I absolutely love your suggestion, seeing the Chimor in-game would be a dream! Already optically they would make the game more colorful, the Chimor could get their own architecture, which could be based on the sand style of the city of Chan-Chan.
I also agree with the last post by Julix3748 on the point that the Chimor would fit into the game much better than the Mapuche, often mentioned here in the forum. These would imo better fit AOE3, where they could be given a campaign in the 19th century in the fight against Chile / Argentina.
I would like to have an America DLC which, in addition to Chimor, also includes a Civ from Central America, where in my opinion the Tarascans (Purépecha) would be the best choice.
1400s, and some historians even posit 1100, due to the natural phenomena recorded to precede it.
Haudenosaunee, are much more of a Medieval civ, than an Early Modern one, as their greatest period of expansion was in the Middle Ages.
The Huns did not even see the Middle Ages, yet are in the game. Would you vote to remove them, because they are the most ill-fitting civ to ever be introduced?
Getting Huns in the game was not a mistake, it was a huge blunder that justifies almost any other people, so long as they barely scrape the time period, since Huns never even touched it at all.
It is not the 1400s, it is estimated between 1450 and 1660.
Iroquois were just a tribe, Mayans and Aztecs were superior to them. They had basic stone weapons, no armor, no proper agriculture, no history recorded, no army, no navy, no diplomacy, no stone buildings, tribal government system and the population was 10000 (10k). - an Asian village was bigger. I guess their army had like 2000 soldiers at maximum.
" Many archaeologists and anthropologists believe that the League was formed about 1450,[40][41] though arguments have been made for an earlier date.[42] One theory argues that the League formed shortly after a solar eclipse on August 31, 1142, an event thought to be expressed in oral tradition about the League’s origins.[43][44][45] Some sources link an early origin of the Iroquois confederacy to the adoption of corn as a staple crop.[46]"
They already had corn in 1143, so they had organized agriculture.
Even ancient civilizations had organized agriculture. Iroquois were 10 dimensions behind the Incas/Chimu, they are not even comparable to Eurasian/African civilizations. They are not developed.
This is like adding Brittany, Burgundy, Normandy, Aquitaine, and Flanders as seperate civs.
We have Inca, which represents the various tribes/peoples of the Andes.
Which is also wrong, because there was only ever ONE Inca, which was the Son of Inti, at all times.
But since “Servants of the Inca” is not a good civ name, we just use Incas.
“Archeological evidence places Haudenosaunee in the area around present-day New York state by approximately 500 to 600 CE, and possibly as far back as 4000 BCE. Their distinctive culture seems to have developed by about 1000 CE. Estimates vary widely as to the founding date of the Haudenosaunee Confederacy, with many claiming a date in the mid-16th century. However, in 1997, researchers Barbara A. Mann and Jerry L. Fields proposed a founding date of 31 August 1142. They arrived at this by consulting the full oral tradition, archaeology, historical record, and even astronomical and actuarial calculations.”
very weird source, the only normal bit i guess is this
Mann and Fields conclude: "The only eclipse that meets all requisite conditions -- an afternoon occurrence over Gonandaga that darkened the sky -- is the eclipse of 1142. The duration of darkness would have been a dramatic three-and-a-half-minute interval, long enough to wait for the sun; long enough to impress everyone with Deganawidah's power to call forth a sign in the sky."
But where are the other accounts of an eclipse here?