-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
I agree with GulFalco
Raleigh, Cortez or any of the French Conquistadors will wipe out all these 'indian' nations quickly.
I would probably argue for turning the iroqois into neutral provinces with really large really hostile populations. That incite attacks from natives in adjecent provinces as if they were rebel provinces. I personally see all ROTW countries as mere building blocks for my empire. As england I have perfected the method of getting a city in new world with j cabot and finding the aztecs with s. cabot and conquering the aztecs with norfolk. It happens every time now.
The only exotic nations to provide any resistance are the indians and persians.. the rest are just annexation fodder.. and BadBoy builders.
Removing the iroqois would make colonizing north america HARDER not easyer. The same for the Chinese and Japanese.
The Indians (as in india) are slightly too weak. More than once has raleigh conquered india for my brits (after finishing off the iroqois, aztecs and incas). India is Almeida fodder when I am portugal. These newly conquered empires bring too much strength to the power that takes them too easily.
Raleigh, Cortez or any of the French Conquistadors will wipe out all these 'indian' nations quickly.
I would probably argue for turning the iroqois into neutral provinces with really large really hostile populations. That incite attacks from natives in adjecent provinces as if they were rebel provinces. I personally see all ROTW countries as mere building blocks for my empire. As england I have perfected the method of getting a city in new world with j cabot and finding the aztecs with s. cabot and conquering the aztecs with norfolk. It happens every time now.
The only exotic nations to provide any resistance are the indians and persians.. the rest are just annexation fodder.. and BadBoy builders.
Removing the iroqois would make colonizing north america HARDER not easyer. The same for the Chinese and Japanese.
The Indians (as in india) are slightly too weak. More than once has raleigh conquered india for my brits (after finishing off the iroqois, aztecs and incas). India is Almeida fodder when I am portugal. These newly conquered empires bring too much strength to the power that takes them too easily.
I think mexico is the way to go. There was a mexican revolution in Mazatlan that almost defeated the spanish in mexico, but the other nations aztec confederacy/triple alliance (the Texcoco nad a second I can't remember) joined with the spanish to throw down the mexicans after years of domination. Also Michoacan was not ruled by the aztecs, instead it was a seperate nation that the aztec tried to years to conquer, the problem was the Michoacan people had copper weapons.
One of the main reasons that mexico was overun so easily by the spanish was that it was composed of a small but warlike nation of aztecs who had vasillized about five other nations who hated being ruled by warmonging brutes, so when the spanish came they threw their lots agaist the aztecs thinking things would be better.
I post later with dates and leaders. Personally I think that mexico should be broken down into smaller provinces and several nations, but there isn't a lot of room for many more is there?
Also I like the idea of native american cultures being added. However, the midwest and southern n.a. didn't really believe in staying put in one play too long they shouldn't have territories of their own. Instead I think that the sizes and aggresiveness of the tribes should be adjusted, most notably the Souix in the mid west, the appache in the arizona/new mexico area, the seminoles in florida, and the yaqi in northern mexico. These tribes were fierce and numerous and prevented much of these areas from being colonized until the mid to late 1800's
One of the main reasons that mexico was overun so easily by the spanish was that it was composed of a small but warlike nation of aztecs who had vasillized about five other nations who hated being ruled by warmonging brutes, so when the spanish came they threw their lots agaist the aztecs thinking things would be better.
I post later with dates and leaders. Personally I think that mexico should be broken down into smaller provinces and several nations, but there isn't a lot of room for many more is there?
Also I like the idea of native american cultures being added. However, the midwest and southern n.a. didn't really believe in staying put in one play too long they shouldn't have territories of their own. Instead I think that the sizes and aggresiveness of the tribes should be adjusted, most notably the Souix in the mid west, the appache in the arizona/new mexico area, the seminoles in florida, and the yaqi in northern mexico. These tribes were fierce and numerous and prevented much of these areas from being colonized until the mid to late 1800's
Native nations
A few thoughts on the various native nations in EU. Viking brings up a good point about the native powers -- they are 100% likely to be wiped out and provide nice ready made colonies/cities as a prize.
I think the game could benefit from making the conquest of the new world a bit less certain. This is one reason I really like the idea of adding a Mexico revolter. Perhaps some other changes could be made to make North America a little less hospitable.
Firstly, would it be possible to remove the Iriquois altogether? Instead of five medium sized colonies existing just inland, could there be five empty provinces with hostile natives (1-2k)? The Iriquois could potentially be replaced with the Souix/Lakota, whom I am assuming would be located further west. Having the native nation in North America buried futher inland may extend their lifespan.
Secondly, perhaps the fortress sizes in China, Nippon and India should be increased? Most of the oriental nations are very passive in regular games, so I don't think better fortresses would make them too powerful.
Another two cents.
A few thoughts on the various native nations in EU. Viking brings up a good point about the native powers -- they are 100% likely to be wiped out and provide nice ready made colonies/cities as a prize.
I think the game could benefit from making the conquest of the new world a bit less certain. This is one reason I really like the idea of adding a Mexico revolter. Perhaps some other changes could be made to make North America a little less hospitable.
Firstly, would it be possible to remove the Iriquois altogether? Instead of five medium sized colonies existing just inland, could there be five empty provinces with hostile natives (1-2k)? The Iriquois could potentially be replaced with the Souix/Lakota, whom I am assuming would be located further west. Having the native nation in North America buried futher inland may extend their lifespan.
Secondly, perhaps the fortress sizes in China, Nippon and India should be increased? Most of the oriental nations are very passive in regular games, so I don't think better fortresses would make them too powerful.
Another two cents.
My knowledge of American Indian history is weak but I have learned that the Iroquois were the only people in North America that could be considered a nation (in a European sense I suppose) so replacing them with another tribe sounds very odd to me. I like Mexico if Poland-Lithuania can't generate good results.
I'd be tempted to support some rebellion in America as well since it is plausible (if not historical) and also gameplay interesting.
I agree that a new native State from the get-go makes its absorption too easy and rewarding. However a revolting Mexico or West Indies state would make sense. As for its name (new Spain, mexico etc), maybe it would make more sense to have it tied to something inspired by where we decide to place its capital city; that solves the (well who does it get independent from) question.
If for instance its capital is in the West Indies, its trigger could be earlier than that of the USA, since there was already plenty of piracy around, maybe some rogue governor would get prompted early (and expecting retribution from the home country would be slow to come).
As well, lastly, I think the USA moniker is handy since United States of America really could suit a country born of either English or French stock. The name makes no reference to its source country.
I agree that a new native State from the get-go makes its absorption too easy and rewarding. However a revolting Mexico or West Indies state would make sense. As for its name (new Spain, mexico etc), maybe it would make more sense to have it tied to something inspired by where we decide to place its capital city; that solves the (well who does it get independent from) question.
If for instance its capital is in the West Indies, its trigger could be earlier than that of the USA, since there was already plenty of piracy around, maybe some rogue governor would get prompted early (and expecting retribution from the home country would be slow to come).
As well, lastly, I think the USA moniker is handy since United States of America really could suit a country born of either English or French stock. The name makes no reference to its source country.
No new additions...and I was just about to argue how fun an independent Tyrol might be 
If I may, I would recommend putting in a vassal nation such as Cuba (most of the major conquistador expeditions were launched from Cuba), or a vassal like Basque country (the province of Euskadia) because the Basque people have a very unique culture and had held of attacks from a multitude of various nations, until the united with Spain against the Moors.
Hartman, here is Aztec/Mexican independance info incase you want it. I also included some info and names on rulers and a revolt leader
Info on Spanish Invasion of Mexico
The Aztec empire was a triple alliance, formed in 1431, of the kingdoms of Tenochtitlan, Tlacopan, and Texacoco. The Aztecs of Tenochtitlan dominated Tlacopans and Texacocoans in this alliance. In the period of 1431 to 1519 the Triple Alliance defeated the eastern kingdoms of Tlaxcala and Huejotzingo , making the Aztecs the dominant rulers of central Mexico. Many other nations were forced to pay a yearly tribute
1519: Hernando Cortez landed Spanish force at Vera Cruz, established base and proceeded inland. Montezuma believed that he was the Aztec god-king Quetzalcoatl.When the Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés arrived in Mexico. Accordingly, Cortés was presented with elaborate gold and silver gifts. Later, fearful that the Aztecs would attack the outnumbered Spanish troops, Cortés held Montezuma II hostage and took control using Montezuma II as a puppet king.
1520, the Aztecs, growing restive under Spanish control, revolted. Cortés called on Montezuma II to quell the revolt, but the Aztec ruler was stoned by his own subjects who viewed him as a traitor. He reportedly died three days later.
1521: Aztec empire capital city of Tenochtitlan fell to spanish and allied forces (Huejotxingo and Tlaxcala both former vassels of Aztecs)
1530: Conquistador Nuño de Guzman destroyed Tarascan kingdom (Michoacan, kingdom never conquered by aztecs due to their ability to work metal) and trade route approaches to northern Piman territory (Jalisco and Zacatecas)
1533: Zacatecas selected as capital provice for the New Galicia consisting of Jalisco, Zacatecas and most of Michoacan, it was quickly and repeatedly attacked by the Chichimacs, an extremely aggressive tribe to the east
1540: large Spanish expedition under Vásquez de Coronado passed through northern Piman territory
1541-1542: Horrendous aboriginal conditions in northern Piman country combined with the departure of Vásquez with much of the military forces, results of Mixton War which consisted of revolts in Jalisco, Zacatecas and Michoacan by native americans who had for years been subjugated by brutal policies of the conquistador Guzman. When Coronado's expedition to the north in 1540 drained away many of the Spanish, the local peoples rose under the aztec Tenamaxtli, known also by the Christian name Diego Zacatecas. They fortified Mixtón, Nochistlán, and other mountain towns and besieged Guadalajara. Unable to cope with the uprising, Cristóbal de Oñate, the acting governor, asked for aid from the viceroy, Antonio de Mendoza. The Spanish, reinforced by a large body of Tlaxcaltec and Aztec, succeeded in recapturing the towns by hard fighting. Mixtón War, took place, whose climax came when the joint forces of New Galicia, headed by Cristóbal de Oñate, and of New Spain, captained by Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza, defeated the Cazcan rebels and their leader Tenamaxtli on December 16, 1541. Pedro de Alvarado was killed in a rash assault on Nochistlán, and the reconquest was slow, but Spanish authority was reestablished in New Spain.
There were also uprisings in Guerrero (NE mexico?) in 1531 by the Yopes, and in Nayarit (?) in 1598 by the Tepic, and several in Ecuador in the 1560's
Also the North Mexican/Southern US area was subgect to wars with the Yaqui (comanche) throughout the 1700s to 1950. The aztecs and their contemporaries considered the Yaqui to be no better than feral dogs, viscous and fearless.
Shouldn't the hostility ratings of the indigenous peoples be upped accordingly, the northern tribes fought for years and years without being brought under spanish control? The numbers should also be increased, the Aztecs could easily field armies of 20k-50k.
Aztec Leaders
Mocteuzma I (1440-1469) undertook wars of conquest throughout the Valley of Mexico and the southern regions of Vera Cruz, Guerrero, and Puebla. Vassilized most of mexico.
Ahuitzotl (1468-1502): king during initial invasion, ignored warnings and reports as supperstition
Mocteuzma II (1502 - June 1524): weak leader given to excesses
Cuitlahuac (June 1524): succeeded Montezuma II
Cuauhtemoc (August 1524 - ?): Cuitlahuac's nephew, who became the last Aztec ruler 80 days later when Cuitlahuac died of illness .
Mixton Leader
Tenamaxtli ('Diego Zacatecas'): intelligent warrior who studied the spanish for weaknesses for several years before organizing the uprising. Always fought battles where the use of the spanish calvary was limited.
Hope it's useful
Ullen
Info on Spanish Invasion of Mexico
The Aztec empire was a triple alliance, formed in 1431, of the kingdoms of Tenochtitlan, Tlacopan, and Texacoco. The Aztecs of Tenochtitlan dominated Tlacopans and Texacocoans in this alliance. In the period of 1431 to 1519 the Triple Alliance defeated the eastern kingdoms of Tlaxcala and Huejotzingo , making the Aztecs the dominant rulers of central Mexico. Many other nations were forced to pay a yearly tribute
1519: Hernando Cortez landed Spanish force at Vera Cruz, established base and proceeded inland. Montezuma believed that he was the Aztec god-king Quetzalcoatl.When the Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés arrived in Mexico. Accordingly, Cortés was presented with elaborate gold and silver gifts. Later, fearful that the Aztecs would attack the outnumbered Spanish troops, Cortés held Montezuma II hostage and took control using Montezuma II as a puppet king.
1520, the Aztecs, growing restive under Spanish control, revolted. Cortés called on Montezuma II to quell the revolt, but the Aztec ruler was stoned by his own subjects who viewed him as a traitor. He reportedly died three days later.
1521: Aztec empire capital city of Tenochtitlan fell to spanish and allied forces (Huejotxingo and Tlaxcala both former vassels of Aztecs)
1530: Conquistador Nuño de Guzman destroyed Tarascan kingdom (Michoacan, kingdom never conquered by aztecs due to their ability to work metal) and trade route approaches to northern Piman territory (Jalisco and Zacatecas)
1533: Zacatecas selected as capital provice for the New Galicia consisting of Jalisco, Zacatecas and most of Michoacan, it was quickly and repeatedly attacked by the Chichimacs, an extremely aggressive tribe to the east
1540: large Spanish expedition under Vásquez de Coronado passed through northern Piman territory
1541-1542: Horrendous aboriginal conditions in northern Piman country combined with the departure of Vásquez with much of the military forces, results of Mixton War which consisted of revolts in Jalisco, Zacatecas and Michoacan by native americans who had for years been subjugated by brutal policies of the conquistador Guzman. When Coronado's expedition to the north in 1540 drained away many of the Spanish, the local peoples rose under the aztec Tenamaxtli, known also by the Christian name Diego Zacatecas. They fortified Mixtón, Nochistlán, and other mountain towns and besieged Guadalajara. Unable to cope with the uprising, Cristóbal de Oñate, the acting governor, asked for aid from the viceroy, Antonio de Mendoza. The Spanish, reinforced by a large body of Tlaxcaltec and Aztec, succeeded in recapturing the towns by hard fighting. Mixtón War, took place, whose climax came when the joint forces of New Galicia, headed by Cristóbal de Oñate, and of New Spain, captained by Viceroy Antonio de Mendoza, defeated the Cazcan rebels and their leader Tenamaxtli on December 16, 1541. Pedro de Alvarado was killed in a rash assault on Nochistlán, and the reconquest was slow, but Spanish authority was reestablished in New Spain.
There were also uprisings in Guerrero (NE mexico?) in 1531 by the Yopes, and in Nayarit (?) in 1598 by the Tepic, and several in Ecuador in the 1560's
Also the North Mexican/Southern US area was subgect to wars with the Yaqui (comanche) throughout the 1700s to 1950. The aztecs and their contemporaries considered the Yaqui to be no better than feral dogs, viscous and fearless.
Shouldn't the hostility ratings of the indigenous peoples be upped accordingly, the northern tribes fought for years and years without being brought under spanish control? The numbers should also be increased, the Aztecs could easily field armies of 20k-50k.
Aztec Leaders
Mocteuzma I (1440-1469) undertook wars of conquest throughout the Valley of Mexico and the southern regions of Vera Cruz, Guerrero, and Puebla. Vassilized most of mexico.
Ahuitzotl (1468-1502): king during initial invasion, ignored warnings and reports as supperstition
Mocteuzma II (1502 - June 1524): weak leader given to excesses
Cuitlahuac (June 1524): succeeded Montezuma II
Cuauhtemoc (August 1524 - ?): Cuitlahuac's nephew, who became the last Aztec ruler 80 days later when Cuitlahuac died of illness .
Mixton Leader
Tenamaxtli ('Diego Zacatecas'): intelligent warrior who studied the spanish for weaknesses for several years before organizing the uprising. Always fought battles where the use of the spanish calvary was limited.
Hope it's useful
Ullen
United resistance to the Europeans in N. America by the Indians did not really come about till just after this game ends. A Shawnee chieftain by the name of Tecumseh began building an alliance of tribes in the eastern and south eastern U.S. - the alliance never fully got off the ground and completely fell apart with Tecumseh's death in battle against an American army in 1813 or so. The addition of a confederation of tribes would - as previously mentioned - just make it much easier for expansion through military annexation. IMHO I like the idea of a New Spain/Mexico.
Argentina was the first sout american nation to revolt against spanish rulers
Argentina of course
Argentina of course
Yes, but not until mid 18th century no? Later than Mexico. I'd love to see Generals San Martin and Simon Bolivar but I think it's a bit too late. If Mexico hadn't revolted first I don't think South America would have.
Sardinia and Provence !
I miss Sardinia and Provence. How I wish they would return!
I miss Sardinia and Provence. How I wish they would return!