"basically was an Avengers movie"? to me an Avengers movie would be heroes fighting against pretty much just one antagonist; Loki in 1st Avengers, Ultron in 2nd Avengers, Thanos in 3rd & 4th.

in Civil War, there seemed to be more fighting against each other than fighting against any other antagonist. perhaps some fighting against each other in the movies titled Avengers, but seemingly not as much as in Civil War.

It should be renamed Avengers Civil War lol

I mean it is an Avengers movie but it is also a Captain America movie so basically if they didn’t have Captain America part of the title there won’t be any difference

@Mdsb759 Civil War had most of the OG6 Avengers except for Banner and Odinson, I'll think all of the New Avengers, and some of the Accords/Rogue Avengers in Spidey and Black Panther. It was basically Avengers 2.5

Plus, they spend almost as much time trying to figure out how to fight Zemo/Crossbones just as much as they were fighting themselves. It's like not calling Endgame a Avengers movie just cause 2014 Thanos was in for like a half hour max.

like I implied before, did not feel like an Avengers movie to me.

maybe if there was less fighting against themseleves and more fighting against movie's main antagonist (seemingly Helmut Zemo), it might have felt like an Avengers movie; though then "Civil War" part of movie's title would have been less accurate.

As mentioned earlier, if Civil War replaced Age of Ultron as an Avengers 2 movie, then the second question would be

" Where does this leave Captain America 3 ?"

@Atari Chris It wouldn't work at all and would make Tony's Character even more unlikeable as he doesn't have a reason to believe in the Accords without Ultron.

If they did called Civil War like Avengers 3: Civil War or something then I can see them just using the story they told in that book "The Heroes Journey" for Captain America 3 or something to do with Bucky Barnes/Sam. Again there are several options. You can even still have The Accords Avengers still Cameo in small scenes to set up Infinity War.

I was asking about the fate of Captain America 3 but you mentioned the fate of Avengers 2. I never even considered the ramifications if it was removed. That whole Wanda Maximof arc would vanish

The Fate of Capt 3 is safe as Marvel has several options to do that would fit with the story involving Steve, it's Avengers 2 that is the problem. The Thing is even though Age of Ultron isn't that great it might be the most important film in the MCU as many characters arc got better cause of their actions in that film, Tony's signing the Accords would have make zero sense without Ultron, Wanda's would be missing from Civil War which would means that Lagos would have to been heavy change. Even down to the name of the Accords would needed to be change as no Ultron=No Destroyed Sokovia=No Sokovia Accords.

Avengers 2 would have benefitted from more on screen Ultron content. Alot of major stuff was happening off screen. Also seeing the impact among civilians not having tech would have enhanced the scope of Ultrons takeover. Add those elements and the film soars