(POLL) North American Civs

[MatM1996]

@untitledjuan

In theory, the existance of Pacanchique is not verified, there’s no proof of him being a historical person, since the accounts of him are mostly legends passed from generation to generation and compiled by scholars in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. On the other hand, the existance of Nemequene and Quemeunchatocha dates back to the 16th century chronicles written by the early Spanish colonists, priests and conquistadors. However, they described those events under their ethnocentric European point of view and the biases they brought over from their Medieval Castilian cultural background. That’s why the game clearly states that the campaigns are a mix of history and folklore, if they went by strictly historical, anthropological or archeological data, the campaigns would end up being rather boring, tbh

That’s true… if it were an AoE 3 campaign, they’d connect El Dorado with something from the Osseus Circle and go full historical fiction or something similar to the El Dorado of The Forgotten…

@untitledjuan

I mean, it really isn’t a problem, in my opinion, they are mixing both history and folklore in the campaigns and that’s fine. Oral history and stories should also count, especially when dealing with the indigenous peoples of the Americas in the “medieval” period

Yes, since the native civilizations of America did not have writing, we are left only with oral history (which is still a historical source, but a more secondary one because it varies somewhat from generation to generation)…

[smiki5five]

Copying my post from another thread:

@smiki5five

In order to avoid the Devs creating some Pueblo-Mississipian Frankenstein architecture, I’d like them not to add everything NorthAm in a single DLC. (Caribs could go wherever though, they can use the SouthAm arch set.)

DLC 1: Moundbuilder architecture
Predominantly wooden stuff for the Mississippian culture area and Eastern Woodlands. Civs could be:

• Mississippians (or variants thereof if it’s too big of an umbrella)
• Iroquoians (Haudenosaunee and other Iroquoian polities like the Monongahela)
• Algonquians
• the Calusa

DLC2: Southwest architecture
Initially simple structures like Navajo hogans evolving into adobe Pueblo architecture. Civs could be:

• Hisatsinom (Hopi name for Ancestral Puebloans)
• Dine/Athabascans (Navajo-Apache umbrella, with a campaign about their migration and war with Anasazi)
• Hokan (Californian umbrella)

[Manwus]

AoE2 has always incorporated folklore. Joan of Arc, El Cid, Attila, all have plot elements drawn from legends that are at odds with purely historical events.

[RatcicleFan]

Montezuma is at least 30% ahistorical given Aztecs lost irl. I think the first two scenarios aren’t even based in history.

[Manwus]

Montezuma is basically wish fulfillment.

[TheTowerDefender]

@Manwus

AoE2 has always incorporated folklore. Joan of Arc, El Cid, Attila, all have plot elements drawn from legends that are at odds with purely historical events.

there is a difference between drawing from legend, and being fully based on legend. I don’t think any of us would be keen on a King Arthur or Robin Hood campaign, just like how many of us didn’t like that the 3K campaign was based on the fictional “romance of the three kingdoms”

[MatM1996]

@RatcicleFan

Montezuma is at least 30% ahistorical given Aztecs lost irl. I think the first two scenarios aren’t even based in history.

@Manwus

Montezuma is basically wish fulfillment.

Yes, the first two scenarios of the Moctezuma campaign are based on the Flower Wars against Tlaxcala and then against their allies in the Tlacopan Alliance. This provides context for why, when Cortés arrives at the end of the second scenario, he quickly secures allies for the third scenario.

@TheTowerDefender

there is a difference between drawing from legend, and being fully based on legend. I don’t think any of us would be keen on a King Arthur or Robin Hood campaign, just like how many of us didn’t like that the 3K campaign was based on the fictional “romance of the three kingdoms”

Yes, if they really want to go that route, they could include two scenarios based on legends in VaV: King Arthur (a sequel and reverse version of Vortigern between 500 and 556, now fighting against the Saxons and allied with the Celts) and Robin Hood (1215-1217) (which would be based on the first Barons’ War that led to the creation of Magna Carta; in fact, in AoE 4, the last three scenarios of the English campaign are based on the first Barons’ War from King John perspective)…

[smiki5five]

@WindwardHail620

You could for example have Haudenosaunee Feudal Age buildings and Mississippian Castle Age in one building set but that compromise would make a very few happy I think.

It isn’t really that far-fetched, many Iroquoian peoples belonged to the wider Mound Builder continuum, particularly the Monongahela culture (Massawomeck). The Seneca oral tradition recalls originating from the Nundawao village near the Bare Hill (Genundowa) fort site.