them they actually lost their appeal.

Regional Units are cooler.

Also Harbours come from teh Thalassocracy UT, and civs sharing UTs would be called lazy reskins.