Poll: what new European civs would you like to see in the future of Civ franchise?

[Patine]

What would a Cuman civ even look like? Now don't get me wrong, I like the Cumans/Kipchaks a great deal (thank Age of Empires for that), I'm just curious if they could even be... civ-ified without being too similar to Scythia.

When did they appear in Age of Empires? I've been playing that series since Age of Empires I dropped in the late '90's, and I use the same user name on all the Age of Empires Heaven forums. I have never seen a Cuman/Kipchak civ. Where are they hiding?

 

[Lord Lakely]

the Cumans appeared in the new AoE2 Definitive Edition (where they were a ludicrously broken civ until the recent nerf and now solidly rank among the S-tier civs.).

Not sure if they would fit Civ 6 though. I would love a nomadic central asian civ that isn't the Mongols, but we already have the Scythians, and I like the idea of Tatars and Timurids/Uzbeks more.

 

[Patine]

the Cumans appeared in the new AoE2 Definitive Edition (where they were a ludicrously broken civ until the recent nerf and now solidly rank among the S-tier civs.).

Not sure if they would fit Civ 6 though. I would love a nomadic central asian civ that isn't the Mongols, but we already have the Scythians, and I like the idea of Tatars and Timurids/Uzbeks more.

Was the Definitive Edition a fanmade mod like Realms, Age of Chivalry, Tsars and Salesman, Borderland Empires, Portuguese Civ Mod, etc., or something more semi-official for paid download and install? I've heard it mentioned, now that you bring it up, but always though something else was being referred to (the original HD revived version, basically).

 

[Lord Lakely]

Was the Definitive Edition a fanmade mod like Realms, Age of Chivalry, Tsars and Salesman, Borderland Empires, Portuguese Civ Mod, etc., or something more semi-official for paid download and install? I've heard it mentioned, now that you bring it up, but always though something else was being referred to (the original HD revived version, basically).

Yes and no. AoE2 DE is a derivative of Forgotten Empires, which was a fan-made mod, but is very much a proper expansion in its own right now. HD is the collection of all the small modifications and expansion packs they made (I'm forgetting the name of the company, but they're Microsoft supported and are currently working on Age of Empires 4)

I did misspeak in my earlier post though. The Cumans were added in the High Definition upgrade, which updated the graphics, made several QoL changes (such as permanent farm reseeding) and added four new Civs (Cumans, Bulgarians, Lithuanians and Tatars (who have a Tamarlane-centric campaign)).

AoE2 HD's civs aren't necessarily something firaxis should go by when designing their civs. The Vietnamese (who I believe are a slam dunk for a third XPac) are playable in DE and HD and they're arguably the most vanilla AoE civ ever.

 

[TyrannusRex]

Definitive Edition is basically an entirely new game. It's a complete remaster of AoE2, with all the expansion content created by Forgotten Empires, plus four new civs and more campaigns/content, one of which is the Cumans. Been playing it since launch and it's A+.

 

[Haig]

What could be a unique unit for:
Armenia
Romania
Bulgaria

Would love to see some of them in civ but are there any good ideas for distinctive units?

 

[Laurana Kanan]

What could be a unique unit for:
Armenia
Romania
Bulgaria

Would love to see some of them in civ but are there any good ideas for distinctive units?

Respectively from modded Civs-
Ayrudzi Heavy Cavalry
Calarasi Light Cavalry
Cumen Ranged Cavalry

 

[Krajzen]

What could be a unique unit for:
Armenia
Romania
Bulgaria

Would love to see some of them in civ but are there any good ideas for distinctive units?

Can't name anyone from menory but
Armenia has had a ton of them, with their own fancy names and so on. Bułgaria I don't recall but I am sure you could provide few of them based on their centuries of major powerhouse which was mortal danger to Byzantium. Romania had just enough crazy military victories between 14th and 17th centuries to warrant few unique units.

 

[ElectRonin]

Respectively from modded Civs-
Ayrudzi Heavy Cavalry
Calarasi Light Cavalry
Cumen Ranged Cavalry

I'm not sure about the Cuman cavalry. They were very close and influential to the Second Bulgarian Empire, even some of our rulers at the time had at least some Cuman blood, but as a whole they're not really considered "Bulgarian" the way we'd consider special units in Civ. It's like if Byzantium's special unit was a Varangian.

I'd go with Opalchentzi/Hushove/Hajduti (basically freedom fighters) and here's why:

- Very iconic. Some of the best Bulgarian literature we have is based on the Russo-Turkish war, and more specifically the Battle of Shipka.
- Their mechanics can be based at least in part on historic accuracy. Make them have a +5 on hills terrain and fight at full strength even when injured or something.
- Their appearance can be more memorable than the usual steppe riders. Here's how they could look

 

[Laurana Kanan]

I'm not sure about the Cuman cavalry. They were very close and influential to the Second Bulgarian Empire, even some of our rulers at the time had at least some Cuman blood, but as a whole they're not really considered "Bulgarian" the way we'd consider special units in Civ. It's like if Byzantium's special unit was a Varangian.

Take it up with Merrick.

 

[ElectRonin]

Take it up with Merrick.

Nah, you don't look a gifted horse in the mouth. Guy's a badass in my book. It's thanks to him we have Simeon in-game, so he has my thanks.

 

[Vahnstad]

1. Italy in united form No, we have Rome for that. And they're better of alone. United Italy was not a thing until very late and parts of it history are highly controversial. Modern Italy is boring. Renaissance Italy is interestng but would be a blob civ. I thought since we did split Celts, Polynesia and Vikings, we wouldn't do this anymore.
2. Moors/Andalusia/Cordoba Divided on it, we currently have Arabia, but we surely can split
3. Charlemagne's Frankish/Carolingian Empire No
4. Florence, Genoa or some other individual Italian state Yes, would be great instead of Italy
5. Ireland Rather not
6. Belgium/Flanders No
7. Switzerland No
8. Normans No
9. Goths (or other Migration Era people) Seems fun
10. Bohemia (Czechs) Not vehemently opposed but there are better options
11. Lithuania Represented by Poland mostly
12. Kievan Rus (separately from Russia) Not opposed to it
13. Cossack Ukraine Not opposed to it
14. Romania Yes, great addition
15. Bulgarian Empire Would be okay
16. Serbia No
17. Armenia (culturally 'European') Great choice
18. Croatia No
19. Finland Mixed, could be fun
20. Ancient Germania No
21. Gauls Would be amazing
22. Burgundy No, overcrowded region
23. Wales No
24. Albania (Skanderbeg) Great leader, underrated civ
25. Yugoslavia (Tito) Never
26. Individual German state (Prussia, Saxony, Bavaria, Teutons etc) Absolutely, ditch the Germans and replace it by Prussia
27. Papal State Yes would be fun with some mechanics
28. 'Slavs' (Samo, Great Moravia, Pagan Slavs etc) No
29. Cumans/Pechenegs/Sarmatians/Khazars etc No

Voted: Gauls, Goths, Prussia, Florence and Romania.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Renaissance Italy is interestng but would be a blob civ. I thought since we did split Celts, Polynesia and Vikings, we wouldn't do this anymore.

I mean, same has been done with Ancient Greece in this game. Renaissance Italy made into a multi-leader blob could work perfectly well.

 

[Vahnstad]

I mean, same has been done with Ancient Greece in this game. Renaissance Italy made into a multi-leader blob could work perfectly well.

I'd rather have Greece being split in Macedon, Sparta & Athens. They're way too different. Greece was never united for a long time, and I feel like Athens civ focused on culture & democracy, Sparta on fanatic militarism and Macedon on conquering would work better.

I'm also in favour of splittting Germany and ditching it for Prussia & Austria, and splitting India into Maurya & Mughals.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'd rather have Greece being split in Macedon, Sparta & Athens. They're way too different. Greece was never united for a long time, and I feel like Athens civ focused on culture & democracy, Sparta on fanatic militarism and Macedon on conquering would work better.

I'm also in favour of splittting Germany and ditching it for Prussia & Austria, and splitting India into Maurya & Mughals.

So should we also split the Maya up into Tikal and Palenque?

 

[Vahnstad]

So should we also split the Maya up into Tikal and Palenque?

No, but it's been done in the past, deblobbing civs.

I think splitting Germany in Prussia, Goths and Austria could work out very well, as they're vastly different, and all made a name throughout history. In case of India, even more so. Modern India, Mughals and Maurya are very different and nothing like each other. Same could be said over Sassanids / Persia though. And China has also such a rich history that it merits a second leader.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think splitting Germany in Prussia, Goths and Austria could work out very well, as they're vastly different, and all made a name throughout history.

Goths and Austria can be put into the game easily without splitting up Germany, and has in Civ 5, with both Austria and Germany being present.
Considering the state of Prussia was the leading force behind German unification, I don't think it needs to be separate either. A Prussian leader for Germany would be fine.

 

[Zaarin]

The game is called Civilization, not Nation-State. Political unity and cultural unity are two very different things. A blob civ is one that throws together different civilizations--like Civ5's Polynesians with their Hawai'ian leader and Maori UU or Civ5's Celts with an Iceni queen throwing Irish ceilidhs in her Scottish capital with her Gaulish UU while speaking Welsh. A civilization doesn't have to be a united polity. Italy and the Maya qualify.

splitting India into Maurya & Mughals.

The Mughals were Persianized Turks...(I agree that if we get them they should be their own civ. Just saying that they're not really Indian.)

 

[Vahnstad]

I suppose you have a point

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Civ5's Celts with an Iceni queen throwing Irish ceilidhs in her Scottish capital with her Gaulish UU while speaking Welsh.

The UU was Pictish.
But I agree. It seems that they were trying to go for Pan-Celticism in their Civ design unlike previous entries. Ironically I don't think any of the attributes included any traits from Gaul at all, mainly the British Isles, which would attribute to what I mentioned.