My Thoughts on the Americans

Age of Empires III: DE III - Discussion
1

I am one of the people that think that the addition of US civilization was a major success and a very positive addition to this game. When I first heard they were being released I thought it was just going to be a lazy cash grab utilizing recycled models, animations, voice overs, technologies, and concepts from the campaign or scenario editor, but upon seeing them for the first time during the fan preview and playing them myself, I have to admit I was VERY wrong, and they are now my favorite civ. The devs did AMAZING work here.

Given what I have been reading here and on Reddit, a lot of people don’t agree with this sentiment, but I think we can all come to a compromise. Personally, I think that the main issue with the addition of the US is in the name itself. Most civilizations are named after their common demonyms (i.e.- British, Spanish, Russian) as opposed to the official name of their nation state (i.e.- British Empire, Spanish Empire, Russian Empire, etc.) The US should be renamed “Americans” to keep in accordance with this trend. And speaking of which, with this logic in mind, the Ottomans should also be renamed the Turks.

Now, as for the timeline issue, I do have to admit that the Americans as a civilization came significantly later than the game’s other civilizations, but they are so historically and culturally relevant (esp. during this time period) that not including them could be seen as a waste of potential for this game. The War of 1812, the Revolutionary War, the Mexican-American War, etc. all took place during the time period of AOEIII so just pretending the US doesn’t exist is a bit awkward. Plus, the civilization is designed extremely well (actually too well because the other civilizations are now comparatively boring). Admittedly as well, I do find it awkward that the US is both a revolutionary and a major civ in this game now.

The final thing I will say is that yes, I would have preferred if the devs had first focused on other civs that people wanted (Italian, Poles, Persians, etc.), but right now I am very happy with what we got. I think we just need to accept this new civ (the other age titles have their own controversial additions, although perhaps the devs should really be looking into renaming them so they aren’t named after their nation state.

3 Likes
2

Why should Ottomans be renamed Turks?

3

Turks are the people, Ottoman is the name of the nation state/ruling family.

4

image

1 Like
5

Let’s not derail the original intent of my thread. Ottomans are the nation state. The people have been called Turks since the middle ages. It would be like calling the Germans in the game, Prussians.

6

No its not the same? Prussians are one ethnic group inside the HRE, if you can even consider them to be seperate enough from other German groups. That would be the same as naming the Ottomans Turks, as Turks is one of the groups which were inside the Ottoman empire. You have Arabs, Egyptians, Syrians, Greeks, Bulgarians, Hungarians, Serbs, Berbers to name a few, just naming them Turks would not sufice.

Also there is no way to make the US called Americans, as Americans are also from Brazil, or Argentinia, or Guatamala. There is not a single American ethnicity.

11 Likes
7

I never agreed with the US launch, but I must say that if they had launched another civ like the Italian one, it would not have as interesting a playability as the US has, although it should not be there, the US gave a good positive spin to the development of the I play with that gameplay,

3 Likes
8

My point is, the game does not use the names of nations for its civilizations. Prussia is the name of the nation. German is the catch-all term for the people. Ottoman is the name of the nation, Turk is the name for the people.

Indians, Canadians, Grenadians, etc. were all a part of the British Empire, but yet we still use the term “British” to denote the civilization in game. The Spanish Empire contained Maya, Aztec, and Inca people yet in game the civilization is called “the Spanish.” Even in Spain itself there were other civilizations such as the Moors. Yes the Ottoman Empire ruled over many other civilizations, but the ruling people within the empire were the Turks.

And in the English language when someone uses the word “American” everyone knows they are only referring to the citizens of the US.

1 Like
9

It does, the only exceptions are Germans (Austrians and Prussians smashed into one) and Indians (Mughals).
Every other civ in the game, is named after a nation, such as British instead of English, Russian instead of Slav, Chinese instead of Qing…

Most cards inthe Germans civ would disagree, since it has way more references to Austria than Prussia.

10

The name of the civs are not named after nations they are named after the people. British is not a nation lol. I would assume they did this so that they didn’t have to worry so much about specific timelines and maybe to avoid historical sensitivities. For example, the Russian Empire didn’t exist in the Age of Discovery, but Russian civilization did. So they used the word “Russians” instead of the specific term “Russian Empire.”

The leader of the civilization is Fredrick the Great. The original flag was that of Prussia. They meant for the civilization to represent Prussia it’s quite obvious. They changed the flag probably because they wanted to better represent the German people as a whole as opposed to one specific nation state out of many German speaking nations.

11

Yes, it is.
Great Britain is a nation composed of English, Scottish and Welsh peoples. It is not a people group, it is 3, so it is a composite nation.
Even Haudenosawnee are a composite nations of different tribes (6 Nations).

Most of the units are from the 30 Years War HRE, in wich Prussia was only a duchy, and almost did nothing in (not Imperial Prussia in any way), most cards are from the Habsburg domain timeframe (Lizzipanner Cavalry, Treaty of Westphalia, Spanish Riding School…).

Germans have always been a weird civ, but they ARE NOT the Prussians at all, since they have no Musketeer or Grenadier, and no Death’s Head Hussar, which were the main units of the Prussian army.

5 Likes
12

Prussia is not the name of the nation, that would be the Holy Roman empire. The people (mainly) were Germans and thats what the civ is (mainly) based on.

The main difference between Ottomans and the European nations, is that the European nations are in the game as colonizers, yes Mexica people were in the Spanish empire, but the colonizing wasnt done by the Mexica. In conquest the Ottomans would be from multiple etnicities, Janissaries werent Turkish, they were mainly from the Balkan.

2 Likes
13

So are the Ottomans, you are just missing teh European, African and Middle Eastern maps of the lands they colonized.

1 Like
14

American is wrong. Americans are people from every country of America, not only USA.
That a word is used for one purpouse doesnt means that is correct. USA didnt give its name to the continent and they werent the first americans neither, they stole the demonym

8 Likes
15

British is not a nation, British is the title of a people. The UK is the title of the nation. If the original devs had wanted to refer to the nation specifically, they would have used the exact word for the nation. As I said before, using the terms for the people is more open ended than using the specific names of the nations. While yes, the term “British” nowadays usually refers to people from the nation of the UK, it can also be used as a catch-all term for the people inhabiting Great Britain even before the nation was formed. British civilization did not start when the Kingdoms of England and Scotland/Wales were unified.

I don’t want to discuss the Haudenosaunee because I don’t know anything about them but if changes need to be made, so be it.

And come on man the cards don’t matter when the flag and leader were Prussian. Yes there are Austrian, Hussite, etc. influences but it doesn’t take precedence over their flag and leader. This further shows however that it is a good idea to make the names of the civs the people as opposed to the nation state.

In response to Touchier, Janissaries were slaves not the ruling class. They might have been the ones with the guns and doing things, but they weren’t the ones in charge. When we talk about the conquest of the Aztecs we learn that the former Aztec Empire was absorbed into the Spanish Empire, even though the bulk of the forces that conquered the Aztecs weren’t even Spanish but were actually Tlaxcalan!

16

Okay well you can be the only person saying United Statesians and everyone else will say American. You can’t “steal” a word that’s ridiculous.

1 Like
17

The United States has achieved great success and can no longer be ignored. It is time for the Americans to join the big family of AOE2 HAHA

3 Likes
18

As a South American, I would feel deeply insulted and denigrated if they came to rename the US as “America”, it is already insulting to want to translate the word “Estadounidense” and for all translators to translate it to me as “American”. I do not like that country and it has a cruel and very dark curriculum with the other countries of the continent, and it is not something that only I think, almost all the habitants of the continent think it!
I would not understand either, because the determination wishes of the Native Americans (such as Haud and Lakota) have a voice and vote (which I do not see wrong) but those of us who live under the Bravo river do not …

Como sudamericano, me sentiría profundamente insultado y denigrado si llegaran a renombrar a EEUU como " America", ya es denigrante querer traducir la palabra “Estadounidense” y que en todo los traductores me lo traduzca como “Americano”. No me agrada ese pais y tiene una cruel y muy oscuro curriculum con los demás paises del continente, y no es algo que solo piense yo, lo pensamos casi todos los habitantes del continente!
No entendería tampoco, por qué los deseos de determinación de los Nativos americanos (como Haud y Lakota) tienen voz y voto (lo cual no veo mal) pero los que vivimos debajo del río Bravo no…

4 Likes
19

The Civilization series uses the term “Americans” for the US and it’s fine. My whole life it seems the only people that don’t like the term “American” are Spanish speakers.

La serie de Civilizacion usa el termino “los Americanos” para notar a EEUU y esta bien. Por mi vida entera parece que la gente sola que no le gusta la palabra “Americano” son los hablantes espanoles.

1 Like
20

My friend, with all due respect, it is the same case that happened with the Haudenosaunee, they are called that and the word “Iroquois” does not like them for cultural, historical and other reasons, and that is why it was changed (a successful change), for What do they have to call the inhabitants of the US the American name? Why? If the word American is for those of us who live in America, both the man who was born in the farthest corner of Alaska and the man who was born in the southernmost area of ​​Tierra del Fuego, explain to me why that word has to be exclusive to them. ? If clearly the civilization embodied in the game does not have any kind of representation with the rest of the countries of the continent?

Amigo, con todo el respeto, es el mismo caso que paso con los Haudenosaunee, ellos se llaman así y la palabra “Iroques” no les agrada por motivos culturales, históricos y demás, y por eso se cambio (un cambio acertado), por qué tienen que ponerle a los habitantes de US el nombre de Americanos? Por qué? Si la palabra Americano es para los que vivimos en América, tanto el hombre que nació en el rincón mas lejano de Alaska como el hombre que nacio es la zona mas austral de Tierra del Fuego, explícame por qué esa palabra tiene que ser exclusiva para ellos? Si claramente la civilización plasmada en el juego no tiene ninguna clase de representación con el resto de los paises del continente?

6 Likes