I gotta say, I find it really weird when people treat modern American countries and their natives as interchangeable, especially when talking about pre-colonization natives.
Perhaps because, unlike the american territories conquered by countries like England or France, the spanish didnât exterminate the native peoples or segregate them as happened in the U.S. with native nort americans on reservations, but rather, they crossbreed with them. Not to mention that the vast majority of these peoples still exist. For my part, I appear to be of otomi origin through my paternal grandparents, so I have indigenous heritage, not mexica, but indigenous, and thatâs not incompatible with being something else, like my french heritage through my maternal great-grandfather.
On the other hand, I donât know about other countries, but in MĂ©xico weâre taught that the pre-hispanic peoples are part of our heritage, along with the spanish, whether someone prefers one or the other.
Well, itâs in the constitution: anyone born on mexican soil, or in something considered part of MĂ©xico, like embassies, ships, or airplanes, is born with mexican nationality along with that of their parents. They are born with dual nationality. Similarly, if one of your parents is mexican, you acquire mexican nationality at birth. And to avoid separating families, those who have a child born mexican for reasons like this can also obtain mexican nationality. For example, if a Turkish woman has a child with a mexican man, both she and her child acquire mexican nationality.
Or, after residing continuously in mexico for five years, or by taking the naturalization exam, itâs very easy to become mexican, at least compared to other countries. I have uncles who live in the U.S. My cousin was born there, but she obtained mexican nationality through her parents.
So, under that law, if people from the pre-hispanic communities of MĂ©xico are born in MĂ©xico, and they are generally children of people who already possess mexican nationality, they are legally mexican.
Maybe itâs because mexicans have been raised that way, but it seems like a very simple and easy-to-understand concept.
In this case, not all mexicans are aztecs, but all aztecs are mexicansâwell, aside from the fact that MĂ©xico as such didnât exist back then, but those are minor details.
Anyway, as I said, the indigenous peoples neither disappeared nor are they separate entities; I am proof of that. The problem is that âmalinchismoâ exists, the racism toward indigenous American culture, but thatâs a separate issue.
Look, itâs like in the U.S. or Spain. âunited statesmanâ, at least those from Mainflower, are of english origin; the âunited statesmanâ descended from them are of english origin.
Spanish who descend from the time when Spain was the monarchy of Castilla are descended from those Castilians, and they consider those castilian ancestors spanish, so to speak, because they donât consider them a separate people; they are their ancestors, only back then the territory had a different name.
If the U.S. had crossbreed with native americans, it would be the same as in MĂ©xico, I suppose.
1 Like
They absolutely did
And I was counting Brazil/Portugal in this as well
I honestly donât know much about Brazil; Iâm only mentioning what I know.
ÂżDid the spanish commit genocide? yes, but they were more horny.
If youâre referring to the fact that the English and French mixed, itâs ridiculous to think they didnât, but the amount of intermarriage was very limited.
I understand that Brazil is a separate issue because itâs truly multiethnic, so there are people, for example, of African descent, who donât have much connection to the original inhabitants. But at this point, everyone will have a shared genetic base, unless theyâre communities that actively refuse to intermarry with people from other ethnic groups in Brazil.
This doesnât address my point that populations before and after contact arenât interchangeable, and weâre straying from the topic anyway. I still think fast infantry is a better solution than fictional mounts.
Well, I still think the eagle warriors could fill that role alongside the jaguars.
On the other hand, well, theyâre not going to remove something theyâve already done, you know, they already paid to get it.
In the end, the DLC will be released, weâll get used to its units, weâll see them as a classic thatâs always been there, just like with the chinese and japanese, and then weâll become the meme: âIâve had this game and girls dressed as cats for 6 hours, but if anything happens to it, Iâll kill everyone in this fandom and then commit suicide.â
1 Like
I donât know about that. The devs have shown only like 5 units and only one is an actual myth.
wdym?
we have shown way more units in the screenshots they shared with us.
you mean the more âin depthâ showcase of some units?
these currently just were:
giant armadillo â myth unit
jaguar rider â military unit
dog mummy â myth unit
so i donât get how you come up with the number of 5.
These three are the ones Iâm saying are made up for the game (even if the dog is based on the Xolo). Thereâs also the Quinametzin (the first thing shown for the game, actually mythological) and the axolotl (another case of real animal but big)
The jaguar rider isnât a myth unit, is it?
The Jaguar Rider is a melee cavalry unit in Age of Mythology: Retold - Obsidian Mirror that is available to the Aztecs. It is a generalist unit with high attributes which excels against most human units. It is also the sole cavalry unit available to the Aztecs. It appears as a female warrior wielding a tepoztopilli and riding a jaguar.
okay, if we count this aswell than, yes, we also have this myth unit announced. (also i just realised there is standing âstone skinâ so its basically 100% confirmed thats the upgrade. Interesting! Didnât realise this before.)
The big Salamander it tied to one of their gods in a myth at least. I canât find any stories with the Armadillo
Damnit the Eagles are using iron
I believe the developersâ reasoning is as follows: Just as jockeys who ride racehorses need to be lightweight, similarly, the rider of a jaguar needs to be very lightweight since a jaguar is smaller than a horse, and women tend to be lighter than men. One could assume that in the fantasy world of Age of Mythology, where all these civilizations coexist in the same era, the Aztecs developed larger breeds of jaguars so they could be ridden, similar to how humans in the real world developed larger and stronger breeds of horses so they could be ridden (originally, horses were smaller and therefore only used to pull carts and wagons; over time, larger and stronger breeds were developed, allowing them to be ridden directly). But since a jaguar is unlikely to reach the size of a horse, in this fictional world, jaguars are typically ridden by lightweight women.
I think this inclusion is consistent with several other inventions in the saga that donât have much historical or mythological basis, but Iâm not saying Iâm particularly in favor of it, Iâm just trying to interpret/guess the logic behind it.
Iâm not so much worried about how these rider-girls look as how their stats will correlate with their appearance. 70% pierce armor for naked units is cringe.
1 Like
Taking only 70% damage from pierce makes sense if you consider them using their speed and agility to make a lot of the fire coming their way miss/only graze them.
Have you ever seen naked soldiers?
Even the completely fictional Warcraft uses armor and, most importantly for the period in which the game takes place, SHIELDS!
Night Elves also wear really skimpy outfits so youâre kinda contradicting yourself. But yeah, some shields for the jaguar rider wouldnât hurt.
1 Like