I saw your post, if anything it emphasizes how spanish weaponry broke the status quo between Aztecs and Tlaxcaltecs. Obviously technology is not everything, especially when you are so heavily outnumbered and fighting in an unknown environment, but this kind of context is not present in the game outside of campaigns. In multiplayer as Spanish against Aztecs, you don’t play with 10 max population and an aztec ai ally, you play with “the best 200 pop army Spanish had to offer” against “the best Aztecs had to offer”. The game balance reflects a bit the tech difference, meso civs have a good start but are not the greatest in late-game. But the civs are not too asymmetric.
I don’t think this criteria is too subjective, if by the middle ages almost all civs were using iron to compete with their opponents.
I didn’t say that, I said they are not your typical “middle age kingdom/empire”. Their addition made sense, Aztecs litteraly clashed with another middle age empire, but to include them in a game that symmetric they made them quite ahistorical.
Yeah I know they were not as impactful as they are usually represented. But the way they are represented (and the way anyone learnt about them in school, even if it is overly romantic), it makes a lot of sense to have them in the game. They are described as the main antagonists of Romans, and the “reason” (history is more nuanced, but the game describes history solely through war between empires) why we got Britons in Great Britain, Franks in France and Goths everywhere. To me its a good addition.
If the game keeps receiving new dlcs, at some point being in the medieval period will be the only requirement. But I don’t think Mississipians are a priority. I think they differ too much and are too losely connected other civs. Even if meso civs were added, I wouldn’t like to double down in this direction.
I wonder if you have an idea of the percentage (this is a genuine question), I can see your point but at the same time I have seen many stone fortifications or ruins in the most random places of the most random regions of France. And among the wooden castles that didn’t survived to the present, a part were rebuilt as stone defenses.
Anyway, my point was that middle age powers built and maintained stone fortifications to defend their frontiers or lands they conquered. See the cathar castles. In those regions, royal powers could have built wooden defenses (mounds were known in the region), but at this point in time wood was not enough and they chose to build much more expensive stone defenses.
Correct me but from what I’ve seen, their main defenses were pallisades, maybe 3-4 m tall pallisades so not on par with what was built in the rest of the world. Now Cahokia’s pallisade was destroyed several times, so they were likely in conflict with neighboors, but they thought pallisade walls were enough (hence my point about military technology).
Their smaller mound platforms were habitations for the nobilities, and altough their central mounds were extremely large, from what I’ve seen they were only built in cities, as palace, and defended with pallisades. Even at a very large scale, I don’t think they are comparable to defenses that were built by the main powers in Eurasia (although they make for a great wonder for sure).
However they did have a way to control regions or roads, and defend their walls, they built guards towers. Seeing the reconstrucions, even if they had taller towers in their cities, I still think it’s a far cry from what was built in Eurasia.
For Cahokia I don’t know, De Soto encountered several kingdoms when he landed so maybe devs would add several mississipians kingdoms similary to the two meso civs, instead of pretending there was a Mississipian empire or unity I’ve seen no one mention.
Regarding Puebloans and Algonguins, I won’t say much but I’m sceptical on Mississipians so I don’t ever see those two ever being added.
I was talking about the consequences of the expeditions, Cortez waged war against an empire, De Soto raided different kingdoms in an expedition with no direct benefits and locals died from diseases off-screen. I think one story fits better in aoe2.
Come on, I know that, but Americans and Eurasians could have lived on differents planets, it would have made no difference until 1500. That’s why I have troubles seeing what is “middle age” about Mississipians.
