Latin American general post

Assigning revolutions based solely on synergy with a civ is a pretty weak reason. It would make more sense to tweak the revolution to work better with the civs that actually have a historical justification for the revolt.

As it turns out there’s actually a historical justification for the opposite of what you’re suggesting. There’s a case to be made for France having a Chilean revolution based on the Kingdom of Araucanía.

Of course, that’s why the developers added the German settlements card, because clearly there is no relationship between these civilizations. (Sarcasm)

(Colonización alemana de Valdivia, Osorno y Llanquihue) I hate the censorship system


I think you completely lost credibility with this “argument.”

That state was never recognized and furthermore the territory it claimed was mainly from present-day Argentina.

In addition to the above, I doubt that the Tehuelches and Mapuches would have accepted a foreign emperor, this argument is as ridiculous as the supposed emperor of the United States. (Joshua A. Norton)

1 Like

I’ve mentioned it a few times, but the german colonization themed cards for Chile are mostly just a meme.

Like yeah southern Chile received a significant amount of german immigrants in the 1850s… but so did almost everywhere else in the Americas.

The military parade is, well… the prussianization of the chilean army happened in the 1890s.

3 Likes

I agree that it is a meme, but given that there is German immigration to Chile and at the same time the revolution is perfect for Germans, it seems a waste not to take advantage of it.

That’s a relatively small series settlements. It’s only significant because of it was a key move in the occupation of Araucanía.

Maybe the English article will work:

It’s far less than Argentina and completely insignificant compared to other parts of the Americas like USA and Canada.

He only ever operated in Chile. His claims to Patagonia are even more tenuous and from a time before Argentina controlled the region when it was also claimed by Chile. The game has references to madmen like William Walker, so even some outlandish revolution justifications would fit in.

They did on the basis of receiving French military assistance. It turned out he was full of shit, but most of the in game revolutions are hypotheticals so one could entertain the idea of his movement taking off. Apparently intervention may have been considered by Napoleon III.

Late reply but Brazil would make sense for France

1 Like

I could be wrong, but I think that historically Argentina and Brazil tend to have immigration from the same places. (In a few words it is possible)


I would love for the revolutions of the United States, Brazil and Argentina to share the civilizations in which they can revolutionize except the historically correct one.

Argentina: Spain, Italy and France.
Brazil: Portugal, Italy and France.
United States: England, Italy and France.

With a change like this, civilizations that lose these revolutions could have new revolutions without exceeding 5, which seems to be the maximum.

Obviously this will never happen, but I think I have the right to dream of more and better distributed revolutions. :sweat_smile:

Lo siento si soy brusco pero como me haz hecho reír la rcsm :rofl:

Pero bueno, para resumir un poco Orélie-Antoine de Tounens al final fue procesado por loco en un juicio en Chile. Actualmente se le considera poco más que la idea de un orate, algunos recuerdan a Orélie-Antoine de Tounens como un loco, otros como un “espía británico” y otros como un elaborado plan desconocimiento de la legalidad de la Patagonia. El único sustento legal que e visto es que a veces se usa como prueba de que la Patagonia en 1860 le pertenecía a Chile y poco más.
Actualmente algunos grupos sociales que tratan de reinvidicar ese reino pero sin mucho sustento legal, y no voy a hablar mucho más del tema debido a los problemas actuales existentes entre grupos indígenas y el gobierno Argentino.

Ahora, esto me hizo recordar a Alfonso Graña o como alguno llamaron “El Rey de lo Jíbaros”, para los interesados les dejo este documental (ESPAÑOL).

PD: sí, estoy escribiendo en español.

I can’t speak on anything else but a lot of the current represented revolutions never succeeded, at least not on the time period actually covered in the game, so it not being recognized isn’t necessarily a deterrent.

1 Like

Europe >> South America

1 Like

The problem is not that his revolution failed, the problem is that he literally had no support, he was just a crazy Frenchman who came and said now this is my kingdom.


To be fair, the developers made no real attempt to improve or update the South American maps. Furthermore, the only South American civilization they made it was to attract AOE2 players, which is a total lack of respect for AOE3 players, especially South American players.


Message for the developers. :triumph:

South America needs more maps with a variety of biomes, natives, stations and trade routes, both maritime and land, this is not something that has not been told countless times in the past, there are literally discussions about it on Discord between several users.

Furthermore, it is incredible that we do not have the Mapuches and Guaraníes to complete the trio of native civilizations. Also because there are only two post-colonial North American civilizations, because Central America and South America did not receive anything. Give us Haiti, Argentina, and Brazil.

3 Likes

I think that at this point almost no one uses this topic for its original function, to suggest things for potential American civilizations, that is, Haiti, Argentina, Brazil, etc.


I propose that a potential Argentine civilization has these towers. (I don’t care if it’s MOD or Official)

Tower.
Tower Features: It has less health than an outpost, costs much less, and can be built in greater quantities. (I’m not sure if 10 or 15 would be a good number)

Tower abilities: it can be attached to a wall pillar, when the pillar and the tower are attached they add their life points to reinforce themselves, the tower allows you to build a wall quite close to its structure.

The image is quite self-explanatory, the main beam of the tower is the one that attaches to the pillar, we can see this in the towers on the sides. The walls can cross a large part of the tower, as shown in the central tower. (Aesthetically it looks good and I think it would be quite functional for a civilization)


Mechanics for American civilizations.

Government House/Casa Rosada for Argentina.

Promote Immigration: Offer a bonus depending on which immigration you are promoting at that time. Immigration flows guarantee new cards that improve our army or give access to new units.

Promote immigration from Argentina.

Promote, Italians, French, Poles, Germans.

Italy.

Effect: economic buildings are 10% cheaper for each age up to 50%; The settlers collect 5% more from the mills, haciendas and plantations, up to 25%.

French.

Effect: cavalry gains 5% more life for each age up to 25%; cavalry shipments bring +2 extra units.

Poles.

Waiting for the DLC to come out.

Germans.

Effect: Light infantry are 5% stronger for each age up to 25%; Light infantry get -0.25 rate of fire.

2 Likes

Well, the Argentines had a lot of French immigration between 1870 and 1914, the third largest…first Italians, then Spanish and third, there yes, the French…

Yes, it works well for me…

Which fits into the game if you consider that the game ends between 1901 and 1922…

But William Walker was an American adventurer that’s why they put him in the game…

No le pertenecía a nadie…recién en los 1870s se empezó a poblar esos territorios…

Why not?..if all the revolutions, except the American and French, that occurred in the 18th century, occurred in the 19th century from Haiti (1804) to Romania (1878)…

Yes, although in defense of them, the Incas were already planned from TWC and the Tupi and Mapuches would be very similar to the Hauds and Lakotas respectively…

Yes, we are between native and post-colonial civs…Argentina, Brazil, Gran Colombia and Haiti are fundamental…Argentina and Gran Colombia for San Martin and Bolivar and Brazil and Haiti for being post-colonial American empires like Mexico…

Many Winged Hussars…

Entre 1857 y 1946, 261.020 franceses emigraron a ###################################################################################################​ De esta cifra, se estima que sólo 100.000 se radicaron de forma definitiva en el país. Me parece bastante poco comparado con los 3 millones de italianos y los 2 millones de españoles.

Los europeos comparten unidades y nadie dice nada, los pueblos originarios tiene unidades parecidas y todo el mundo pierde la cabeza. :crazy_face:

Eso no es una defensa, es una excusa. Si los desarrolladores quieren seguro que pueden crear mecánicas que los hagan sentir diferentes a los pueblos del norte.


Por ejemplo.
Viste la capacidad de convertir unidades normales a heroicas de los atlantes, porque no darle algo parecido a los mapuches, pero en lugar de unidades heroicas son unidades de pólvora.

Agregas un nuevo recurso, armas capturadas, este recurso lo podrían generar de varias maneras, matando unidades enemigas, desde los puestos comerciales y desde la embajada nativa luego de investigar el contrabando de armas.

La mejora industrial o Imperial de las unidades mapuches podría permitirte entrenarlos como unidades de pólvora directamente, pero estas mejoras costarían el nuevo recurso.

Los mapuches podrían tener cañones ligeros y artillería capturada, pero en lugar de costar oro costaría de este nuevo recurso.

Boom, nueva mecánica, nueva civilización y encima divertida de jugar, en especial para hacer un buen Rush a la base enemiga.

Claro, habría que verlo…

¿Como el Oeste de México, el Amazonas, el Esequibo y demás? :sweat_smile:

No quiero entrar en polémica, pero considero un argumento muy pobre el desconocer la propiedad de un territorio simplemente porque no está poblado. Podemos reflexionar sobre este punto recordando la historia de la colonización de Texas cuando era territorio mexicano.

Si nos trasladamos a la actualidad, encontramos muchas regiones en América que están muy despobladas. En mi opinión personal, me parece que algunas personas creen que la anexión oficial de un territorio (por parte de una nación) solo ocurre cuando “se ha acabado con los nativos”. Sin embargo, históricamente, muchas naciones han anexado territorios, incluso manteniendo a los nativos que lo habitan. Esto es evidente en el caso de los nativos amazónicos en la actualidad.

Personalmente diría que sí, precisamente como el Oeste de México, el Amazonas, Esequibo, etc.

Es una burrada decir que todos esos esos territorios eran parte íntegra del Virreinato cuando lo que había era territorios medio mal cartografiados algunos presidios y misiones perdidos por el mundo, más que nada abrazando la costa.

Esos nunca fueron realmente territorio realmente incorporados a la colonia.

Y no, esos territorios no estaban “desploblados”, había mucha población indígena en ella y en muchos casos (la Comanchería, o especialmente el Amazonas Ecuatoriano) no fueron colonizados por los españoles precisamente por la población que ya existía en esos territorios.

1 Like

En realidad nunca fueron colonia… porque no eran colonia, eran virreinatos :grin:

No quiero expandirme (por ahora) en el tema de los virreinatos, pero por el momento sólo mencionaré que es irracional (desde mis perspectiva) pensar que en la era de la colonización y descubrimentos hayan dejado sin delimitar grandes extensiones de territorios, especialmente los que delimitaban con el mar; y por supuesto hay que considerar los factores económicos involucrados. Si bien es cierto que la cartografía de esa época era muy poco precisa con respecto a la actual, si se podía delimitar territorios virreinales en zonas poco pobladas.

¿Dentro de qué definición un Virreinato no era sino un término administrativo para las colonias de la América española?

2 Likes