Do you think the Aztec faction will work?

**Anti-hero** · 02-04-2006, 20:01

CA can not include all of the societies and important achievements, but only give an “overview” of them. The Aztecs were not the only Aboriginal culture in the Americas encountered by the Spanish as the Bulgarians are not the only eastern culture in Eastern Europe.

I know, but allow me to be just a teensy bit frustrated by the fact tha CA tends to give a much more thorough "overview" in some areas and no overview at all in others ;)

**Sykotyk Rampage** · 02-05-2006, 05:53

yes your right, no overview, but at least they try, and what they don't do, the best modders in the world sure do a great job of putting in a new view.

**AntiochusIII** · 02-08-2006, 02:06

As others have said, the Aztecs do not belong in the game. I am thoroughly fascinated by Tenochtitlan, is willing to sack it some day in some other game, preferably a Total War, but I...as I've said before...would go for a better polished Constantinople anyday. Besides, CA has never been really that good at depicting civilization as-is. Their game is about War, War, and War. I mean, look at all those bland factions of RTW! Constantinople of BI looks absolutely no different, either!

The Aztecs are outclassed. Cortez may had barely succeeded, but he had with him like no more than fifteen thousand Spaniards, at most, and an army larger than that--typical of the Later Middle Ages anyway to carry larger armies than the earlier days--could thoroughly trounce Tenochtitlan's millions of inhabitants, who would be plagued, as well as weakly-armed with no proper weaponry in a Eurasian sense. The Mongols could do something like that, why not the Conquistadors?

Anti-Hero's argument is, indeed, strong. And it extend beyond Eastern Europe, if you wish to look at it like that. What's a stronger influence in 14-15th century Europe? Serbia, Islam (-ic threat), Mongols, or Aztecs?

The argument about rewriting history is null and void: it is, to me, a rather cheap shot. None of us wants to play a strictly linear campaign, but I bet none would welcome, say, Sukotai (which 99% of you don't know, but, until Columbus' discovery when it's probably the last legs of a campaign in our game, as relevant as Central America was) fighting European knights...

There is a limit to which history and fantasy seperates...

**econ21** · 02-08-2006, 02:17

Originally Posted by AntiochusIII

... Cortez may had barely succeeded, but he had with him like no more than fifteen thousand Spaniards...

Sorry, I may have lost track of the discussion at this time but Cortez had no where near that number of Spaniards. My (cough) impeccable source tells me that he set off with 500 and 15 horses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hern%C3%A1n_Cort%C3%A9s

He probably had thousands of native American allies, but even then I doubt they reached 15,000.

Reading some of Cortez's exploits with his small band of Spaniards, I sometimes feel it is more suited to a Total Warrior game than a Total War one. I don't think one side ever appeared to have such a staggering superiority over the other until the Europeans took the maxim gun to Africa.

**Kraxis** · 02-08-2006, 16:58

Cortez' numbers fluctuated as he recieved reinforcements, even had to fight the governor of Cuba (then added his troops to his own). In all some 3-4000 Spaniards were involved in the fight.
The allied indians grew in numbers as the army advanced as more and more suppressed tribes joined in. Eventually there were more people in Cortez' army than in the Aztec army defending Tenochtitlan.

**Sykotyk Rampage** · 02-08-2006, 17:43

3-4000 Spanish? With Cortez? At Tenochtitlan?

naa maybe 3 to 400 Spanish....with 1000's of native tribesmen.

All the history I was taught in university, never placed 3-4000 Spanish Soldiers in the fight for all of Central America. The Spanish just out Tech'd, Out thought, Out lasted, the natives. The Aztecs lost because of their dominance over other tribes ...it was rebellion with a big R, the Spanish just happened to be along for the Ride!

I believe it was like 160 destroyed the Incas civilization, captured and put to death their king, just to prove a point. Submit to the our king or you will all die.

But we have hashed this topic to death: disease, tech, rebellion..the great down fall and rise of a new civilization, mixing of the races, Spanish, the native tribes, and Africans to create a brand new master race....the Mexicans, Jamacians, Cubans, etc, etc,

Have a great snowy day, 2 more months of winter, I am moving to the Carribean....I am sick of snow! Any one down there need a project manager?

**Orda Khan** · 02-08-2006, 18:00

MTW II was a good choice but I will not be rushing to discover America

......Orda

**Kraxis** · 02-08-2006, 23:24

No, you didn't read my post.

There were not 3-4000 with Cortez at any point, it was the total number of Spaniards involved. I do hope that you do not think that Spanish never suffeerd losses, or even very heavy losses (relative to their size). Remember La Noche Triste (or whatever it called)?

The very reason Cortez had to have a small civil war was because he was draining the Spanish manpower in the Americas. Some wanted to stop him, he would of course not do that as he had nothing to return to (much like Pizarro in Inca lands).

Pizarro was a bright man. Unlike Cortez he didn't go to war against the Incas. He sneaked in because he was deemed to weak to be any threat. Rightfully so. 50,000 Inca warriors were encamped around the Spanish, no matter the advantage in weapons, they would never get out alive if it came to that.
But the emperor was too important, so when Pizarro captured him he could have had 5 or 5 million men, it made no difference.

After this the Spanish did have to fight the empire in bits and pieces, and it was not too easy always. But that was because the Inca empire was more integrated in it's own sphere unlike the Aztecs who were 'merely' masters of a whole range of subjugated tribes.

**Brutus** · 02-09-2006, 00:05

Originally Posted by Simon Appleton

Sorry, I may have lost track of the discussion at this time but Cortez had no where near that number of Spaniards. My (cough) impeccable source tells me that he set off with 500 and 15 horses.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hern%C3%A1n_Cort%C3%A9s

According to Bernal Diaz del Castillo, who was one of the original members of Cortez' expedition, the original force consisted indeed of about 500 men (excluding the ship captains and sailors, who amounted to about 109) and 16 horses (Del Castillo is nice enough to give a description of every single horse and who it belonged to). Apparently within these 500 men were included only 32 bowmen and 13 musketeers...

Many of these men seem to have been killed or wounded at one of the first major battles they had, hardly any horses survived the first weeks. However, Cortez cleverly got the men the governor of Cuba sent to take him prisoner to work with him.

Source: Bernal Diaz del Castillo, The true history of the conquest of New Spain.

**TheBigJon** · 02-09-2006, 12:56

I reckon it could work, i'm gonna hold judgement until i play.

**Bob the Insane** · 02-09-2006, 13:59

Originally Posted by TheBigJon

I reckon it could work, i'm gonna hold judgement until i play.

That's my opinion in a nutshell...

**Patricius** · 02-11-2006, 04:04

I think the developers debated this among themselves. I have faith in CA. I hope it will be possible to see Tenochtitlan and its pyramids with their blood spattered steps with M2TW. If they have Tenochtitlan - and how could they not? - I wonder whether its canals and insular situation will be depticted. What I look forward in particular are the various types of new terrain.