02 · Setting — The Lost Dynasties

Status: Skeleton · Owner: TBD · Updated: 2026-09-23

Purpose

Define the world, the roster of playable dynasties, and the rules for how real history is handled.

To define

• World premise — why are dead dynasties all on one map at once?
• Launch roster (recommend 4–6 factions, not 12)
• Per-faction: era, region, visual signature, unique unit(s), unique building, passive bonus, play-style in one line
• Faction selection moment — when, how reversible, how monetised
• Historical-accuracy policy and cultural review process
• Naming conventions for units, buildings and ranks

Candidate dynasties / kingdoms

Vanished states with strong visual identity and low representation elsewhere:

Candidate	Region / era	Visual signature	Possible identity
Majapahit	Java, 13–16c	Split-gate candi bentar, red brick, kris	Naval reach, trade
Srivijaya	Sumatra, 7–13c	Riverine, maritime, Buddhist stupa	Water control, tribute
Khmer Empire	Cambodia, 9–15c	Baray reservoirs, sandstone towers	Hydraulic economy, war elephants
Champa	Central Vietnam, 2–19c	Brick kalan towers	Raiding, mobility
Pagan	Myanmar, 9–13c	Plains of gilded temples	Faith economy, massed infantry
Ayutthaya	Siam, 14–18c	Island capital, canals	Defensive, diplomatic
Gojoseon / Goguryeo	Korea, ancient	Fortress walls, lamellar armour	Siege, heavy cavalry
Aksum	Ethiopia, 1–10c	Stelae, obelisks	Trade, elite infantry
Sassanid Persia	3–7c	Cataphracts, fire temples	Heavy cavalry shock
Nanzhao / Dali	Yunnan, 8–13c	Highland, pagodas	Terrain advantage

Think about

• A dead-empire roster is your marketing. It is also your biggest cultural risk. These are not fantasy kingdoms — they are the ancestral heritage of living people, several in the exact markets that monetise this genre hardest. Budget for consultants from each culture represented, and put a named owner on that process. Getting Majapahit's iconography lazily wrong will cost you Indonesia, your likeliest biggest market.
• Decide the accuracy contract and publish it. "Historically inspired, not a simulation" is a legitimate stance and it settles a hundred arguments — but it must be stated, not implied, or every forum thread relitigates it.
• Avoid the sensitive edges. Living religions, contested territorial claims and colonial-era conquests are minefields. Empires that fell to internal causes or to other ancient states are far safer than ones whose fall is a live political wound.
• The anachronism problem. Srivijaya (7c) and Ayutthaya (18c) never met. Your premise has to justify the collision — a mythic afterworld, a "cycle of rebirth" tied to the Moksha title, or an explicit ahistorical sandbox. Pick one; do not hand-wave, because it also answers "why is my temple next to a cannon?"
• Roster size is a scope trap. Each faction is unique art, units, buildings, VO, balance and live-ops support — forever. Six excellent factions beat twelve reskins, and you can sell more later.
• Asymmetry vs balance. AoE-style civs differ enough to feel distinct but not enough to break competitive play. In a persistent 4X where players cannot re-pick each match, an imbalanced faction is a permanent grievance. Decide how strong asymmetry can get, and whether faction change is ever allowed.

Open questions

#	Question	Blocks	Owner
1	What is the in-fiction reason all these dynasties coexist?	Narrative, art
2	Launch roster size and exact list?	Art, balance, scope
3	Can a player ever change dynasty? Free or paid?	Monetisation, balance