Tu idea es muy buena, por un lado se podría representar a varios países de Latinoamérica y por el otro podría darles a los desarrolladores libertad para hacer cambios en la civilización inca. 
2 Likes
Of course, and although it is true that the history of the Incas is directly related to the history of the current countries of Spain, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia, Chile, Argentina, Paraguay and possibly Portugal, Venezuela, Panama and Brazil; The truth is that tribal civilizations such as the Guarani, Tupi, Mapuche, Arawak among others, is related to the particular history of some countries. Can we from this humble forum bring representatives from each country together and discuss which tribal Native American civilization should be placed in the game (in a polite manner and temporarily omitting nationalist passions)? I consider it unlikely 
Considero el más evidente al Bolas Warrior ya que era un arma muy popular en el Collasuyo, otra unidad sería el icónico Huaraca, incluso escuché de unos chilenos que usan la frase “dar huaraca” que es el equivalente parecido a “te gané con mucha facilidad y de manera contundente” 
En efecto; la historia de los Incas, así como de todos los virreinatos, están entrelazados con los países actuales hispanos de sudamérica. Y esa es la razón por la que tomé este punto de vista “inclusivo” en donde trato de analizar la superposición de las historias que tenemos en común lo países actuales (cosa difícil, hay que admitir). Desafortunadamente en la actualidad y como se ve en muchas redes sociales los sudamericanos utilizamos la historia como un argumento para “odiarnos”, y es por eso que me opongo a algunas civilizaciones: si van a diseñar una civilización sólo para mantener una historia de odio reviviendo conflictos antiguos, entonces no considero a esa civilización viable para enriquecer AoE 3: la historia se estudia para aprender de los errores y tomar mejores decisiones, la histora no debe ser aprendida para odiar a los demás (hablaría de más cosas aquí pero de seguro algunos temas podrían ser considerados “polémicos”).
La historia de los Virreinatos de sudamérica es algo que une a los países actuales, incluso también se me había ocurrido la idea de usar a los Virreinatos para poder formar a los “países actuales” sudamericanos:
Del Virreinato del Perú: saldrían Ecuador, Bolivia, Perú y Chile.
Del Virreinato de la Plata: saldrían Bolivia, Argentina, Chile, Uruguay y Paraguay
Del Virreinato de Nueva Granada: saldrían Colombia, Venezuela, Ecuador y Panamá.
La bandera final se definiría recién en la edad 4 o 5
También con el agregado de la opción de elegir el “camino del emperador Inca”
Evidentemente esto lo veo poco probable, y es debido a que muchos ciudadanos de muchos de estos países no aceptaran ser representados por un “virreinato que no me representa” y querrán tener su bandera desde la edad 1, y están en su derecho.
FE DE ERRATAS
El término “Apo” para la cultura Inca significaba algo parecido a “espiritus de la montaña”, sin embargo “Apo” para muchas de las culturas amazónicas (especialmente de idioma jíbaro) equivale a “líder” como es el caso de “Lonko” para los Mapuches. Un nombre más apropiado para esta unidad es “Liawar” que equivale a “Noble” en Quechua.
Para completar dejo esta imágen
Es un dibujo (sobreviviente) de la rebelión de Tupac Amaru, desafortunadamente no sé si en esa imágen están representados el ejercito de Mateo Pumacahua (por la bandera que tiene el simbolo de la cruz de borgoña española) o del ejército de Túpac Amaru II (por la bandera roja de la izquierda que podría ser la Bandera de Túpac Amaru II), de igual manera se ve la combinación de soldados “occidentales” con escaramuzadores armados con hondas (huaracas).
Ah, por cierto esta es la Unancha Imperial del Inca Rey
(como pueden ver tiene símbolos tradicionales andinos como los Amarus y símbolos hispanos como la Cruz de Santiago)
También me olvíde de agregar que podría existir una “Revolución” Inca en base a la leyende del Inkarri en donde supuestamente el Imperio Inca volvera a alzarse a la gloria mundial una vez más.
2 Likes
Would like to see “La Gran Colombia” as a playable civ in the near future!
And Historical Battles about the Independence Wars with Liberators like San Martin!
Greetings from Quito, Ecuador by the way!
3 Likes
I write this idea of civilization (in English just in case) based on the following reasons:
- I believe that all South American countries deserve inclusion.
- I regard this idea as the most “historically accurate”.
- As I perceive, the AoE 3 division does not have as many resources as the other divisions of the AoE Saga do; so this idea will optimize resources and will be able to reach as many countries as possible, making its profitability more likely (as opposed to taking out a civilization for each current country, probably unlike Mexico and Brazil, the main interested parties in buying a DLC that include their countries will be the inhabitants of that country).
- The AoE saga should not bear the differences, rivalries and problems that South American countries may have.
I hold these truths to be self-evident:
- The USA, Mexico and Brazil are huge markets and sufficiently particular to justify their own civilizations (plus most have been called Empires at some point in their history).
- In America there were 4 Viceroyalties (New Spain, New Granada, Peru and Río de la Plata), there were also 7 General Captaincies that were attached to a viceroyalty (General Captaincy of Cuba, General Captaincy of Guatemala, General Captaincy of Puerto Rico, General Captaincy of Chile, General Captaincy of Venezuela, General Captaincy of Yucatan and General Captaincy of Santo Domingo).
- Due to the type of “regionalization” of the current AoE 3 civilizations it is preferable to have at least 3 civilizations that have the same gameplay: USA, Mexico and Brazil should have a similar gameplay. So I propose 3 American civilizations that have the same particular gameplay: Viceroyalty of New Granada, Viceroyalty of Peru and Viceroyalty of the Río de la Plata.
So here is my suggestion from Civilization:
cough cough, I mean the post-division of viceroyalties:
Because I don’t want to overdo it again explaining the “Lore” I go directly to the concept of civilization and gameplay:
CONCEPT OF CIVILIZATION:
For this I must mention that it will be similar to the type of European game: in addition to being colonized and Hispanicized civilizations, Latin Americans also have a lot of European blood: For example, the current Republic of Peru has 33.72 million inhabitants, of whom according to The CIA World Factbook 60.2% is Mestizo (20.30 million) and 5.9% is European (1.99 million), giving a total of 22.29 million Euro-descendants. It should be clarified that some countries like Chile group Europeans and Mestizos as a single block: “White and non-Indigenous” (88.9% of 19.49 million inhabitants = 17.33 million Euro-descendants). Also make the clarification that the term “Amerindian” refers to all the original American ethnic groups (Quechua, Ayamara, Ashanika, Jíbaro, etc.) and there are countries like Peru that has 25.8% (8.70 million) of “Amerindian” inhabitants without mestizaje that are generally populations that had complete autonomy or directly no connection with the viceroyalty (we will delve into this later).
AGE ADVANCE:
(I) Exploration Age: It will be the period in which the main cities were founded by the European Colonists.
(II) Commerce Age: Settlement and formalization of cities, the expansion process begins (make effective the colonization of claimed territories)
(III) Fortress Age: Strengthening of the main cities.
(IV) Industrial era: Here is the turning point, here “your colony” must break away from the viceroyalty and choose which nascent nation you should belong to.
(V) Imperial Era: First (and only) decision you must make as a sovereign country.
AGE ADVANCEMENT SYSTEM:
-To advance to ages II and III it will be a simple choice between 2 options, but attention: the alternative that you do not take for Age II will be the only one that you take for Age III.
I want to advance to age II, these are my 2 options: 1) Choose the Inca influence (economic improvements), 2) Choose the Hispanic influence (military improvements).
- I choose option 1 (Inca influence).
- The game progresses and now I want to advance to age II: I only have the Hispanic Influence option, but now I receive more benefits from this choice.
To advance to Age IV will be the breaking point, you will have to choose between the following countries: Ecuador, Peru, Bolivia and Chile.
For this it is necessary to inform that before starting the game your deck only has 15 cards (which will serve mainly for ages 1, 2 and 3). When advancing to age IV, and after choosing a nation, 5 more cards will be added to the deck (it goes without saying that the Nation and Metropolis flag will change).
By choosing a Nation, in addition to having 5 additional cards, you have exclusive improvements:
PERU: the Hussar is upgraded to “Húsar de Junín”, the Musketeer is upgraded to “Legión Peruana”. These units have their own “Skin”.
CHILE: the Hussar is upgraded to “Húsar de la Muerte”, the Musketeer is upgraded to “Batallón Cívico”. These units have their own “Skin”.
ECUADOR: The Hussar is now upgraded to “Granadero de Tarqui” (every so often he can throw a grenade). the Musketeer is upgraded to “Protector de Quito”. These units have their own “Skin”.
BOLIVIA: The Hussar is now upgraded to “Coracero de Bolivia”, the Musketeer is upgraded to “Colorados”. These units have their own “Skin”.
Here game mechanics could be implemented to make these civilizations even more particular:
- The explorer owns his own Skin.
- The scout possesses his own “special ability”.
- “Unique military unit upgrades” may be immediate and free (and advancing in age may be more expensive for balance reasons).
- Etc. (if anyone has any other ideas, feel free to state them)
Units with “particular improvement” will have their own Skin in their upgrade to “Imperial” (which in this case would be “Presidential”) that will conform to the military uniforms of these countries in the mid-nineteenth century (AoE 3 concludes in 1850, with obvious exceptions of the events that occurred in the Battle of the Little Bighorn (1876) and the Rebellion of the Sepoys (1857)), although I consider that in exceptional cases they could use the uniforms used by the armies of the War of the Triple Alliance (1864 -1870) which was the deadliest battle in South America in the 19th century and would make this reference the most “modern” date that AoE 3 could refer to (if you think it’s worth extending the date a little more, ok).
To advance to Age V:
You have to take one of the fundamental decisions that will mark the bases and the future of your nation, this decision will give you 5 new cards and other particular bonuses (as well as possible improvements).
Example:
Peru:
- Peruvian Civil War of 1856–1858: it was probably the deadliest war in Peru throughout the 19th century, you must choose between 2 sides: Liberals or Conservatives, the leaders Ramón Castilla and Manuel Ignacio de Vivanco participated.
- You could also choose the option “The Inca Plan”.
Regarding the rest of the countries, I am not going to get involved since I do not want to make a “false step” that could offend any citizen of those countries.
Some system of “revolution” could also be implemented, but I admit that I do not consider it convenient (since they are countries born of a revolution).
Possible difficulties for this possible DLC:
- Although 3 new “civilizations” would be added, it would actually add 10 nations, each with their own skins for particular soldiers and also add 10 cards for each nation. It’s hard work… will it be worth it?
- Probably some citizens of these countries do not like the idea of being represented by their original viceroyalty.
Possible benefits for this possible DLC:
- It could be added to a large number of countries and make them unique and particular enough.
- It is a simplified way of adding a large number of nations.
- It could greatly expand the target market with just one DLC.
- Players from other countries would find it much more attractive to have a civilization that breaks down into 4-5 countries, this would be much more attractive than buying a DLC with one or only two countries (whose main target market would be the inhabitants of that country).
- “Traditional” civilizations like Spain could have other revolutionary countries outside of America, thus being able to add more countries.
- Much more material for “content creators”.
Possible improvements for this DLC:
Native Americans: each country would have access to its own Native Americans, but for this, Native American minor civilizations would have to be implemented (Aymara, Guaraní, Arawak, Tehuelche, Muiscas, etc.), many of these minor civilizations could be shared by these countries : Quechua could be shared by Ecuador, Peru and Bolivia; but Peru would also have the Arawak and Bolivia would have the Aymara. Obviously this will also increase the work, but the DLC could take advantage of these new Native Americans to create and populate more maps. Will be worth?
Final reflection:
I know this is unlikely, but I liked creating this idea. I know it will be impossible to create so much material for a single DLC. I’ve come up with everything to make it “profitable”, I know it’s unfeasible to keep building such asymmetrical civs in AoE3 (which already has 22 civs) for profit, balance and target audience reasons.
As a personal experience, when I activated the “revolution” of Germany almost 15 years ago and saw my flag I was so excited that I literally jumped with excitement in the internet cafe, I didn’t even think about such essential questions as: Is my country in the Revolution? of German civilization? Why? The process of immigration to my country from Germany only began in 1857
It was unforgettable to see my country represented in AoE 3, and as I said before: every human being has the right to love his homeland. There are currently some Latin American countries represented in AoE 3, and I would like to think that this Serie (AoE) could do something, within its possibilities, to honor its fans throughout South America.
P.S:
For those who wonder: why are there so many mestizos in Latin America? The reason is that Queen Isabella I of Castile in 1503 legalized “mixed” marriages between Europeans and Native Americans (considering them free people), in countries like the USA these marriages were not legal until 500 years later.
PS 2:
The “Morochuco” is recognized for its courage in combat, geographically they inhabit the regions that were ruled by the Inca nobility during the viceroyalty times (just like the cowboy “Q o r i l a z o”), a more suitable cowboy for the Peruvian nation would be the “C h a l á n”.
Edit: malditas palabras censuradas 
3 Likes
Yes obvious…North America has them (Mexico, USA and Canada)…the logical thing is that Latin America/South America has them too…Carabobo (1821) for Gran Colombia, Ragamuffin War (1835) for Brazil and Vuelta de Obligado (1845) for Argentina…
Claro,no lo habría dicho mejor…
De hecho originalmente para TWC tenían pensado dividir las civs en civs Nativo Americanas (las de Norteamérica) (Lakotas y Hauds) y Meso civs (Aztecas e Incas),pero como nos les dió tiempo de meter a los incas pues quedó así…imagínate que ni los aztecas tuvieron campaña (aunque se desconoce sí la tenían planeada desde un principio)…
1 Like
el problema es uno historico ya que chile se independizo antes que peru incluso financio la expedión libertadora del peru, e incluso envio a la escuadra a mexico en 1821 xd
1 Like
Supongo que por eso estará Perú también como avance de edad del Virreinato.
Por otro lado, siento que no siendo tan distinto de los europeos en aquella época, quizás no sea necesario tener avances de edad tan rebuscados y quedarnos o bien, con los estados federales o con los políticos. No sabría si aplicar estados federales a países no federales, en todo caso.
En la misma línea, alguien dijo una vez por acá que poner naciones latinoamericanas es como hacer un split de España, equivalente a un split de Alemania
2 Likes
Supongo que no les resultó conveniente hacer un DLC para el año 2006 y un DLC para el año 2007
La capitanía de Chile estuvo adscrita al virreinato del Perú durante la mayor parte del periodo de tiempo de AoE 3, de la misma manera que la Capitanía de Cuba al Virreinato de Nueva España 
Exacto, de la misma forma que Argentina estaría disponible en el “avance de edad” del Virreinato del Río de la Plata; también Colombia y Venezuela estarían disponibles en el “Avance de edad” del virreinato de Nueva granada. Para estos casos no considero factible considerar a la Gran Colombia y Provincias Unidas del Río de la Plata porque sólo duraron 10 y 20 años respectivamente, si alguien tiene una idea de cómo complementar estas naciones sin complicar la mecánica de estas hipotéticas civilizaciones, bienvenidos sean.
También está el detalle que Ecuador y Bolivia pueden “nacer” de los virreinatos del Perú o del Río de la Plata… también consideré a Chile para que pueda “nacer” del virreinato de la Plata, pero pensandolo bien estaría bien sólo como parte del Virreinato del Perú para que cada uno de estos 3 virreinatos tengan por lo menos 2 “Naciones exclusivas”.
this has more to do with south Americas native population being much bigger than north America and that north America grew mostly to immigration in the 1800s esp.
When the 13 colonies broke away from the UK they had just 2 million people, by 1900 the US had 76 million, the majority of that growth came from European immigrants. By comparison most European nations would increase between 2.5 and 5 times in that period and Brazil would go from 3.3 million in 1800 to 17 million in 1900.
When Spain started colonizing the Americas it had a population of just 6-8 million people, it was not a major European power, Spanish colonisation was reliant on the natives to cooperate and that is why so much of south America has native roots, there simply weren’t the Spaniards in the world to replace them.
Spain also certainly did not treat the natives as equals.
I got to say i really do not think that is true. the USA IS probably big enough to support the DLC they got themselves, but Mexico as far as what i can read online did not do particularly amazing. my assumption is that the south american community makes up around 10-15% of the playerbase, economically they are likely only about 5%. Meanwhile Europe is like 50% of the playerbase and even more of the economic base. in order for south American nations to make sense economically they have to sell quiet well outside of south America.
I really doubt the international market can bear 5 different spanish speaking nations, as far as we know mexico certainly didnt perform well, and it likely had the best chance to do so.
3 Likes
And you know this how, exactly?
i don’t truly, i just base it off what i see when i read forums etc. its a pretty common sentiment that it didnt do as well as they hoped.
im not privy to anything you guys aren’t.
de hecho sur america tenia casi el mismo numero de nativos que norteamerica
4 Likes
Menuda publicación te sacaste!
Me gusta mucho, muy buenas ideas aqui!
Gran trabajo!
1 Like
So, you didn’t brother to check steamdb before making that statement?
I already checked BTW. USA DLC has more sales than México and African Royals, but neither compares with the amount of sales of the base game.
Also, KotM has a similar amount of sales with the México DLC. If anything, the US is an anomaly and KotM was not a good investment, even though it has good reviews
It’s curious because USA has the worst reviews compares with the rest. Not saying they are bad reviews, though. It’s just that they aren’t that good (USA was review bombed, as the post below comments).
Edit:
African Royals sales (2 civs)
Mexico sales (1 civ)
US sales (1 civ)
KotM sales (2 civs)
Mexico DLC has the least sales, but given that’s it’s only one civ, it’s comparable with African Royals or even better. KotM has the least sales per civ. The US DLC has the most sales per civ. I would guess that the best investment with the info we have now would be more North American native civs. A market study on Iran, southeast Asia and Korea would be a good idea, I suppose. I presume they would be the most willing to buy a DLC of their countries.
1 Like
The USA DLC was review bombed a couple of months back after people lost access to it because of a steam update. Before then, it was the highest-rated DLC.
1 Like
I’ll edit my post accordingly
Sí,mucho trabajo…quizás si hubieran podido retrasar TAD para 2008 podrían haber lanzado 4 civs en TWC y Persia con TAD…
1 Like
For Argentina I think the Battle of Punta Quebracho would make more sense. It was a major battle from the same war as Vuelta de Obligado and took place a year later, and Argentina actually won it unlike Vuelta de Obligado which whas a Pyrrhic victory for the Europeans.
that number is an estimate, and frankly looking at the numbers im really doubtful.
people are MUCH less likely to review a DLC than a game yet it gives the same multiplier as it does for game sales to reivews. which you can see here: https://steamdb.info/app/933110/charts/
also all those DLC numbers would be unviable for the game, it takes likely 100s of thousands of dollars to make each DLC. with 30k sales assuming 3 euros per sale they couldn’t make them.
i think the methodology they use, and you by extension, is about as accurate as going on to youtube and assuming every view on a video=1 sale of that DLC. if you want a reasonably good minimum id go and look at achievements:
“influencer” here has 5.5% of people getting the achievement, which means assuming 1 million owners about 50-60 thousand people brought it, with a slightly more optimistic 1.5 million owners we get about 80-100k DLC owners. regardless, clearly the number you found is at least 3-4 times less than it should be. its also obviously possible people simply didn’t get the achievements but owns the DLC.
the highest Mexico achievement is about 4.5% so about 45-70k owners.
1 Like
The numbers I used are wrong, then. However, if you use Inluencer as a proxi for AR and compare them with KotM and México, it still means that per civ, México DLC has given more money to Microsoft than AR or KotM.
Anyway, people at FE are the ones who know about market studies and their target audience