u/ArtoriusCastus14

I keep seeing people argue that “Spain” does not fit AoE4 because Spain was not fully unified for most of the medieval period. But honestly, I think that argument falls apart when you look at how AoE4 already handles civilizations.

AoE4 civilizations are not frozen snapshots of one exact century. They are often broad historical arcs.

The English are probably the easiest example. AoE4’s English go from an Anglo-Saxon-inspired early identity into Anglo-Norman, English Gothic, and eventually Tudor themes. That is a huge historical transformation inside one civilization.

France is similar. The French civ represents a broad arc from the early medieval/post-Carolingian world through Capetian France, the Hundred Years’ War era, and into early modern France. “France” in the 800s was not the same political reality as France in the 1500s, but AoE4 still treats it as one civilization because the game is representing a long-term historical identity.

The Abbasids are another good comparison. The Abbasid civ represents a larger caliphal and Islamic Golden Age legacy, even though the political reality of the Abbasids changed dramatically over time, especially after the fall of Baghdad. It is not just one clean state in one clean period.

The Holy Roman Empire is also not a modern nation-state. It was a complex imperial structure made up of many regions, princes, bishops, cities, and identities. Yet AoE4 includes it because it has a recognizable medieval identity.

China is another obvious example because the civ literally compresses multiple dynastic phases into one civilization identity. The game already accepts that civilizations can evolve across centuries.

So when people say, “Spain was not unified yet,” I think they are applying a standard that AoE4 does not really apply to its own civ roster.

A Spanish civ could easily represent the Christian Iberian arc from Visigothic legacy, Asturias, León, Castile, Aragón, Navarre, the Reconquista, and eventually the Catholic Monarchs. The point is not that Spain existed in 800 exactly as it did in 1492. The point is that Christian Iberia had a clear historical identity, military tradition, religious frontier, political development, and gameplay potential across the AoE4 timeline.

Medieval Iberia is also one of the strongest RTS settings you could ask for. The Reconquista created a frontier society shaped by castles, raids, repopulation, religious conflict, diplomacy, shifting alliances, military orders, and cultural exchange. That is not a weak identity. That is basically an RTS design document waiting to happen.

El Cid alone shows how much potential there is. Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar was not just a simple “Christian hero fighting Moors” figure. He was a Castilian noble, military commander, exile, warlord, ruler of Valencia, and someone who served both Christian and Muslim rulers at different points. That complexity is exactly what makes medieval Iberia interesting. It is not just black-and-white crusading. It is politics, loyalty, faith, survival, and ambition all mixed together.

Age of Empires already understands this too. AoE2 included the Spanish and gave us the El Cid campaign. Other medieval strategy games understand Iberia’s value as well. Crusader Kings III built an entire Fate of Iberia expansion around the peninsula, focusing on long-term conflict, coexistence, diplomacy, and cultural change. Medieval II: Total War also treated Spain as a distinct faction with a Reconquista path, cavalry, skirmishers, naval potential, and later gunpowder identity.

So the question should not be, “Did Spain exist as a fully unified modern country for the entire AoE4 timeline?” By that logic, we would have to nitpick half the civ roster.

The better question is: did Christian Iberia have enough unique history, military identity, architecture, language, heroes, conflicts, and gameplay potential to justify a civilization?

I think the answer is obviously yes.

Spain could bring several unique themes to AoE4:

• A Reconquista mechanic based around reclaiming, fortifying, or expanding territory.
• A multiple kingdoms system, with Castile, León, Aragón, Navarre, or Galicia represented through age-up choices, landmarks, or bonuses.
• Military orders such as Santiago, Calatrava, Alcántara, and Montesa as unique units, techs, or landmark systems.
• A frontier warfare identity built around castles, raids, town militias, cavalry, and flexible defenses.
• Religious pressure through monks, missionaries, sacred sites, conversion, or support mechanics.
• Iberian military flavor, including jinetes, caballeros, almogavars, sword-and-buckler infantry, and order knights.
• A possible naval and trade identity, especially if the civ includes Aragón, Mediterranean trade, or later Atlantic expansion.
• A late-game gunpowder and unification theme, ending around the Catholic Monarchs without needing to jump fully into the colonial era.

There are also multiple ways the devs could approach it.

They could make it a broad Spanish civ, representing the Christian Iberian kingdoms as a long historical arc, similar to how the English and French represent several phases of development. They could call it Castile if they want a narrower identity. They could make it a Kingdoms of Iberia civ where age-up choices represent different crowns. Or they could design it around a full Reconquista system, where territory control, fortifications, religious pressure, and military orders shape the civ’s playstyle.

A past Spain concept on this subreddit already had some cool inspiration with Reconquista themes, missionaries, naval identity, kingdom bonuses, and landmark flexibility. I do not think every idea needs to be copied directly, but the overall direction is strong. Spain should not just be “French knights with conquistadors.” It should feel like a frontier civilization built around expansion, religious pressure, military orders, castles, cavalry, and the gradual unification of Christian Iberian power.

To me, Spain is one of the most obvious missing civilizations for AoE4. It fits the timeline, it fits the gameplay, it fits the franchise history, and it would bring a language, setting, and medieval identity that the game still does not fully have.

And selfishly, yes: I want to hear Spanish spoken in AoE4.

Just wanted to throw some thoughts out there. Obviously none of this is confirmed or anything, just speculation based on how the newer civs/variants are being designed.

The more I look at Jin, the more I feel like it sits in a weird middle ground between a full civ and a variant. On paper it is treated more like a new civ, and mechanically it has a lot going on with Mounted Villagers, Emissaries, Tributaries, Meng’an Mouke, Iron Pagoda, Mounted Grenadiers, and its own music. But it also shares some models and voice lines with China/Zhu Xi, so presentation-wise it still has that “related civ” feeling.

Honestly, I don’t think that is a bad thing. If anything, I think Jin might be showing where the devs are going with this idea: reuse some assets where it makes sense historically, but make the civ play differently enough that it feels like its own thing.

That is also why I kind of wish Knights Templar and House of Lancaster had released in this same era of variant design. Both of those civs feel much more distinct than some of the older variants, and if they had released alongside something like Jin, who knows — maybe they would have gotten their own soundtrack or at least more unique music layers.

Knights Templar especially feels like it deserves its own audio identity. The civ is already very different from France in gameplay and theme. It has a crusader-state/military-order fantasy that could have sounded amazing with Latin chant, heavier percussion, and maybe some Levantine influence. It feels like one of the variants that most deserved unique music.

House of Lancaster is similar. It is obviously tied to the English, but it has its own War of the Roses flavor. I do not think it needs to sound completely unrelated to England, but a darker, more martial Lancastrian version of the English soundtrack would have made it feel more premium. Even a unique motif or age-up stinger would help.

That is what makes Jin interesting to me. Jin sharing some assets with China/Zhu Xi does not bother me much because it still gets enough distinct treatment to feel special. But it also makes me look back at civs like KT, Lancaster, and Ayyubids and wonder if they would have felt even better if they were released under the newer design philosophy.

For example, Zhu Xi has a solid historical basis, but I wish it leaned even harder into the whole scholar/bureaucracy/academy side of Chinese history. If the civ is named after Zhu Xi, I want it to feel more like an academy-state: civil service exams, stronger scholar-official identity, more emphasis on institutions, maybe even more distinct Shaolin flavor. Right now I like the civ, but I still think it could feel more unique compared to China.

Order of the Dragon is another one. The idea of fewer but stronger elite units is cool, but I think it could use more flavor as an actual knightly order. Things like chapter houses, vows, relic-based bonuses, commanders/marshals, or some kind of unit preservation mechanic would make it feel less like “HRE but expensive” and more like a true elite brotherhood.

Jeanne d’Arc is probably the one I would most like to see redesigned. I don’t hate the idea, but I think Jeanne would be more interesting as the center of a French resistance/liberation civ rather than a superhero unit. More banner, morale, visions, Orléans, Reims, peasant levies, and comeback mechanics. Less “France with a MOBA hero.”

For the newer variants, I would roughly place them like this:

Golden Horde feels more distinct than Jeanne, but still very close to Mongols at its core.

Macedonian Dynasty is interesting, but the Varangian focus puts it in a weird place.

Tughlaq feels stronger as a variant because the governor system and elephants give it a clearer identity.

Sengoku Daimyo might be the best example of a variant that almost feels like a full civ, because the clan allegiance system changes the whole fantasy of playing Japan.

My biggest concerns are probably Golden Horde and Macedonian Dynasty.

With Golden Horde, I think focusing on Batu Khan makes sense for the early Horde, but it also feels limiting. The Golden Horde later became much more Islamic, especially under rulers like Berke and Uzbek Khan. I think it would be really cool if they had some kind of later-game choice between staying more steppe/traditional Mongol or moving toward an Islamic khanate identity with tribute, trade, vassals, and state-building.

With Macedonian Dynasty, my issue is the Varangian focus. The Varangian Guard absolutely belongs with Byzantines, but since Vikings are already coming, it puts the civ in a weird spot. It can start to feel like “Byzantines with Vikings” or like a temporary Viking teaser. I think the Macedonians should lean more into Basil II, imperial restoration, themes, frontier warfare, silver economy, and Byzantine state power. Varangians should be part of the civ, but not the whole identity.

One small thing that I think would help: once Vikings are in the game, maybe reuse some Norse voice lines for the Macedonian Varangian units. Not the whole civ, obviously. Regular Byzantine/Macedonian units should still sound Greek/Byzantine. But Varangian-specific units speaking Norse would make them feel more intentional and less awkward.

Also, I really hope variants get more unique music eventually. I get that full soundtracks for every variant might not be realistic, but even unique motifs, age-up stingers, or combat layers for civs like Knights Templar, House of Lancaster, and Ayyubids would make them feel way more premium. Jin having its own music naturally makes the older variants feel a little left behind.

Overall, I think variants are at their best when they are not just “parent civ plus one gimmick.” They should feel like specific historical sub-civs with their own flavor, mechanics, and identity, even if they reuse some assets where it makes sense.

Again, just my thoughts/speculation. Curious how other people would categorize these newer variants.

https://preview.redd.it/1etqag6zog0h1.png?width=532&format=png&auto=webp&s=c84a7c3252c6635f88bc196474ed095f28324a7e

I know this is not the same as hitting Conqueror rank or grinding the ladder at a high level, but I finally got every achievement for the new AoE4 DLC, and I’m honestly pretty proud of it.

As someone who does not always have the time to invest in ranked or push for Conqueror, completing all the achievements felt like my own personal milestone with the game. It gave me a reason to explore the DLC fully, try different strategies, and really appreciate the work that went into it.

I especially enjoyed the Jin Dynasty. I do not think they are necessarily aggressive, and I do not think they are in the best place balance-wise, but they were still fun to play, especially in Crucible mode. More than anything, though, the campaign was the real highlight for me. The missions, dialogue, hero moments, and optional objectives made it feel much closer to the kind of Age of Empires campaign experience I’ve always wanted from AoE4.

I also want to thank the community and the developers. This game has come such a long way, and it keeps getting better. The discussions, feedback, streams, memes, guides, and passion from the community make AoE4 feel alive, and the devs deserve credit for continuing to improve the game and listen to players.

I’ll update everyone once the Viking DLC releases and I inevitably go achievement hunting again. And I still hope we get Spain someday, because hearing my language spoken in AoE4 would be incredible. Long live Age of Empires!

https://preview.redd.it/fh9ybu6sla0h1.png?width=3840&format=png&auto=webp&s=6a124a8a4c2307672a41c090e69dc947a179e647

I have to give credit where it’s due: the campaign in this DLC is a major step in the right direction for AoE4.

One of my biggest issues with the base game campaigns was that, while the documentary style was interesting, they often felt too distant from the actual characters and events being portrayed. This new campaign feels much closer to what made older Age of Empires campaigns memorable. It has in-game dialogue, hero units who actually speak during missions, optional objectives that give you more to do, and a story that feels much more engaging from mission to mission.

That alone makes a huge difference. The campaign does not feel like a detached history lesson. It feels like you are actually participating in the historical struggle being depicted. The missions feel more alive because the characters have a presence, and the optional objectives give the maps more personality and replay value.

To me, this is exactly the kind of direction AoE4 needed for single-player content. Age of Empires has always been at its best when it teaches history while still making you feel invested in the people and conflicts on the screen. This DLC seems to understand that balance much better.

Even if the DLC only adds one civilization, the campaign itself feels like a genuine treat to play. It shows that the developers listened to feedback from players who wanted a more traditional, character-driven Age of Empires campaign experience. For single-player fans, this is a very encouraging sign for the future of AoE4.