Incas added as well?!?

**The Blind King of Bohemia** · 05-13-2006, 13:47

From a new Gamespy preview:

Only parts of the Americas are on the map. You can land troops in Brazil, explore the Caribbean, or tool around Florida and the southern part of North America. The jungles in South America are thick with vegetation, which make them rough on horses. We briefly took a look at a city siege, with Spanish troops attacking the Incan capitol. The Spanish troops were armed with muskets (and reloaded them using realistic animations), while the natives were an explosion of color in their brightly-painted uniforms and gear.

Link

I hope they have added the Incas and its not just bad journalism, and that it was really either the Aztecs or the Mayans. If you look at the areas it doesn't mention Peru or the Western part of South America, which is a bit of a worry in that sense.

**Patricius** · 05-13-2006, 14:03

If the Incas are in, it would showcase how towns accomodate to the most astounding relief. Totalwar in the Andes is fine by me.

**Prince Cobra** · 05-13-2006, 14:07

It's possible. There are 21 playable factions but the number of the unplayable is still a mystery.

**Antagonist** · 05-13-2006, 14:28

Personally, I would be interested in an Incan faction if it was depicted in the correct geographical area, but if not...

Still, wasn't it an early GameSpy preview which raised a hue and cry by reporting that there would be a Viking faction in BI? Mistakes can be made.

Antagonist

**scorillo** · 05-13-2006, 14:55

incas were almost in the stoneage then...i dont see any point to add such primates

**Watchman** · 05-13-2006, 16:20

Everyone there was Stone Age tech-wise (although the Incas had started using copper weapons - the Conquistadors apparently found those genuinely dangerous). The major powers were, however, also extremely well organized with sophisticated agricultural, bureaucratic, mercantile and military systems.

**The Blind King of Bohemia** · 05-13-2006, 17:46

Originally Posted by scorillo

incas were almost in the stoneage then...i dont see any point to add such primates

I would not wade into a topic if you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. They were far more advanced than the Aztecs in military terms and had their successes against the Spanish also.

**edyzmedieval** · 05-13-2006, 23:16

If you check the E3 video interview with some lead programmer(forgot his name), he said that the Aztecs are UNPLAYABLE. He never mentioned Incas or Mayans anyhow.

But he indeed mentioned tons of other stuff, including the fact that they worked very hard on the AI part.

**Colin Wright** · 05-17-2006, 07:07

Originally Posted by The Blind King of Bohemia

I would not wade into a topic if you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. They were far more advanced than the Aztecs in military terms and had their successes against the Spanish also.

The problem with describing people as 'stone age' is that acquisition of metal-making skills just isn't much of a benchmark for how civilized or sophisticated a people are.

If you read much in the field of pre-history, you'll find the terms 'stone age,' 'bronze age,' 'iron age' tend to have fallen out of favor. The reason's fairly obvious: who's more advanced, the Zulu or the Maya? The Zulu have iron weapons - they must be way ahead of the Maya, who only have stone? Well, what about details like cities, monumental architecture, a system of writing, a highly elaborated social system? It's like figuring some punk with an X-box is way ahead of the Pope because the Pope happens to be happy with his old Windows 95 computer.

Metallurgy by itself certainly is useful: aside from beating hell out of your neighbors with first bronze and then iron (copper by itself is great for jewelry and that's about it), once you have iron your agriculture will go nuts. However, using the metallurgy alone to judge how advanced a civilization is is like judging how wealthy people are by the car they drive; easy to be way off.

**Papewaio** · 05-17-2006, 07:06

Originally Posted by scorillo

incas were almost in the stoneage then...i dont see any point to add such primates

I think in your rudeness you are confusing memes with genes.

Stoneage = memes.
Primates = genes.

Mind you humans are to primates what squares are to rectangles.

So if you are going to remove Incas on the basis of being primates you will have to by your own rules of logic remove all the other human factions.

**The Stranger** · 05-20-2006, 15:22

Originally Posted by scorillo

incas were almost in the stoneage then...i dont see any point to add such primates

seems like you dont know your history. their cities are so well build they still stand and you still cant get a knife between 2 stones. a impressive achievement without the tools we use today. and even know only few buildings last for 100 years...