You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Age of Empires III Discussion

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.96 replies
Age of Kings Heaven » Forums » Age of Empires III Discussion » 4th civ?
Topic Subject:4th civ?
« Previous Page  1 2 3 4  Next Page »
posted 01-03-05 07:02 PM CT (US)         
i'm new to the forums, hi

So we know france, britain, and spain are in tha game. I was looking at the pictures released from IGN, and noticed a flag of a country i have never seen. It is seen twice, on top of two buildings. at first i thought france... no, colours go vertically there. Croatia? no, red is at the top of croatia. am i missing something? is this and obvious flag? or did ES slip up?

posted 01-12-05 08:23 PM CT (US)     76 / 96       


would rather prefer more Europeans (+ a coupe of Asians):

English, Gaels (represent Scots and Irish), French, Scandinavians, Spanish, Prussians, Austrians, Russians, Dutch, Portuguese, Ottomans, Persians, Africans (black ones), Japanese and Chinese.

The Gaels, Africans (Who would make a 1000 times more sense as different tribes in an expansion) and Chinese and Chinese never had colonies, they were themselves colonised. The Persians, Ottomans and Austro-Hungarians have nothing to in the Americas. The Germans and Japanese never did too, but so far we have evidence of their possible appearance in the game.

Removing Indian tribes wouldn't make more room for European civs. They won't be playable, they're just there to make alliances (and massacres I would guess).

Emperor Archie, we already know for a fact there won't be a native civ to play with. Besides, there were still a lot of Indian tribes after 1800. It took the whole 19th century for the Americans to exterminate them.

Gamer man
posted 01-15-05 02:32 PM CT (US)     77 / 96       
i would just like to say that while some of the americans (which i'm unfortunetly a citizen of) are saying that the US should be in, i would just like to point out that mexico was just as large and powerful of a colonie until the US decided to conquer 1/3 of their land in the Mexican- American war (after 1850) so to put in the US, would not only be unfair to most of hte european powers, but also unfair to mexico.

Moooers are remembered, chirpers never die, splashers are invincable

posted 01-15-05 08:06 PM CT (US)     78 / 96       
Several things:

-Greenland IS part of America.
-Native tribes ARE in the game. It is confirmed.
-It is likely the x-pack will cover African, Asian and Australian colonization, that means Italy and Belgium will most likely be added.

-If ES is accurate, the USA won't be in the game, not even in the x-pack. No home city, no colonies in the same epoch as the European powers. And to everyone: USA wasn't a real world power until 1918. For most of the game's time frame they were either a British colony or an intrascendental country to the really important things happening in the world.

-Mexico was indeed much larger than the states and that situation changed because of the government's infinite stupidity.

-In conclusion, I really really hope USA and Mexico are not included in the game or its expansion.

Co-Author of the Aztec Civilization Outline for AoM.
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro to do The Hobbit!
Chichén Itzá is one of the New 7 Wonders of the World!
posted 01-15-05 08:28 PM CT (US)     79 / 96       
The US would make sense in the expansion actually. In the 1800s they started conquering the West from the Indians, they made war with Mexico jsut for territory and they also with Colombia to help Panama earn independance (though their real motivation for this was to buld the Panama isthmus). After the independance, they could have Home Cities (Washington, Boston, New York, etc.) send them support to populate the West (while massacring the Indians).

But it's not really necessary. Such civs as the Italians, Belgians, Ottomans, Japanese, Austro-Hungarians, etc., would be better for an expansion. It's almost certain we'll see the Americans in AOK IV, though.

posted 01-15-05 09:01 PM CT (US)     80 / 96       
Of course. Americans missing from AoE 4 would be out of place. What I mean is that if the game had only focused in the time period and not colonization, Americans and Mexicans would make sense, the way the concept will be handled, not really.

Co-Author of the Aztec Civilization Outline for AoM.
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro to do The Hobbit!
Chichén Itzá is one of the New 7 Wonders of the World!
posted 01-16-05 11:44 AM CT (US)     81 / 96       
Anyone who has "American Conquest/Fight Back" may hold the answer to this question.

That PC game covers 1517 to 1804.

Russia, Germany, Netherlands, and Portugal were used along with Spain, France, and England.Also Native American Tribes for a total of 17 civilizations.

Sweden could be the "Viking rep" in the new game......The 8th "European" Civ has become the puzzle. If not Sweden, than it might be Venice just because of her sea trade and desire for exploration.It would also give the Italians a role in the game.

"The Greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you,to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears,to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters"...Ghengis Khan

[This message has been edited by Cheruscan (edited 01-16-2005 @ 11:47 AM).]

posted 01-23-05 12:41 PM CT (US)     82 / 96       
I am 99% sure that Dutch will be in AOE III.

Also very likely that German and Portugese will be in AOE III.

That's 6 of 8.

The thing I really wonder is which of these 3?

Sweden (probably)

Denmark (If Russia is in, then they wont be probably in since most people think that Sweden was the strongest Scandinavian Country during 1492-1850)

Russia (doesn't belong to this game imo, until expansion, more like a land empire then a collonial power)

posted 01-26-05 01:31 AM CT (US)     83 / 96       
Someone mentioned Amercian Conquest: Fight Back, and I must say its a bit tilted to the Europeans especially with the Inca's and there lack of horses. I perfer to see the Inca's versus the Egyptians, Huns, Romans, so forth and so on.
In as much as I am excited about seeing the new Age of Empire, I am also bracing for disappointment. As South American military leader Simon Bolivar will not be considered. All he did was free an entire Continent. Lets not also forget General Ignacio Zaragoza Seguin, who organized peasant farms against the French, this is also known as Cinco de Mayo. These are military leaders who unfortunately are overlooked because of a decidedly eurocentric focus on greed. Just because these American leaders were liberators and not conquerors doesn't mean they should be excluded. And more importantly deny RTS gamers like me to joyously revel in their triumph over tyranny.

Therefore its apparent if Age of Empire is about the 18-19 century then it should pit Conqueors versus Liberators and stay away from the civilization building.

[This message has been edited by nuevointi (edited 01-26-2005 @ 01:32 AM).]

posted 01-28-05 02:38 PM CT (US)     84 / 96       
Of all the Mexican heroes it's strange you went precisely with Zaragoza, as he is not the most important one. Anyway, I differ with you.

Why can't you just embrace the idea that was merely based on focus? It's great the game is based on European powers and their conquests. Colonialism is the topic of the game, and you should accept it, or simply not buy the game if you are really that disappointed with ES' decision.

Besides, of all things left out of the game that happened in the epoch, believe me Bolivar's great deeds are nothing compared with the really important matters of the time, say the Battle of Trafalgar or the whole Napoleonic Wars.

Co-Author of the Aztec Civilization Outline for AoM.
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro to do The Hobbit!
Chichén Itzá is one of the New 7 Wonders of the World!
(id: Medieval Warfare)
posted 01-28-05 06:43 PM CT (US)     85 / 96       
God...we established this. Germany is 98% 4th Civ
posted 01-29-05 04:17 AM CT (US)     86 / 96       
[Of all the Mexican heroes it's strange you went precisely with Zaragoza, as he is not the most important one.]

As a purely intellectual argument, revolution was apart of the colonial period and infact it was a revolution that brought Napoleon to power. Though it brought an end to the colonial period.

But I couldn't agree with you more. And more to the point I know very little about Mexican American and South American military history- and there are volumes of history there. But that ignorance highlights my desire. Lets see there is Cossack I and II, Age of Empire I and II, American Conquest, American Conquest Fight back. There is also a Waterloo expansion pack and you have to also include Risk I and II. If you want to go a little further back there is Praetorian, Roman total war, Crusaders. If one where an anglofile, then one should have no problems living out that European fantasy. But haven't you thought about playing the other side.

Thats the market base that I come from.

These RTS games not only satisfy indulgencies but they also create new curiosities, and this time that means South American Revolutionary Army; Mexico. I might be wrong but I don't think I am the only CONSUMER that thinks this way. After all why include Japan in the mix if this is about European Colonialism.

[This message has been edited by nuevointi (edited 01-29-2005 @ 04:58 AM).]

posted 01-29-05 07:39 AM CT (US)     87 / 96       
What Compa_Mighty said, AOE III deals mostly with the colonization of Northern America, with the great seapowers and colonists of that time:

Great Britian
The Netherlands

and another 'European civ', probaly Russia, as seen from the Yukon Bay screen.
(Sorry for making AGAIN such a civ list)

Also don't know why people expect Japan in the game, basing their argument upon one simple drwaing? Maybe someone of the desingn team of ES just got boring drawing all these redcoats and thought, hey, why wouldn't I make a 'cool' Samurai for fun during my Lunch?

nuevointi, I really understand that you are dissapointed with the fact that Mexico or/and another Latin American country isn't participating in the game (except for the Indian tribes), but there are enough other history matters that also won't be included in a game such as this, and you know the answer already for yourself, that subject is too unknown to make a game of it.
Live with it, but I'm sure there won't be a Southern American country playable in AOE III

P.S. I'm new here, as you've probaly seen.

posted 01-29-05 09:03 AM CT (US)     88 / 96       
My guess..

5.Ruissa (The westcoast)
6.Germans in some form. (Big market, would be odd to leave them out.)
7.The Dutch

As for the last one. (Stop reading here if your not interested in history, Swedish history)
I've seen Sweden mentioned a few times along with Denmark and the Kalmar Union.
Heres what i know about Swedens role in the new world.

The year 1620 - Migrating from Sweden is forbidden by Gustav II Adolf. I'm not sure how strict this was or for how long, but forbidden it was.
The earliest record of Swedes on American soil i have found is in 1638, when imigrants founded a colony by the name of "New Sweden", close to the Delaware river. We lost that clony in 1655 to the Dutch. Today it's called "Wilmington".
Erik Jansson from Sweden founded another colony, Bishopshill. It was founded not that far from Chicago and housed a couple of thousend Sweds for a while. The colony was founded in 1846 and then dissolved in 1861.
None the less it's estimated that 280 000 Canadians and Ten milion americans have some degree of Swedish blood pumping in there veins. However most of these ancient reletives migrated in the 1850's or later.
Personaly i would love to se the Swedish "Karoliner" in blue and yellow coats wondering around in the new world, but that's unlikley since there only were a few friendly christian colonys at the time. No land was claimed by force as the French, Spanish and English did. At least not to my knowledge.

Most of the time we had our hands full with our neighbours.

Other interesting facts about Sweden at the time.

There is a story about how the Swedish king Karl the XII, who negotiated with pirates about claiming the island of Madagaskar for Sweden and giving tired Pirates a haven in Sweden for them to retire. Then our king got shot with a button and died, the expedition however, came as far as Spain were they ran out of money. And that's the end of that.
We did however get the island of Saint Barthélemy from Napoleon in 1785 for suporting the French during the war against Britain. We lost it after 93 years when it was an election about wich country the inhabitants wanted to belong to, Sweden got one vote. So now it's French.
Sweden had 42 soldiers fighting for the liberation of America from Britain. And 22 Swedes fighting with the French in Europe against the Brittish.

Gustav the III wrote in a letter to countess Boufflers after America had liberated them self:

"Maybe we find our self in the century of America, and perhaps this new republic will, although not better equiped then the first builders of Rome, tax* Europe, as Europe has taxed America for two hundred years. "
*It says "brandskatta" in the letter, and since it's an old word i havent heard before, any Swede with a better translation, feel free to correct me.

Denmarks part in the new world i don't know anything about, but i would bet it was about the same.

And yeah, making one Scandinavian civ would piss a lot of people of. It's just not a good idea.

As to Japan, one big reason that speaks for including them are that asia is a big market. And including any civ from it, would probably boost sales. And there's alot of Japan/ Samurai crazed people in Europe and North America to so. Unlikely but not impossible.

Maybe it's like this. You can choose the three given countrys in campiagns but the other more unlikely ones in multiplayer? That leaves more room for ES to play around with diffrent civs. Just a thought.

Please excuse my bad english.

posted 01-29-05 10:00 AM CT (US)     89 / 96       
Well said.

I am a true believer that the Swedish "Karoliners" will be there rounding out the 8th European Civ.

The only other European sea power during the Colonization period besides Denmark would be Venice.Neither one looks promising.

My pick still remains:

Who else had colonies in America?

Germany is the exception ES put in for "what if" situations.

If there is to be an add on package (like always), my bet it will remain in the Americas with the time period coinciding with 1850-1898 and all the conflicts in the Western Hemisphere.

The European Theater would be the subject of another Game (AOE IV) with all the conflicts from the 1500's to 1860' that would be something else indeed.

Why would they (ES)want to put all their cookies in one jar?

Another game means more money.....and more fun for us......

"The Greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you,to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears,to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters"...Ghengis Khan

[This message has been edited by Cheruscan (edited 01-29-2005 @ 10:02 AM).]

posted 01-29-05 10:22 AM CT (US)     90 / 96       

Quoted from Cheruscan:

If there is to be an add on package (like always), my bet it will remain in the Americas with the time period coinciding with 1850-1898 and all the conflicts in the Western Hemisphere.

I agree!
A very cool expansion pack for AOE3 would be the American civil war.

[This message has been edited by Hellberg (edited 01-29-2005 @ 10:35 AM).]

posted 01-29-05 10:43 AM CT (US)     91 / 96       
Jup, but I think that would be a bit shortcoming for that whole matter, the American Civil War (and the Napoleonic Wars, also mentioned before), I think, deserves a game for its own.

Maybe AOE IV could deal with both the US and Europe, one part of the game would handle the Civil War, the other with the Napoleonic Wars?

posted 01-29-05 11:02 AM CT (US)     92 / 96       
I really think the x-pack will deal with Africa and Asia's colonization. I don't think they'll put the American Civil War in.

Anyway, nuevointi, Latin American military history is not all that interesting you know? Sure there are a lot of characters, but their interest is in their political decisions much more than their military ones.

While I don't know much about South American history, I can speak for the Mexican one: from 1810 to 1923 we were on intermitent war with only three or four short periods were military tactics really mattered, everything else was decided by treaties or by other political artifices.

Notable periods or characters that could be depicted in this kind of game:
-Morelos (1813-1815)The true military leader of the independence.
-Santa Anna: War with Texas (1835)
-Mexican American War (1846-1848) This wasn't even a war, think of an invasion that couldn't be countered.
-Zaragoza's heroic defense of the city of Puebla, but that lasted only a day: May 5, 1862.

So, while the country was immersed in war, the really interesting things happened in paper. If you want to study Mexican history of the XIX century, please do, it's something really interesting, however, for military things, a designer would have to take huge creativity liberties to make work. (By this I'm not saying it wouldn't be nice, just a little bit difficult and inaccurate perhaps.=

Co-Author of the Aztec Civilization Outline for AoM.
Peter Jackson and Guillermo del Toro to do The Hobbit!
Chichén Itzá is one of the New 7 Wonders of the World!
posted 01-31-05 02:34 PM CT (US)     93 / 96ívar_in_New_Granada

Bolívar's attack on New Granada will always be considered one of the most daring in military history. The route of the small army, about 2,500 men, including the British legion, led through flood-swept plains and icy mountains, over routes that the Spanish considered impassable.

As another article said Hannibal took a year to prepare his trek over the Alps, Bolivar contemplated his attack crossing the Andes in weeks. To me that seems like a great challenge as a gamer. And its not fictional. So why as a consumer should we not get the most out of our gaming experience with this genre.

[This message has been edited by nuevointi (edited 02-01-2005 @ 00:33 AM).]

posted 01-31-05 04:41 PM CT (US)     94 / 96       
Himalaya's? Wow! So the Elephants were the first animals on the Mount Everest, fantastic!

My dear nuevointi, Hannibal was a Carthegian (Carthage is now modern Tunis, which is in Northern Arica, not northern India or something like that) General, who first invaded Europe and crossed the ALPS in order to conquer Italy and Rome, in which he failed.
If he'd crossed the Himalaya's there would be already a Hollywood film made upon this journey

And well, I'm not sure if I speak for everyone here, we've learned alot from Simon de Bolivar, which I'm thankful for, because I really am interested in history and this is new for me. Therefore, if you're so interested in those revolutionary wars, I'd hope for you that one of these warriors maybe are includeded in a campaign of the Spanish/Portugese in South America?

No offence, but I also hope that you know now that you really CAN'T play with these native Americans, which is really annoying for us when you're still trying to convince us why they should be playable, which the're... not.
So, it isn't really the whole discussion worthy if you know what I mean.

[This message has been edited by Esau (edited 01-31-2005 @ 04:43 PM).]

posted 02-01-05 00:34 AM CT (US)     95 / 96       
Well thanks Esau, I appreciate that, I am glad you are curious. Hope you don’t mind that I edited my post concerning the mountains.

- Of course if this never happened, then I would certainly agree with you ,Esau, but it did happen, not just in South America but also in the US. However it doesn’t mean peasant revolts will always be a victorious if you consider peasant revolts such as the Boxer rebellion in China, and those in Africa. So really its a question of mathematics— what gaming mathematic models can best represent this kind of outcome without distorting the overall logical outcomes.

- Successful peasant revolts are close to impossible in most RTS games. But maybe if you add option’s like berserk mode, patriotic fervor mode, essentially actions that allow for mathematical variations, dare I say chaos, then a South American army in hands of a skilled player could certainly put up a good fight and have a reasonable probability of victory, similar to history.

[This message has been edited by nuevointi (edited 02-01-2005 @ 03:53 AM).]

posted 02-05-05 07:45 PM CT (US)     96 / 96       
You never know
we gota wait evan though we are geting realy close
i think that germans and russia are in it though from reading the whole topic
keep finding out more info

Aoe 3
need to read pc gamer is the aoe 3 mag out in england yet
help plz
« Previous Page  1 2 3 4  Next Page »
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Age of Kings Heaven | HeavenGames