AOE3 Forums

Did the Inca scale walls and use battering rams? I recently found out that the Aztec would scale walls and use battering rams when invading fortified/walled cities.

Yes, the Incas scaled walls.

They might have used siege weapons, but there is currently not a lot information on up to what point the Incas used siege weapons.

Certainly they must have had some way to charge at a fort (even if it was a shield to cover from arrows and stones).

The problem is that there's not even information as to how the Incas were capable to carry huge stones to mountain-tops (like in the case of Macchu Pichu).

The Spanish burned all the information that could have been helpful in figuring out the engineering tools of the Incas. Yet, all that's left are the huge fortresses and the large stones, which is just the product and they give little to no clue as to how they were made.

It's amazing how in 100 years of conquest, they conquered the most threatening empires.

As far as I've read on the subject, the Inca war tactics and diplomatic system is what led to the expansion of the empire in such a short time.

The Incas preffered to annex another kingdom or tribe by peace rather than by force.

Look up Quisquis on Wikipedia. I'm sure it has the battle there.

I found it, but it stated that the Incas retreated not because of the Volcano, but because the warriors did not want to fight anymore.

Apparently, the Inca soldiers were tired of fighting (for the obvious reasons: Disease, and the fact they had just fought a war against other Incas) and wanted to go back home. Yet, Quisquis ordered them to keep on fighting and--after the 2 failures against the Spanish--the soldiers killed Quisquis and went home.

The story on Quisquis plain shows at what moment the Spanish had arrived upon Inca territory. The Inca soldiers were so tired and discouraged that they were even capable to kill their own commander so as to they could just go home.

GeneralN20:

Did the Inca scale walls and use battering rams? I recently found out that the Aztec would scale walls and use battering rams when invading fortified/walled cities.

Yes, the Incas scaled walls.

They might have used siege weapons, but there is currently not a lot information on up to what point the Incas used siege weapons.

Certainly they must have had some way to charge at a fort (even if it was a shield to cover from arrows and stones).

The problem is that there's not even information as to how the Incas were capable to carry huge stones to mountain-tops (like in the case of Macchu Pichu).

The Spanish burned all the information that could have been helpful in figuring out the engineering tools of the Incas. Yet, all that's left are the huge fortresses and the large stones, which is just the product and they give little to no clue as to how they were made.

It's amazing how in 100 years of conquest, they conquered the most threatening empires.

As far as I've read on the subject, the Inca war tactics and diplomatic system is what led to the expansion of the empire in such a short time.

The Incas preffered to annex another kingdom or tribe by peace rather than by force.

Look up Quisquis on Wikipedia. I'm sure it has the battle there.

I found it, but it stated that the Incas retreated not because of the Volcano, but because the warriors did not want to fight anymore.

Apparently, the Inca soldiers were tired of fighting (for the obvious reasons: Disease, and the fact they had just fought a war against other Incas) and wanted to go back home. Yet, Quisquis ordered them to keep on fighting and--after the 2 failures against the Spanish--the soldiers killed Quisquis and went home.

The story on Quisquis plain shows at what moment the Spanish had arrived upon Inca territory. The Inca soldiers were so tired and discouraged that they were even capable to kill their own commander so as to they could just go home.

Cool. I just barely discovered this. I read that the Aztec would also use huge hammers and hammer gates.

The fortress at Kuelap still amazes me. It's perfectly built and stood the test of time. I just wish the Aztec fortresses wouldve.

The taking of cities and conquering was very different from Mesoamerica. Aztec used war more than diplomacy, which was a huge mistake. The peoples that sided with the Spanish actually didn't demise the Inca, but just sought more opportunity with joining the Spanish. Kinda weird o think about.

 
I must've read it wrong, my bad. So mutiny basically? I read in The Broken Spears that during the Siege of Tenochtitlan, they started killing Aztec elites out of discouragement. It's sad how they turned against each other in the time of need.
 

GeneralN20:

GeneralN20 continues on this coz if he wouldnt, then Cosmic jaguar would think that he left discussion cause he won, and would continue doing what he always do

That's right Ivan. Great seeing you here again.

But the discussion has been dragged on for too long, and I have already proven my point correct.

Cosmic Jaguar: "The Spanish accounts have said the same for the Aztec."

Oh, and I remember him stating something along the lines of: "The Spanish never wrote anything about the Incas."

Hahaha. Now he states the Spanish said the same things for the Aztecs as for the Incas.

if metis was here he would prove u wrong just letting u no

I couldn't care less about Metis. He's not anybody whom I should bow down to or praise.

im right and be right till history prove me wrong...BRAZIL DIDNT REVOLT FOR INDEPENCE

In 1788/89, Minas Gerais was the setting of the most important of the conspiracies against colonial authorities, the so called Inconfidência Mineira. The Inconfidência was inspired by the ideals of the French liberal philosophers of the Age of Enlightenment and the successful American Revolution, which had taken place in 1776.

The conspiracy was discovered by the Portuguese colonial government in 1789, before the planned military rebellion could take place. Eleven of the conspirators were banned to Portuguese colonial possessions in Angola, but Joaquim José da Silva Xavier, nicknamed Tiradentes, was sentenced to death. Tiradentes was hanged in Rio de Janeiro in 1792, quartered and his body parts were sent to different towns as an example. He later became a symbol of the struggle for Brazilian independence and liberty from Portuguese rule.

The Inconfidência Mineira was not the only rebellious movement in colonial Brazil against the Portuguese. Later, in 1798, there was the Incofidência Baiana in the former capital, Salvador. In this episode, which had more participation of the common people, four people were hanged, and 41 were jailed. Members included slaves, middle-class people and even some landowners.

Source Citation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonial_Brazil#Inconfid.C3.AAncia_Mineira

if u actualy read ma 1st post u woiuld actually no i talked about tiradentis... and we got our indepence on 1821 and all u saying is dat the rebellion was in the late 1700s... and that aint relly no rebellion, we didnt relly fight for out indepence everyone nos dat

ES_Paragon:

Ok, CosmicJaguar and GeneralN20 it is time to take your debate/argument to private chat.

Woah there Paragon. I created this topic, and as far as the topic's theme goes, anything related to a 3rd X-pack is welcome in here. Discussing the matter of the Incas, which are a civilization that are a part of this suggestion, is perfectly correct because it is part of the topic's theme.

Just because the others want to call that particular discussion "Inca vs. Aztec," it doesn't mean that the theme of the topic is that.

Furthermore, there are also other discussions going on in this topic relating to other sections (Such as Denmark, Sweden, and Norway discussions, and currently the Brazil discussions).

If you don't read the topic, then don't try to abuse your powers and try to lock this topic because it has opinions that ES apparently seems to dislike.

Take this as a warning, there is no need to infect so many threads with your debates and continuing to do so will result in suspensions / bannings of accounts.

Don't warn me on this subject.

The only topic I created that was completely based on the Incas, YOU (As in whoever took the time to do such things) ERASED IT when these new forums were created.

Every other thread that was made had only my statements and I have a right to give my statements on reply (which is a button option on the forums) to the statements of other forumers. 

I'm not going to set the blame on anybody, but please don't just crash into this topic and refer to me as if I had done something wrong.

Heck, you moderators are the ones who are not commenting on the thread's topic...

and we got our indepence on 1821 and all u saying is dat the rebellion was in the late 1700s...

Late 1700s = 1770s - 1790s

1821 is not too far off from those dates...especially since on those days the situation went by slow.

For instance, what took back in those days a decade to achieve, it currently takes half the time.

we didnt relly fight for out indepence everyone nos dat

The majority of Brazil did not fight for independence, but there were plenty of rebellions in Brazil from sections of the country that wanted independence to come by faster.

History shows that....

GeneralN20:

ES_Paragon:

Ok, CosmicJaguar and GeneralN20 it is time to take your debate/argument to private chat.

Woah there Paragon. I created this topic, and as far as the topic's theme goes, anything related to a 3rd X-pack is welcome in here. Discussing the matter of the Incas, which are a civilization that are a part of this suggestion, is perfectly correct because it is part of the topic's theme.

Just because the others want to call that particular discussion "Inca vs. Aztec," it doesn't mean that the theme of the topic is that.

Furthermore, there are also other discussions going on in this topic relating to other sections (Such as Denmark, Sweden, and Norway discussions, and currently the Brazil discussions).

If you don't read the topic, then don't try to abuse your powers and try to lock this topic because it has opinions that ES apparently seems to dislike.

Take this as a warning, there is no need to infect so many threads with your debates and continuing to do so will result in suspensions / bannings of accounts.

Don't warn me on this subject.

The only topic I created that was completely based on the Incas, YOU (As in whoever took the time to do such things) ERASED IT when these new forums were created.

Every other thread that was made had only my statements and I have a right to give my statements on reply (which is a button option on the forums) to the statements of other forumers. 

I'm not going to set the blame on anybody, but please don't just crash into this topic and refer to me as if I had done something wrong.

Heck, you moderators are the ones who are not commenting on the thread's topic...

and we got our indepence on 1821 and all u saying is dat the rebellion was in the late 1700s...

Late 1700s = 1770s - 1790s

1821 is not too far off from those dates...especially since on those days the situation went by slow.

For instance, what took back in those days a decade to achieve, it currently takes half the time.

we didnt relly fight for out indepence everyone nos dat

The majority of Brazil did not fight for independence, but there were plenty of rebellions in Brazil from sections of the country that wanted independence to come by faster.

History shows that....

hmm... actually that makes sense! Since the discussion is about  if Inca should be in the game or not!

btw. general (based on what you have written on the first page) we dont want a expansion to have either Sweden-norway or denmark-norway, we want BOTH... kinda, we want sweden (the swedish empire sweden) AND Denmark (the denmark-norway denmark). I'm not really shure exactly who is "we" but im one of them...

btw. general (based on what you have written on the first page) we dont want a expansion to have either Sweden-norway or denmark-norway, we want BOTH... kinda, we want sweden (the swedish empire sweden) AND Denmark (the denmark-norway denmark). I'm not really shure exactly who is "we" but im one of them...

Well, if that's what you guys want, I guess I'll edit the first page to include that new separate civilization.

Hmm....I need to also expand on the home cities.

Would you like to help me create a separate Swedish civilization (I'll keep the one already in there are Denmark-Norway, I suppose)?