Civilizations you would like to see in DLC

[Zaarin]

Why? At their height they ruled over a handful of cities, and it lasted for a few years. As soon as Hammurabi was done, they were quickly overrun. They were significantly smaller and less significant than their various less famous neighbours. Many of the things that people credit Babylon for (eg Hammurabi's Code of Laws) were done by others first. And the real crux of Hammurabi's achievements were what he did with Babylon the city. He made it a prominent city, setting its foundations for becoming a city known to the world forever. So doesn't that make it best as a city state?
Babylon was awesome, and a very interesting part of history, but they definitely have the benefit of a romantic view.


EDIT: Sorry, they clearly include the Neo-Babylonians as part of the same thing. Considering they have Nebuchadnezzar II as their Civ5 ruler. So that basically invalidates everything I said.
I made the mistake of being too specific. Apologies.

Yeah, the original Babylonian Empire was so brief that generally I'd take Babylon unqualified to mean the Neo-Babylonian Empire, which was definitely the premier civilization in the Near East until the Medeo-Persians came along. I suppose one could make a case for the Assyrians, but I'd argue that the Assyrians were just a different dynasty of the same civilization. They spoke the same language and had essentially the same culture; just different capitals.

 

[Myth and Legend]

Charlemagne as an alternative French leader.

Henry V, Richard I or Edward the Black Prince as an alternative militaristic leader for England.

Venice

The Crusader States

The Eastern Roman Empire (plebs will call it Byzantium), the Emperor should NOT be female.

The Mongols with Genghis Khan.

The Timurids with Timur the Lame.

Thrace

Hungary

 

[Gabriel Sergio]

Ancient European tribes, maybe like Gauls, Germania, Iberia, Dacia or Illyria.

 

[Myth and Legend]

Ancient European tribes, maybe like Gauls, Germania, Iberia, Dacia or Illyria.

Gaul is France but change the leader to Vercigetorix

Germania is Germany but change the leader to Arminius.

Iberia is Spain but change the lader to someone else.

Dacians and Illyrians are too obscure, the Thracians are a better choice IMO.

 

[Zaarin]

Gaul is France but change the leader to Vercigetorix

If Gaul is France, Rome is also France, Spain, England, and arguably Germany.

 

[Atossa]

I would love to see Polynesia back in some form and we have sorely lacked an Inuit Civ to round out a proper world map.

Those are good choices. Perhaps we could also see the indigenous people of Australia represented?

Leaving out Persia, of course, would be an egregious error.

 

[Melville]

The Inuit/Inupiat.

 

[MooFreaky]

Gaul is France but change the leader to Vercigetorix

Gaul's boundaries were different to France's. Also the Gauls provide none of France's heritage, as they are entirely different peoples. Gallic history & culture was considerably reduced by their many years as part of Rome. Then once the Franks took over, France was dominated by their culture. While Gaul and France may have occupied similar territory they are hardly the same Civilization. That is why Civ5 had the Celts, which they mapped as being both Britain and France. Which is a fair enough abstraction considering the game.

 

[Zaarin]

Gaul's boundaries were different to France's. Also the Gauls provide none of France's heritage, as they are entirely different peoples. Gallic history & culture was considerably reduced by their many years as part of Rome. Then once the Franks took over, France was dominated by their culture. While Gaul and France may have occupied similar territory they are hardly the same Civilization. That is why Civ5 had the Celts, which they mapped as being both Britain and France. Which is a fair enough abstraction considering the game.

I disagree about Civ5's Celts being an acceptable abstraction--they were an abominable mishmash--but I agree with everything else. (Also I love your avatar.)

 

[BenZL43]

Srivijaya.

No, not Majapahit.
Not (modern) Indonesia.
I want to see Srivijaya - the Golden Age of Buddhism in maritime SEA, when trade winds were strong and riches were abundant.

 

[MooFreaky]

I disagree about Civ5's Celts being an acceptable abstraction--they were an abominable mishmash--but I agree with everything else. (Also I love your avatar.)

Yeah... I mean it's far from ideal. But I can't see the Gauls getting in when France is already there. It's not my ideal solution, but I preferred having the Celts there than not. Same way that I understand the concept behind Polynesia. It isn't the best solution, but I can see what they were getting at.

Hk-47 is the bomb

 

[Sascha77]

Since I'm German and since Civ VI seems to be built to feature different leaders for the same civs, I'd love to see a German leader that isn't geared as heavily towards war/conquest. I actually loved Civ IV's choice of German leaders in this regard with the more industrious/militaristic Bismark on the one hand and the more cultural Frederick the Great on the other. Although one could argue that, in real life, Frederick was just as much a war-monger as Bismark .

The game could also use more Mesoamerican civs like the Maya and the Inca. You haven't really played Civ V unless you played an ICS-game with Pacal ..

I do miss Polynesia in this version - loved their abilities and unique unit/building in Civ V and taking into account their (real life) achievements when it comes to navigation and early colonization of the Pacific, this civ surely deserves as spot in this game.

Perhaps an Indian leader other than Gandhi would be nice. I'm not too familiar with Indian history, but there surely must be someone much more aggressive/militaristic in that country's long history to include in a Civ-game.

North American native tribes are sorely missed in Civ VI as well - but I'm pretty sure we'll see at least one of them return as a DLC.

The Celts absolutely need to make a comeback. I loved Boudica and Brennus in previous versions of the game and their combo of spirituality and aggressiveness.

I'd also love to see more leaders from the actual "cradle of civilization" (Mesopotamia). Babylon, Persia, etc.

Carthage is another candidate that could use a comeback. Highly successful and influential civ historically and they were a lot of fun on water-maps in Civ V.

Gaul is France but change the leader to Vercigetorix

Germania is Germany but change the leader to Arminius.

Well... Gaul is basically the Celts who should absolutely make a comeback. Just don't call them "Gauls" ... call them Celts like in the older games.

Much like Gaul, Germany back then wasn't a "country" per se and the term "Germanic" wasn't even what those people called themselves (the Romans did). I do agree however that they would be a good candidate for inclusion in some way. Maybe kill two birds with one stone and include the Franks under Charlemagne? That way you'd have an older civ that represents the roots of two modern countries (France and Germany).





S.

 

[Tesch]

Modern Era Sweden.

Leader: Olof Palme
Trait: Moral Superpower
In the modern era all of your cities will grow 1 population per turn if at least two other civs are at war with each other or if any civ chosen fascism. This trait is not restricted by housing nor does it affect regular growth. Can only be stopped if Sweden takes on fascism.
Maybe not as an official DLC. But could be a fun mod.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah... I mean it's far from ideal. But I can't see the Gauls getting in when France is already there. It's not my ideal solution, but I preferred having the Celts there than not. Same way that I understand the concept behind Polynesia. It isn't the best solution, but I can see what they were getting at.

Hk-47 is the bomb

I don't really see territorial overlap as an issue. We already have two Greek civs and will inevitably see Byzantium as well--which overlaps with Greece, Rome, Arabia, Egypt, and Persia. In Civ5 we even had Byzantium and Ottoman Turks with the same capital.

The game could also use more Mesoamerican civs like the Maya and the Inca. You haven't really played Civ V unless you played an ICS-game with Pacal ..

Inca are South American, not Mesoamerican...

Well... Gaul is basically the Celts who should absolutely make a comeback. Just don't call them "Gauls" ... call them Celts like in the older games.

Much like Gaul, Germany back then wasn't a "country" per se and the term "Germanic" wasn't even what those people called themselves (the Romans did). I do agree however that they would be a good candidate for inclusion in some way. Maybe kill two birds with one stone and include the Franks under Charlemagne? That way you'd have an older civ that represents the roots of two modern countries (France and Germany).

Civilization and country aren't the same thing. Civilizations may include more than one state. There may have never been a single Gaulish state (closest was Vercingetorix's confederacy), but there was certainly a Gaulish civilization (which was, in fact, different from British or Celtiberian civilization, and both were extremely different from the Brythonic and Goidelic civilizations that Civ5's abomination of a civ was attempting to lump into one civ).

 

[daft]

Urartu

 

[OAFK]

South American Civ needed be it Mayan or Incan

Richard I (lionheart) gets my vote for alternate English leader, would be very cool for some holy war stuff if they got the bonus' right

 

[SMcM]

If Gaul is France, Rome is also France, Spain, England, and arguably Germany.

That's a nonsense comparison really.

 

[Bodin]

I would like to see new DLC Civ Packs based on region:

1.Ancient World Mediterranean Region
Babylon
Hittie (Hattusa)
Phoenicia
Cathage
Persia
Hebrew (Canaan/Israelite)
Philistine
Assyrian
Ugarit
Troy (Trojan)
Minoan (Crete)
Akkad (Akkadian)
and of course, a map script of the Ancient Mediterranean which would also allow civilization which are already in Civ 6 to be included such as Egypt, Sumeria, Greece, and so forth.

2. Heptarchy Region (not as only a Medieval scenario locked to a time period, but a region that can be started from ancient era start and played into the near future era):
Celts
Picts
Angles
Jutes
Saxons
Britons
Danes
Varangians
Obotrites (Obotrite Confederation)
(perhaps even the separate nations of England (Wessex, East Anglia, Mercia, Northumbria [including sub-kingdoms Bernicia and Deira], Essex, Sussex, and Kent)
and of course a map script of the British Isles.

3. The same idea can be applied to the Americas (Inuit, Aleut, Yupik, and Haida) or native American tribes such as Apache, Cherokee, Sioux, Mohawk, Iroquois, Shoshone, Pawnee, Navajo, Choctaw, Blackfeet, and so forth. And lets not forget the Central/South American tribes to go with the Aztecs such as the Incas and Mayans).

4. The same idea can also be applied to the African nations (there are many to choose from).

5. And lets not leave out the many Asian nations that could make a good addition (include the Pacific Islands and even Australia).

And so on and so forth depending on the region one considers. There's lots more that could be listed (so, this list is by no means exhaustive).

 

[MooFreaky]

Well... Gaul is basically the Celts who should absolutely make a comeback. Just don't call them "Gauls" ... call them Celts like in the older games.

Much like Gaul, Germany back then wasn't a "country" per se and the term "Germanic" wasn't even what those people called themselves (the Romans did). I do agree however that they would be a good candidate for inclusion in some way. Maybe kill two birds with one stone and include the Franks under Charlemagne? That way you'd have an older civ that represents the roots of two modern countries (France and Germany).

The difference is there is a clear path between Germania and modern Germany, as there is between the Franks and modern France. There is an evolution from one people to the next, giving heritage between modern and ancient. Whereas the Gauls see their path fall off a cliff, before meandering into non-existence. When Gaul was conquered they lost a lot of their population. Then they spent centuries under Roman occupation and were one of the most "Romanised" of all the peoples that fell under Roman banners. The Gallic heritage was basically bred out of existence. Anything that survived (ie not much) was dealt with by plague and war, before being subjected to Gothic and Frankish mastery.

Sure people with Gallic bloodlines bred into the Franks, but their culture, customs and ways of life, were totally eradicated.


The problem stems from the fact that there are so many Civilizations that have histories so long that they can't fit into the Civilization (the game) mould properly. How does having a Unique Unit and a Unique Building (or Unique Improvement) allow you to pick through the whole history of a Civilization like France? France and Rome (and others) could easily be seperated into half a dozen (or more) different Civilizations that were all distinct from one another. It would be great to have a UU, UI and UB for each age of the game, but certain Civilizations can't do this (America is too new. Rome doesn't have a modern period - and using Italy isn't an accurate solution)

 

[CivLuvah]

Persia and the Ottomans, but everyone wants that.

Iroquois
Maya
Inca
Hungary
Mali
Kilwa
Zulu
Korea
Vietnam