This is great some great insight!
Always a pleasure to see people who wants to dig in to their heritage, learn and promote it, especially when they come from otherwise fringe groups that has been left to the side by history.
Due to other bigger events and civilizations overshadowing them.
So far I am starting to get a outline how the Aztec, Maya and Inca are going to look like.
The Zapotec which were suppose to be one of the main focus are being set a little to the side for now. But from the knowledge I know from them, they are far more rural, heavy into trade in diplomacy rather than warfare, and more in line how you described yours, a in between of a city-builder and a more rural civilization.
I would love trying to draft a Civilization that bases itself more âNomadicâ and in a way, mimics the Mongols to some extent.
And where the use of âCuscui/Chieftainsâ Are their means of âLandmarkâ, aging up with special units is something I would love to try. This could fit really well with them consider they havenât left any major âLandmarkâ structures, at least that has been well documented enough.
I think youâre trying to do too many things at once with a single unit. 1 and 2 (and ladders) can be done with siege towers and battering rams and neither of those units are implausible for mesoamericans (and Mayans actually used them). 3 could achieved with normal towers. Towers could have some unique emplacements such as a boulder drop and smoke signal. 4 sounds quite interesting, and I think this is what the unit should focus on.
It could have dual functions of being an infantry unit thatâs a firestarter/saboteur when unpacked, and also having the ability to deploy into a pyre that creates a smokescreen. That would let you screen your troops from siege weapons and let them close the gap to get in and destroy them. Natives could lean heavily into abilities related to stealth to use forests and smokescreens to level the playing field.
You need specific units that are faster, not everything across the board. You could have the unique native units move faster (such as atlatls being a faster crossbowman). I think youâd also need an infantry unit that runs especially fast. Something like the eagle warriors of AoE2 or coyote runners of AoE3.
Some other options could be to give natives new mechanics. Capturing enemies in warfare was very common in the Americas. The Aztecs had flower wars, and other natives had the concept of counting coup. One way for this to be achieved would be to give them a bonus that synergizes with conversions. Macuahuitl, maces, and tomahawk could stun and immobilize enemies making it harder for them to run from conversion.
The whole Americas should also be considered when developing a mesoamerican unit set. The Inca, Chili, and Muisca of South America, Aztec, Mayans, and Tarascans of Mesoamerica, and Puebloans, Mississippians, Algonquins, etc of North America should all be considered.
Problem with using Towers, is that Towerâs arent Mobile enough.
And with the recent nerfâs to Towers, they will take to long to get up efficiently.
Youâd want something that can be much more reactive than sending a group of villagers to try build a tower quickly.
The Ladder is something more to allow them to bypass Palisade walls, its biggest downside is complete lack of protection, it can be easily destroyed by units stationed at the other side of the wall, not to mention that units have to construct the ladder on the wall section itself, leaving them vournarable to ranged units behind it.
Itâs more designed to allow for sneak attacks, find a undefended section of wall. Especially in the early game.
The Siege Tower (Which is documented was used by mayans), werenât the type that rolled on wheels, and would often be constructed right undernieth the walls. They would sometimes construct them at a limited distance away from the walls if the terrain allowed for it to be dragged into place.
The Siege Tunneler is just a damage-version, to be able to break walls, and were their main way of getting through defenses. I couldnât find any documented use of Battering Rams, Battering Rams also rely on a wheeled structure, alternativly be lifted. Which in this case wouldnât be much different from the Siege Tunneler idea. In a Sence, game-mechanically wise, the Battering Ram and Siege Tunneler are the same but in name. And the fact that Siege Tunneler get damage bonus for reach garrisoned unit. (same way rams did in AoE2)
Ranged Platform is there to serve as a mobile-tower, and allow some level of aggresive Tower play. But can be balanced individually from normal Towers, by being counterable by anti-siege weapons as well. But much stronger against Melee and Ranged units.
Boulder upgrade ability, which would be their equivalent to Burning Oil, would be available for it, unlike regular towers. allowing you to field some front-line AoE.
The Ranged Platforms (Lack of a better name) Were something that they often used in unison with their Siege-Towers.
They built the Range platforms first at a distance, to allow them to be able to start supressing units stationed on the defensive walls. This was done in order to allow them to build up the siege towers undernieth the walls, in order to scale them
I Think its a very interesting and different approach to siege that is worth being emphasized upon.
While it might seem like to much. I donât really see it any more complicated than using Rus navy or manage Mongol structures.
at least in my personal opinion, I see it nothing more than a unpacked Mongol structure, that can be garrisoned and moved into position. And has a option to unpack between different âbuildingsâ. Depending on what you need.
This would also give the unique quirk to the American civs, that they have Siege-weapons that are mobile and flexible, and can be played very reactivly. To help compensate for their lack of long range Siege such as Bombards and Trebuchets.
Certain units will be moving at Palace-guard speed.
And Certain units will have movementspeeds buffs akin to Forced March / double time / movement speed arrow.
Giving temporary high speed movement akin to Cavalry.
But I am no fan of allowing them to permanently run at Cavalry speed, like eagle warriors do in AoE2.
I find it a bit to much Unrealistic, without wanting to go into whats realistic or unrealistic debate.
It also removes a level of uniqueness. If you have âcavalryâ for the these civs, then we will miss out on unique tactics especially made to deal with a lack of cavalry, and they wouldnât be much more unique to old world civs.
Using the form of movement speed buffs, would allow them manuverbility in a battle in the same way cavalry does. But Strategically how you would move units around the map would be very different.
I donât think the lack of cavalry will be a issue at all.
Putting the whole Americas in consideration will set me considerably back.
Putting on the task of just Aztecs, Maya and Incas (And originally the Zapotec)
Was already monumental in itself. As I am going deep into the research of each of them.
The Aztecs and Maya are easier to find commonality with. But that isnât strange as they were geographically quite close.
The Incas differ quite a bit. But there are some shared stuff, but at the same time rather very distincly unique in many ways compared to anything else.
if I were to do North American tribes, I would have started more from scratch with these as well. But I have far to little knowledge about them to be able to get a draft.
Also another consideration im sticking strictly with is the Time-line relevancy.
My foucs are on the civs that were largest during the timeline between 8th-16th century.
One of the reason why I ended up putting the Zapotec to the side for a bit, as their peak ended in the 8th century, and then they were reduced to a smaller kingdom for the rest of their time, still hanging on and be influental all the way until the Spaniards came.
This is where having no siege crew screws things up. It would be a lot more elegant if there were siege crews to carry some of the equipment since they didnât really use wheels. But having that floating around supported by nothing is absurd.
A mantlet would be better suited for this function. They were used in the old world and they feature along with rams as an Iroquois unit in AoE3.
Overall, I think you could have some satisfying native siege designed around several different battlefield constructions instead of just a âsiege platformâ. The constructions could be as follows:
Battering Ram - same as the existing one but carried by a crew
Siege Tower - same as the existing one but carried/rolled on logs
Mantlet - similar to your âranged platformsâ but more mobile
Pyre - emits a smokescreen that acts as a stealth forest and also damages buildings at close range. Slowly depletes health until it consumes itself
Mayans could have more unique options like pit traps and hornet bombs
I think there should be a dedicated unit similar to eagle warriors that serve the cavalry role. It could be like 80% the speed of cavalry and then have a âforced marchâ or sprint ability for temporary speed boosts. It could be further distinguished by lacking the ability to construct siege and could be trained from something like a nobleâs hut.
All the natives are going to need the same foundational unit set so when proposing a design for the Mesoamericans, it should be compatible with the North and South Americans. You donât need to do anything too in depth for research.
The Incans could be grouped with other powerful South American empires like the Chimu and Muisca. They could have regional units such as a bolas thrower that could be like a scaled down mangonel and deal ranged area damage.
The North American natives are a perfect fit for this time period. The Puebloan and Mississippians had many large impressive cities during this period. You donât necessarily need to research these guys, just avoid making natives revolve around a core mechanic that only makes sense for Mesoamericans and excludes the North Americans.
ofcourse, the siege platform needs to have crew animated into it. If it has to use ghost-crew that siege uses currently when unpacking and reloading, or actually animate in a couple of guys carrying it. Either works for me.
The Mantlets is pretty much the Default base of the Siege-Platform. As it acts like an Mantlet, and it could be default as a mantlet.
Now for the ranged attacks, that can be a matter of civ-design feature. The Range Towers are depicted being used, and does make a little more sense on allowing their range attacks to ignore Wall-bonuses.
Hornet Bombs are in the plans for the Mayans, thinking them to be a unique technology that unlocks a hornet bomb skill for their slingers. (The effect of the hornet bomb be supportive in nature)
I donât know how much youâve played RUS on navy maps, but their Lodya ships are fairly fun to use when you get used to its features. I personally prefer them over regular ships. They add a fun unique quirk to ships and a flexibility that can be played upon.
The Rus kinda mimic the New World civ but on water, as they lack any sort of âadvancedâ ships compared to other civ, such as Hulks and Cannonships.
Yet they work quite well.
Itâs something I would love to give to any of the New World Civ.
Itâs not like Iâm gonna completely ignore the content I make for the Mesoamericans if I were to add more Native-American civs.
It will form a sort of Basis of sort, but I leave it open for considerable changes if needed.
The Tarascans are something I recently came across and are definitely on my radar.
I donât think they will be a to hard addition to make as Iâm also including the Incas who also used Metal weapons.
But Iâd like to research them some more, which is happening while I am trying to map the âgeneralâ idea of meso-america and the incas.
If I am going to make a civ concept with them, then I would have to research them quite a lot. Which is what I do for any civ I make concepts around.
Infact I let most of the research and things I find about these Civâs mainly dictate how I design them.
I put a far greater focus on making things more thematically relevant. And itâs also a great source of inspiration.
But we will see how thing goes in the future.
I have a set of planned Civs Iâd like to cover now, and Iâd also thinking of doing African civâs as well once Iâm done with a few pre-colombian civs.
But it will leave me a good basis to go back to when I want to add a few more American civs down the line.
I donât think a âsiege platformâ is really comparable to Lodya ships. Lodya ships start out with a useful role and can transition to other ships. A siege platform starts out in a useless state and has to transform to be useful. It would make more sense to cut out the useless state and just have infantry be able to make rams, towers, mantlets, and smokescreens as battlefield constructions. It would also eliminate the need for a siege workshop building.
Perhaps, but its nothing more than to adjust the useless state to start off as something usefull.
Say it just starts off as a ram or its equivalent. Can garrison units just like a ram.
but unlike conventional ram, it can be turned into a siege tower when needed and ungarrison troops ontop of the wall. Alternativly and most commonly just break down the wall (this is a problem with Siege-tower design in general on the game)
If there is a lot of army, then ram is pretty useless, however it can then just change into a âtowerâ, and allow for some long range damage, and perhaps some close range AoE akin to burning oil to deal with crowds.
And whenever it is low HP, you can just turn it into a Pyre when needed, granting you some cover / blinding defensive structures.
Iâd rather have this, because one of the big problems of having -individual- siege equiptment is that its not very Pop-efficient.
Also the fact that the core issue of any native-american civ is lack of Ranged seige weaponry, such as Mangonels, Springalds, Trebs and cannons.
If youâre stuck with a battering ram, youâre pretty limited what you can do with it.
Sure you can also make a Pyre to give you some LOS cover. but that requires you to sink even more resources, Resources you are already hard-pressed for especially in the late game, when other civâs have a technology advantage to a degree. (in forms of weapons and defenses)
This flexibility, akin to Rus Lodya ships, allows them to compete on par with otherwise technological superior opponent.
Rus Lategame navy excells, not only because the rus ships are rather cheap.
but because whatever the situation turns into, you can quickly adapt, say turning one of your ships into a Demo-ship to deal with mass cannonships.
Your navy dosnât get wrecked because its able to provide tools that you need quickly on the field allowing you to adapt to the situation.
This is something I feel the native-americans needs to play on when it comes to siege-warfare.
So I think itâs only fair that in return they canât launch trebs and mangonels from the safety behind a wall.
Nor have siege weaponry that can counter siege.
Itâs only fair that they then get access to Cheaper and more flexible siege tools, to play around and shift their weakness.
They can then use situations reactivly, such as; I just invested a lot of resources into a battering ram, oh shit the opponent is coming in with Mangonels. Turn ram into Pyre to cover your range units allowing them to get away. Instead of just staying as a ram and being useless as it canât really push without cover from ranged units.
Alternativly also when someone is trying to Tower rush you, you can invest in a early ram, that allows you to deal with the towers, and then be used as a tower itself to cover your resources and alliviate some pressiure. Rather than just sitting useless in the base.
This allows the American civs to sieze the early game initiative, which they need, consider they suffer a late game disadvantage to various degrees. They should have early game advantage to equal degrees.
Well, Iâm not super sure the source of that exact model, its been floating around a long time.
I studied Mesoamerican Archaeology in college, and my prof at the time was all about the Chontal Maya, and the reconstruction is based I believe on Columbusâs descriptions.
I may do some digging but I can only find pretty weak sites about the topic, I have a variety of books on mesoamerican warfare and lifeways but the Chontal or Putun Maya were significant traders in the Caribbean, and based on the research we read about they may have actively traded as far as Florida on these craft.
Thats great! Actually when it comes to Mayans, I am quite curious about their Maritime technology aswell as culture.
I know as much as there were a fair amount of Mayan coastal towns that thrived due to coastal trade, as it was a very efficient way of trading for the American civilizations. As it was their most efficient means of transporting goods over long distances.
So if you manage to dig up anything about Mayan river and seagoing vessels larger than a single man canoe, I would be delighted.
Problem with googling this is you get so much trash-results it makes it hard to find specifics. And not to mention so much info being locked behind Pay-walls.
That looks pretty cool. Some unique siege units for the less technologically advanced civs would be nice.
Like a civ whoâs infantry can quickly build ladders right on walls.
It gets a little tricky because every civ probably needs cheap feudal siege (rams), ranged anti siege (culvs/springs), and long range anti building siege (trebs/cannons). Maybe even anti ranged infantry siege (mangonels).
So they need to hit all those areas with siege units or some other type of unit, but also avoid silliness like guys throwing tree logs (like AoEO does).
I donât think you necessarily need 1 to 1 equivalent units. You could have some that fill multiple niches or other ways of mitigating enemy siege and buildings.
Universal Siege Units
Rams and Siege Towers make sense for basically all factions. The only problem is that lots of factions would have carried versions instead of wheeled and having unmanned siege would make this look even more ridiculous than it does now. Just making siege crews would make everything look better though.
Battlefield Constructions
More options for battlefield constructions could also be a way for them to level the playing field. Constructable Pyres to create a smokescreen that conceals your units or Mantlets to shield your infantry would let you avoid or tank some damage. Building most siege in the field would also eliminate the need for a siege workshop building. There could be unique options for Maya who had things like pit traps and hornet bombs.
Ranged Anti-Siege
Jungle Archer: Something similar to the Arrow Knight from AoE3. Could be available for Inca, Maya, Aztec, etc. Some of the Incan auxiliary archers apparently used giant arrows. I think theyâre referring to tribes like the ones mentioned here:
Skraeling âBallistaâ: According to the Norse, the natives had some kind of stick weapon for flinging large projectiles. These could be available to all North American natives. I think there also may also have a connection to Lacrosse.
TÄ«pao: A Polynesian siege weapon that could be anti-siege and anti-building.
Anti-Personnel Weapons
Bolas Warriors could have an area of effect attack. Mayas had hornet grenades that could also be an option for them.
Anti-Building
Smokescreens could allow rams to get close enough to do damage. Some of the anti-siege units could also double as anti-building.
I agree they donât have to 1 to 1. I just think the bases need to get covered for balance. Like long range anti building, ranged anti siege, and cheap feudal siege.
Something to compete with Bombards/trebs is probably the trickiest to get right and fit the less technologically advanced civ without getting too silly.
I found an actual example of this strategy being employed. The Maori AupĆuri tribe gets its name from a time when they used a smokescreen to escape a siege. Having infantry able to construct pyres that create smokescreens could conceal and protect them from long range fire of siege units.
The same article also mentions a âTrojan Whaleâ strategy where a fake whale carcass that concealed warriors was made to lure defenders out of a fort. Iâm not sure how it could be applied to a unit or strategy, but itâs an interesting concept.
