[Religion and Revolution]: Further Native Nations

You are not really open to suggestions, are you? :D
Not even if we are more-or less agree ;)

The diffs: As I said, I would definitely add the Comanche to North America in the next step, they are fairly important
I would consider to have both the Cree and the Algonquin, even if they are close
The 2 South could be Chibcha and Mapuche (so we keep the Tehuelche in)
Shaur renamed to Jivaro
Also, I'm not really fond if the Mixtecs, that area is already very crowded
Though I can certainly live with having an extra civ there too, so compromise here :)

This makes a complete list both region and culture-wise:
North (10): Apache, Sioux, Cherokee, Iroquois, Hurons, Navajo, Comanche, Inuit, Algonquin, Cree
Central (4) + Caribbean (2): Aztec, Maya, Zapotec, Mixtec + Arawak, Carib
South (7): Inca, Tupi, Tehuelche, Mapuche, Jivaro, Guarani, Chibcha

Now my input is complete ;)
Naturally feel free to accept and decline anything, these are only suggestions of course
 
You are not really open to suggestions, are you? :D

I am open to suggestions. :)

But as I said, the next 6 Native Nations are planned.
Although it is still relatively open, which 2 Native Nations we will add in the South.

-> Navajo, Alonquin, Caribs, Mixtec, Southern 1, Southern 2

As long as the team does not object, we will do it like that.
(Many considerations have been put into that: Balancing, personal wishes of team members, availability of Leaderheads, ...)

After that we will see. :dunno:
The team will discuss then, which other Native Nations we will add.
Your input might be considered then. :thumbsup:
 
As you can see, I don't really have more suggestions, the list starting to feel complete
So good job on it overally!
The only missing important civ is the Comanche as I have already stated a couple times

Btw, one minor nitpick: I see you consistently use Alonquin, in all 5 pages of this thread
It's Algonquin (or Algonquian)
 
Here is another peice of information about the Cree, if you eventually think about adding another sub-arctic native group:

I fully support the idea to add the Inuit as a tribe, we need a logical choice for arctic regions.

Other ideas might be the Algonquin (which are a tribe by themselves but could also represent a broader group such as the Cree and other related peoples) and if there was interest, the Cree could be added separately (they're a very large and significant group throughout large parts of Canada, even to this day).

Take a look at these maps:

Spoiler :
Algonquins (not including most Cree)


Spoiler :
Cree

 
Hi guys, here are the next two native civs. Sorry for the delay, my internet was down over the weekend.:eek:

View attachment Algonquian Generals.txt

View attachment Algonquian History.txt

View attachment Algonquian Leader1.txt

View attachment Algonquian Leader2.txt

View attachment Algonquian villages.txt

View attachment Carib Generals.txt

View attachment Carib History.txt

View attachment Carib Leader.txt

View attachment Carib villages.txt

As you can see I've added the bio's for two Algonquian leaders. I couldn't decide what one would be better, maybe the group in general has a preference? Female Algonquian leaders are few and far between but these two seemed to be the best representation and had the most reliable documented info.

Also as Algonquian, pertains to a language group rather than a singular tribe, I've tried to include a few names of villages and leaders from the more prominent tribes, such as Blackfoot, Cree, Abenaki, Shawnee, Cheyenne, Wampanoag, Powhatan, etc. Although in the game they will be represented by the one leader.

Any comments/feedback/changes let me know.
 
I see you more or less included the Cree here
I guess this excludes them as a separate NA civ

Anyway, what do you think of the remaining southern natives?
I'm really curious on your opinion after the conversation we had with raystuttgart
 
Hi Absinthered,

Thank you for your interest and feedback.:)

I see you more or less included the Cree here
I guess this excludes them as a separate NA civ

You are correct. Ideally the team would like many more native civs represented but we are constrained by several factors. Firstly, the game needs to be balanced in terms of numbers of tribes within the different continents to avoid potential bugs and other problems. Secondly, there is a lack of good leaderheads out there that would adequately represent native civs. Thirdly, the maps in the game are only so big, and we don't want to overcrowd things.

With that being said, Algonquian seemed to be a more representative choice for a North American civ. We could use them to represent several native civs and given their widespread locales, could place them in numerous ares on a historically accurate map.

Anyway, what do you think of the remaining southern natives?

I believe we both suggested the same tribe. You referred to them as the Chibcha, whereas I referred to them as the Muisca. But they are essentially one in the same. The Muisca were a Chibcha speaking people. I like this choice as at the moment, we really don't have a tribe from the area of Columbia represented and with the Muisca some of their practices were largely responsible for fueling the stories of "El Dorado."

The other tribe I was thinking of were the Cambeba. We have the Guarani and Tehuelche in the south of the continent, the Tupi in the east, the Inca and Shuar in the west, and possibly the Muisca in the north. Geographically, it would be nice to balance thing out a bit and have a central based tribe, and although not that widely known after the 16th century, when Francisco De Orellana travelled down the Amazon in the early 1540's, he did mentioned that the Cambeba appeared to have large expansive villages and were a civilization of some note.

I'm really curious on your opinion after the conversation we had with raystuttgart

I'm not sure what particular conversation you are referring to? But I will try to address the major points you have made.

1. Jivaro & Mapuche
Historically these names would be more accurate, but the team has decided to leave the Shuar and Tehuelche as they are. What with the additional work we have for other features this absolutely makes the most sense right now. I will at some point beef up the bio's on both tribes and mention the wider groups to which they belong.

2. Balancing
Again from a historical point of view, there should be many more tribes in North America than in Meso or South America, but for the sake of balancing we have to equal this out more than is probably desired. Essentially the game has to be playable with as few bugs and gliches as possible.

3. Comanche
Personally I am not too keen on adding the Comanche. We already have the Apache and Navajo, who and I hate to make such a sweeping generalization, were not too culturally dissimilar and who resided in the areas close to Comanche territory. I think three similar tribes in the same area might be a bit boring for the player? Just my opinion.

4. Chibcha & Mapuche
Already answered the Chibcha question. As for the Mapuche being the other South American tribe, I still prefer the Cambeba for the reasons I have given.

5. Mixtecs
I agree that given the smaller area of Meso-America, 4 tribes might make things a little crowded, but its that balancing issue again.

6. Algonquin/Algonquian
Before the final release we will make sure that the term Algonquian will be the only one in use, and no other spelling or variation such as Algonquin or Algonkin will be used.

I hope I've answered everything for you. If not fell free to post any other questions, feedback or suggestions.
 
@colonialfan:

Mixtec (Central)
Southern 1 (other Background of course)
Southern 2

Could you please start preparing Texts / Bios for these then ? :thumbsup:
(No need to hurry, maybe in the next couple of weeks.)

So I understand we have:

Mixtec -> Central
Cambella -> South

For the 3rd one (also South):
Feel free to choose one yourself as long as it generally fits to the one good leaderhead we have left.
(I fully trust you here. :) )
 
@colonialfan
Thanks for the detailed answer on everything!
I can more or less accept all the reasoning behind these decisions
I didn't hear about the Cambela previously, but they sound like a good addition

Btw, What's the exact relation between Tehuelche and Mapuche in your opinion?
I had read different things about it on different sources
Could they both be implemented in the same time, or is it closer to the Jivaro/Shuar and Chibcha/Muisca case?
Also, what's your opinion on including the Pueblo?
 
Also, what's your opinion on including the Pueblo?

Current thougths about really implementing a new Native Nation most of all depend on having a good quality Leaderhead. :)
When having found one of these, we start brainstorming about the Native Nation, that might fit to it.

So without further good quality Leaderheads ... :(
 
Current thougths about really implementing a new Native Nation most of all depend on having a good quality Leaderhead. :)
When having found one of these, we start brainstorming about the Native Nation, that might fit to it.

So without further good quality Leaderheads ... :(

Actually I was curious about the historical/regional reasons, whether they would be a good choice or not based on those
I'm already too familiar with the fact that finding suitable art can be real a pain :mischief:
 
Actually I was curious about the historical/regional reasons, whether they would be a good choice or not based on those
I'm already too familiar with the fact that finding suitable art can be real a pain :mischief:

Our "decision making process" simply is very different. :)

1. Good quality Leaderhead

2. Brainstorming which Native Nation might fit
(Also considering aspects like balancing the regions.)

Having a good quality Leaderhead really is the most important factor currently.
Discussing everything else does not make sense without that. :dunno:
(These discussions would be just hypothetical without any real target ...)
 
@colonialfan
Thanks for the detailed answer on everything!

You are welcome, I'm glad I could help.:)

Btw, What's the exact relation between Tehuelche and Mapuche in your opinion?
I had read different things about it on different sources
Could they both be implemented in the same time, or is it closer to the Jivaro/Shuar and Chibcha/Muisca case?

The relationship of the Mapulche and Tehuelche is primarily a linquistic, and a somewhat cultural one, quite similar to the linquistic connections between the differing Algonquian tribes. The Tehuelche adopted the Mapulche language and some of their cultural practices, though still retained their political autonomy. You could have the Mapulche and Tehuelche implemented at the same time, though the reason I initally suggested Mapulche was that they could be used to represent several tribes in an area, rather than one specific tribe as is the case with the Tehuelche.

Also, what's your opinion on including the Pueblo?

I have no strong objections to the Pueblo being included. However, it is another tribe in the southwest, where we already have the Apache and Navajo, and currently our leaderheads are somewhat limited. Personally I'm leaning towards a tribe from the great basin area, as that area has no representation as of yet. I was thinking of maybe a tribe like the Shoshoni or the Ute. If you have any suggestions I would be glad to hear them.
 
Maybe you could resurrect this indio empire.

I have reservations about resurrecting an empire that had already ceased to exist before the Europeans reached the America's.:( That's why I've stayed clear of the Hopewell or Adena cultures. Besides we already have the Inca and Shuar on the western side of South America. However, if there are team members who really want this civ included, I'll research what I can on them and compile the historical and biographical texts.
 
I think we should try to keep the historical evolution of the tribes/cultures in America. If the empire has ceased to exist before the Europeans reached America...so let the empire RIP... :)
 
@colonialfan:
Could you please start preparing Texts / Bios for these then ? :thumbsup:
(No need to hurry, maybe in the next couple of weeks.)

Will do. The Mixtec might be a bit challenging, as we have another female leaderhead, but I'll see what I can dig up.

For the 3rd one (also South):
Feel free to choose one yourself as long as it generally fits to the one good leaderhead we have left. (I fully trust you here. :) )

Thank you, I appreciate it.:D

On a completely seperate note, I think we should eliminate of one of the leader bio's I have provided for the Algonquian. I personally don't mind what one, but every other native civ has just one leader and I think we should remain consistent.
 
On a completely seperate note, I think we should eliminate of one of the leader bio's I have provided for the Algonquian. I personally don't mind what one, but every other native civ has just one leader and I think we should remain consistent.

Of course, Algonquian will also get only one leader. :)
 
Top Bottom