Sure, we have AOE2 Definitive Edition, but playing the beta what struck me most was it was fundamentally an old game with old conventions and feels ancient today, even compared to laptop-spec games like DOTA2/League.Outside of fantasy or Sci-Fi, AOE2 time period (and probably AEO1 too) is what resonates with people most. We have also had other RTS games that go from ancient times to modernity and beyond. We've had a bunch of more modern World War RTS games since then already, (Company of Heroes), and of course gun-powdery AOE3, they have had their turn.RTS as a genre is kind of depleted, or at least, significantly less significant - and when there is such a drought of titles, I personally want the titles to use an established time period that works and people enjoyed, and maybe not be so conservative with modernisation of gameplay - I already like what they have done with scale and verticality.I strongly think medieval is an intuitive and well established time period for RTS - intuitive resource type gathering, intuitive scissor/paper/stone units and counters.The franchise future shouldn't depend on a single magazine picture. I think this is all based on 3 being coincidentally later, and then that magazine picture from years ago where someone seeded the idea of further progression with IV and V. So far, doing that didn't really work out so well. There is no need to cling to the idea that different AOE games being set in different time periods. The idea that we should keep bouncing around time periods and let the last good medieval RTS be a game from the last 90's in the name of experimentation or originality is odd.We haven't had a good AoE game in 20 years - not in my opinion anyway.We haven't had a medieval Age of Empires game in 20 years.My hunch is that the HRE would wait for an expansion with a few member states and they'd try to find some way to convey what a political mess that confederation was - Franks can cover it during the Charlemagne era and aftermath anyway. For a tenth, probably Italy (perhaps a specific city-state this time like Venice or Genoa or Florence?) since they're going into Renaissance and they also have lots of stories with Byzantines and Muslims. Romans - If they're doing late antiquity, they have to do this.Could even figure into a fall of Rome campaign! My hunch is that the HRE would wait for an expansion and they'd try to find some way to convey what a political mess that confederation was, perhaps multiple member states - Franks can cover it during the Charlemagne era and aftermath anyway.Īll this is speculation of course, but it's fun.ĮDIT: Maybe Persia as the Mongols' Eastern rival instead of China, since they also have interactions with Arabs and Turks. Turks - gives Saracens a Middle Eastern rival and you can do fall of Constantinople!.Something Eastern European (Hungarians?) - Mongols also need a western rival, Magyars can also fight Franks/Goths in early Middle Ages.China - Mongols need a rival in the East.Maybe the Franks could cover it, but that might spread them too thin at least as the primary rival. Goths - Well, someone has to rival the Western Romans, the Huns disappear from the scene too quickly for base game, and you can tell early Medieval stories with the successor states.Romans - If they're doing late antiquity, they have to do this, and they can turn into the Byzantines.Arabs/Saracens/Berbers - They're going to want to do something with the crusades and perhaps Islamic conquest.Franks/French/etc - An obvious rival for Britain and too iconic to leave out.Britons and Mongols have already been confirmed, so here's a try at seven more:
![age of empires iv predictio age of empires iv predictio](https://www.allkeyshop.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/80-1.jpg)
AoK had 13 in the base game, so let's say 8-10 this time. There seems to be a big focus on telling stories in single player too, so they'll want civs that can naturally match with others. I'm gonna take a stab at guessing on the civs, which will be more diverse this time around and less on release.