Why are there literally no games with a revolutionary war setting aside from Ass Creed shit...

team fortress 2.

Attached: Valley_Forge.png (819x746, 390K)

Because modern game devs are tax-hiking Communist gun-grabbers.

Remember when they made that Revolutionary War Ass Creed game and English people got butthurt about it?

because only americans care about it

to be fair, guns cause more death than a knife. and its much easier for one person to kill many with a gun then with a knife

give me a civil war game that lets me pilot a wooden submarine and kill the coward yankees

Attached: 1541120609745m.jpg (1024x689, 121K)

Because the Napoleonic wars were the real kino of the time period.
Brits fighting Brits with French help is boring.

>because americans would ruin it with their shitty nationalism

The war itself essentially happened because of "shitty nationalism"

They can't legally get upset about pakis raping their children so they have to continually seethe at americans.

This, it has nothing noteworthy. Why should they waste their efforts on something like that?

Right and its easier to kill many people with a car than with a knife
What is your point

The Hunley wasn't wooden.

Well it happened due to jewish oligarchs wanting to secure their position in American hearts and minds.

The world would objectively be a better place if the His Majesty George the Third, by the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland, Defender of the Faith, and so forth had been able to protect the colonies from being conquered by Israel.

Attached: never trust the devious clap.jpg (698x539, 188K)

>Call of Juarez: Bound in Blood's first level is you fighting off the Union troops
>afterwards you are running away from your general who is out to get you because you didn't listen to orders

Attached: [SallySubs] Wakaba Girl - 01 [BD 1080p FLAC] [73133141].mkv_snapshot_03.19_[2017.06.13_21.35.11].png (593x659, 570K)

Empire and Napoopan and they were shit.

Line Warfare and the Age of Enlightenment hasn't really been done right in any form of media since the stereotype more or less boils down to:

>Stand in a line like an idiot.
>Get shot.

And that's most peoples impression of how war happened from about 1520 to 1914. They aren't completely wrong, but it would be like reducing other forms of warfare to:

>Go as a detached squad in an amorphous combat zone.
>Get IED'd/AK'ed.

or

>Gather around a Castle or some other strong local fortification.
>Get dysentery.

The Age of Enlightenment is the crux of all our modern discourse and the way we look at the world today. In a way, a lot of the shit-flinging and extremist ideologies that you see online on both sides is a mass re-evaluation of some of the ideals and thoughts that were born out of some salon in France about three hundred years ago.

Can you settle for a Civil War game where you get a squad of about 300 good ol' boys with Whitworths causing a mass rout and getting a 20:1 K/D ratio. Ultimate General: Civil War would be just up your alley if you like Total War battles in any way.

Attached: 0003.png (1272x720, 1.33M)

Gun operator boogeyman argument of course

Blackwake does muskets great, as does Napoleonic Wars (Warband mod) and Holdfast (spiritual successor to Napoleonic Wars).
It turns out that long reload times aren't really THAT bad because they actually encourage melee fighting.

Attached: blackwake_ram.jpg (1920x1080, 484K)

Attached: cover.jpg (800x554, 98K)

Autistic people like you should be banned from this site.

>send 100 guys to take fort with 5 guys
>they reach fort
>fire at fort
>1 guy died
>fort fires back
>50 guys die
fuck this game

>cover.jpg
"spergs" can't tell when a thing is tacky as fuck.

Europa Universalis IV, Children of Liberty (appears to not have been updated in its Early Access form in 5 years), Liberty or Death (for the Genesis), Birth of America (PC)

You expect something from the nineteen nineties to not be tacky?

Attached: hqdefault.jpg (480x360, 16K)

Yes and governments have killed more people than any individual could ever hope to kill. What's your point?

Looks like a scene from The Duelists

Attached: Feraud_by_glooh.jpg (529x700, 112K)

It was more than 200 years ago, Jews didn't even exist yet, neither did video games.

Attached: My_c6e3b5_400127.jpg (431x352, 16K)

Barry Lyndon, actually. Both are good films though.

Attached: 0015.png (1272x720, 1.12M)

Not something from before 1995.

Attached: tacky.png (270x368, 169K)

A handful of boxcutters brought down the twin towers.

give me a Civil War game where I get to burn down Georgia

Spergs (Anglophobes) are the only autistic "people".

but the meme

I didn't know Koei made a Washington's Ambition game

There was nothing tacky about 5th gen (1995-2000).
The 2000s were tacky as hell.

FUCK SHERMAN

Attached: 52y38wo4wbgz.jpg (597x699, 84K)

You're ignorant as fuck.

No that was jet fuel.

>Reckless

Literally spent defending the Colonies from the French after the Colonists attacked Ohio and provoked war.

y*nkee scum have no culture other than making sandwiches and defying constitutional rights

DEO VINDICE

what is age of empires 3?

Did something? seems like there are more shitty threads with porn webm head images than normal. counted five before asking.

>Koei keeps pushing out RoTK and NA games
>only one LoD game
Still holding out for a Revolutionary Warriors though

A good game that keeps being compared to an amazing game like AoE2 and wrongly called shit

Because spending thirty seconds to reload your gun isn't fun.

>it has nothing noteworthy
maybe actually read a book before you make statements dickhead

this fucking worthless tranny fortnite generation jesus

>obsessed with beards
Onions.

based and didnothingwrongpilled

>recommending Ultimate General while ranting about accurate depictions
Can't even oblique in this shitty arcade game.

youtube.com/watch?v=Z6sed_sOhoY

>thinking protestants aren't jews
Jesus Christ user, I should burn you at the stake for your heretical actions, but that will come after the pope and most of the church is purged for cucking to them

Do it again Uncle Billy

Dude, your choices for a Civil War game range from that, some incredibly autistic Matrix Games title that would take ages to get into, or some shitty shooter from the History Channel that everyone forgot. You take what you can get.

>ayo we wuz gud bois we dindu nuffin
>da evul britons be oppressin us, just need more territories for dem programs
George was way too mild, Washington and the other kikes should've been hanged at the first sign of disobedience

nobody wants to spend five mins reloading their muskets after every shot

I find it really unbelievable that the British gave up and allowed America to keep existing. They still outnumbered and outgunned the colonials. They could've kept up the fight and we'd be talking England English and sipping tea right now.

I'm imagining something like that today, if there were an undiscovered continent in the middle of the Pacific Ocean and some Americans fled to it to make a new, free country. As soon as the U.S. Government got wind of that, I'm sure the U.S. would bring their battleships and thousands of infantry to come and take it over by force and no small group of people could stop them.

>I find it really unbelievable that the British gave up and allowed America to keep existing
They always had other, more pressing problems. First it was France and Spain, then it was Russia, then Germany and suddenly the US was too strong to deal with anymore

>tfw no frontier explorin' RPG

Fuck off, coward.

They tried second time, even burn down white house and shit, but US got to strong it was not worth to continue fight

When will it get the credit it deserves?

Attached: BB2F0CCD-C440-4609-B14C-95ED49DA64FA.jpg (220x346, 37K)

>Blackwake
How is it, user?

>the last boss

Attached: b49.png (1200x1200, 54K)

What is Battlegrounds 3

Fuck off and play pic related.

Attached: 6158-1-sid-meier-s-gettysburg-.jpg (800x600, 109K)

there is also CIV 5 campaign

>Historians in Britain often see it as a minor theater of theNapoleonic Wars
lol
Also, it's the US that started that war

I really enjoyed it for 150 hours then never touched it again.

the campaing in that game was all made up bullshit, one of the reasons why it was so dissapointing

because it is shit and irrelevant

I see none of you lived through the 90s.
>87
>and it's got clashing colours, mixmatch artstyles, and a goofy protagonist face anyway
What's your point? I loved the 80s and 90s as decades but nobody can say they weren't tacky and over the top.

>had to reply to himself to get even one requested response
big yike

>Revolutionary Warriors
Yes please.

Attached: flipfloppy.gif (260x320, 1.97M)

This is a meme that people also tried to use for discouraging WW1 games, but it isn't true.
For a start, muskets can be reloaded by a well trained soldier in sixteen seconds. Example:
youtube.com/watch?v=SJMbxZ1k9NQ
On top of that, long reload times can make for fun gameplay if you have a good melee system in your game. You fire the opening volley, you fire your secondary weapon, then you can close in for melee.

Attached: spadroon5.jpg (631x960, 72K)

DO IT AGAIN UNCLE BILLY

Plus the aliens saved us by creating the storm that saved Washington.

>Gather around a Castle or some other strong local fortification
>Get dysentery
Ah, CK2 is truly a perfect game

It's litterally the most boring and lamest part of history

It's good man, a bit rough around the edges but the core gameplay is surprisingly good.
The tutorial is incredibly janky, but once you get past that it's just intense multiplayer.

Attached: 1531658538501.jpg (1920x1080, 340K)

2ez

>This is a meme that people also tried to use for discouraging WW1 games
Wait, really? Breech-loading repeaters were already available near the end of the Civil War, fifty years before WW1. I figured WW1 combat wouldn't make for a good game because it was mostly about sitting in a trench until some asshole commander ordered you to go over the top and get killed by machine gun fire or poison gas, assuming you didn't die of an infection while you were still sitting around.

>For a start, muskets can be reloaded by a well trained soldier in sixteen seconds.
That's still a pretty long time.

There's a question I've always had about Revolutionary War times. Maybe someone here knows enough to answer it:

I once heard that the guns back then were so inaccurate that they didn't even bother aiming. They just fired huge volleys in the general direction of the enemy and counted on sheer volume of fire to guarantee at least a few hits. Later on, though, they started developing rifles that were actually accurate, but only a few guys got them. When one of those guys got captured, they were hanged as murderers, the logic being that unlike the other soldiers, they actually aimed, so their killing was deliberate.

Is any of that true?

>That's still a pretty long time
But there's also a big difference between 30 seconds and 16 seconds. So I was just correcting the falsehood.
And if need be in gameplay you can speed it up even further than real life by having the player execute all aspects of the reload perfectly.
Or you can carry extras in reserve if you're really worried about reload time in gameplay.

Attached: markblackbeard_clip_image004_0000.jpg (326x493, 35K)

Attached: 1546704648915.jpg (597x681, 121K)

guys what are you talking about? what can be best than MUH AMERICUNT history? aren't you guys patriotic to the best nation in the world and it's amazing history of glory and victory?

I do know that sharpshooters were singled out because they were particularly hated for the paranoia they caused (could be shot from anywhere) and their efficiency.
They weren't hanged as murderers under the reason of deliberate killing as far as I know. People still killed each other with bayonets and swords all the time at that point. I wouldn't say it was a common thing, but I can't find anything on it to disprove it occurring.
Where'd you hear it? I would say it's safer not to believe it until you can remember/find a reliable source for it.
>what can be best than MUH AMERICUNT and it's
You're making it painfully obvious you're not from a first world country there, champ.

ouch, what a burn

>Where'd you hear it?
Well, you'll probably laugh at this, but I heard it from a Revolutionary War reenactor that one of my middle school history teachers brought in to speak to the class. I've always wondered about it, but I couldn't find a clear answer when I tried to look it up.

What about that stuff about the accuracy of the muskets? The guy made a point of saying that the command given to soldiers was "Make ready, present, fire", i.e. no command to aim.

Love how Americans think the taxes were high when in fact they were lower than what actual Brits had to paid.

Hey now just because brits are used to being cuck master supremes that doesn't mean everyone else has to do the same.

I don't mean to be rude by saying this but there's a possibility it's a false memory (as in you heard him say something similar but got the context mixed up with something else). Either that, or maybe it did actually happen but as an isolated occurrence.

When it comes to the accuracy thing, consider the near 100% accuracy of bayonet fighting. They would have had to hang everybody who stabbed a guy by that logic. I'm not saying everyone was always consistently logical in that time of course, but most people were.

I'm still searching articles on sharpshooter history but can't really find anything to confirm or deny it.

>had to paid

Attached: you.jpg (418x480, 51K)

i live in RI 4 minutes from where the gaspee was burned. fallout 4 was pretty cool to me just because i grew up around all this revolutionary era stuff

>I don't mean to be rude by saying this but there's a possibility it's a false memory (as in you heard him say something similar but got the context mixed up with something else).
Maybe, but I doubt it.

>When it comes to the accuracy thing, consider the near 100% accuracy of bayonet fighting. They would have had to hang everybody who stabbed a guy by that logic. I'm not saying everyone was always consistently logical in that time of course, but most people were.
I could see them thinking that aiming with a rifle was cowardly or dishonorable, because you'd be killing someone a long distance away who was effectively defenseless against you.

>I'm still searching articles on sharpshooter history but can't really find anything to confirm or deny it.
I found this article about one particular group of riflemen, but I don't know how accurate it might be or whether or not it applied to riflemen in general:

>morgansriflemen.com/history/
>Morgan’s Riflemen chose their targets – the first generation sniper. Because of this, if a rifleman was captured, he was hung as a “murderer.”

Here we go, I found an article on sharpshooters/snipers.
bostonglobe.com/ideas/2015/01/16/why-fear-and-admire-military-sniper/UKotOxOc2hTKoH9rZ5Kh9I/story.html
I think what you're saying about the mindset is correct by the way, I just don't agree with the argument of it being a logic for hanging as murderers. I would say they did hate snipers for they way they killed, and they did kill them on sight, but they never tried to officially justify it as murder for those reasons.

You were tricked into rebelling against God ordained authority by Masonic capitalists.

DO IT AGAIN, UNCLE BILLY

I'm not even American lmao, but keep falseflagging

American Conquest, an RTS on the Cossacks engine, was pretty good and covered a lot of american history. Hard as shit, though (at least it was for me when I played it as a 10-year old).

Attached: 00171269.jpg (1280x1024, 552K)

didn't even know this existed

battlegrounds 3 soon, friends

>age of empires never had real world history mixed with fantasy elements

Attached: 1507313340738.jpg (707x682, 74K)

this i wish britannia had won

>They could've kept up the fight and we'd be talking England English and sipping tea right now.
Jesus fuck. Last thing I want is needing a porn license, a TV license and a ban on anything sharper than a balloon animal. Thanks France and all other countries involved for helping the English fuck off

Attached: 1081F6FD-AFB2-4744-9B3F-9B7E1C2A2D24.jpg (401x299, 42K)

Is there any Europa Universalis mod for this?

Not him but while AoE2's multiplayer was obviously mix and match, its campaign mirrored real events. You didn't have the fucking Eskimos fighting the Aztecs over an alien artifact like in AoE3

So based they named the best tank ever made after him.

because the civil war is a more interesting period in american history being a transition into modern warfare, you had line infantry with muskets fighting in open fields, but then you also had machine guns, submarines and trench warfare

Honest answer, americans don't make games and no one else cares about irrelevant war like that.
Even British Empire was more focused on Napoleon than on american niggers chimping out back then.
Also american conquest exit and did it well

>Irrelevant war
That’s very tsundere of you

>americans don't make games
...eh

>American conquest
Best bargain-bin purchase I've ever made.
youtube.com/watch?v=v8Nh4AF7zTA

>France and Spain throw their weight behind USA in the war to annoy the English
>Gain basically nothing from it, and France cripples her finances so much they go into Revolution
>Sets the stage for 120 years of world wide British Empire

Thanks, Ameribros.

our empire now you old fart

To add to the confusion: Even during WW2 large part of the soldiers aimed not to kill, but to wound or outright miss because they just did not want to take a life.
With muskets that kind of dissociation from the situation would be easier, there simply was no way to know if it was your bullet that had killed someone, it's as if the enemy was always struck down by random chance, by the will of god, and not by you.
With sharpshooting you undeniably always worked with the intent to kill.

*cries in oldworld*

Attached: 1554220946634.png (737x540, 620K)

That dude is
>Not in line formation, having plenty of space
>Not under fire
>Shoots without aiming
and still fucks up at the third shot. It's just impossible to maintain that speed in a hour-long battle. And he'd definitively have to aim.

>Even during WW2 large part of the soldiers aimed not to kill, but to wound or outright miss because they just did not want to take a life
That story comes from non-scientific approximation by S.L.A. Marshall, who was later caught out lying about many things, so I wouldn't take it as gospel.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L.A._Marshall#Controversy_after_death

Video game.
Look at literally any FPS ever made and tell me it's 100% authentic to the experience of shooting a real gun.
Basic visible plausibility is all that matters. Even in milsims.

There's plenty better in the same time period, there's plenty of strategy games that cover the era. You want shiny gfx and not gameplay though, I get it.

>IRL
>Muskets had around a 1/3 meter grouping at 50 meters meaning that a shot at an enemy 50 meters away nearly always delivered a hit

>Videogames
>Shooting from 10 meters has 100 meter grouping

also
>>Not under fire
the FPS player will also be under fire
>>Shoots without aiming
aiming applies to the FPS player too

I can't believe people still quote that bullshit, look it up you fags.

SLASH
AND
BURN

This, American history is boring shit altogether
>everyone who says something I disagree with is some Fortnite zoomer!
We're probably older than you, kiddo

But nationalism is good. You're thinking of lack of nationalism, since THAT'S what goes along with modern politics

no one outside of the US would want to play it because of the American habit of asserting moral superiority and delusions of grandeur when it comes to their military history - see things like that American Sniper film

Even then that was only really as a tutorial, the meat of the game was mostly about the joys of good old fashioned European colonialism.

>200 years ago, Jews didn't even exist yet
Um, sweetie. Jews has been existed since Abraham era.

god isn't real.

This
Sort of combined with this

The inaccuracy of muskets is cartoonishly exaggerated just like the clumsiness of full plate armor or the effectiveness of japanese katana even though the "weeb-blade" is the worst sword in human history

I remember reading that during the musket-times average regiments would always reliably hit a bed sheet sized test targets from a combat distance with no one missing a shot
There was always a hole for every soldier
But during combat that effectiveness always SOMEHOW mysteriously dropped to 1/10th lethality

This was actually not because of the muskets being bad guns, because they are actually great guns, but because your dumb anglo grand-grand-grand-etc-parents were actually GIANT FUCKING PUSSIES

So fuck you all and stop making games with shitty muskets just because your ancestors were scared little baby boys.

Fuck off, funcle billy

eu1-4

SHALL

...

>Now that have taken their guns they won't be able to commit mass murders ever again!

Attached: 1552834678939.png (1057x745, 757K)

Do it again. This time leave no survivors

Attached: William-Tecumseh-Sherman.jpg (2364x3000, 902K)

That's because Chinese literally do not do anything if something bad happens next to them because of bullshit laws. If you help someone that got stabbed or try to take down the stabber they could sue you into oblivion and probably win. Look up footage of accidents in China. No one ever helps. People could literally be on fire and people will act like nothing is happening and just walk by. Try and stab someone in the states in a crowded area and you'll get a dozen people dog piled on them.

>focused on Napoleon
>In 1776

Attached: 1524094501937.png (423x525, 472K)

based

Retard probably means the War of 1812

Because the US isn’t a pussy coward country. Which is also why its citizens carry guns.

Did you miss the part where they were busy fighting France?

I don't understand how anyone can look at mutts and think they're anything other than traitors

>try to take down the stabber

China doesn't actually have a self defense law. If you injure or harm an aggressor you are likely to be charged as well.

>They tried second time
You mean when America backstabbed empire and attacked while they were busy?
And you still pathetically lost while gaining nothing and having capital burned?

Barry Lyndon. Great taste, user. Most of Yea Forums seems to have superior tastes in film and music.

The American colonies were surprisingly unimportant to Britain compared to its other colonial holdings in the East that produced spices, sugar, and all sorts of luxury goods that were extremely expensive to get a hold of in Europe. At the time of the War of Independence the British Empire was engaged in open warfare against the French and Spanish empires across the globe, and there was also a big war against India that erupted at the same time. Fighting the war against the American colonists was extremely expensive because not only was it on the other side of the Atlantic but the French were also heavily involved which meant it wasn't a simple matter of beating up the minority of independence-supporting colonists and calling it a day; eventually it was decided that the amount of money it would cost to win the war and keep America wasn't worth it compared to the colonies' economic value and just let them go. It's also worth noting that this conflict was so large that France, which had the second most powerful empire at the time, actually spent so much money on it all that the country pretty much went bankrupt.

King George never entirely gave up wanting that American clay though, and during the War of 1812 he wanted to send a full army under the Duke of Wellington to push in and make territorial claims, but he was talked out of it.

>Do one revolution in ancient history
>Britty-Brat-Bongs still seething

Lets be honest, id welcome british rule again

and most modern games don't?
pleb nigga

Because everyone except Americans and some autists do not care about it at all.

I find it pretty fascinating they've became great allies now.

>Defend colonies in a colonial war that spills over into Europe
>Hey, guys we are going to need more money to rebuild after defending you in a costly war
>WTF FREEDOM DUDE

Jews have been around forever. When the first fish to grow legs walked into dry land, a dude named Goldblatt immediately came by to sell it insurance.

Do it again uncle billy. Leave no survivors, destroy there monuments, erase their bloodline uncle Sherman.

Ban assault cars

>Americans literally can't comprehend why no one cares about their little chimping out
>Made entire thread about it
>If enemies burns our white house we win
>Brits seethign

>Implying those uniforms aren't sexy as fuck.

You can always fuck off you know

>revolutionary war game
>burger music starts playing
>get shot
I don't see how chinese markets would get into this.

>there
Based thirdworlder.

Why hasn't there ever been a game about the War of 1812?

Attached: image.png (112x112, 7K)

someone made a mod for warband based on it, that's all i got

DO IT AGAIN, UNCLE BILLY

Bong here, why the fuck would you even want that? If we became an absolute monarchy again I'd understand but why you'd want to be dictated to by subservient ducks to the EU is beyond me

Probably the primary reason is the same that there are so few American Civil War games: it would alienate a global audience. Europe is a massive game market, so is South America, so is Asia, so is Australasia, so is Canada. A game that focused on American history would alienate these markets; they wouldn't be interested. Conversely, games about WWI and WWII have been done by big studios / publishers because almost the entire world was affected by these wars and was directly involved in them. And the majority of the game market world (with the notable exceptions of Germany and Japan) was on the Allied side during those wars. US and Canada, most of Europe, Australia, South America etc. were all on the Allied side.

Even historical games about ancient Rome probably have more global appeal, since many modern societies can trace their ancestry directly back to the Romans (most of Europe, also European colonies like the US/Canada, Australasia, and South America as well, since the Europeans that colonised those places were heavily influenced / affected by the Romans). But even these games are hardly huge sellers - Assassin's Creed is probably the best-selling "historical" series. Things like Total War and Civilisation are pretty big, sure, but not as big as, say, GTA or COD.

Also, the American Revolutionary War and American Civil War might be seen as too politically contentious. The former would alienate Canadians and Brits, while the latter would alienate many Americans. I guess the former only alienates two relatively small countries, but going back to my first point, most of the world just doesn't give a shit about the American Revolutionary War and wouldn't be interested in a game about it.

>zoomer who needs spiderman or elsa to be on anything to catch his attention for more than five minutes

History becomes boring the second guns and cannons come into play, and historical games in such settings will also be boring.

Attached: 1473260833531.jpg (2048x1152, 826K)

I remmber an fps game YEARS ago that was an FPS civil war game

Retard.

>debt incurred fighting for the defense of their homes against the french and Indians.

>Why are there literally no games with a revolutionary war

Not enough propaganda value in it

Sorry Cletus, the rest of the world doesn't give a flying fuck about your shitty history. That's the objectively true reason why there are so few games about those events. I'm sorry you're so butthurt by it.

Attached: average american.jpg (500x500, 75K)

>posts Maximilian-era armour while talking shit about guns

>replying to yourself

England was already broke from fighting France and both France and Spain wanted to help the colonies to give the English the middle finger, and ferrying more soldiers and supplies across the ocean to feed a war that the common people back home also think is bullshit (in part because they have to pay for it) wore the Brits out.

The U.S. didn't "Defeat" the British in the traditional sense of stomping their armies, they just held out long enough for the redcoats to go "Fuck it you win, we've got other shit to do."

that sounds like bullshit
sure, muskets weren't super accurate, but they were only used to close the distance before some good ol' stabbing
and snipers were hated because they were out there hunting officers, not because they had no problem with killing

>I-I LET you win!!!
Holy fuck the cope is next level

I'm an American you dip.

This isn't even fucking controversial. The Americans knew their best bet was to wait out the Brits and they did so. Then the Brits pissed off to molest India and China for a hundred years.

As others have said, it was a bit of a boring war compared to both older ones and more modern ones. The technology is right at the point where nothing major can really be offered. And RTS or management sim could possibly be done for it, but even then that might be pushing things.

Why are Yankees so insecure?

Attached: 1469480804217.jpg (1600x1200, 329K)

>nothing noteworthy
You mean except for the world's first use of a submersible in combat?

The English are forever obsessed with America
The obsession meme is less meme and more straight up reality

>*shoves porn license hastily behind back* yeah mate... i'm an american "bro," ha-ha...
>*bins knife*

Die Sherman you fucking fuck!

Fuck you

Attached: B68B5FC5-8CBD-4B5E-8233-B0A5C591F456.png (671x603, 168K)

oi you got a loicense for that illegal opinion??

because there is much more interesting revolutions in the history

Attached: original.jpg (1280x904, 199K)

- Isn't a pussy coward
- carry guns

Attached: William-Adolphem Bouguereau - The Difficult Lesson (1884).jpg (1598x2412, 1.17M)

Fuck the queen
Why do we have to pay?

top notch taste lad

are*

>he doesnt know about the chinese mass stabings

>our reckless debt

Maybe if Washington wasn't such a shit general in the French Indian War he'd have not needed all that extra dosh

Attached: 1496846434181.png (797x601, 664K)

Mutts dont make games about wars they lose

Are they STILL salty that they lost the only war they've had against Canada?

They make games about vietnam all the time, faggot

>against Canada
Fuck off Canadian and stop trying to take credit for the actions of your betters.

Apparently

Do it again, uncle billy

>STILL seething over having the white house burned down by Canucks

Attached: 1200x630bb.jpg (630x630, 63K)

based billy the torch making traitors seethe a hundred and fifty years later

>muh war and violence

Do you Americans have anything other than never ending violence?

Only because they think they won lol

dont want to give the goys any ideas

If any piece of media accurately portrayed the philosophy behind the American revolution, it would activate too many almonds in the normies. The founding fathers would have been shooting at our government by now. They started a war over taxes far lower than what we have today, proportionately, intended the US to be white (see 1790 naturalization act, signed before even the bill of rights) and would absolutely not go for all of this infringing on rights and gun control talk.

Nobody is going to let people see an accurate depiction of the American revolution because it would necessarily require pointing out that the modern American government would be viewed as illegitimate to the founders.

Attached: index.jpg (265x191, 12K)

Fellow commonwealth patrician.

Attached: 1363369548044.jpg (3223x4821, 2.78M)

Do it again, Uncle Billy.

Glory glory Hallelujah.

Okay but the Brits lived in England and could vote on it. Why do I have to pay taxes for some cucklords overseas at all?

>bunch of colonial aristocrats throw a shitfit because the mother country tells them they need to quit killing natives and asks them to help pay for the war that saved their possessions

American revolution is bottom tier when it comes to revolutions

yeah and abraham lincoln came after the war

pick up a book tard

Attached: 1544964830907.jpg (270x285, 11K)

He says when the revolutionary war was won by the French

It's hilariously ironic because America is doing that to itself these days.

I'm a liberal and even I think you should kill yourself.

>Wanting nanny state, CCTV bullshit and shit like TV taxes.

No, you faggot. It's because the guns in WW2 are cooler. And you always play an American in those games anyway. It's always hilarious being in the lead by heaps and bounds and watching the people try to bring you down when you are at the top.

We make all the fucking video games here anyway. What do you faggot Eurotrash got? Fucking Ubisoft? Oh wait, they actually even made a game about the Civil War.

Fucking Euros.

Nobody here thinks we won Vietnam. We just think it's a very interesting time in history because of how horrible it is, and the current art vogue isn't "fuck yeah America" it's that depressing nihilism. Not to mention we see every day the effects Vietnam had on people who walk the street destitute with no future and hardly a past at this point.

so you make all the games
and you buy all the games
and even then nobody considers the american revolution a good setting

Calm your cholesterol down before you have a heart attack from that cheeseburger there, obvious patriot.

Plenty of founding fathers were in favor of taxes, they just didn't think they should go to britbongs. The Articles of Confederation was abolished primarily for the reason that it limited the federal governments power to tax. And everybody fucking knows America was racist. Do you think that is some secret only you are on the in on?

Most importantly the founding fathers never saw a fucking M240, and I don't think they would have said "yeah everybody should have a M240 in their home and a A-10 for good measure"

FUCK yankees and FUCK indians

Attached: confederate pepe.jpg (259x194, 10K)

Yeah, but what gets passed off as "nationalism" today is isolationist tribalism.
You can't reasonably use a gun for anything but violence and hunting, and you have to be a special kind of person to hunt with an assault rifle.

Still mad.

We create culture, we have no reason to live in the past and can make any future we want, so we explore that. Keep reminiscing about selling Chinese people massive amounts of opium though, or getting millions of Africans of all kinds killed.

Fucking Euros can't even start great wars for good reasons.

>No, WE own Africa not you waaah it's ours it's ours.

Sherman is burning in hell along with Lincoln

The south is lucky they're in the union. It can't take care of it self.

It's about the amount of taxes, not who they're going to. They weren't against taxes, but they'd find things like income tax outrageous.

The founding fathers never saw the internet either, so is the 1st amendment only for printing presses? There are plenty of quotes from the founders' writings that showed they wanted the people to have weapons that kept the military subordinate to them, so you bet your ass they'd want the average person to have any and every modern gun they could afford.

>Holdfast
>encourage melee

Attached: 1556372166204.png (583x290, 261K)

youtube.com/watch?v=lnud3VjXebY

Attached: maxresdefault.jpg (1280x720, 108K)

Imagine you're a gamedev in 2019. You can do:

A: Participate in making some more shovelware games-as-a-service loot-n-shoot shit and put food on the table

B: Participate in making a game set in revolutionary times US and spend the rest of your life being hounded by trannies for lionizing the evil cisheteropatriarchy of colonialism.

still mad the only culture you have is located between your toes I see

There will never be anything as great as this game.

DO IT AGAIN, OL' MAN BILLIAM

this: the likely outcome of a "successful" independence is complete economic collapse within 30 years followed by foreign-backed slave revolts and interventions
with some bad luck it might even lead to silly things like Mexico reclaiming Texas or the southern most states being turned into a black ethnostate where all the negros in the entire US are moved to

I think it was a History Channel special I once watched mentioned that the English didn't have the resources to engage in multiple campaigns in America at the same time. So when the army in the north was doing something, the army in the south chilled, and vice versa.

No, it's not the amount of taxes, it's who they are going to and why they exist. We voted the taxes in. More importantly than that, after you factor in all those taxes, we make more "money" than the aristocrats at the time.

And the founding fathers were of the mind that they did not have the foresight to see things like the "internet" coming, so they made the constitution a living document so laws could change to fit the time.

There are obvious points where laws break down. The right to bear arms does not extend to all arms. Congress does not allow you to make or own a nuclear warhead. In fact, you cannot even own a nuclear generator. You also cannot own a fighter jet with missiles on it.

There are obvious reasons. If everybody owns an AR-15, it's not that bad. If everybody owns a M240, if one person decides to do something, he can kill much more people before anybody could do anything even if we all were walking around with M240's. If somebody owned a nuclear warhead, he could destroy an entire city, and there is no deterrent. It's common sense.

So no, if you showed the founding fathers modern weapons they wouldn't just go "yeah let's just give everybody that." That's where the "disciplined" part of the things they wrote come from.

correct

yeah but the US colonies were expected to live independently from Britain, be self sustaining, and yet pay money up to Britain without getting anything back
it doesn't take a genius to realize whats wrong with this

Meanwhile every urban center on the coast collapses on day 3 when the kale and banjitar supply runs out.

It's not really that big of an event to anyone but burgers.

"No taxation without representation"

You're ignoring the second part.