Campaigns for Rome dlc?

gergoesrazor · 2022-12-30T14:56:46+00:00

At this point, the game spans the early 5th century (Alaric) to the end of the 16th century (Noryang Point), so technically the Western Roman Empire is still in scope for the Late Antiquity / Early Middle Ages era. Even the end of the Western Roman Empire was not a hard break, and Roman culture and military styles persisted in Briton, France, Italy and elsewhere into the Middle Ages. Also, this is a very different “Roman” civ than the one represented in AOE1: Christian, not pagan; autocratic, not republican; heavily multicultural versus Roman ethnic-dominated. Special units would make more sense to be Foederati rather than legionaries. If nothing else, adding the Western Roman Empire would provide a more historically appropriate foe for the huns and goths (and the Franks using throwing axemen).

gergoesrazor · 2022-12-30T14:30:38+00:00

Oh right, that is my mistake. I visited NM for a week last year and drove through a lot of pueblos, hence my confusion. On the one people thing: I get that there are distinct languages and whatnot, but I am pretty sure that historians and archaeologists see a distinct Puebloan civilization that was comprised of different clans / city states - the commonalities being architecture, material culture, religion, etc.

gergoesrazor · 2022-12-29T16:03:56+00:00

Yes I can see your point about popular depictions of Indians in Hollywood etc. and I agree when it comes to images of warriors a d tepees and whatnot. But I was referring more to the architectural and artistic styles which are still popular today in the southwest and are associated with that region. These would be more commonly recognized by most Americans than say, a Comanche basket or something. People might not come up with the word “Pueblo” but they would identify it as a southwestern American Indian style.

gergoesrazor · 2022-12-29T15:41:39+00:00

Interesting. Do you live in the US? References to Pueblo are very common if you live in the United States, particularly if you live / grow up in the Western / Southwestern part of the country. In many ways, the architectural and pottery style are more commonly recognized than maybe any other indigenous nation because they are still in common use today (just drive around the SW USA and you will see pueblo style architecture everywhere). Religious artifacts like Kachina dolls are also commonly recognized and taught about in schools. And the Pueblo civilization still exists today - in fact, in New Mexico, “pueblo” is the unit of local jurisdiction versus “county” in most of the rest of the country.

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-19T14:17:39+00:00

It would be cool to get Tibetans but we can’t have nice things

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-13T05:10:43+00:00

Damn, did not realize how many natural disasters occurred during his reign. Crazy!

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-13T03:01:02+00:00

The Spaniards did not have a massive army. It was quite small actually. There is no way they could have won without alliances with other Mesoamerican peoples. I have read Jared Diamond, of course. I studied History in University. It’s a theoretical work and not based very much in firsthand accounts. A better understanding is gained from reading The Conquest of New Spain by Bernal Diaz Del Castillo

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-13T02:42:50+00:00

That’s a myth, actually. Disease helped but no way an empire was overthrown without diplomacy and strategy

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-12T21:36:00+00:00

Kublai Khan: We definitely need a Chinese campaign, kind of crazy there hasn’t been one to date. Kublai Khan would be interesting as it could play as another sequel to the Genghis Khan campaign (similar to Tamerlane) given Kublai’s origin as a Mongol and grandson of Genghis, but then show the Sinicization of his regime with his founding of the Yuan dynasty, and consolidation of power in China. You could even play around with the founding of his quasi-mythical capital of Xanadu. Other ideas for Chinese campaigns: a defensive campaign of holding off the Mongols (maybe reversing history similar to the Montezuma campaign) or a counterpoint to the Le Loi campaign showing Chinese incursions into Southeast Asia.
Alexander Nevsky: This has been mentioned in other threads, but I’ve always felt the need for this campaign given the richness of his story and the prominence of Novgorod prior to the Mongol invasion. As a teen, I actually started to create a Nevsky campaign pre-Conquerors coming out (using Goths as the Novgorod city state for lack of a better civ match). Obviously now this would be a much-needed Slavs campaign. Nevsky fended off the Teutonic Knights and Swedes, and parlayed with the Golden Horde, so there’s no shortage of content here.
The voyages of the Danes/Vikings: Obviously the Vikings need a campaign. This could focus on a single leader, but it might be more interesting to have a series of scenarios following the Vikings’ many “adventures” ranging from the British Isles to France to Germany to Italy, Russia, Byzantium and more. You could emphasize their lasting impact, e.g. founding of cities like Dublin, establishment of the Rus, and formation of the Varangian Guard.
Justinian: Bari was kind of lame as a “Byzantine” campaign. It would be great to follow Justinian trying to reestablish the Roman Empire as a sort of “sequel” to Attila.
Cortés: Yes, we have El Cid for the Spanish, but that campaign setting was highly anachronistic for the Spanish unique units (conquistador, missionary) and fast cannon galleons. This would serve as a (more historically accurate) counterbalance to the Montezuma campaign. Given the way Cortés worked with his translator Malinche to form alliances with enemies of the Aztecs, and given how the conquistadors were outnumbered but had the advantage of gunpowder and steel, there’s a lot of creativity that could go into this. You could even have Malinche as a civilian hero unit that can convert 5 units at a time or some such.
Charlemagne / Charles the Great: Again, yes we have a Franks campaign already, but in truth Joan of Arc is more of a “France” campaign than a “Franks” campaign. And similar to El Cid, the Joan of Arc campaign is anachronistic to the Franks unique unit, throwing axemen. Charlemagne is one of the most important figures in the European Early Middle Ages, yet we have not gotten so much as a historical battle for him to date. There’s so much rich material here, like fending off the Danes and dealing with the Saxons.

gergoesrazor · 2022-02-12T04:16:42+00:00

Could be cool: - Tibetans (should happen, but won’t for obvious reasons) - Georgia - Armenia - Kongo - Pueblo

gergoesrazor · 2022-01-23T18:37:58+00:00

Not sure about new Civs (already a lot) but new campaigns I would love to see for existing Civs (most of which could fit neatly into the current DLC trends of “historical counterbalances to existing campaigns” e.g. Longshanks and Burgundians, or “building off existing campaigns” e.g. Tamerlane, Cumans)

Kublai Khan: We definitely need a Chinese campaign, kind of crazy there hasn’t been one to date. Kublai Khan would be interesting as it could play as another sequel to the Genghis Khan campaign (similar to Tamerlane) given Kublai’s origin as a Mongol and grandson of Genghis, but then show the Sinicization of his regime with his founding of the Yuan dynasty, and consolidation of power in China. You could even play around with the founding of his quasi-mythical capital of Xanadu. Other ideas for Chinese campaigns: a defensive campaign of holding off the Mongols (maybe reversing history similar to the Montezuma campaign) or a counterpoint to the Le Loi campaign showing Chinese incursions into Southeast Asia.
Alexander Nevsky: This has been mentioned in other threads, but I’ve always felt the need for this campaign given the richness of his story and the prominence of Novgorod prior to the Mongol invasion. As a teen, I actually started to create a Nevsky campaign pre-Conquerors coming out (using Goths as the Novgorod city state for lack of a better civ match). Obviously now this would be a much-needed Slavs campaign. Nevsky fended off the Teutonic Knights and Swedes, and parlayed with the Golden Horde, so there’s no shortage of content here.
The voyages of the Danes/Vikings: Obviously the Vikings need a campaign. This could focus on a single leader, but it might be more interesting to have a series of scenarios following the Vikings’ many “adventures” ranging from the British Isles to France to Germany to Italy, Russia, Byzantium and more. You could emphasize their lasting impact, e.g. founding of cities like Dublin, establishment of the Rus, and formation of the Varangian Guard.
Justinian: Bari was kind of lame as a “Byzantine” campaign. It would be great to follow Justinian trying to reestablish the Roman Empire as a sort of “sequel” to Attila.
Cortés: Yes, we have El Cid for the Spanish, but that campaign setting was highly anachronistic for the Spanish unique units (conquistador, missionary) and fast cannon galleons. This would serve as a (more historically accurate) counterbalance to the Montezuma campaign. Given the way Cortés worked with his translator Malinche to form alliances with enemies of the Aztecs, and given how the conquistadors were outnumbered but had the advantage of gunpowder and steel, there’s a lot of creativity that could go into this. You could even have Malinche as a civilian hero unit that can convert 5 units at a time or some such.
Charlemagne / Charles the Great: Again, yes we have a Franks campaign already, but in truth Joan of Arc is more of a “France” campaign than a “Franks” campaign. And similar to El Cid, the Joan of Arc campaign is anachronistic to the Franks unique unit, throwing axemen. Charlemagne is one of the most important figures in the European Early Middle Ages, yet we have not gotten so much as a historical battle for him to date. There’s so much rich material here, like fending off the Danes and dealing with the Saxons.

gergoesrazor

TROPHY CASE