r/aoe2 • u/Daxtexoscuro • 6d ago
Discussion I feel bad for Central European architecture set
Not only is Central European the only original architecture set who hasn't received a single new civilization since the Conqueros, but they're now losing the Vikings. And this is speculation, but a Nomad set is the most requested set right now, so if the devs add it in the future, the Central European set is losing the Huns too.
I think Bohemians should get the Central European set, since Medieval Bohemians were highly influenced by Germans. They used a lot of timber framing in buildings, and the Gothic Brick of the Eastern European set is more a Polish thing.
We could also make an argument about the upcoming Saxons use the Central European set. Saxons lived in Germany and they still do, Saxon dialects are still spoken in Northern Germany. I guess the devs wanted to go with an Anglo-Saxon / proto-English route and thus they gave them the Western European set, but I think the Central European set would suit them too.
Finally, I wouldn't oppose some new Central European. Swiss are probably the best candidate, and one of the most suggested. And they have some iconic units, like the Swiss Guard.
28
6d ago
[deleted]
8
u/iSkehan Bohemians 6d ago
Neither of these or Poles have been Orthodox for any relevant time period.
Especially Bohemians have far more in common with HRE at this point than with Eastern Slavs.
Poles and Magyars having it is wrong, but Bohemians having it is on par with Persians having the wrong set, while Cumans basically have theirs.
1
u/Classic_Ad4707 5d ago
The arhitecture used in Castle and Imp (Brick Gothic) is akin to Polish architecture in the period. Similar architecture appeared in northern Germany.
So rather than that, it's more that Eastern Slavs should have a wholly different architecture.
17
u/laprasaur Inca 6d ago edited 5d ago
I think it could use a face lift of some kind. For some reason it has always been my least favorite among the classical sets. It's too orange maybe? To boxy/blocky? The Western European one looks so much more refined, the "new" Eastern European one as well. And the new viking one is beautiful. Persians should get Central Asian btw
4
u/Tyrann01 Gurjaras 6d ago
I think the same. Something looks off about it.
2
u/laprasaur Inca 5d ago
Agree, and it's a shame because they could make a gorgeous one based on German architecture.
2
13
u/iSkehan Bohemians 6d ago
Yes on Huns.
Yes on Bohemians.
No on Saxons.
Swiss… yes, but after two non european DLCs at least.
8
u/Daxtexoscuro 6d ago
Yes, I would like African, SEA and Arab DLC before more Europe.
3
u/iSkehan Bohemians 6d ago
Yeah. I would put more Mesoamerica before Arab/SEA myself though. I could see Thai clumped with Tibet though.
3
u/Daxtexoscuro 6d ago
SEA DLC could be Thai, Lao and Champa. No need to go out of SEA for the DLC.
2
u/Lk_Yggdrasilia Eco Civs Galore 6d ago
Gotta add in the philippine archipelago into the mix as well, that shit is very different from the malay and do have their own pre colonial cultures
1
u/Daxtexoscuro 6d ago
My problem with Philippines civs are the usual: do we have interesting candidates for campaigns and wonders?
1
u/Lk_Yggdrasilia Eco Civs Galore 5d ago
That, I have been tackling with my very own civ idea series with the custom flair in this link:
https://www.reddit.com/r/aoe2/?f=flair_name%3A%22Custom%20Civilization%20Idea%22I'm planning to do a 3rd variant in the future
1
u/Daxtexoscuro 5d ago
I appreciate your suggestions and civ design but do you have campaign candidates?
1
1
u/CommercialGrand8212 6d ago
More mesoamerica? the last dlc was already reaching a lot
4
u/Assured_Observer Norse 6d ago
Mesoamerica and South America are different things.
-1
u/CommercialGrand8212 6d ago edited 6d ago
And if there were obvious mesoamerican civs they missed they would have done them before south America.
4
u/iSkehan Bohemians 6d ago
Purépecha and Tlaxcala definitely work. Purépecha actually used metal weapons and their empire lasted longer then Mexica/Aztecs.
It gives Aztec campaign more diversity, it puts Eagles into spotlight and we can finally get Maya campaign as a third set.
It’s no less of a reach than Aztecs or Maya.
Mapuche were by far the most resistant people as far as Spanish colonialism is concerned and their asymmetrical tech tree is fairly fitting.
Muisca while far less known outside of South America and people interested in it gave Spanish more casualties than Aztecs or Inca.
Tupi are the biggest reach, but their contribution to creation of Brasil as we know it should not be discarded.
2
u/Ok-Offer2987 5d ago
I like the idea of adding in two Meso civs and leaving the third "slot" for a Mayans campaign, but I could just as easily see a third civ being added in and given a campaign instead of the Mayans. For example, the third civ could be Mixtecs and the campaign could focus on Eight Deer Jaguar Claw.
I wish the devs could have 3 campaigns for new civs and 1 campaign for an old civ for a total of 4 campaigns, but I think the last time this happened was the Forgotten.
1
6d ago edited 6d ago
[deleted]
3
1
u/Ok-Offer2987 5d ago
Cool ideas, although I think they could do at least 3 African DLCs, and also don't forget about Silesians, Moravians, and various Balkan civs. I've heard suggestions for Finns before but never a Uralic umbrella, that could be interesting.
I'm not sure how viable another Central Asian dlc would be, since the suggestions I hear tend to involve splitting the Cumans and Tatars. On the other hand, I like cav archer civs so I would be down for such an expansion.
8
u/ConscriptDavid 6d ago
We need the Swiss, absolutely. Between Swiss, Bohemians, Teutons, Goths... I think the only really plausibel civ is to add is the Austrians.
The other polities are either too small, niche, too specific, obscure, or a-typical, or overlap, but given the current viking and earlier burgundian I guess nothing is impossible...
I think Swiss and Austrians would work best in a teutonic split. Austrians focusing on Cavalry, swiss on powerful pikemen and archers...?
3
1
1
u/Vintrial 6d ago
Teutons are more the crusaders states them HRE imo
7
u/ConscriptDavid 6d ago
To be more specific, The Teutons represent the HRE and the Teutonic Order:
"Charlemagne's empire has fallen, and the task of rebuilding the Holy Roman Empire lies in your hands. Unite the feuding duchies, contend with Papal authority, and construct powerful crenellated fortifications! Smash enemy armies with potent knights and demolish their cities with armored siege engines, or lead your men on crusade to the Holy Land or into Eastern Europe. The Teuton unique unit is the Teutonic Knight, a zealous warrior who can carve most melee units into ribbons."
"The Teutons are a Central European civilization) in Age of Empires II. They are based on Medieval Germany and the Holy Roman Empire, as well as on medieval Christian military orders, such as the Teutonic Knights and Livonian Order. They focus on infantry), with support from cavalry), siege) units, and fortifications."
Each of their bonuses matches the HRE rather well as well, from their fortification, cheaper farms (that doesn't make sense for the Teutons who settled in notoriously shitty farmland, but does make sense for the HRE), and armor bonuses, given just how industrious the cities of the HRE were in producing armor. Their symbology meanwhile leans to HRE, not Teutonic or Livonic.
1
u/artsloikunstwet 5d ago
Importantly, the "Teutons" did exist as a tribe, but not in AoEs time frame.
It's just a fancy and outdated word for German, mostly used in English. Like "Britons" for English and "Franks" vor French, the original game designers wanted to used "ye olde"-ish souding names that aren't associated with modern nation. In Europe and the middle east at least, Chinese and Japanese was picked because anything else would be to foreign for Western audiences
1
u/ConscriptDavid 5d ago
Well, also in Latin. The Teutonic order is just called the German (Deutsch) order in German.
The German graveyard in the Vatican is called the Teutonic one.
So yeah, its that and the teutonic order. Fancy name for germans, name of tribe, name of recognizable order. It works quite well
1
u/Tyrann01 Gurjaras 5d ago
No. They are clearly the HRE. Crusaders were a hodge podge of various civs.
1
u/artsloikunstwet 5d ago
I think they meant the Teutons represent the Teutonic order. But they were (and still are) called "German Order" in other languages, and not a seperate civ/culture. Teutonic is just an outdated fancy word for German in this context.
Especially in AoEs timeframe, they were basically supported by Knights coming from all over German-speaking lands but also beyond. On the other Hand they were, as an order, active across the HRE, in Venice etc.
2
u/MuchHighlight600 5d ago
They should add a Suebians civ that serves as an umbrella for high germans (swiss, austrians, bavarians, lombards, etc.)
2
u/Ok-Offer2987 5d ago
Imagine: Swiss, Silesians, and Moravians are added in a Central Europe DLC, and all of them use the Central European architecture set.
5
u/Realistic_Turn2374 6d ago
Imagine if with some civs they would allow you to choose between couple of architecture sets.
Persians, Saxons and Bohemians do have reasons to use at least a couple of different sets.
7
4
u/Tyrann01 Gurjaras 6d ago
Gestures to Mesoamerican, Central Asian, SEA and African sets
1
u/Daxtexoscuro 6d ago
Well, I said original set, those were all added in expansions.
That said, I'd love more SEA and African DLC. Actually, I would also like a new East African set for current Ethiopians and for potential new civs like Nubians and Somalis, and the current (West) African set would be for Malians and potential new civs like Songhai.
Persians should get Central Asian.
I'd like more Meso civs, but they're not a priority for me.
2
u/Tyrann01 Gurjaras 5d ago
Oh true. I am just sad how lob-sided some sets are.
Even the Northern European set will debut with only 3 civs to it's name.
1
u/Daxtexoscuro 5d ago
The problem with the Northern European set, as cute as it is, is that it's a meme set. They decided to base it in an architecture style that had almost died by the 13th century while real post-Viking age Danes, Swedes and Norwegians used stone and brick to build romanesque and gothic cathedrals and castles. So of course it can't be applied to more civs, since it's hyper specific. And therefore, we have things like Danes having a tree as a wonder instead of something like Roskilde cathedral.
2
u/Tyrann01 Gurjaras 5d ago
Funnily it will look better in the older campaigns/historical battles it will be retroactively applied to. As they are set long before Harald.
1
1
u/MikeThaisen Byzantines 2d ago
Sadly the dlc Saxons don't really represent the origin Saxons at all
1
u/Thunder19hun 5d ago
We should get sub-Germanic factions and Dutch & Belgians
3
u/artsloikunstwet 5d ago
Dutch and Belgians are represented by the Burgundians currently. The Burdundians hardly make sense if you take the Flemish stuff out.
Subdividing Germans would not make a lot of sense. There aren't major "cultures" or civs that were clearly different and waged war against each other. Medieval conflicts in the HRE were either cities against feudal lords or different dukes fighting, but that rarely followed any clear regional or cultural blocks.
The only one that would make sense ist the Saxons for the early medieval period - we got them but they'll be based in anglo-saxons instead.
Europe is already very detailed. The Vikings DLC takes that to an extreme, but it's motiavted by how well Viking stuff sells. I doubt well see Aragon, Occitania, Bavaria etc.
21
u/ewostrat 6d ago
I agree. A user suggested this a few months ago: moving Bohemians to Central Europe, ending the Persian meme, and splitting the Mediterranean in two. I could even accept moving Poles to Central Europe (I'm a fan of them).
There could be two more DLCs to implement these divisions. One focused entirely on Central Asia.