Even meso civs without any cavalry units can make xolotl. Hindu area civs have scout and camel/elephant, but they can’t make counterpart of xolotl?
At least from a more technical standpoint, it’s because the game doesn’t differentiate between converted buildings and those you construct yourself. For the American civs, they can start with the Xolotl available, but it doesn’t matter unless they can get their hands on a Stable. For Hindustanis however, because they already can make Stables, there would be no way to limit a Xolotl equivalent unit to only converted stables. And their general civ design means that it shouldn’t be part of their regular tech tree, as not having it makes them play more uniquely.
11 Likes
Just a design choice by the devs, no historical reasoning behind it.
I wish they give Knights to Dravidians that would make their tech tree a bit more unique as well as solve their mobility problem.
2 Likes
I think from a more game-play-ish standpoint, it’s easier to think of the meso civs as a one off case.
Should the berbers get steppe lancers If they convert a mongol stable? Should Burgundians get elephants if they convert a Bengali Stable? Should Romans get Elite Cannon Galleon if they convert a spanish dock?
I honestly do see what you’re saying. I don’t think there’s a “logical” answer. It’s just the way it is for meso civs.
2 Likes
The original Indian civ had no knights because it was heavily inspired in the AoE3 Mughal civ which Im peetty sure had no horses
And devs thought that keeping the “no knights” design philosophy for India would make them more unique and interesting
4 Likes
By the way Malay and Khmer also fall under Hindu Area.
Agreed. Op your word choices are… questionable