alamo as an historical battle.

[Lias_solano]

ok,i know its just out of the timeframe for Empires,but for a historical battle i think the alamo would be a great idea.Ive just watched a documentry about it on tv.(gotta love the discovery channel)
Would be cool to have the surrounded and outnumbered texians battleing the mexicans.It wouldnt be about winning the battle,more about seeing how many mexicans you can take to hell with you

Anyone got any other ideas for historical battles to be included??


lias

edit....heres a link to the wiki page on the alamo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Alamo

[jo the greek]

battle as alamo happened million times in history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Maniaki
and i think americans always overexaggerate about their history.
i have read about the most important battles of all times written by an american general and he had put the battle of custer

[William the Bastard]

Having a battle of around 200+ men against an army of 1,800 doesn't sound like an interesting tactical battle IMO. It would have been like having Thermopylae as a historical battle on Rome. Just a bit dull and not really any options for how to play the battle. I would much rather see large battles like Waterloo or Borodino in the game. Or some of the set piece battles of the Seven Years War and American Revolutionary war.

[akd]

Only if Texas gets to be an independent faction in the game.

[edders]

I'm not sure - wouldn't CA have to put a John Wayne super-unit in for historical accuracy?

[Lias_solano]

you dont need john wayne,,,,davey crockett was there


lias

[KLAssurbanipal]

It is too late...
Game is 1700-1800,
In Alamo soldiers wore other uniforms than XVIII century, so CA won't make new units for only one battle....

[Lias_solano]

yes i know its just a little bit out of the timeframe.And as for the unifoms im sure there will be some sort of american militia unit in Empire,so they could just use that.

lias

[Kinjo]

battle as alamo happened million times in history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Maniaki
and i think americans always overexaggerate about their history.
i have read about the most important battles of all times written by an american general and he had put the battle of custer

Stop assuming and don't be a hater of course opinions are like bass holes, everybody has one and some really stink! :usflag:

[jo the greek]

in what i assumed?

[edders]

He's referring to your claim that Americans exaggerate their history. Also, the battle of Alamo is more likely to be in the game (personally I don't think it will, though) than the battle you cited because

A: It's more famous

B: American history is more accessable to other countries than Greek/Turkish/Macedonian etc etc. history.

C: There are more American customers than Greek ones

[jo the greek]

i unterstand the logic but generally americans because they had small history
and not many wars overvalue theirs battles.
in the same book i have read the general had put in a small skirmish battle between some mexican riders and some americans riding mules

So someone that doesnot read history a lot takes wrong messages in the europeans wars of every era there were billinions like these battles.

a fact that they do not unterstand history as europeans is iraq.

[akd]

It is too late...
Game is 1700-1800,
In Alamo soldiers wore other uniforms than XVIII century, so CA won't make new units for only one battle....

Empire does not end at 1800, as it is pretty definitive that the game will include the Napoleonic Wars, but no doubt the Texas Revolution will be just outside the time period of the game. However, there was nothing at the Alamo that would prevent it from being depicted in the game using elements from the Napoleonic Wars that will already be in the game.

[Trax]

Small but famous battles like the Alamo are good material for historical battles because they can be represented in 1:1 scale.

Borodino would look just silly in game with ca 5000 soldiers on the field.