No, if USA is in, Brazil and Mexico MUST be in aswell.
3 Likes
May I ask you to live you nationalism aside for the sake of this classic game before it gets destroyed? Thanks.
I gave you FACTS. The US at least a 120 years span. ÂżHow much would you get with latin american nations? Âż40? US looks forced and cringy. Mexico and Brazil is just total nonsense. âIf US is in, Mexico must be inâ âI support Brazil, and afterwards Mexicoâ. Stop it please. Want to play as MĂ©xico? Learn to revolt in the game. Revolutions are underused just because people donât know how to play them.
You may ask for even more unique cards or units for the mexican revolution, or even a general buff (because it is the less or second less used revolt from all the Spanish ones). Go ahead. But forget about it being an initial civ. Youâve been explained why and it wonât become true just because you want to.
8 Likes
I am not Brazilian, so it is not a case of nationalism, while the USA inclusion and design scream âAmerican Exceptionalismâ, which makes âaccusationsâ of nationalism (as if it was a bad thing) quite hypocritical.
Did not even exist for the fisrt 2 Ages of the entire game.
1 Like
USA is in game cause creators are american not thanks to be in the timeframe
4 Likes
Thatâs true though. AOE 3 is like ânorth-americans firstâ and âMURICAâ kind of game.
Actually itâs not just that âwe got the USâ. We actually got the United States 3 TIMES.
- On the campaign
- As a revolt
- On 2021 as a faction for multiplayer
4 Likes
We still have USA revolt, and that did not stop the devs.
Now Brazil and Mexico, in the least, are mandatory.
Apparently not very well, since you did not even bother to research my name, and just assumed âmexicanâ.
I do not want to cross your borders, dude, instead wealthy americans are buying land inside mine, because your country is turning into a Modern Dark Age.
Although the United States became independent before Brazil, it remains very recent for the timeline originally proposed by the game, but that did not prevent the United States from being added. So apparently any civilization born within the gameâs timeline is valid as long as it is relevant enough.
Brazil has enough relevance to integrate the game. Even before being independent, it became the capital of the Portuguese Empire. It was a colony that became politically more important than the metropolis. When he became independent, he did it with the title of Empire, which corresponds to the proposal of imperial civilizations in the game. it had an immense agricultural and livestock production, trading with several other countries. He led what was perhaps the greatest war on the American continent, against Paraguay. It has unique military units, such as the Volunteers of the Fatherland.
Still, I agree with those who think it breaks the gameâs proposal. If it were up to me, instead of adding post-colonial civilizations like the United States and the Empire of Brazil, they should improve the mechanics of the Revolution, allowing the Revolution to be activated earlier, in the Colonial Age, and better adapting the cards and balance in general . But unfortunately it is too late to do that, as Microsoft preferred to break the logic of the game by adding the United States rather than improving the Revolutions, and thus, Brazil and other post-colony civilizations are indeed acceptable.
6 Likes
I wouldnât have them activated in the Colonial, but in the Fortress Age, definitly.
The United States has set a bad example, and now every revolutionary country has supporters
Players will not be satisfied with what the developer does
11 Likes
The United States is a one-off mistake that shouldnât be repeated
4 Likes
Since we have the USA in the game, they should have a continental rival - Mexicans civ - I was hoping that they would appear in the USA DLCâŠ
If there were two North American revolutionary civs, then South America should get the same number - Brazilians and Colombians (Gran Colombia).
It would be nice to see Argentines as well, but then it would be nice to add another North American civ - Canada.
Adding these civs would create a problem with the current revolutions. I think this problem would be very easy to tackle - replace these revolutions with new ones.
5 Likes
I would like to see Rio de Janeiro as the Home City of Brazilians civ. I know it might sound silly but wish you could decorate it with Christ the Redeemer statue. I know that it is from the 20th century, but in the USA civ you can decorate Washington with a statue of Nathan Black - you can do it anyway. Overall, you could do some nice statues to dominate the Home City of Brazilians civ.
1 Like
Would love to see War of Liberty ported to DE or maybe Microsoft can add the fellows who created to the team.
2 Likes
Then the mechanics of the Revolution would be thrown outâŠ
Better to make fully playable civs only the greatest revolutionary powers - Brazilians, Gran Colombians and Mexicans. It would be nice to see Argentines as well, but then it would be nice to add a third North American civ - Canada unfortunately was still a British colony, so either there would be two civs for both American continents, or 2 civs from North America and 3 from South America.
Of course, in place of fully playable civs, new revolutions should arise:
- in place of the USA - Australia
- in place of the Mexicans - Cuba
- in place of the Gran Colombians - Federal Republic of Central America
- in place of the Brazilians - Bolivia
- potentially in place of the Argentines - Uruguay
2 Likes
I would switch the places of Bolivia and Uruguay. Portugal has far more history with Uruguay and about none with Bolivia.
1 Like
Isnât Cuba a bit too far from the time frame 
I would argue to replace Mexicans we could instead have Texans instead of cuba
1 Like
That would be interesting if they added a new age
Well technically every colonial nation is already in the game. Brasil was portugueze and guess whats already in the game? The portugueze.
3 Likes
Or just dont add those. US was a mistake, why add more mistakes?
8 Likes