Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Expeditions: Conquistador Discussion Thread

Avonaeon

Arcane
Developer
Joined
Sep 20, 2010
Messages
593
Location
Denmark
We now have an agreement with Desura which will provide DRM-Free standalone clients to everyone who's pledged $15 or more once funded. We'll keep working on getting it out on more platforms as we go along though, so stay tuned.
 

asper

Arcane
Joined
Nov 14, 2007
Messages
2,207
Project: Eternity
there is really a wave of games from kickstarter going against the streamlined crap and bringing back options and tactics and replayability.

Wait with the praise until the games are at least released. So far we have only promises.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
517
Location
The frozen north
there is really a wave of games from kickstarter going against the streamlined crap and bringing back options and tactics and replayability.

Wait with the praise until the games are at least released. So far we have only promises.

Yeah, totally aware of that. But promises is more than we have had since the 90s so at least someone is thinking there is a market again. But on the codex you take the negative route of course.
:mob:
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
Looks good. Too bad this is from the perspective of the Spanish butchers.

Indeed Spaniards brough only :decline: for the nations tribes who engaged is such :obviously: activities like cannibalism and mass human sacrifices.
Yes, the sacrifice that consisted mostly of prisoners of war and rest being shitty slaves or volunteers. The cannibalism was done on already sacrificed individuals. Keep sucking Cortes cock.
Somebody needs to read the chapter in Carnage and Culture about Cortes. I'm sure Cortes was a p. cool dude, but the reason he found so many native allies so easily was because of the Aztecs.
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.

EDIT: And why shouldn't the conquest be defended? The mexican tribes were quite happy conquering each other. Had they been capable of building a boat larger than a canoe and had access to SCIENCE! they would have been quite happy to conquer Spain.
 

Santander02

Arcane
Joined
Sep 29, 2009
Messages
3,363
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.

I think the same thing as well, and it seems to me that the Aztecs in particular were more sanguinary than most other cultures of the Americas, as far I know not even the other great American empire of that time, the Incas, engaged in warfare and sacrifices to the same extent as the Aztecs did, (ie the "Templo Mayor" in Tenochtitlan had around 60 000 skulls taken from sacrifices, while most Incan sacrificial tombs had just around 20 bodies or so) in any case the Spanish would never have had success in either conquest without the help from the natives that were dissatisfied with their current overlords.
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.
The Flower Wars were waged under the consent of both parties. The political purpose was likely to weaken them in the long run. Don't use the account of extremely biased Christians that weren't there to support your "numbers".

EDIT: And why shouldn't the conquest be defended? The mexican tribes were quite happy conquering each other. Had they been capable of building a boat larger than a canoe and had access to SCIENCE! they would have been quite happy to conquer Spain.
This is a fallacy:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/two-wrongs-make-a-right.html
 
Self-Ejected

Kosmonaut

Lost in Space
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
4,741
Location
CCCP
No, the Flower Wars were waged by the expressed purpose of getting prisoners for human sacrifice. Your New Age infatuation with aztec culture is ridiculous.
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
No, the Flower Wars were waged by the expressed purpose of getting prisoners for human sacrifice. Your New Age infatuation with aztec culture is ridiculous.
That too. But it was certainly political as well. What New Age infatuation? I larp and defend the Aztecs from westerners that have some hollywood notion about them. I have a greater infatuation with German culture and should this account and the backup alt get banned the third will have a very German theme.
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.
The Flower Wars were waged under the consent of both parties. The political purpose was likely to weaken them in the long run. Don't use the account of extremely biased Christians that weren't there to support your "numbers".

EDIT: And why shouldn't the conquest be defended? The mexican tribes were quite happy conquering each other. Had they been capable of building a boat larger than a canoe and had access to SCIENCE! they would have been quite happy to conquer Spain.
This is a fallacy:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/two-wrongs-make-a-right.html
1) We aren't talking about the flower wars. We are talking about human sacrifices. Oh yeah, and if you were paying attention you would have noticed the low estimate was given by the Spanish bishop, and the high estimate by the historian who was the great grandson of the Aztec king. Using your logic we should throw out the low numbers. :lol:

2) It isn't "two wrongs make a right". It's "Hey, this civilization and the statu quo was so fucking horrible that all of their neighbors sided with some invaders just to get rid of them. Therefore, you are not going to convince anyone that it was a bad idea with a morality argument, you dumbfuck."

3) I hate the way people of your political disposition pretend like you are advocating from some bullshit moral high ground. What you are really providing are such egregious distortions of the truth to support your position that anyone with all of the facts and a hint of morality or intelligence is disgusted. When people of other dispositions are confronted with this type of situation they admit they were wrong and change their position instead of further entrenching themselves by inventing new deceptions.
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.
The Flower Wars were waged under the consent of both parties. The political purpose was likely to weaken them in the long run. Don't use the account of extremely biased Christians that weren't there to support your "numbers".

EDIT: And why shouldn't the conquest be defended? The mexican tribes were quite happy conquering each other. Had they been capable of building a boat larger than a canoe and had access to SCIENCE! they would have been quite happy to conquer Spain.
This is a fallacy:http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/two-wrongs-make-a-right.html
1) We aren't talking about the flower wars. We are talking about human sacrifices. Oh yeah, and if you were paying attention you would have noticed the low estimate was given by the Spanish bishop, and the high estimate by the historian who was the great grandson of the Aztec king. Using your logic we should throw out the low numbers. :lol:
So fucking what if he was the grandson of the Aztec fucking king. He was still Christian and his work was pervaded with bias. If the son of a WW2 vet claimed his father killed 100 Germans his words aren't going to reliable because of blood relation. The "low" estimates are not anymore reliable than the "high" estimates. Oh look I can make a smiley too!:lol:
2) It isn't "two wrongs make a right". It's "Hey, this civilization and the statu quo was so fucking horrible that all of their neighbors sided with some invaders just to get rid of them. Therefore, you are not going to convince anyone that it was a bad idea with a morality argument, you dumbfuck."
Only their neighbors also sacrificed people yah dumbfuck! They hated the Aztecs just like they would if any other group rose to prominence and power. The Flower Wars were the means by which the Aztecs took in sacrificial captives that weren't shit slaves or volunteers. So to talk about human sacrifice you'd inevitably have to talk about the Flower Wars.
3) I hate the way people of your political disposition pretend like you are advocating from some bullshit moral high ground. What you are really providing are such egregious distortions of the truth to support your position that anyone with all of the facts and a hint of morality or intelligence is so disgusted that they are alienated from your position. When people of other dispositions are confronted with this type of situation they admit they were wrong and change their position instead of further entrenching themselves by inventing new deceptions.
Fuck you, stop whining you child and understand that you have a Hollywoodian idea of the Aztecs. Who this comment should be directed towards are those that deny the Aztecs ever sacrificed anyone in the first place.
 

J1M

Arcane
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
14,616
We know others also sacrificed people. It doesn't help your argument.

If you have more accurate numbers on human sacrifices, share them. Otherwise rational people like myself will continue to accept the numbers presented by historians as a valid range.

I don't know where you get the idea that this position was provided to me by hollywood. If anything, my impressions of the Aztecs were way more pedestrian before learning about them. At most I thought they killed something like 400 people a year before reading Carnage and Culture.
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
We know others also sacrificed people. It doesn't help your argument.
It helps my claim that hatred of the Aztecs was political in nature and not because they practiced human sacrfice
If you have more accurate numbers on human sacrifices, share them. Otherwise rational people like myself will continue to accept the numbers presented by historians as a valid range.
I don't pretend to have some concrete number on the amount sacrificed. I do however know that your sources are not reliable at all and their numbers shouldn't be trusted.
I don't know where you get the idea that this position was provided to me by hollywood. If anything, my impressions of the Aztecs were way more pedestrian before learning about them. At most I thought they killed something like 400 people a year before reading Carnage and Culture.
This is less your fault and more about the extremely fucking annoying trend of people believing even the most ridiculous numbers I always see. Sorry if I lumped you with the rest.
 

OSK

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
8,004
Codex 2012 Codex 2013 Codex 2014 PC RPG Website of the Year, 2015 Codex 2016 - The Age of Grimoire Make the Codex Great Again! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire
Montezuma is a dick. If I ever start near him, he's the first to get taken out.
 

Commissar Draco

Codexia Comrade Colonel Commissar
Patron
Joined
Mar 6, 2011
Messages
20,856
Location
Привислинский край
Insert Title Here Strap Yourselves In Divinity: Original Sin Project: Eternity Torment: Tides of Numenera Wasteland 2 Divinity: Original Sin 2
J1M,the Aztecs were disliked for political reasons. The Aztecs weren't the only ones to do human sacrificing and westerners like you need to stop defending the conquest.
It is disingenuous to refer to the extracting of a tithe from the surrounding tribes of 20,000 human sacrifices each year as 'political reasons'.

That's the low estimate given by Zumarraga. Ixlilxochitl pegs it even higher: one in five children each year.

I think the same thing as well, and it seems to me that the Aztecs in particular were more sanguinary than most other cultures of the Americas, as far I know not even the other great American empire of that time, the Incas, engaged in warfare and sacrifices to the same extent as the Aztecs did, (ie the "Templo Mayor" in Tenochtitlan had around 60 000 skulls taken from sacrifices, while most Incan sacrificial tombs had just around 20 bodies or so) in any case the Spanish would never have had success in either conquest without the help from the natives that were dissatisfied with their current overlords.

This or you can believe the Stormfront Science! that Each Spanish Aryan Ubermensh was able to defeat 100 Indians. Libruls really are pushing luck defending Aztecs, even according to their standarts.

And Someone whose ''godhood'' Cortez have taken is indeed more butthurt than Varnaa about Russians... :lol:
 

Quetzacoatl

Liturgist
Joined
Feb 13, 2011
Messages
1,819
Location
Aztlán
This or you can believe the Stormfront Science! that Each Spanish Aryan Ubermensh was able to defeat 100 Indians. Libruls really are pushing luck defending Aztecs, even according to their standarts.

And Someone whose ''godhood'' Cortez have taken is indeed more butthurt than Varnaa about Russians... :lol:
The sacrifices in Templo Mayor were accumulated from continuous conflict with their neighbors. Said sacrificial offerings to the gods were prisoners of wars taken in the flower wars. Oh look standard librul bitching. Instead of debating me or my points you stand in the sidelines screaming "Stupid Liberals!". Fucking laughable.
The Florentine Codex reports that in one of the creation myths Quetzalcóatl offered blood extracted from a wound in his own genital to give life to humanity.

I think this explains a lot.
It explains nothing my avatar or username wouldn't have.
 

kaizoku

Arcane
Joined
Feb 18, 2006
Messages
4,129
so much butthurt yapping

it's an RPG. let the player carve his own path.
at least that is what I'm wishing for the game to allow
 
Self-Ejected

Kosmonaut

Lost in Space
Joined
Jul 11, 2008
Messages
4,741
Location
CCCP
This or you can believe the Stormfront Science! that Each Spanish Aryan Ubermensh was able to defeat 100 Indians. Libruls really are pushing luck defending Aztecs, even according to their standarts.

And Someone whose ''godhood'' Cortez have taken is indeed more butthurt than Varnaa about Russians... :lol:

I whish I could understand what the fuck are you trying to say. Whenever I read one or your post I have a hard time getting it. The only thing that I can grasp, and the perennial theme in your posts is the usual butthurt about librulz and atheists.
 

Johannes

Arcane
Joined
Nov 20, 2010
Messages
10,487
Location
casting coach
This or you can believe the Stormfront Science! that Each Spanish Aryan Ubermensh was able to defeat 100 Indians. Libruls really are pushing luck defending Aztecs, even according to their standarts.

And Someone whose ''godhood'' Cortez have taken is indeed more butthurt than Varnaa about Russians... :lol:

I whish I could understand what the fuck are you trying to say. Whenever I read one or your post I have a hard time getting it. The only thing that I can grasp, and the perennial theme in your posts is the usual butthurt about librulz and atheists.
You're forgetting negros and mudslims.
 

Deakul

Augur
Joined
Feb 21, 2011
Messages
417
Location
Taxachusetts
I hope to God that this gets made, this is my dream game.
Been wanting a game where you control conquistadors as they make their way into the New World and own ass since forever.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom