Gbetos weren't Malians, but Beninese...

[FlipperTime]

Why do Malians, a desert-related people, have Gbetos from the jungles of Benin as unique units??? I mean, there are Sofa warriors with their tunics, Mandekalu cavalrymen (like Sundiata's unit) & Mossi mercenary heavy cavalrymen as well. They were options... even the Fulani or Dogon masked warriors would've been more appropriate.

& Gbetos are from Benin-Nigeria (Dahomey), which could perfectly have been a real fourth African civilization (without taking out Portuguese folks, of course), characterized by their excellent metallurgy & their trade.

Mixing them seems to me as similar to having Chinese samurai or Frankish longbowmen...

[aqcamus]

The Malians arent actually a desert related people, they made up and Empire which covered the whole region you wrote above, they extended from the southwestern Sahara to the north of the jungle area from central Africa, also the Mali Empire had access to the sea being the first ones to make contact with the damn Portuguese, so yeah, the Gbeto are fine with the Malians

[FlipperTime]

Originally posted by Joseph Joestar:

The Malians arent actually a desert related people ...

The main feature which the Malian Empire is famous for is their control of the trans-Saharan trade routes; adding to the fact that half of their empire is covered by desert, while the other half is a savanna.

Originally posted by Joseph Joestar:

..., they made up and Empire which covered the whole region you wrote above, they extended from the southwestern Sahara to the north of the jungle area from central Africa...

If you watch a map of the Mali Empire, you will notice that no, they didn't reach Central Africa at all, but they expanded mainly into Senegal, Mali & Burkina Faso. Most they reached in Western Coastal Africa is today's Ivory Coast to the South, which is still far away from Nigeria.

Originally posted by Joseph Joestar:

..., also the Mali Empire had access to the sea being the first ones to make contact with the damn Portuguese...

The fact they were the first ones to make contact with the Portuguese has nothing to do with Mali & Benin being different kingdoms. Just as a matter of fact, Portuguese-Malian relations started via Gambia, not via Edo (Nigeria).

Originally posted by Joseph Joestar:

..., so yeah, the Gbeto are fine with the Malians

Thus, this is an incorrect conclusion.

[Marva]

The Malians' territory did effectively reach areas south of the Savanna, warranting the use of the Sankar-Zuma Sofa armies. However, this doesn't place them anywhere near the Kingdom of Benin, where the Fon people might be found, nor the territory of the Zande (South Sudan), where the version of the Mambele seen in-game originated.

However, the Malian faction in AoE 2 is supposed to represent all of West Africa, not just Mali. It is disappointing that this is the case, especially with there only being three African factions, and the fourth introduced in Africa's expansion being an entirely European nation, but this is the same company that thought the Bantu should all be counted as one civilization for Rise of Nations, so I know not to get my hopes up.

Because Malians represent all of West Africa, they do get to benefit from the best parts of most of the civilizations there.

Farimba: Mossi horsemen.
Universities: Malian Empire as a whole.
Reduced wood costs: Really, just the entirety of the Sahel. (Acacia trees suck, and they're just as hostile as anything else in Africa.)
Gunpowder: Kanem Bornu.
Fast Fire Ships, Arbalests, and gold mining bonus: Soninke-controlled gold mines, and Soninke poison archery tactics. (Also, Senegambian sailors)
Archer-resistant infantry: I believe it should be attributed to the Songhay or the Zazzau, but I'm not sure which.
Tigui: Just the nature of levy-based, archer-driven warfare in West Africa.
Gbeto: Fon people, and all Mambele-using cultures.
Fortified Walls: Kingdom of Benin.

All things considered, it turned out well. Personally, I would've loved to see a trade bonus in there, but I really can't complain about the cohesion of the design. The civ turned out well.

Really, if you want to see Africa represented accurately without some numbskull trying to apply outdated Victorian-era models to the development of nations, you're going to need to dive way down and look between the crevices for some broke companies who need investment. Unfortunately, the markets in many African countries haven't yet reached a point where the locals would be able to influence the gaming industry all that much. Maybe in the future.

"the Fulani or Dogon masked warriors would've been more appropriate."

Those two groups are currently at war with each other. The Fulani jihad never ended, and their genocidal tendencies haven't disappeared. Including either group may very well be taken the wrong way in the future, so I can understand why they'd opt out of using either, ignoring gameplay reasons. Ultimately, Gbeto is a good fit. Manages to make gunpowder redundant, too.

If the faction was split up, maybe we'd see the Dogon, the Fulani, the Ghanaians, the Bini, and a Mandekalu rider.

[El Jeffe Epstein]

The Huskarl isn't a Gothic unit it was a Norse/Saxon one, the Keshik was a Mongol unit not a Tatar one, Benin and Malia were apart of the same cultural sphere.

[Marva]

Originally posted by Arthur Morgan:

The Huskarl isn't a Gothic unit it was a Norse/Saxon one, the Keshik was a Mongol unit not a Tatar one, Benin and Malia were apart of the same cultural sphere.

Can't say I see how they could be considered to be a part of the same cultural sphere. They didn't really have much in common, and they lived in different biome sets.

[Barath]

Well, since its (mostly) a game about europe in the middle-ages (Persians, Japanese and Chinese were mostly put in cause of AoE1 in the beginning) I can understand that there are only 3 african civs atm (even so i was a bit dissapointed about that myself) - its those medival Europe had the most contact with. And they probably wanted to put some nice stuff in it - so better give the Gbeto to the Malians instead of not including them at all. And I think the main point of Mr Morgan was, that they NEVER made so much sense about historical accuracy. Think of all the memes: Chinese without the tecs they freaking invented, Saracens being the worst ARABIA-Civ, Magyars havin winged Husars, Koreans fighting Persians in Yucatan, etc.

[Marva]

Originally posted by Barath:

Well, since its (mostly) a game about europe in the middle-ages (Persians, Japanese and Chinese were mostly put in cause of AoE1 in the beginning) I can understand that there are only 3 african civs atm (even so i was a bit dissapointed about that myself) - its those medival Europe had the most contact with. And they probably wanted to put some nice stuff in it - so better give the Gbeto to the Malians instead of not including them at all. And I think the main point of Mr Morgan was, that they NEVER made so much sense about historical accuracy. Think of all the memes: Chinese without the tecs they freaking invented, Saracens being the worst ARABIA-Civ, Magyars havin winged Husars, Koreans fighting Persians in Yucatan, etc.

...And the assumption that the "Dark Ages" were dark for anyone outside Europe. The game is just showing its age. Ultimately, it runs on the same Eurocentric assumptions that fuel just about every other 'historical' game. The game isn't centered on Europe, but it relies on the European perspective to frame history. It's because of this that most nations don't fully mesh with it.

[Barath]

Originally posted by Wall of Light:

The game is just showing its age. Ultimately, it runs on the same Eurocentric assumptions that fuel just about every other 'historical' game. The game isn't centered on Europe, but it relies on the European perspective to frame history. It's because of this that most nations don't fully mesh with it.

Well, usually I see eurocentric views very critical as well, but I guess its ok for an "Age of Kings" game. It IS supposed to focus on the era of western european Knights. The whole fighting-with-buildings-thing (towerrush, castle-drop, etc) was inspired by medival strategies. I doubt as well there were Pikes or hellbards in meso-America or Africa. The basic-skins for the units are all clearly european, only the UUs and buildings have era-specific skins. The Indochinese-Civs, african kingoms, meso-America, Koreans, etc all came with add-ons (official or inofficial). If you look at the first Civs in Age of Kings before Conquerors, the only not European Civs were Turks, Saracenes (because of the Crusades), Mongols (who invaded Europe during the middle-ages) and Persian, Chinese, Japan (who were all used in AoE1 - Persians were mostly just an excuse to have a Civ with Elephants again).
Still: Since they already made the African Civ-skins, they could rly have tried to add a few more Civs.
Iirc after the last Khans there are no more Civs supposed to be added, right? Well... Maybe in AoE4.

[Marva]

Hoping we see more African factions in AoE4.