My brother in Christ South America wasn’t even remotely empty, Argentineans are “basically” ethnic spaniards because they commited murder on a massive scale, following the footsteps of the United States.
(and saying they are ethnically spaniard is patently false in the first place, it’s just a matter of actually setting foot in the freaking country to realize they are as ethnically diverse as anywhere else in the continent)
What you’re doing here is literally genocide denial by pretending all the land these countries occupied were conveniently empty and weren’t just taken by force through settlers.
20 million people, last i checked the incas had more than 10 million people, some go as high as 16 million, but lets be fair and say 10 million.
so for the rest of south america you have 10 million people. did there live people there? yes, i never claimed no one lived there. my claim is that it was comparatively sparsley populated to the rest of the world including central america and peru. my claim is also that you can see this in the modern population, unless brazil and argentina were uniquely brutal in their fight with the native americans you would expect those countries to have a large native influence, similar to Peru and Mexico, if there where large population before colonization.
for your information id also consider siberia, north america and most of central asia to be “desolate” despite them also having a fair number of tribes and people groups, simply put the number of tribes isn’t what defines an area as being desolate or not, its the number of people living there.
as another example if we look at australia before colonisation. it has about 500 groups, with a total population of about 750.000 people, meaning the average group only had about 1500 people. or to put it in another way, australia is about 3/4 the size of europe but had 1/100th the population, and that is if we assume a relatively low population for europe. now are you gonna argue Australia is not desolate? id argue it still largely is today.
i have never suggested no genocides happened in south america. also to you, how low does the population of an area need to be before it becomes reasonable to call a place desolate? is modern Mongolia desolate to you? cause i think it is. to me 10 million people sprawled across 16 million km is desolate, esp. once we admit some areas are less densely populated than that.
so after having looked it up 56% of Argentinians are mestizo, which is higher than i thought (all i ever had heard, read and seen before this was that Argentina was considered quiet white. i guess we could dwell on what this number actually hides under the surface but lets not go there). i will admit i was wrong on the make up on Argentina.
The developers have been adding civilizations 2 at a time, so I thought it would be good to add 3 DLCs from South America, first they would be the great Colombia and Argentina, second they could be Peru and Chile, and finally Brazil and some native South American civilization, the other option It would be adding all of South America in one expansion. As for the mechanics, I don’t think there is a problem. The South American civilizations can be perfectly differentiated. In terms of architecture, they would all be different or I would group them together. Greater Colombia and Peru would share the same architecture. Argentina and Chile would share another architecture.
I understand that there are people wondering why South America and why not another region, but for me the answer is obvious, a large part of the essence of AOE3 is basically the encounter between the old and the new world, that is, Europe and America, the colonization of America and the American revolutions are essential part of AOE3, then an expansion on South America would be like The Warchiefs 2.0, the truth is I’m not that interested in Asia and Africa, I don’t want to say that they don’t deserve new DLC, but America and especially South America occupy a special space for me, South America is a region rich in battles and the warlike essence of South America is basically European, the South American revolutions along with the Napoleonic wars are interesting topics to add in an eventual expansion
Now I’ve been thinking a bit about post-colonial potential civs. I think that the developers may add civs in the future that would be “derived” from the old civs already present in the game, e.g.:
Portuguese - Brazilians civ (certain)
French - Haitians civ
Dutch - South Africans civ
Together with the “British” USA civ and the “Spanish” Mexicans civ, these civs would represent the post-colonial civs that emerged after the largest colonial empires.
And now it’s time for more unconventional ideas:
Germans (renamed into Austrians civ) - Prussians civ
Ottomans - Egyptians civ
Russians - Ukrainians / Ruthenians / Cossacks civ
These are not post-colonial civs, but “derived” from the remaining old civs.
However, I bet that if Brazilians civ were added, the creators would not forget about the remaining post-colonial civs from South America (that’s what it would be like to do), which of course “derive” from the Spanish. The strongest candidates are, of course, the Argentines and the Gran Colombians.
I would love an Haitian civ, as long as they do them justice and not make them a generic pirate civ. Even now, just because there were pirates in isla Tortuga, doesn’t mean Haiti should be a pirate rev
Well, the developers have been releasing DLCs with this order, A two civ DLC, A Standalone DLC, A two civ DLC, A standalone DLC.
So I think if they release those DLCs, I think it would be like this:
Argentina and Colombia DLC
Brazil Standalone DLC.
Peru and Chile DLC.
Haiti Standalone DLC.
Only an Idea, I would like to read more of these.
Even tho I agree that those civs should follow the American/Mexican Age-up, It’s true that for some of this civilizations is going to be difficult to have this system because of the lack of region or states to have even 3 options for age up. (like Chile for example) maybe a variation of this Age-up should do it.
Again I would like to read your Idea. (sorry for the text wall).
Even though I’d live to have all of those (¿cuántas civilizaciones tenés?) adding all of those would be even more ambitious than The Conquerors expansion. If I had to chose, I would add Haiti and Perú, just so Argentinians don’t get bragging rights
En realidad esa es la imagen idealizada del General San Martín, históricamente nunca usó un caballo blanco.
Bromas a parte, San Martin utilizo varios caballos a lo largo de la guerra de independencia, obviamente no tuvo uno particular y no sabemos con certeza de que color era su caballo en cada batalla, incluso en la batalla de san Lorenzo se discute si su caballo era un bayo claro o zaino.
Me disculpo si dije marrón, pero en mi defensa el caballo zaino parece marrón y yo en particular pienso que es el que tenia en la mayoría de los casos, pero no descarto que el mito del caballo blanco de San Martin sea causado por el uso de uno o varios caballos bayo claro.
Como me gusta jugar con ganado, decidí probar de nuevo Argentina, para ver las nuevas cartas… Juego principalmente en Tratado contra la IA. Me gustó, fue divertido. Además, me llegó algo de inspiración y decidí hacerles un Revolucionario y un Gaucho únicos.
El Revolucionario está basado en el Regimiento de Patricios, un cuerpo voluntario de milicias de emergencia creado para combatir a los británicos en 1806.
Este es el primer intento de un Gaucho, que no tiene una vestimenta completamente estandarizada. Hubiera querido ponerle el poncho, pero no se me ocurre cómo. Al menos, prefiero este al comanchero genérico.