Aztecs Overpowered

[Rhyfelwyr]

Having recently landed in the New World, I've been fighting several battles against the Aztecs. My Venetian armies match theirs in size, and are filled with Venetian Heavy Infantry, Venetian Archers, and Feudal Knights. However, Aztec armies are still overunning my forces. A line of Jaguar Warriors routed my Venetian Heavy Infantry (in one thread here claimed the best infantry in the game) in seconds. I think this is ridiculous considering they are armed with clubs and have fur for armour.

I think Aztec unit need to be significantly toned down, and perhaps give them slightly larger armies in compensation. Also, a scripted plague in their settlements when the Europeans arrive would represent the crippling effect the new diseases had on the Aztecs.

Anyone else here been frustrated when fighting them?

[RTKBarrett]

Aztecs are in no way overpowered my friend, u just need to deal with them in the proper way :-) Infantry on infantry the aztecs are superior to pretty much every unit going when it comes to 1 on 1, and with the morale boost from a priest i can understand ure frustration...

However easiest way to handle them is a simple repetative charge with heavy mounted cavalry *it doesnt even have to be in the flank* Just be careful about engaging cav with two handed units on the charge as sometimes it gets messy and hard to move out of the engagement...

I know alot of sp'ers try to limit the amount of cav in their stacks to 4-6 for realism purposes and what not but i believe if u want success ure going to have to notch that up a bit and mayb remove some of the ure heavy archer units etc...

Also iirc venetian heavy are ap units? If u can recruit late era swrdsmen or something similar i think they will fair better

[AggonyDuck]

Well the greatest strength of the Aztecs is the effect they have on the enemy's morale, while the biggest weakness of the Venetian Heavies is their morale. What should work better against Aztecs is cavalry and cav arch.

[Lacessit]

Gunpowder and cavalry are your friends! Don't try to match the aztecs in fierceness, they'll always beat you. Infantry is useless against them, except for pinning down a line. Cavalry, artillery and arquebusiers will destroy the Aztec morale though, after that, your infantry should be able to rip through them!

[Xehh II]

How do you use cavalry in the Aztec Jungles? Whenever I fight them it's endless jungles.

[Ramses II CP]

Less a problem with the quality of your troops, more a problem with their morale. Bring a standard, a high chivalry general, and some guns. Problem solved. :)

[IrishArmenian]

Missile cavalry is ideal against the Aztecs, preferably Heavy Missile Cavalry. If unavailable, just use good charger cavalry!
I utilised Boyar Sons to much effect against the Aztecs! You'd be surprised at the amount of damage a cavalry unit can do to an Aztec army. Remember, taking prisoners is far more effective than killing in combat, so chase down the routers in the case that they do muster enough strength to return to the battle!

[joe4iz]

Pizzarro used under two hundred veteran troops to kill over 6000 Incas warriors when he captured the Inca King. No Spanish were killed in that fight.

I would not want to fight any faction that did not offer some decent resistance. The first time I went to the New world I was overwhelmed by the Aztecs when they counterattacked the first settlement I took.

But you got to love the colorfulness of the uniforms and stuff. I always go to the New World now just to fight them.

[Horatius]

You all have a very different idea then me on what Aztecs are infact for.

Give a very hefty bribe to improve your relations to perfect, make an Alliance, gift them some of your enemies cities in the old world, and laugh as your Aztec allies make mincemeat out of your enemies

You need to bring entire stacks of cavalry along endless oceans, and they can't be replenished in the new world, the mercenaries are very expensive and limited in number, and there aren't enough cities to seriously effect wether you win the campaign or not, and it is funny seeing your enemies falling to cotton wearing club wielders

I tried bringing Noble Cavalry, Lancers, and French Mounted Archers before, your casualties will be very high, the all noble army you bring hurts realism, they will win by right of their large numbers of soldiers, and you will have a massive drain on time better spent fighting your true enemies.

Last but not least as a good reason to ally the aztecs, Gold, gold, chocolate, tobbacco, chocalate, and chocolate, the new world is full of resources even a 1 star finance merchant will rake in money from, and it's better to bring the merchants then the cavalry, especially since merchants are free.

Which is the reason I never even try to conquer the Aztecs

[Megas Methuselah]

Pizzarro used under two hundred veteran troops to kill over 6000 Incas warriors when he captured the Inca King. No Spanish were killed in that fight.

By the terms Pizarro met with the Sapa Inca, everyone was supposed to be unarmed. After a small series of supposed insults, the Spaniards grabbed the emperor, unsheathed weapons they weren't even suppose to be wielding, and fought off thousands of unarmed nobles and warriors. Not surprising they were so willing to risk their lives really, as their emperor was a god-king on par with the Egyptian pharoahs or Chinese emperors.

I think problem is come from the misunderstanding of historical facts: Europens were never so stronger than Natives, and the fear of gunpowder is overrated.

Europeans had better armour and battlefield tactics (especially the tercio), but as they were never present in overwhelming numbers, that doesn't count for much.

Gunpowder is severely overrated. Crossbows were much more favoured by the conquistadores over the early, primitive, and unreliable firearms.

* Its long and tragic story, but simply: They thought Spanish are their gods. They opened their cities, and worshipped them.
* They lost against Cortes because Spanish fooled them. So their King taken prisoner by Cortes and they slaughtered one by one.
* They do not fear the gunpowder. They fear that the guns are the work of God.

Most contemporary historians agree that the whole God thing is largely a myth. Exceptions can be made for Moctezuma, though, who may have feared that Cortez might have been Quetzacoatl or a descendant of Quetzacoatl coming to reclaim his throne. This statement alone, though, is disputed.

After terrible defeat of Incas, Aztecs ordered themselves against the Spanish. Spanish even lost battles against them, Cortes have been captured once..

Yeah, the Spaniards lost their share of battles in the conquest. But why are you mentioning the Incas? They had no part in this.

But the problem is, unlike Mayans and Incas, Aztecs are not wise, cultured people. They were brutal and warlike. They never be popular on MezoAmerican tribes anyway. And many tribes choosed Spanish to fight together. . Spanish mostly won with help of the Natives.

YES! Yes, this is the primary point. The Spaniards were able to gather the support of tens of thousands of native troops. It was with this support alone that the Spaniards were able to emerge victorious. Left to their own devices, the Spaniards would merely die on the outskirts of the Aztec empire; they almost did, in fact, had they not found some allies in Cempoala who resented the Aztec human taxation for sacrifice.

The Aztecs were, contrary to your statement, a wise and cultured people. But they were brutal and warlike. It was this, together with the decentralization of their empire (unlike the Incan empire, it was more of a league of semi-autonomous city-states that were loyal to the Triple Alliance, which was in turn loyal to the Tenocha Mexica), that allowed the Spaniards to gather the support of so many allies from amongst the empire's bitter and/or independant-minded subjects and foreign enemy states.

And ofcourse, diseases came from european countries and did terrible damage on native's population. Europeans know that and they even sold their diseased blankets to native tribes.

Yes, this is another primary point. Tenochtitlan, in particular, suffered a devastating outbreak of plague. The native populations, once struck, often dropped by 60 to 90%.

However, the whole blanket thing is an entirely different situation from a different century. You have your facts somewhat mixed up.

[Yesugey]

But why are you mentioning the Incas? They had no part in this.

You have your facts somewhat mixed up.

I choosed to avoid any details as possible, and give general info about invasion of Americas.

For example, i said Aztecs are not wise. They are not, but if you compare with Mayans and Incas. They had good technology and culture, but they appeared just 1300's, and most of their traditions were adopted. There is no way to tell they are wise and cultured, if you compare them with +3000 years old Mayan or Inca empires.

Also the blanket story is about Apacheans. (Thats why i said "Europeans" not Spaniards)

History geeks could find more gaps

[O'Hea]

In the Aztec army, status was derived from taking prisoners. Weapons were designed to wound and debilitate enemies without killing them, because almost every war the Aztecs participated in was a garland war. A large part of why so few Spaniards died was probably the fact that the Aztecs would try to drag them off rather than kill them in the field. The Spaniards had no such problem. They also had steel swords that could punch through Aztec armor and kill with one blow.

And although the effect of guns and horses was very real, the vast majority of Cortez's men were swordsmen. If I remember correctly, there were only about a dozen horses with them at the start of the expedition, and about as many guns and crossbows.

[Prussian to the Iron]

never having had a problem with the aztecs,


why did you ressurect a 2 year old thread Yesugey?