Please add Japan!!!
One of the next civs can indeed be Asian but the other civ has to be the Byzantines because of how popular of a demand it is to add the Byzantines.
I wanted to say something similar, but this is very well said…
I do not like this “representation of some people” think
I want Japanese too, because they are interesting, not because of representation of east asian people, or religion in PC game
Nah, let’s go big or go broke…
Pls No …
I dont want to See european medieval Knights fighting against nativ americans…
Zero History …
I mean, you’re already seeing them fighting chinese Nests of Bees and Malian Musofadis, so I believe that ship has already sailed.
This would be very interesting as they should lack both cavalry and siege units.
Of course, cherry trees (Sakura) are characteristic trees of Japan and bloom in spring… I wouldn’t be so wrong… let’s not rule out seeing it in April (as happened with the US civ in AoE 3 DE in April last year)…
They can have siege units (mantlet and ram), what they could not have is siege machinery…
Andean people did actually build their own siege engines too. They just were really weird.
The problem with medieval Americans and other parts of world is, that they did not develop/use advanced warfare technics like in medieval Europe/Ázia
Not to mention, the New World did not have very much contact with the Old World (An example of rare instances of contact between the Americas and the Old World during the Medieval era is when the Vikings traveled to North America). Notice that Europe, Asia, and Africa were all in contact with each other considering how close they are (this part forming the three continents forms the Old World as we all know).
Yes, that’s why you have to go for the simplest…
Yes, America and Oceania are a separate case of Eurasia and Africa… America and Oceania entered the European worldview and idiosyncrasy only in recent times (only 500 years for here)… That is why the intercultural clash felt stronger in those continents…
Well, yes, it is true that the American civilizations did not have shared siege weapons because they were not in contact with other civilizations. I mean, the Romans invented catapults, but the Trebuchet was a Chinese invention, fusing both methods later created the counterweight trebuchet. While the use of gunpowder came from China, cannons as we know them were invented in Europe.
Nor is it that with battering rams and trebuchet it has been easy to conquer castles, in Europe there were as many problems as in America in conquering fortresses. In fact, apart from siege weapons, similar siege techniques were used both in South America and in China: blocking supply routes, making long sieges, using arrows or incendiary missiles, mining the walls of fortresses, etc
Now, while the Americans civs. did not have european siege weapons, they were still good at “besieging”. The Incas reduced the city of Quito to ruins without advanced siege weapons, possibly with battering rams and incendiary materials (fire arrows and incendiary stones). Also the Mapuche, who destroyed 10 Spanish cities in less than 1 year and managed to prevent Spanish rule in their region, to the point that the Kingdom of Spain made a peace treaty that recognized them as the Mapuche Confederation for 200 years.
In Aoe3 to balance, there were war rituals that increased the siege damage of military units. They could easily have them the same, apart from the battering rams, and units with a strong fire attack.
Of course, unlike the Mali Grand Bazaar, it would be nice if the native festivals had names based on the deity they represent, something like Illapa the god of war and Inca lightning to improve siege and fire damage. Or that Quetzatcoatl improves agriculture.
On the other hand, siege weapon functions can be covered with specific infantry units:
- Sprigan → shock infantry with bonus anti-siege-units
- Onagers → units with area damage, anti-archers, etc.
- Siege Towers → with large stairs… and yes, there are records that they used them.
- Battering Rams → rams but without cover, the same as Aoe3. Either, infantry with long maces.
- Cannons → would make up for it with rituals that increase siege damage. The Incas could get some cannons, but they would have to complete their dynasty bonus in IV age (Incas de Vilcabamba).
Without idealizing these people - how the Americans were good at besieging?
Well, at least referring to the Incas, before they controlled the vast territory in the Huáscar period, they had to face a large number of nations, many of them with their own fortresses, pyramid-shaped cities, or hidden among the hills at thousands of meters high.
Among these, the Chimú, who had a citadel with clay walls on the coast (Chan-Chan), the Chachapoyas, who had a hidden fortress in the mountains, or the Chancas, who are believed to be descendants of the Wari and who even destroyed Cuzco on one occasion. Latter Pachacutec remodeled what was left of the city so that it has the shape of a Puma, or of Kon (a puma-condor deity).
About the ruins ruins, the Incas were not like the Mongols or, who destroyed to destroy without caring about the culture they destroyed. The citizens of the defeated towns were incorporated into the empire, and if they were very dangerous, they did something similar to the Romans: they declared their capital an anathema site and turned it into a ghost town, where no one should set foot again, on pain of death. That is why many ancient cities were left standing, and well, the deterioration of the years is noticeable in the buildings made of clay.
An exception to this rule is Atahualpa, who in the civil war did not mind leaving half an empire in ruins as long as he took the land from his brother. The result of the destruction of Atahualpa is the city of Ingapirca, "the 2nd Cuzco", when the Spanish arrived, only a few months after the destruction, they found it like this (it is not because of the passing of the years, it was already like this) :
Here is a 3D reconstruction of Ingapirca, and that is the only part of the city with stone foundations. The Cañari part, nothing was left.
Now, obviously their siege techniques (torches, flame arrows and stones, rams) were limited as they lacked the engineering of the West. If they put them in Aoe4, you’re going to have to use a LOT of “cannon fodder” to get them to destroy enemy cities, lol, but hey, it’s a war game, “war never comes cheap”.
I think next 2 civ will be japan and byzantine
Yeah,i feel they will be for this route…war rituals and siege infantry units…
I do not like the concept of “siege weapons in infantry form”
It’s the only realistic way I see to be able to give siege to the mesocivs…
You could have Mantlets and Jungle Longbows as Inca Siege weapons tbh, as well as Battering Rams.
I didn’t even include the Pukara Purisaspa which is much more historically dubious.