Cold Analysis:
These 3 elements do not fit with the Mapuches, but they may be artistic licenses to give balance to the game. I agree with you that they agree more with Apaches or Comaches.
The burning of European houses, it can be any Native American people, as in the case of the Mapuches, who in the rebellion of 1598 burned 7 cities, killing 3 000 people, or the Jíbara rebellion of 1599, where they razed 6 cities, killing 30 000 people.
The dominance of horses applies to almost all Native American peoples.
Climbing a mountain, it could be the mountains of California (Apache) or the mountains of the Andes (Mapuche).
Ehm …
American natives?
USA?
Mexico?
3 Likes
The Canoe thing is just like the Rawhide Covers Big Button that the Hauds get on their Docks.
2 Likes
So it could be an update from the Sioux and Iroquois, maybe “fixing” the changes they made in AoE 3 DE.
Although I would also like to see more Native American civilizations added, my favorites are the Jivaros and Apaches, although many other Native American civilizations fit the game as well.
At the moment I consider that America is well represented in AoE 3 and other continents (Africa, Europe, Middle East, Asia) and other historical events (Napoleonic wars) should be explored.
As a personal comment, I think the Mapuches fit into AoE 3 and although I see badly that Mapuche fans have popularized them on the internet with fictitious data, it must be admitted that his fans have spent a lot of time popularizing them and that effort should be rewarded in the game .
3 Likes
I hope these pictures are about not one but two native civs.
I sincerely hope the USA DLC will include 1-2 native North American civs. Council of Three Fires (Chippewa, Ottawa, and Potawatomi Indians) and one of them: Apache, Cree, Cherokee, Comanche.
If that were to happen, hopefully there will be a Brazilian DLC that would include South American civs natives like Mapuche and Tupi. For balance, they could also give a third South American civ e.g. Muisca (also called Chibcha).
3 Likes
I would rather get 1 well done Native civ, than 2 half-assed ones because the entire dev focus was the USA.
2 Likes
There could also be that possibility. So could it be 2 African civilizations and 2 Native American civilizations in the new DLC?
3 Likes
You’re actually right. But if one civ from North America is the Council of Three Fires - somehow it would be nice to have civ natives from the area of today’s Canada. Besides, I think such federations are the best to make civs of them.
I’m afraid of new civs. Looking at the US, I have the impression that the developers have lost their ideas and talent for making civs for AoE 3. We’ll see if the African civs are well made. May it be so.
USA civ in AoE 3 had to be weird and crapie anyway.
3 Likes
Certainly not Africa. Well, unless they give two civs as a free update? So that everyone can test how African Civs work and convince themselves of them. There is also such a possibility. Would have been nice.
Nah, bro. I actually WANT to pay for African civs, actually good content, not like the USA, which should be FLC, and bad at one at that.
I just meant to add two African civs for free to the game to get to know the mechanics of the African civs. If everyone could get to know it then the African DLC could become more popular. Some might be afraid to buy African DLCs without knowing how they work.
Is there a possibility that they indirectly add Native American civilizations through “Historic Battles”?
As happened with some African civilizations in AoE 3 DE
1 Like
I want more HBs, but I also want more proper civs more than HBs, so I hope it is a proper MP civ.
1 Like
It would be nice if they added new Historical Battles and presented in them, for example: Vienna Relief. Like now the Ethiopians in HB. We would get a European DLC at a later date.
Historical Battles can be a nice form of announcement for new DLCs 
3 Likes
That’s a bit broad. The French did their best to stay out of directly participating in the Beaver Wars and they did a good job of isolating the Iroquois. The only real exception was the Fox who were nearly wiped out by the French-Indian alliance during the Fox Wars but there was a lot of diplomatic pressure on the French to participate in that war.
The other major exception was the Natchez in Louisiana but it was largely the actions of a very corrupt powerbase in New Orleans which was fixed immediately afterwards by the Crown.
The French participated as Mercenaries, so as to not claim direct involvement. They provided Cavalry and Shapshooters to the Iroquois warfront, though their numbers were very low. So did the Dutch, though I am not sure if it was in the Fur Wars.
It used as the reason why the Hauds get Halberdier and Cuirassier shipments.
Indeed. The “Council of Three Fires”, the alliance between the Anishinaabe peoples of the Ottawa, Chippewa and Potawatomi nations was a major force in North America that is often overlooked but is being recognized more and more in modern academia. The Anishinaabe were able to drive the Iroquois to heel, removing them and their towns from above Lake Ontario after the latter had driven out the Huron. They also exerted power over the Sioux and British.
The Anishinaabe were pretty much the Venetians or Dutch of North America. They controlled the Great Lakes region and the fur trade always ran through their capital at Michiclimakinac making them fabulously rich and powerful. They were known for being far better at building canoes than the Iroquois and many other woodland Indians and they once won a naval battle with canoes against British warships.
Further, besides playing an integral roles through the entirety of the Beaver Wars and Intercolonial Wars, they were also a major force in both Pontiac’s Rebellion, which forced the British to enact the Royal Proclamation of 1763 (which was a key factor of the American Revolution) and the Northwest Indian War. Pontiac himself was an Ottawa.
Needless to say I’m one of the few who voted for them on the poll.
6 Likes
I voted for them, and for Mapuche and Tupi.
Of course, South America is underrepresented (before the Incas, there was no civ from there at all). Two civs would be cool. The third could be Muisca (also called Chibcha).
North America is well represented. One civ is enough there. Council of Three Fires would be the most interesting civ, apart from that the only “Canadian” one. Of course, 1-2 others for North America would also be cool.
4 civs from South America, 4-5 civs from North America and 1-2 civs from Central America (Mayans too?).
3 Likes
Well, South America is generally represented by the Incas and that is because it was the largest empire and probably the most advanced in all of pre-Columbian America. In just over 100 years, the Incas managed to defeat all the kingdoms and peoples they faced (well, except for the Jíbaros, but that’s probably because they used the Amazon jungle to their advantage).
Personally, I would love for the Jíbaros to be a playable civilization because they have had worldwide influence in various media, such in the Blizzard games (which are also part of my childhood and adolescence) and I learned about the history of the peoples Amazonians when I worked a season in the Amazon rainforest and many of those stories are worthy of legends.
Another interesting South American civilization is the Guaraní who supposedly stopped the Chanka expansion (before the Chanka-Inca war) and tried to invade the Tawantisuyo on more than one occasion.
The Muiscas/Chibchas would be an interesting civilization, they could appear as a allied civilization in the battle of Cartagena de las Indias
Edit:
It would also be interesting to explore the concept of miscegenation in America, and concepts such as “the colonial Inca nobility”
5 Likes
I dislike the given options. I’d rather see the Inuit, the Haida, and the Kiowa as a North American expansion.
1 Like
