I had already seen those videos for a while, I think it is an excellent research work.
However, it must be admitted that some details were omitted (such as the defeat of 4 Spanish divisions with 3,000 Spanish soldiers and 10,000 indigenous allies who came to the aid of Cusco from Lima) and the role played by the Inca nobles during the sieges.
Once again, I apologize for bringing videos in Spanish, however, I personally liked these videos because they have more detail on the events that occurred with the Incas of Vilcabamba.
I reiterate that this is only my personal opinion.
Thanks for the confidence. The history of South America is written mainly in Spanish, and although there is an attempt to translate relevant videos into English, many times it is not possible. I know that many times it is complicated because I have even seen people who have maliciously exaggerated or invented historical data of South American âTribesâ (In Spanish they are called âNaciĂłn-Puebloâ which are âtribesâ that did not have a government organization and that they do not fall into the category of âEmpireâ or âKingdomâ), and I do not know if they do it out of ignorance or chauvinism.
If you are interested in Inca history, I can provide you with this link (which I also found on the Fan-Wiki) where the almost 40 years of Inca-Spain conflicts are described in great detail.
The Inca minor civ will be removed from random maps, but they will likely be replaced by a similar faction that will have a similar unit and technologies. They will also still be available in the campaign scenarios they were available in (all of this assuming they proceed like they did when they made the Warchiefs)
Actually they didnât include those in the original game so I think itâs one of those factions (o rmaybe a rival of the Incas) that will replace them.
Aztecs have the renegade Spanish card and Iroquois have renegade French/Dutch so maybe Incas will be able to recruit renegade soldiers too.
When exactly is AoE3 supposed to represent? I canât remember but it always felt like very early age of exploration and very early colonization. If thatâs the case Africa doesnât actually fit all that well. Early European exploration in Africa was mostly limited to coastal settlements and small port town, not vast land conquests of large African states. Thatâs not until the later 1800âs, and I always pictured AoE3 representing 1491 to around the early 1800âs. Just a thought tho, Iâm not sure.
There really isnât a precise end to the period of aoe3, in theory it seems like the late 1700 is the end of the period covered by the game, but then there are clues that the period may and well beyond 1800, almost at the doorstep of the word wars.
Characters like napoleon, some revolutions of various civs, some units like ironclad and gatling.
Since AoE4 wonât be on a more modern period like speculated years ago, I see no problem of bringing the time period of aoe3 until before the 1900.
Oh sure, I donât have a problem with it at all. The period of African colonization would certainly be very fitting for AoE3, for example if they were doing expansions. That just doesnât seem likely and my original point was more going for a possible explanation why African states are left out of AoE3.
It is unlikely that we get more civs, despite the most people would love that, but isnât too unlikely to get new continents and maps (Africa and Europe) and new tribes, along with game modes.
Yea thatâs exactly my point. They know theyâre not going to expand any more, so they added civs that fit the current period/geography. Not sure how likely European or African maps would be, especially African. Wouldnât make much sense unless they were adding African civs. Not a great deal of colonial conflict between European in Africa during the vague period of this game.
cool thanks. Wasnât too sure where all the tribes were from. Does that mean they didnât have many south americana tribes or the ones they had just happened to not be associated with inca?
The other south american minor faction was the Mapuches who are so, so not the Incas 11 Actually, one of the south american map, Patagonia, is the only map with no native settlements at all.
the anglo-boer wars are outside of the scope for AOE 3. so is the unification of Germany and Italy, i mean you could make the argument based on the sioux war which lasted until 1876, but really aoe 3 should be seen as stopping in 1830-50, we donât heave breach-loading riffles as a general rule.
The western part of the Amazon is also missing, I am interested in this area because the legendary Shuar live there (to this day), the only undefeated âNaciĂłn-Puebloâ in all of America. Also part of the Chaco Boreal where the GuaranĂ lived and the southeastern part of the Amazon where the CharrĂșa lived, who were the âNaciĂłn-Puebloâ that divided the Spanish Empire with the Portuguese Empire for centuries.
Candidates to replace the minor Inca faction: There are several, but as I saw in the videos there are minor settlements that still preserve the Andean architecture. So it could be the Chancas or Huancas.
Thatâs true, but in general, up to the first word war the tactic didnât changed much from the last years that aoe3 cover.
Also, since there isnât really a limit to the time that aoe3 cover, AoE4 supposedly should have covered the 2 world wars, but now itâs back to the middle ages, so I think that DE can expand a bit further.
It should be official, Iâm including mods too in this discussion.
not true, the russo-japanese war wasnât fought the same way as the american civil war for example, and even that looked somewhat alien to what european observers where used to (in europe they usually expected melee to follow after a volley, in the US they tended to just sit an shot at eachother), warfare in the later half of the 19th century would have been alien to someone like napoleon, formations got smaller, werenât closed packed anymore and horses where losing their role as combat weapons.
but even besides tactics weapons had simply changed a lot in the 70 years since the napoleonic war, a typical soldier there had a musket which at best of conditions could fire 4 times in a minute (but 3 times was usual), in the russo japanese war they had repeating riffles with magazines, making reload something like a second between each shoot in a 5+ magazine. the ranges had opened up with all weapons, a rifle of the time could easily hit someone 500 meters away with a good marksman while a musket in the napoleonic war really wasnât suited for more than 100 meters against line formations, artillery was just as extreme having gone from line of sight firing to ballistic firing.
if we go with naval units then a single battleship from the russo-japanese war (say the IJN mikasa) would have been able to sink the entire american navy of the civil war periode, with armor impenetrable to the american ships, a higher speed and guns that fired several times longer than anything from the 1860s and where far more powerful anyways.
at the nicest it goes to 1876 with the battle of little bighorn. but really the technology in the game is at large 1850s or early if we ignore sioux and the revolution factions. we donât have repeater rifles (hell we hardly have breach-loading riffles), we dont have ballistic artillery, we dont have modern battleships and we donât have automatic weapons. so we can be confident it ends well before 1900.
Well thatâs enough for covering most of the things that I suggested earlier.
Also, there are some advanced units, like ironclad and gatling guns, the main problem is that also the units like the infantry donât change appearance.
AoE3 goes from very early Colonization period, to late 19th Century (Napoleon and Ironclad Warships), so Scramble for Africa does fit, specially with French, Spanish, Portuguese and Dutch expeditions into it from the 15th to the 17th Centuries alone, which the game does cover.
AoE3 is not âEarly Colonial Periodâ, it is ALL Colonial Periods, right up to almost WW1, since you also get East India Company in the game.
