Results 1 to 30 of 39

Thread: Aztecs

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Member Member Sand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Kildare, Ireland
    Posts
    57

    Default Re: Aztecs

    I dont understand the aversion to the Aztecs or the game continuing on beyond 1453. After the fall of Constantinople European efforts turned to finding a westward route to India so the inclusion of the Aztecs in the 1492-1530 span of the game is perfectly justifiable.

    My only complaint would be how to make the Aztecs challenging opponents as an end game climax. By 1492 most players wont have any serious rivals left in the Old World to compete with, whilst if it comes to some 10% thing people will spend the last few turns min-maxing by disbanding all their bad troops and building loads of elites to ensure the 10% is as big and deadly as possible.

    I can only imagine the New World will be a seperate campaign start, wholly seperate from the Old World campaign - with maybe the benefits of new world empires abstracted in the Old World campaign.

  2. #2
    Scruffy Looking Nerf Herder Member Steppe Merc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    7,907

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Because it was not Medieval. Try and think of this from a player that specializes in Eastern factions. It would be illogical for the Seljuqs, Mongols or Byzantines to try and sail to the America.

    "But if you should fall you fall alone,
    If you should stand then who's to guide you?
    If I knew the way I would take you home."
    Grateful Dead, "Ripple"

  3. #3
    Member Member ThijsP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Nederland
    Posts
    220

    Default Re: Aztecs

    I think it would allow a mini campaign as the aztecs were you have to unite Middle-America and build up defenses for the enivitable Spanish invasion and fight for your existence. I think it could be fun, a bit like the mongol invasion campaign in STW-MI.

  4. #4
    ............... Member Scurvy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,489

    Default Re: Aztecs

    i think aztecs against the eastern europe factions could be very intresting (anbd different) its onlky a computer game...so it doent have to be all that acurate, and it might make for better gameplay/etc.

  5. #5
    Forever British Member King Ragnar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    The only place that matters: Britain
    Posts
    749

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Any ideas of what units they will have? I think ther will be jaguar and maybe eagle warriors, not sure about any more tho.
    Vote For The British nationalist Party.
    Say no to multi-culturalism.

  6. #6
    Time Lord Member The_Doctor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    The TARDIS
    Posts
    2,040

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Cortez did conquer them in 1521.

    So I see no reason why they should not be in it. Though I do believe it will be a seperate campaign.

    History in the Making
    A huge campaign spanning from the years 1080-1530, that will take the player beyond the first Crusade up until the dawn of the renaissance. An extended campaign map will allow passage to South and Central America bringing the player into battle with the Aztecs.
    The first sentence describes one campaign. The second sentence describes another.
    Last edited by The_Doctor; 01-22-2006 at 22:02.

  7. #7
    Dedicated CA Fan Member Susanne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Laying siege to the CA office, Sussex
    Posts
    53

    Default Re: Aztecs

    As the Atlantic would take up loads of the map, the scale of the mini-map would be even smaller to that extent that fans of the mini-map would need to press the zoom button more than five times to be able to discern the terrain reasonably well. So, the assumption that there will be an Aztec mini campaign is likely.

    Came to think of something... it would take years to learn all the names of the Aztec cities, units, generals and buildings. And people used to say that Roman unit names were hard to spell when RTW was released...
    RTW Heaven Site Director, HeavenGames LLC

  8. #8
    Robbing the rich since 1066 Member Lord Armbandit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Midlands UK
    Posts
    57

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Quote Originally Posted by Steppe Merc
    Because it was not Medieval. Try and think of this from a player that specializes in Eastern factions. It would be illogical for the Seljuqs, Mongols or Byzantines to try and sail to the America.
    Lets remember that the discovery/conquest of the americas is at the end of the campaign, and that historically it was done by Spain, the dominant european power of the time. If your Seljuks, Mongols or Byzantines are by that time the dominant power, why shouldn't they go in for some aztec bullying?

    Total historical accuracy would mean watching a documentary, not playing a game.
    Voting is an illusion to allow the common man to believe he has some control.

  9. #9
    Member Member TB666's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Malmö, Sweden
    Posts
    1,519

    Default Sv: Re: Aztecs

    Personally I'm really curious about the Aztecs.
    They will be sitting on the continent for quite some time so I wonder what CA has in store for us so that we won't be bored with them.

  10. #10
    Magister Vitae Senior Member Kraxis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Frederiksberg, Denmark
    Posts
    7,129

    Default Re: Sv: Re: Aztecs

    Quote Originally Posted by TB666
    Personally I'm really curious about the Aztecs.
    They will be sitting on the continent for quite some time so I wonder what CA has in store for us so that we won't be bored with them.
    We won't be playing them... Playing against them perhaps. Or if the game is a twogame setup (like with MTW and STW) then we have them and the Spanish/some other European power.
    You may not care about war, but war cares about you!


  11. #11
    MTR: AOA project ###### (temp) Member kataphraktoi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Malaysia and Australia
    Posts
    1,287

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Medieval should really focus on Europe, Middle East and Asia 1530 is stretching the period too far

    From 600 - 1453 would be a better suit:

    800 years of brutal warfare.

    4 periods

    600-814: IRise of Islam and the Age of Charlemagne

    814 - 1099: The Divided World (large empires have begun to split. eg. Carolingian EMpire, Abbasid EMpire weakens after Harun Al Rashid)

    1099-1291: Age of the Crusades and Mongols

    1291 - 1453: The House of Osman
    Retired from games altogether!!

    Feudalism TOtal War, non-active member and supporter. Long Live Orthodox Christianity!

  12. #12
    MTR: AOA project ###### (temp) Member kataphraktoi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Malaysia and Australia
    Posts
    1,287

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Byzantium in Americas?

    "Greek Fire devastastes the whole Amazon Forest"
    Retired from games altogether!!

    Feudalism TOtal War, non-active member and supporter. Long Live Orthodox Christianity!

  13. #13
    Member Member Claudius the God's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    162

    Default Re: Aztecs

    I think it will be especially interresting for a "Mesoamerica" Bonus Campaign where it starts off with the Conquistadors, the Maya, the Aztecs, and various other groups...

    the Aztecs and Maya had warriors with obsidian bladed weapons that could slice a horse's head clean off.

    the elite warriors were at the front lines with the lesser warriors behind. it was also a 'capture as many enemies as possible for slavery' type battle.

    there wasn't much in the way of formations, and battles were often at a stalemate until the conquistadors arrived with their cannons to break up formations as the allies of the Spanish charged into enemy troops.

    a defeat in battle would mean being forced to pay tribute to those that defeated you, the Aztec Empire in particular was an economic empire where numerous cities had to pay tribute. it was not a territorial empire... so the Total War system may have to have some changes for this...
    Last edited by Claudius the God; 01-23-2006 at 04:12.

  14. #14

    Default Re: Aztecs

    Quote Originally Posted by Claudius the God
    a defeat in battle would mean being forced to pay tribute to those that defeated you, the Aztec Empire in particular was an economic empire where numerous cities had to pay tribute. it was not a territorial empire... so the Total War system may have to have some changes for this...
    I thought RTW had regular tributes....
    im prety sure i remember having some babarians and the greeks paying 4 my new ships at 1 point and laughed about it.

    But apart from that.

    I want to ask why do you beleve that they would not include the whole map in from the begining?

    Its been customry in the past. for the whole map to be used in the campaign.
    and then add on extra sub campaigns with an expantion,
    What you sudgest is that thiw will be MTW2 And the Aztec's Expantion. (extra units extra land exetera)

    I dont know if this is true at all.

    But personally i would imagine that the whole lot would be there at the same time.
    as one campaign.

    Then as with STW and MTW and now RTW. An add on at a later date
    So i guess... I would say:
    be on the look out for VI 2 in the not to distant future.

    If ive already been proven wrong please let me know :)

    But honestly i beleve the aztecs will be in the main campaign with evwry 1 els.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO