“Small.” The Seven Fires controlled an area of the great plains only slightly smaller than France, Spain, and the UK combined.
Just so we’re clear, here.
2 Likes
Out of curiosity, could you link a map or source? I’d be interested to read about them.
Not in population though. Also they would have no ages since their technology didn’t improve much in timeframe of this game. And even their existence as one bigger organisation is out of this games scope.
When I get back from work. Heading there now, so can’t really elaborate at the moment, but thing about it this way - a huge chunk of the Great Plains of NA was under the control of the Seven Fires. Only the very far south stretches and the very far north wasn’t, as the Comanche in the south and the Plains Cree in the North just weren’t worth fighting for more control.
2 Likes
Again we are talking about medieval times. Why not add USA when we are at it?
1 Like
Thanks, have a nice day. Always interested to read about cultures I don’t know yet about.
Would be nice if AOE4 would continue with that tradition and also give some exposure to cultures the general audience might not have heard much about instead of focusing on repeating the same stories over and over again.
5 Likes
Piggybacking off your post since I assume you’ve educated yourself on this stuff.
If a nations like Sever Fires were added to the game, could they compete late game from a gameplay perspective?
That is, if they didn’t have large defensive structures on par with castles, or siege weapons, etc. would they still be playable against the civs that had those units/techs.
We have Mongols, we have Lakota, we have Huns. Does this answer your question?
Bohemian Dromons come to mind too because you want them to be able to compete on water too, wouldn’t you.
I could list a few more but the Age franchise took always some liberties and is focused on telling compelling stories rather than being a 100% accurate historical source (see Scottish campaign in AOE2 among others). You should rather pick a good book than playing video games for that.
3 Likes
Yes in AoE 2 with steel armoured Aztecs it doesn’t matter but this game is supposed to be quite authentic and so far it managed to do that. And we got no Huns or ancient Celts here.
Seven Fires confederacy is out of the time of this game and tribes from which it is made off made no technological progress from 900 to 1550 to make distinct ages from.
Yes if in 10 years they make DLC set in future than it would make sense.
3 Likes
Nope, and frankly the post comes across rather aggressive in addition to not answering my question at all.
So the actual answer is “they’d have to be given stuff they didn’t actually have to be competitive from a gameplay perspective”?
And you should rather work on your interpersonal skills rather than trying to stroke your ego on internet forums.
7 Likes
That’s exactly why AoE might be helpful to educate some people that many “small tribal civilizations” around the world were actually not small nor a tribal civilization as they thought, if those civs are featured in AoE.
7 Likes
Yes, and the more Age holds itself out as an authority on historical games, the more it assumes a duty to deliver on that promise. I’m super excited to see what the devs do next. I think they’ve got a lot in store.
2 Likes
You mean people only pay and play for their home civilisation ?
2 Likes
For better or worse, it’s been an accepted theory around here that players want to play civs geographically/culturally proximate to their own nationality.
All the way back in 1997, MS pushed ensemble to add some eastern Asian civs for marketing purposes, or so I recall being explained by a former dev years later (I believe it was Sandy).
Ngl that sounds a lot like tribalism .
Yes it was Sandy . He said that he was initially opposed to that as the popularity of SC in Korea was’nt because of Koreans in SC .
The price is different in different places . It costs <30$ in my place
1 Like
I dont see the need to slap some arbitrary limiter on how many European civs can be in the game, as long as the civilization is interesting, they should be considered to be added to the game. Medieval Europe was one of the most diverse and interesting regions in the world at the time and also one of the most well documented and I dont see the need to supress that. This is not me saying dont add non-European civs, I myself am really looking forward to the Delhi and hope they add a Mamluk sultanate/Egypt based civ, as well as the Meso civs, however I hope they continue to explore the vast possibilities within Medieval Europe for civs.
7 Likes
I’m going to lump some stuff in together as I respond to a few of your questions to this response.
- The Seven Fires are likely a descendent of the Mississippian civilization, but even if they aren’t a direct descendent, the nomadic lifestyles of many of the people of the Seven Fires would have allowed them to directly experience, if not assist with, the creation of things like the Cahokia mounds. Monks Mound, the largest of the Cahokia mounds, has a larger perimeter than the Great Pyramid and the Pyramid of the Sun. In the post I mentioned you to, you’ll find more information about the old cities that used to be spread across the Americas and the great plains.
- In that link, you’ll find references to defenses made of earth and clay made in very much defensive structures. The Western and Eastern Dakota, 6/7 of the Seven Fires, would have been invested in making settlements like this. Blood Run in particular would have been constructed and inhabited largely by the two Dakota nations.
- IMO, the Seven Fires in particular would actually shine best as a late-game civilization. I’m going to make a post in AoE4 about a civ concept for them later tonight, and I’ll ping you to it when it goes up. The TLDR is that, imo, the best way to portray the Seven Fires would be to start them off as an agrarian society that needs to be defensive and elusive in the early ages and then transforms into a nomadic powerhouse that needs to roam the map with their entire base to retain their economy.
- Regarding Siege: This one is tricky. We don’t know if the more ancient cultures in the Americas had used siege weaponry, but it’s unlikely. The TLDR on this one is that wheels just weren’t used in the Americas because the terrain wasn’t kind to wheels and it was easier to drag sleds across rocky terrain and over the prairies than it was to try and make wheels survive the journey. As a plus side, however, trade was extremely prevalent in the Americas. One of the main functions of the Seven Fires’ nomadic bands would have been to regulate trade between various cities and settlements. This is why they hunted buffalo so much - they could trade it for things with the cities, and get crops. People like the Mandan would have traded a lot for a few buffalo, and the plains Natives excelled at getting buffalo.
My compromise is this - Make the Seven Fires reliant on trade, either with the neutral settlement or with allies, to gain access to technology like siege weaponry or specific blacksmith upgrades. It’s a compromise that makes sense with what the people did and it would work into replacing Stone and Gold, as the civ would be unable to use either.
There’s a lot more to say on that part, but I’ll save that for my post concept later on.
1 Like
Yes and that means for them to get same revenue from your country they need to sell at least double the amount of copies. (most likely more than double) That makes it even worse.
No but most people want to play what they know and associate with middle ages so European powers, Turks, Japan and mby even Aztecs and not some small technologically undeveloped seven nations which are also out of a games time frame.
I agree on portrayals being misleading. Part of deciding who goes into this game is the history of who fought who. It is easier to make campaigns with civs who fought against others already in the game. The English certainly fit the bill here.
Also, they were pretty successful militarily throughout this game’s timeline. They ruled more of what is now France than the French did on and off throughout much of the middle ages. They also conquered Wales, at least half of Ireland, and parts of Scotland. They fought on a global scale as well. Richard I was rather successful in the holy land and English mercenaries were highly sought after in Italy, Spain, Hungary etc in the 14th century following their victories over the French at Crecy and Poitiers. In the early 15th century, they essentially conquered France following the battle of Agincount and Henry V was named heir to the French throne. However he died young (before the king of France) leaving an infant son so someone else became king. Initially, losing France was more due to a politically disastrous truce where they ceded most of their lands in France back to the French and allowed the French army to evict the English settlers. This caused a lot of unrest which sparked the wars of the roses etc.
1 Like
I’m all for adding many European civs or as many civs as general from anywhere. I love all history regardless from where it’s from.
But if you are going to add 6 European civs and make them all look similar with the excuse they are all European, like they did with English, French and HRE, then I’m not interested.
1 Like