Relic Entertainment's announcement of Age of Empires 4 brings attention to a common issue in strategy games: the absence of actual empires. The author argues that games like Age of Empires and Civilization focus on peoples who *had* empires, rather than the mechanics of empire itself. An empire is defined as a state where a core ruling population extracts resources from a distinct periphery.

Historically, empires, like the Roman Republic or Athenian Empire, did not require a monarchy and were dominant forms of large-scale social organization. Modern nation-states are often consolidated forms of former empires, making the idea of an 'age without empires' a misnomer. Even today, many regions experience ongoing imperialism.

In typical gameplay, players annihilate opposing settlements rather than conquering them or reducing them to tributaries, which contradicts the fundamental purpose of an empire: to utilize the resources and labor of a subordinate population. The 'empires' in these games are more akin to fanatically murderous nation-states projected backward in time. While conversion is possible via priests, it's a niche mechanic, not a primary strategy, and doesn't reflect historical imperial practices.