I suppose that for me it is also a great advantage to know Spanish.
Of all the books I read, the only one that affirms that “The battle of the Maule was a Mapuche victory” is the book “La Araucana” by Alonso de Ercilla. This is an “epic poem” which indicates (in my opinion) that many of the events narrated in this book can be “modified” or even “invented”; In the same way it is a good book, my favorite part is when the author is given a potion that sends him on an “astral journey” where he can see the battle of Lepanto from the sky.
The kingdom of Portugal formally began in the year 1139, obtaining the rank of Empire in 1415 (in itself the name is related to Age of EMPIRES) so, in my opinion, it deserves its inclusion in its own righ.
The empire of Portugal was scattered in almost all the continents
About Korea, it must be recognized that its inclusion in AoE 2: the Conquerors was a marketing maneuver, they wanted to enter the market where the boom of RTS games began, even the cover of AoE 2 in this country is unique:
However, there is no denying that Korean culture has been present for centuries, I remember that in Empire Earth 2 the Korean campaign spanned from 2333 BC to 676 AD. But specifically for AoE 2, the Kingdom of Goryeo could be named, which later “evolved” into the Joseon dynasty.
Maybe Mapuche could fit in the game, but other than one battle with the Inca, I’m not aware of them being very prominent in the AoE2 time period. The period of Mapuche ascendancy was firmly in the AoE3 time period and I’d love to see them feature there.
No they didn’t, they united in the 1450s. And their attacks (not extermination) on the Innu were during the beaver wars (1609-1701) which is pretty far outside the AoE2 period.
These are not anachronistic.
Korea was much larger under kingdoms like Goguryeo and often controlled parts of Manchuria.
Early on, the County of Portugal was busy with the reconquista which was not insignificant. They were also making voyages in the Atlantic such as discovering the Azores in the 1300s and making forays into Africa in the early 1400s.
Aight, fair enough. I suppose I discounted Goguryeo since it startles the AOE1-AOE2 border, but you’re right.
The previous Medieval Iroquois achievements (Expansion, reorganization, and three sisters) are historically relevant enough to be counted as a civ as opposed to an indigenous ethnic group.
the majority of it, sure - but there’s still plenty of content in the AOE2 period
I’m sorry, but the 1142 date is being more widely accepted by Mainstream scholars, journals, and publications like PBS and the New Yorker all the time. As historiography becomes less Eurocentric, we’re beginning to rely much more on archaeology and the pre-modern relevance of astrology. The only way we were able to decipher the ancient Mesopotamian Eponym chronicles was by lining up astrological events in tandem with archaeological findings - that’s how the timing of written records was figured out. By those same metrics, the previous 15th century Iroquois date is looking less and less plausible.
Sure, but I feel like making a case for a civ not being in the game by comparing it to another civ that isn’t in the game is a putting the cart in front of the ox a bit.
But there are probably many sites yet to be discovered that could be an even better fit. Right now, the info to base a Tupi civ on is very limited, but with further archeology, there may be enough discovered to make a good case for them.
That article is decades old and it seems like 1451 is still the more widely accepted date. Even if it was the earlier date, all the justifications you’ve given for having the Iroquois (Beaver Wars, etc) occurred far later. They are an excellent fit for AoE3, but in the timeframe of AoE2, they are unremarkable compared to their neighbors. There isn’t a great deal of information on which to base a native civ of the eastern woodlands so there’d probably be at most one civ. If that’s the case, the strongest contenders for a civ would be the ones who interacted with the Vikings such as the Algonquins (or Anishinaabe more broadly), Innu, or Mi’kmaq.
