The only thing that bothers me about this is that it generates visual field. The flag should only activate while you have troops near it.
Are they any worse than Warchief auras, Tribal Marketplaces and Community Plazas? I would risk to say that both the Tribal Markets and Community Plazas are far more annoying mechanics than the Flags, tbh.
Also, from a business standpoint, Brazilians would be a money maker. The most popular mod for AoE3 was Wars of Liberty, and the first civ that they added was Brazilians. Besides, you don’t need as many assets for the civ, in comparisson to a NA or African civ.
Honestly, I no longer care much for the “but the timeline” argument, ever since the devs released the Mexicans, which is probably the most fun civ concept I’ve ever played. Maybe they’ll add South American NAs down the line in a dedicated “big DLC”, but for a single civ DLC, I don’t think it’s a good idea.
1 Like
You can kill a War Chief or Missionary to stop the aura but you can’t kill a flag.
The amount of things flags can do is also ridiculous. Buffing units, reducing training time, massively increasing the effective radius with cards, etc. And it’s kind of a joke that this is a feature of a Mexican flag that’s not even accurate.
If it was restricted in some way such as garrisoning your General in a Fort to hoist a flag that turbocharges the Fort and surrounding units that would be much better.
3 Likes
Mod that is set in the industrial revolution and later. I think until the first world war. AOE-3 is set from the discovery of America, until the mid to late 19th century.
4 Likes
As I said before, they are considerably worse because you can’t kill the source of the aura.
I’d rather have nothing than civ bloat because of low quality recycled content. The recycled crap like Depots and Commanderies is part of what makes Malta hands down the worst civ in the game.
2 Likes
I would say until the 1870s, judging by the most modern technologies available (Gatling Guns and Ironclads), right after the American Civil War. Maybe up to the Franco-Prussian War. Although we have a campaign mission in 1890, but 1870 still makes more sense. It also when Germany and Italy unified
1 Like
The flag can be captured and the opponent loses it until they get it back or time passes.
It’s a mechanic created just because it’s fun and helps balance certain shortcomings of civilization, if you don’t like it that’s fine, but to say that it’s horrible is just an exaggeration.
It seems like a bad idea to me, that would only make it more annoying to use it and to be honest most of the time it is used offensively, I see no reason to nerf it.
1 Like
You need to take down every unit and building there (a nightmare on treaty or chokepoints) while it gives too much benefits. We had to nerf tepees, missionaries and plaza but hey now we add a flag that boost everithing from a safe place. Just ridicoulous.
You cant neither kill the explorer as he can be in base LOL
PD: USA can spam buildings with wagons and infantry. While MX has tanky units too. A meme
2 Likes
I 51.3% agree with you. You mention ironclads and Gatling’s, and I’ll add an even later event, because we have a Boxer Rebellion card, BUT most gunpowders use muskeets. I would argue that the effective end of the timeline is the US civil war, then (Do it again, uncle Billy!)
1 Like
The game portrays the European colonization of the Americas, between approximately 1492 and 1876 AD.
Source: Wikipedia. But of course, this is not an exact range. I would say the game extends back to 1880 - 85.
Note: The article talks about the base game without expansions (AOE-3 2005). That’s why it says that it portrays colonization, but now we know that the game is very different.
I was referring to the offensive level, if we talk defensively, I think we should take it as a card that stacks effects, but it is temporary, it has an area of effect, it needs to be activated and it has a recharge time, in exchange for all those disadvantages it is instant and does not require shipping.
PS: I don’t think it’s broken, but we may need to adjust the effects that the flag can stack, but it doesn’t take away from the fact that it’s a solid mechanic.
1 Like
They acquired firearms, right?
I don’t know if Mapuches too.
They were organized under Jesuit leadership so they would have had access to some firearms. They even made some wooden cannons.
Mapuches were fighting Chile and Argentina into the mid-1880s so they would have had some guns by then.
3 Likes
1876 is based of the lakota campaign in war cheifs, the original 2005 game was by the devs own admission meant to be 1500s to 1850s.
1 Like
I understand that the Mapuches gained gunpowder weapons thanks to the conflicts with the Spanish. I think that one of the most famous characters would be Leftraru, who organized the Mapuches and led them in various battles.
The game stopped focusing on colonization when they added the Asian civilizations, after that the game was abandoned until Microsoft decided to revive the saga.
To avoid straying from the topic.
In SteamDB the movement seems to continue, there is still the possibility that they add some civilization, since there is a pattern of behavior, I think that the developers will add Brazil, it is the most logical thing given that they are the first Latin American economy and have a large player base.
It would also be fun to have more civilizations from South America, especially since it is very outdated with content, it would be nice if at least update maps with content that has already been added, such as maritime trade routes, although adding more flora, fauna and minor civilizations would be well received.
Honestly, I hope that this month we have at least some information, I like to think that we still have a long way to go before the game feels complete. 
Yes, it could be… I miss the Republic of Nassau from when I played AC4 back in January 2014 (actually I finished Unity about a month ago and started Syndicate on Saturday with the coronation of Carlos III)…
Yes, it could be too…
Omani closes me more for having a 19th century empire (Persia would be more of a 16th-18th century empire)…
No, because the industrial revolution started in 1760, that’s why the revolutions are from the industrial age (with the exception of Mexico for obvious reasons)…
No, if you say about the battle of little bighorn/greasy grass in the lakota campaign, it happens in 1876, not in 1890…
And the Finnish revolution in 1917…
No, it’s in the Black Hills War (1876-1877) (although obviously the timeline goes back to before World War I)
It is that before the expansions it would be 1492-1815/1850… with the expansions the timeline extends to 1421 (Chinese campaign) and 1876 (Lakota campaign)…
Of course…
Oman certainly peaked in the early 19th Century, but it had already been consolidating for centuries. Anyway, it’s still firmly in the aoe3 time frame without needing to stretch it.
Oman is also an interesting case, being one of the few non-European powers that managed to spread its influence over long distances and to other continents. It would also have a mixture of Arab and African units, which would also make it unique.
I think it is among the best candidates for a new civ.
I played them many years ago for the last time, so my memory is a bit fuzzy. I thought there was a scenario in Wounded Knee, but I’ve just checked that and it happened off-screen. Therefore 1870s is reinforced xd.
Sure, that’s why I mention it a lot…
Yes, Wounded Knee is mentioned but not shown, so I don’t consider it…
Just because you want it doesn’t mean it’s the most logical.
In my opinion, Brazil as a standalone civ would be very boring. It was so strongly tied to Portugal that it was the seat of the monarchy until a revolution in Portugal made them go back. An overhaul of Portugal and the Brazilian revolution with the ability to return to Portugal would be welcome, but I don’t think anything further is needed.
If we absolutely must have another post-colonial civ, Gran Colombia stands out as the one with the most potential to be fun. Their chaotic history of merging and fracturing successor states would have a lot of variety.
2 Likes
It is true that in reality postcolonial civs are either boring (USA civ) or chaotic (Mexicans civ) - chaos is more attractive to me.
Brazilians civ don’t have to resemble the USA civ, but they can follow their own path. It’s different with Gran Colombians civ who are asking for similar schemes (similar but not identical).
Brazilian civs I think should be able to build Exotic Orchards (similar building to Cherry Orchard and Grove Mango). This building would allow you to generate Coins by collecting coffee or Food by collecting bananas. I think that the agricultural economy is the most characteristic thing about Brazil.
Adding Brazilians civ could mean an update for Portuguese - probably it would be adding Home City cards for Portuguese adding Brazilians civ content (as it is with Spanish civ).
I agree. Gran Colombia was the father of all revolutions in South America and its first leader was Simon Bolivar. Numerous possibilities for unique revolutions (including a Muisca revolution similar to the Mayan revolution in Mexicans civ) make Gran Colombian a civilization of unpredictability, twists and many possibilities. This may sound like a rehash of Civ Mexicans, but I think Gran Columbians civ shouldn’t focus as much on Insurgents, Cowboys, Outlaws, etc like Mexicans civ.
1 Like