This just didn't seem fair
Although I have played MTW2 on a regular basis since it came out, I have never played much past the point of winning the long campaign. Somewhere in the later game I would get bogged down slugging it out with the Mongols and/or Timurids and just go on to a new campaign.
Consequently, I never even bothered to try to go to the new world because I always satisfied the long campaign requirements long before getting the world is round message and even if I did--- by that time I had my resources tied up with the previously mentioned Mongol/Timurid slug fest.
Well, playing as my usual favorites (The English) I decided to go for it this time and conquer the known world (leaving Rome to the pope of course).
I didn't try for the new world until I had finished off all the factions on the continent and by that time I had acquired totally teched up armies including several merc gunpowder units.
Not knowing what to expect, I sent 5 such armies towards the "Indies"
I landed with my first army at the lower most section that had only one Indian "rebel" village of about 600 natives. My full stack included 7 arty units--2 ribaults, 2 culverins, 1 mortar, and 2 ballistae. I also had 2 units of Retinue LB, and 3 units of arquebusiers. I'm not sure why they were labeled as rebels since they were the only village on this section of the new world. I mean who were they rebelling aganst?
It was an embarrassing slaughter. I never committed a single mêlée troop, but simply surrounded the village with my artillery and missile troops. The indians started out massed in the village plaza, but started running back and forth as my mortar and culverins slaughterd any who happened to be standing in the wrong spot.
I kept my shorter range missile troops positioned just so that when one of the Indian units would move to the village perimeter, they would get pelted by musket or archery fire. All the time I moved my ballista units around picking off other units standing in one spot for too long.
When I had the villagers cut down to about 30%, I moved my missile troops and ribaults in close enough to fire at the reminants of the "rebels". and wiped them out to the man.
I did lose 6 or 7 men to return missile fire, but that was it, and as I said, my melee troops just set on the sidelines for the entire battle (well, a few tried out the local surfing, but that was pretty much the extent of their involvement)
I almost didn't have the heart to go on, but figured the Aztecs would be a little more of a challenge. They were, but not much. Oddly, two of their three cities had Muslim architecture, which I thought a bit strange.
After it was all over, I didn't feel like I had accomplished much. What I mean is that feather headdresses, annimal skins, and obsidian clubs just don't stand much of a chance aganst armor, guns, and cannons.
I know it's just a game, but I wonder if Cortez ever had any remorse of what he did? I just wonder
Re: This just didn't seem fair
"rebel" status doesn't always indicate some sort of a coup de tat or idealogical revolution..they simply aren't a part of any faction yet too small/insignificant for CA to label factions for all of them.
Also you have clearly not fought the aztecs yet...
Re: This just didn't seem fair
He clearly states he has.
And in my personal opinion, I was also greatly disappointed when I first fought them. I brought 12 fleets each with a full stack but only needed 1 to take over the entire aztec region.
In my new games I just mod them to have significantly higher stats and more hitpoints to kind of simulate that they have strength in numbers (there is a limit to unit size, so I can't just up that). Still quite easy, but at least I need several stacks to fight them now.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
My bad, I must have missed that sentence.
Well, historically it took 2000 spanish dragoons to wipe out an army that was pretty much all of aztec (or was it mayans cant remember) at one battle, so I'd say its realistic.
I'd say the disappointment is on par with lancers and gendarmes: disappointing in game but historically true.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Yes, I did annihilate the Aztecs.
I took their first city with a similar army except I had no arquebusiers--only Longbow for missile troops. Still, I used my usual seige tactics of blasting the enemy off the walls with my culverns, knocking several holes in the walls in the process. I then took out any dangerous towers, and began picking off tons of troops through the gaps in the walls with my ballista.
When the Indians finally retreated from the exterior walls, I moved in--getting my archers on the remaining walls and over the gate. The Aztecs stupidly massed within their range and lost another bunch before they moved to the center plaza.
By this time I had moved my mortar in and started to bombard them from within their own city. When they were down to about 25% I closed in for the kill.
Final score--they lost about 1350 men to my loss of 165.
Before I could get another army ashore they immediately besieged me with another 1300 man army. I sallied and once again cut them in half with my various missile and arty units before I routed them with the remainder of my swordsmen and heavy cav.
I did end up with one fairly tough field battle. I had an 850 man stack and a 650 man stack against two 1200 plus stacks of theirs. My starting army and their first army were facing each other in center of of the map. Their second army was fast approaching from my rear. My second army was also to the rear of their army facing me, but of course was unavailable unless my initial units routed off the map.
I held my ground as long as I could--pounding the army in front of me with my various missile units. When their army approaching my rear got too close, I charged the the army in front of me routing them off the map. I then did my best to turn and face the second army, but by this time my forces were too depleted and a bit too disorganized to contend with the second full Aztec stack and of course my slow moving arty units got overrun.
My remaining starting forces held their own though, but eventually began to route also. It was touch and go for a while as one unit at a time of my second army came on the field, and worse yet, the fighting had gotten too close to my second army's staging area.
In fact several of the initial missile units of the second army on the field also routed, but eventually the heavy infantry and cav hit the field and turned the tide in my favor.
This pretty much broke the back of the Aztecs. They lost about 1700 total to my losses of 700. I defeated their emperor immediately on the next turn in a small field battle which resulted in final city suddenly becoming a rebel city with only 600 men left. It was a piece of cake.
All in all, since I simply brought too many high tech armies, with the excepting of the one field battle I described, it was pretty much like shooting fish in a barrel.
I think if I try it again, I'll put an arbitrary cap on the size of my forces to even the playing field a bit.
Cheers
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Hmm, if you try it with mods like retrofit (where aztecs are stronger in the Kingdoms campaign), you will find your infantry fleeing quite fast from quachique/priest/150 unit size flaming arrows.
Or you can just mod the units like FactionHeir and give yourself a challenge. I think giving them morale boost, like the zealous warriors they are, would be nice.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Yeah, see the end of my AAR for a clear example of what's wrong with the Aztecs. I had to sit in siege for awhile because I'd brought all cavalry (Too slow crossing the sea otherwise) and their performance was horribly embarassing. One stack of cavalry could easily crush every single Aztec army in the new world even if their family tree isn't wiped out almost instantly.
Honestly, though, I think the problem is more with the strength of the player's army at the endgame. If you bring any kind of gunpowder, any heavy cavalry, or any decent generals then the Aztecs are going to be vastly outclassed. If you want a little challenge without modding the game send only captains with basic infantry, and I still wouldn't expect to lose.
:egypt:
Re: This just didn't seem fair
What is the quote from Americas loading screen.....
"They calculated that even if 25,000 of them died for every one of us, they would still defeat us"
Something along those lines.
Unfortunately the Aztecs did not put up much of a fight against Cortes or his Tlaxcalan allies and let them into Tenochitlan under peaceful terms, Cortes attacked, massacred the city and killed the Emperor. There was not much organized resistance after that.
The Mayans were a different story since they didn't have a very centralized government to begin with.
The real story of conquest was Pizarros campaign against the Inca, he had only 180 men, 1 cannon and 27 horses. It didn't help the Inca that they were in the middle of a civil war.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
When I first heard that the New World was going to be included in Medieval 2 I didn't care, I thought it would be just kind of tacked on for the sake of having another selling point on the back of the box. And in truth, it is just kind of tacked on there for the hell of it but I actually really enjoyed going there.
I first went there with the Scots with a similar scenareo as the OP described. I basically slaughered them. But it was a mad rush because I had only a couple of turns until the game ended and I deseperately needed a few more territories. The way it played out felt right to me, the hapless natives being slaughtered in the name of conquest and it did genuinely feel a bit horrible to do.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
If you can use lots of ranged units and gunpowder, of course you will have an advantage, especially with the still passive AI in siege battles. Try putting a limit on your ranged troops and you will see that the fight becomes much harder. Try sailing there with only one stack, and fight non-siege battles - that way, you will give the AI the advantage because in that damn jungle it's really hard to keep track of all units.
Oh, and it seemed to me that the Aztecs were tougher in melee prior to 1.2, I guess because of the shield bug etc.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
if you are looking for a challenge why not download a mod that had era.
start in the late era and try and invade the new world while still having to consolidate in europe.
i thought the advantage of going to the new world was the money but if u control the whole world what the point?? i dont see why u would keep playing when there are no factions left in wurope
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Quote:
Originally Posted by crpcarrot
if you are looking for a challenge why not download a mod that had era.
start in the late era and try and invade the new world while still having to consolidate in europe.
i thought the advantage of going to the new world was the money but if u control the whole world what the point?? i dont see why u would keep playing when there are no factions left in wurope
That is totally up to you, really. In my Spanish campaign I did nothing but crusades after consolidating Iberia (including a few crusades against Italians when they attacked the Pope), and I got to new world a little bit after winning the campaign.
I was playing the good turtle (but somehow never got past trustworthy...bah), unlike most of the times hwere I finish up europe THEN go to the new worlds..haha
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Quote:
Originally Posted by Forward Observer
I know it's just a game, but I wonder if Cortez ever had any remorse of what he did? I just wonder
Cortez couldn't just walse into Tenochtitlan with his steel and lead. It wasn't the superior technology that defeated the native americans (especially not the aztecs), Cortez allied himself with loads of native americans who were hostile to the aztecs (for example the Confederacy of Tlaxcala), while at the same time the aztecs had some bad leadership.
What defeated the native americans was the newcommers ability to make the natives fight alongside the newcomers against other natives. Also, perhaps the most important reason for all the native americans downfall: Disease. The Conquistadores brought loads of diseases from the old world to the new world, diseases that most europeans were immune to, but that decimated the population of the new world, leaving entire villages barren of population (one example is smallpox).
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quickening
The way it played out felt right to me, the hapless natives being slaughtered in the name of conquest and it did genuinely feel a bit horrible to do.
yeah, I quit my americas campaign as new spain because it felt a bit rough to be blasting them to smithereens with culverins as they ran around screaming in the town square...:skull:
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Personally with the Kingdoms: Americas, I liked it when I had to face 3 full stacks with max#soldiers = false so they'd appear all at once, and fight all at once. It's not easy to fight 6000 soldiers with 1500 that ran out of ammunition and exhuasted troops...damn AI extra gold.
Like Stalin said, quantity has a quality on its own.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLastPrivate
Personally with the Kingdoms: Americas, I liked it when I had to face 3 full stacks with max#soldiers = false so they'd appear all at once, and fight all at once. It's not easy to fight 6000 soldiers with 1500 that ran out of ammunition and exhuasted troops...damn AI extra gold.
Like Stalin said, quantity has a quality on its own.
I can't wait to get Kingdoms in under two weeks time now! When it was first released I was dying to play it but then I was busy for a few months and now Im dying to play it all over again. I'll be going the Mayans right away. They were always my favourite culture. Just hope my PC can handle the hordes of Native Americans.
Re: This just didn't seem fair
