America, 1700-1800?

It's been kind of bugging me, but how will CA interpret the 13 colonies? Something that caught my attention to a possibility is that there will be "protectorates". Is it possible CA plans on having the colonies available at the start, but ridiculously weak and underdeveloped as a protectorate of the British?

Also, the rather disciplined formations of the Native Americans we have seen so far makes me wonder if CA won't have whole Native American nations represented as well, possibly playable. I of course hope to all ends that I will not be lining up my Indians in ordered formations to stomp on the French/Spanish/British/Dutch with supporting artillery and cavalry...really dispel the atmosphere, that would...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

It's been kind of bugging me, but how will CA interpret the 13 colonies? Something that caught my attention to a possibility is that there will be "protectorates". Is it possible CA plans on having the colonies available at the start, but ridiculously weak and underdeveloped as a protectorate of the British?

---

Going by the screenshots and various tidbits dropped by CA, this is what's been cobbled together so far:

1.) The 13 Colonies starts out as part of Britain. Whether or not they'll be a protectorate or otherwise receive special status is unknown.
2.) Given the right combination of circumstances, the Colonies can rebel against Britain and thus emerge as its own faction (the U.S.).
3.) Should the Colonies rebel, it probably won't be until the second half of the game.
4.) If the U.S. does emerge, the player will then be given the choice to switch over to playing as the Americans, or to continue playing as the British.
5.) It's unclear whether the the Colonies can still rebel and form America if they're owned by a faction other than Britain. It's been hinted once or twice that yes it's possible, but it has yet to be officially confirmed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

Also, the rather disciplined formations of the Native Americans we have seen so far makes me wonder if CA won't have whole Native American nations represented as well, possibly playable. I of course hope to all ends that I will not be lining up my Indians in ordered formations to stomp on the French/Spanish/British/Dutch with supporting artillery and cavalry...really dispel the atmosphere, that would...

---

Although I highly doubt they'll be playable without modding, it does look like that at least a couple Native American tribes will make an appearance as their own faction (although CA has yet to verify this for certain). If you look at screenshots showing the campaign map, you can see on the mini-map that several regions in North America are in colors that don't appear to correspond with those of any of the European factions. While of course that's not incontrovertible proof that at least a couple American Indian nations will be their own factions, it's definitely not out of the question either. ~:)

Playable tribes with modding.....sounds pretty cool. :beam:

Imagine having a whole Sioux or Mohawk country.

Apparently America's first navy was just a mass of hired pirates, kinda wonder
if that will be an option avaible in the game..?

& there will ofc be the Native American tribes, though I wouldn't care the slightest
to be able to play them, plus there would have to be a lot of modding involved to
make the Native American tribes playable, as they may have to create new buildings
to construct & work out about ships since they can't exactly get to Europe on their
crappy boats.

Quote:

---

... their crappy boats.

---

Don't call my canoe a crappy boat! :laugh4::laugh4::laugh4:

Anyways, yeah, they'll need a bit of modding to make them playable. My God, I hope someone is up for the task. I CAN'T WAIT TO COLONIZE EUROPE!!!!

lol.

I'm sure someone will unlock all of them, right about the time someone does a Warhammer, and Rome mod for it as well lol.


That said, I hope the natives fight like natives. Obviously in melee combat, but if they rushed in a formation that would just be sad.

Plus i'm hoping like history I can wipe out about 80% of them with new diseases, much like the campaign in Kingdoms where the natives outnumber spain but in the end there are not many left.

I just hope the Natives will be bribeable factions as I'd like to play out my own little Indian v Indian wars or proxy :juggle2:

The tribes in North America were very important to the success or failure of the colonies of the major powers. They were partners and allies. There were more than a dozen that were of significant importance in the time line of the game, and this was just east of the Mississippi River. Some were better fighter and or controlled vast regions of tributary tribes and no one was going to hold a colonies without their help and cooperation. Even the fledgling rebellion in the 13 colonies needed them, though they quickly forgot about it after a time. Washington, Green, and Wayne all employed Choctaw Scouts. Most of us know of the strong alliance between Briton and the Iroquois, held together by their loyalties to Wm. Johnson.

The Indian Wars were mostly about trade, loyalties, fair dealing, and great diplomacy. Whether this will be accurately portrayed in this or any other game is questionable though.

Also the technology transfers were not just one sided, though by this time it may have been more so. How many of us realize that our table utensils come from Native Americans, or the propensity for bathing more than once or twice a year?

At the end of the period was when the potato came into cultivation in Europe, which allowed for a vast improvement in nutrition and a follow-on population explosion where it was introduced. It might even be argued that it could have forestalled the French Revolution.

There is a lot more to this time in history than most of us see and we just take for granted that things are as they always have been, but this was a time of great change through out the world.

Fertilizers were first being researched in this time also and the industrial revolution could not have happened with out the agricultural revolution.

Back to Indian fighting capabilities. In the Special Forces Edition we are offered Roger’s Rangers. This unit was famous because they could do what the Indians did at a time when Indian Allies were in very short supply…

We are just going to have to wait and see the combat abilities CA gives these units but I am sure they will be very strong in ambush and hand to hand but not sustainable in a stand up slug it out fire fight.

I see some1 likes researching the Native Americans ^^

True, how could the US economy work now without the help of the Indian Casinos?

But being serious now. The map of America looked quite huge, if they were to make
it a playable faction & considering how huge a number of tribes were it could be quite
difficult to use perhaps?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pantsalot

But being serious now. The map of America looked quite huge, if they were to make
it a playable faction & considering how huge a number of tribes were it could be quite
difficult to use perhaps?

---

Difficult to use how? Because of the large amount of territory armies would need to cover marching from one place to the next?

Well total war is about multiple factions going at it and the French, Spanish, & English all tried to bleed one another with their Indian allies. This didn’t change much when the U.S. came into being. However, the U.S. had very few tribes loyal to them in a position to counter any of this. The Choctaw and maybe a few Chickasaw fought in the Red Sticks War as did some of the loyal Creek.


There were really only a few powerful tribes or alliances by this time and ever band of ever tribe need not be portrayed.

The war of 1812 was also a time of Indian uprisings. The Red Sticks War in the south and Tecumseh’s War in the north were the largest. Andy Jackson almost got us into war with Spain by going into Florida at the same time.

There is a lot of fertile ground for Campaigns and Mods in this regard.

THe Americas should be like a vassal sort to Britain. It is allied and must pay the required tribute for every turn it is vassal to Britain. THe colonies are different from Britain in terms of military and uniforms. COlonists had their own local militias and Britain had its own men. THink of it this way: George Washington fought for Britain in the French and Indian war, but u never see a picture as a redcoat. He led the Virgininan troops.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knud

THe Americas should be like a vassal sort to Britain.

---

Americas? So, you're saying Spain's colonies in South America was a "vassal" to Britain?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Knud

It is allied and must pay the required tribute for every turn it is vassal to Britain.

---

Assuming you meant the Thirteen Colonies, they weren't "vassals." They were colonies, and thus a part of the British Empire.


EDIT: A couple days later. Uh, sorry about this, I was really grumpy at the time. Take this post with a laugh. :embarassed:

I was just thinking of something I have seen in some of the old, ancient, and even board games when it came to movement in early North America.

Often you had to stick to river courses or it slowed your movement drastically. Boat was the most efficient and quickest means of transport.

Men who tried to make it on foot often starved to death. Look at what happened with the American attack on Canada.

When George Rogers Clark marched his men from Kaskaskia to Vincennes he sent a boat around carrying the cannons. It arrived within a day of his arrival, or maybe sooner, even though it was mostly up stream and in a huge flood.

I know we will have to wait to see but I was wondering if water movement would be an option in the vastness of North America and what other movement restrictions it would have.

Don't forget New France was gigantic, though far less manned.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

http://www.quebecoislibre.org/06/060319map.jpg

I really hope you can just buy new france, like Thomas Jefferson did. Sure it'd be pre napolean, but if you have the cash why not beat the americans to it :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Polemists

I really hope you can just buy new france, like Thomas Jefferson did. Sure it'd be pre napolean, but if you have the cash why not beat the americans to it :)

---

First you'd have to play like the 13 colonies, and cause France to go bankrupt paying for your little revolution.


~;p

Just a little historical heads up: Thomas Jefferson did NOT BUY NEW FRANCE. He wasn't president until 1800, and by then, Spain, not france, owned Louisana. He bought the Louisana territory from the french only after Napoleon wanted it back from spain. New france was a area spanning from the Ohio valley and vast tracks of Canada, and directly conquered by the british and through a peace treaty. Louisana was a seperate part altogether.

Also, how in the name of God would america be even a useful faction in the 1700's? I'm american myself, and I know just how pathetic our armed forces and political clout were then. The americans continually proved themselves unreliable as line soldiers time and again, and only were able to win when in more frontier style fighting, without lines or rules (for at least the first 1/2 - 3/4 of the war, until the continental line got whipped into shape and enough experience and supplies). In fact, for most of the 1700's it was hell for George Washington, Congress and the like to even keep the colonies/ US from killing each other, let alne stay together. Most Americans then identified themselves with the colony they were from, not as American. Feelings like these persisted well into the 1800's as state's rights activists. These feelings were only really ended at the end of the American Civil war. What i hope is, that they don't make the mistake of overpowering the US when it does come in, because the US was ANYTHING but powerful and coordinated. (The brits quickly learned that even before the war started: they had huge amounts of trouble coordinating shipments of supplues for their frontier garrisons because the colonists had nill experience in actively working with each other)

That's a bit strong, gamerdude. The Continentals fought a highly effective guerrilla war in New Jersey in '77 and afterwards fought well in the European style in several battles against the British before the war went to the South.

In which battles in particular did Americans go head-on with red-coats and win, before the south? Bunker/Breed's hill, is one that i know of (that ended in strategic defeat anyways), but i haven't heard of any others that involved the old-world style head first approach in which the americans won. Like I said (or implied anyways) and you too, the americans knew how to fight guerilla warfare quite well. I will admit, now that i have thought some, the colonists did have some experience in line fighting from the french and indian war/7 years war, but that was with the red coats on our side. I should be more lenient, though, considering the fact that no one at that point had really the ability to go fight red coats head to head and win. It must have shocked foreigners that people once seen as second class and disreputable fighters would even be able to hold out at all against the british army.

However, if you have read a decent history book about this period, you would see quickly how the Americans were the Dis-United states. For instance, The South viewed this war initially as a New England rebellion, and most southerners remained loyal. It was quite difficult to get the colonies to give Congress the means to fight a war during the course of the war, as Congress was little more than a body that recommended what needed to be done, at least until the Articles of Confederation were tossed (well after the end of the war). My point was, the US was not a truly well oiled and expansion oriented republic until Jefferson took over, at least. George and John Adams had their hands full setting precendents and making the new system run. Right there, the end of the 1700's are spent just getting america on its feet and stable. I wonder if this would even be worth playing, because after the revolutionary war, america spent a lot of its time with internal problems, which lasted until out side the 1800 time frame.

But that will most likely be the joy of playing as them, to rewrite history. It's possible that the Americans will have a different tech tree from everyone else, one that enhances it's troops enough so that you will notice a significant difference from a low tech America, to a high tech one. This would make America an economy based faction, to get those important upgrades so it can compete on the battlefield. I think that would be fun :beam:

Possibly so. WHat i was mainly afraid of is another game trumpeting americans as the all powerful unstoppable mega-war-death-machine, and especially in a time when america was experiencing far more woes than success.

If america would be a player faction, I think they would need to take in some considerations. Americans may not have been the most dependable open field soldiers available, but they were adept a luring the british into fights that required loose order, not close order fighting. Also a huge boon to america is something that was almost unheard of outside america: the long rifle. WHile being slower to reload, it was deadly accurate at a far greater range than the musket. Riflemen were feared by the Brits, because they had no real way of getting in close enough to fight back without taking many casualties. Another thing is that we had were excellent leaders. At the time, americans were also extremely wealthy for people of their social status, and yankee sailors were well known for their skill (too bad they were short on actual fighting ships).

What we didn't have was sound political unity or a dependable heavy infantry until the war drew to a close, and political unity wasn't sound even then.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by gamerdude873

In which battles in particular did Americans go head-on with red-coats and win, before the south?

---

The Battle of Saratoga in 1777

In many ways it was the most pivotal battle of the American Revolution.

The Americans did outnumber the British forces by roughly 3 to 1 but Gates sat out most of the battle with most of the troops and only Arnold and Morgan went into the attack. Gates sat in his trenches and watched.

It was not just a military victory but a great political one. It brought Spain and France into the war against Briton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

But that will most likely be the joy of playing as them, to rewrite history. It's possible that the Americans will have a different tech tree from everyone else, one that enhances it's troops enough so that you will notice a significant difference from a low tech America, to a high tech one. This would make America an economy based faction, to get those important upgrades so it can compete on the battlefield. I think that would be fun :beam:

---

I want to become a Monarchy :laugh4:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mailman653

I want to become a Monarchy :laugh4:

---

Well from what we've seen in the previews so far, that could indeed be an option for the U.S. Granted, it might not go over very well with the newly-independent colonists.... ~D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Martok

Well from what we've seen in the previews so far, that could indeed be an option for the U.S. Granted, it might not go over very well with the newly-independent colonists.... ~D

---

I may have already said this some where on the forums…or maybe not…but Old Ben Franklin held discussions with the Stuarts on that very subject…I assume it was a just in case sort of thing but wouldn’t it through a wrench into the works if the Colonies had a Jackobite King…wouldn’t that just cork the Hanoverians?

:laugh4:

Forgot to reply to this, but the Americans fought Euro-style at Monmouth and Springfield in NJ before the war headed South. I've actually watched the re-enactment at Monmouth a few times, good stuff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YLC

It's been kind of bugging me, but how will CA interpret the 13 colonies? ...

---

Consider this, if I may make a suggestion:
Medieval2:TW had Kingdoms and Medieva[1]:TW had Viking Invasion in both of which there were factions (tribes? etc.) that were not in the main games. If we have patience enough to wait, CA could publish [if they are of a mind to] an expansion (like Kingdoms and VI) about each of the 13 colonies as a separate faction (it should be fun to reenact their petty political jealousies & squabbles and moments of unified cooperation) but allied with each other, of course (as the Eastern & Western empires in Rome:TW's Barbarian Invasion), then throw in the Iroquiois and other sundry native tribes, to make things more interesting, plus of course the English, French, Spaniards, and maybe some Hessians or whatever. But--I don't know--since neither you nor I are CA, ours is but to speculate and, maybe, suggest. The decision lies with them. Just a thought, though; what say you?
Hawooh.:idea2:

Sorry i've been away so long. Internet trouble.


This is my fault for not being specific enough, my bad. What i meant for head to head was with both sides attacking, with neither side having prepared earthworks. Monmoth COurthouse was after Baron von Steuben whipped the colonial line into shape in valley forge. Before that, the colonial line was a disgrace: read about the battle of long Island and new york: huge sections of the rebel line melted away when the the british charged with bayonets (Another thing that the colonials sorely lacked: bayonets, at least beofre the french began to supply them). However, when the americans had earthworks prepared, the Brits could have real trouble disloging them.

Quote:

---

The Battle of Saratoga in 1777

In many ways it was the most pivotal battle of the American Revolution.

The Americans did outnumber the British forces by roughly 3 to 1 but Gates sat out most of the battle with most of the troops and only Arnold and Morgan went into the attack. Gates sat in his trenches and watched.

It was not just a military victory but a great political one. It brought Spain and France into the war against Briton.

---

I haven't looked into the specifics of how this battle was fought, so i disregaurded it as a hit and run battle where the americans knew and used the terrain to their advantage, and brits were weighed down by a hefty baggage train. Either way, it was very key to the success of the revolution.

It may not be what you are looking for but have a look at the Battle of Stony Point. An American force stormed and took a British Fort in a three pronged Night Attack.

They drew off part of the garrison with a diversionary attack and stormed the walls. No mean feat! Even if Washington decided they couldn’t hold it long and evacuated.

I guess I'm less disagreeing with you on facts and more on what you conclude from them, gamerdude. We both agree that American forces fought with mixed results varying on a number of factors from training to equipment to tactics. I would say that this is true of most European powers of the time - or at least, most European nations faced these ups and downs on the battlefield. I certainly think that the US shouldn't be able to invade Europe in ETW, but I wouldn't rule out becoming a major local player.

Also, good to have you back, I'm enjoying this discussion.