TBH if you make it too generic it will probably become boring, just some nondescript dude with a spear. At least now it has the advantage of being very appropriate for Aztecs and somewhat appropriate for Mayans. They kind of dropped the ball on the Incas of course, but not nearly as much as by giving Incas Meso Architecture. (Understandable given that FE was a mod, but still an unfortunate limitation). I think 1 or 2 regional variants of the Eagle would be fine, given the large number of cavalry variants out there (Steppe Lancer, Winged Hussar, and cav UUs)
Maybe the Mayans could have the [Macuahuitl Runner] as their unique scout line unit, while the Incas will have the [Star Mace Runner] or [Mace-Axe Runner] as their unique scout line unit counterpart.
The Mayans did apparently use the Macuahuitl as well and the Incas used two different types of Maces where one of them is called the “Incan Star Mace” while the other is called the “Mace-Axe”. The Mayan scout unit will be armed with the prior mentioned weapon while the Incan scout will be equipped with either the Star Mace or the Mace-Axe.
Both Maya and Inca could also instead have a shared regional unit that can be called the [War Club Runner]. They can later be upgraded to the [Axe Runner] in the Castle Age and finally to the [Elite Axe Runner] in the Imperial Age.
I still think Mayans are more than fine with the EW, both historically and gameplay-wise. If you’re going to make a unique variation for every civ, then it’s just another UU, which isn’t really needed.
Also, if we’re going to bother with either a unique Inca version, or a Peruvian regional unit, there are plenty of more region-specific names. Chasqui, Runancha, or Auca Runa.
What needed role does this fill (especially for Mayans, who definitely don’t need any kind of buff)? I’m all for more American regional units, but most of these would make more sense in the context of new civs.
Macuahuitl Runner sounds good for mayans. The idea that I have in mind is to give aztecs and mayans some sort of generic unit shared by both civs. But in imperial age, aztecs get Eagle warriors as the final upgrade. And Mayans get their own upgrade as Macuahuitl runner. With the sprite looking similar but without the eagle hat, instead they get plume crowns.
Indeed. Not a perfect fit, but they at least represent the (current) Eagle’s role as a very fast foot unit, and there isn’t really another great way of representing Chasquis in game.
And therefore is a good possible option for renaming a military unit for Incas specifically.
Of the three, I much prefer this one since it uses an actual Inca word. When it comes to changing weapons, there does come a point when it might be confusing for units with 3 different weapons (spear/maquahuitl/mace) to share the same role. IMO variants of regional units should at least share the same weapons.
Eh, not sure about that. If we’re going to bother with making them specialized with new sprites and names, might as well give them something that reflects the uniqueness of the culture. A name like “[Weapon] Warrior” is fine for generic units that are shared across many cultures, but IMO is too bland and on the nose when a unit’s weapon is already obvious from its sprite, and there are more culturally relevant names. There are a couple UUs with fully generic names (Camel Archer, Chakram Thrower), but the majority of them have an element that is linguistically derived from the host culture. Imagine calling Samurai “Elite Curved Swordsmen” or “Katana Knights” (okay, that last one is semi-cool, but only because of the alliteration, use of a native word, and “knight” being an unusually cool word). Even units with “exotic” sounding names which people may mispronounce have been added (Shrivamsha, Coustillier, Houfnice, Leičiai, even the Xolotl Warrior, which I’m pretty sure I’ve never heard anyone pronounce correctly), so I wouldn’t make that a limiting factor.
It triggers me when somebody calls Inca mesoamerican.
I mean, cant we just call them indigenous americans or pre-Columbian civilizations?
I undestand that for gameplay issues they are similar, and I dont really have a problem with that, but calling a Andine civilization as mesoamerican is kind the same as calling portuguese or spanish as east europe civilization.
@Renatinho182 I am sorry that this discussion that I have created encourages other people to label the Incas as Mesoamerican. If I could still edit both my original post and topic title I would happily replace the word “Mesoamerican” with either “South Native American” or “Pre-Columbian” instead, so that we will refer to every indigenous tribe that lived in the continent that would later be known as South America.
We could henceforth refer to the Aztecs, Incas and Maya as the [Pre-Columbian Civilisations] as a collective name for them in this discussion if it fits better. Or at least that is what I am going to do from now on if I will post future comments in this discussion.
I think it probably kind of comes of the architecture sets, that seems to be how a lot of people, myself included, group the civs. The Incas currently use the Mesoamerican architecture, and as such, are therefore usually refered to as Mesoamerian.