>>677775>I was thinging about Cortez
That's actually worse. You're talking about Natives fighting Natives with Spanish siege support during a civil war. Most of the city-states pledged their fealty to the Spanish crown because, in their usual system, it just meant nobles had to show up to the occasional birthday or coronation, and pay minor tribute. The Spanish had to gradually gain control of the region over the course of the following century for that reason, being largely aided by the fact that each of their men carried a pandemic with them.>(x) Doubt for the first part
They were hunter-gatherers who kept their men from breaking under high-volume gunfire. Guess how they managed that.>Machu-China like most declining Empire was in denial, they were unable to comprehend the might of the Europeans
Wouldn't agree with that one. They were aware of their weaknesses, with their largest one being a European specialty, and could've easily managed more, had they not suffered constant betrayal, especially from commanders granting boons to their "enemy" mid-battle, like forcing peasants to give supplies or confiscating messages that'd alert other commanders.>For example they unironically thought that thier galleys will crush the British evnoy fleet in a show of might during the start of the opium wars.
The Chinese had hardly touched even coastal waters since the mid-15th, when the Yongle Emperor ordered their fleets burned (to save money). This is where they were weakest, and it was largely a result of them being such a massive trade destination. Chinese shipping was redundant and unprofitable. It's also (indirectly) why the British declared the war in the first place. >True, they fought themselfs more, but they were phateticly weak compared to the Europeans
No, the banner army system was just rife with corruption. Manchu administrations were insufficient to run China, even with Han help. Mere country boys drove back British army men using swords and wooden shields.