Well America was found eventually in M2TW, so why not Australia in ETW?
It could fufill the same thing, natives with lots of trade? :laugh4:
Printable View
Well America was found eventually in M2TW, so why not Australia in ETW?
It could fufill the same thing, natives with lots of trade? :laugh4:
The Dutch 'discovered' Australia in the 1600's, they just didn't colonize it.
It'd be rather boring, I think. Unless you count the bits where your troops were routed by a sudden stampede of Kangaroos.
New Zealand, though, THAT might be interesting.
Sudden stampede of Kangaroos could be interesting.
Hey, include one, include the other. :laugh4:
yeah, but you'd probably kill your troops marching them across the desert, and there's nothing useful in WA anyway (no offence to anybody living there-im refferng to the 18th century). That said, if they did include Australia kangaroos would be a MUST.
I foresee kangaroo-mounted boomerang-throwers in future ETW expansions ;)
I think I might make an Australian mod. For absolutely no viable reason.
As good a reason as I've ever seen. DOO EET!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by pevergreen
Wish I knew more about the history of the area... New Zealand really that bad?
Since it looks like CA are going down the route of one campaign map per continent rather than a single huge map, hopefully it'll be relatively easy to just tack on another continent.
Antarctica: Total War mod here I come!
The New Zealand natives were basically the Asian equivalent of the Zulu. Except they took a while to get mad enough to really get into things. But they did have two wars with the Brits and, if I remember, nearly won one of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by adembroski
They may also have gone into battle hopped up on enough local herbage to ignore anything short of an elephant gun. But I may be thinking of the Filipino's in that case.
Maori warriors were pretty scary, to each other at least.
I can imagine the native troops for Australia though:
Kangaroo mounted Boomerang throwers.
It has been pretty much proven that the Portuguese charted Western and Southern Australia under Cristóvão de Mendonça, while the Dutch were still having to polish Spanish boots. The discovery is in Vallard Atlas (Which was done in 1547, therefore well before the Dutch Empire, and the map shows the Eastern and Southern coasts of Australia, named in the Atlas "Java La Grande"), and since the Portuguese were the only European nation in the area by that timeframe (Colonized Timor in 1511), that leaves us only with one possibility. This was done by Australian researcher, Peter Trickett.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheogorath
Another curious possibility was that Magallanes (Or whatever he's called in English), was also trying to circumvent the world through the Americas, and since the Portuguese could not do that, due to the Treaty of Tordesillas, there is the possibility that Magallanes could be working for the Portuguese crown, as a spy (He was Portuguese). If that is true, Cristovão's assignment could very well have been to rendez-vous with Magallanes in unknown waters, where the latter would transmit the knowledge he'd gotten from the voyage (The most blatant one being the first confirmation that the earth was indeed round).
If by 'pretty much proven', you mean 'there is vague evidence, a significant part of which is based on native paintings of what might be Portuguese ships.'
And given some of the things painted on rocks by Australian natives, its hardly surprising that something which looks like a European ship would appear.
Regardless, the first CONFIRMED and undisputed exploration of Australia was made by the Dutch.
As to the rest, Magellan missed Australia by quite a ways. He did manage to circumnavigate the world, but I'm fairly sure it had been confirmed some time ago that the world was round (even in Europe), and the 'flat-earth' theory was generally confined to more rural areas.
By pretty much proven, I mean "significant evidence encountered" in the Atlas I mentioned, where the coast is charted. Native paintings are just a minor detail which have no relation with the Atlas (Though, it may be further proof, but as you said, it isn't a certainty.) This is so, and in such a way that recent Australian school books mention (As far as I've been told) that the Portuguese were indeed the discoverers of the island.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sheogorath
"Confirmed" is rather impossible. Unless someone had passed through the Pacific before Magellan. "Most probable" is probably the correct term. Anyhow, the rendez-vous theory is just my wishful thinking and comparing dates. But missing Australia by far, since that island wasn't even charted, and in the times we speak about doesn't seem to unlikely even if they were supposed to meet.
Moved to Monastery.
Didn't Magellan sailed under the Spanish flag?
Would be a bit boring, seeing as there was very little trade with the natives and vast lands of nothingness.
Although it sounds contradictory didn't the aboriginal people 'discover' Australia about 30, 000 years ago?
Yeah, but when we say "discovered", we mean discovered by Europeans. Although native people indeed have "discovered" those lands a long time ago, when those lands were discovered by Europeans, it meant end of their isolation and inclusion in global affairs...Quote:
Originally Posted by InsaneApache
Yes, he did. Portugal had a great history of inserting spies everywhere in this time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarmatian