7 New Civs You'd Like to See in Civ7

[pokiehl]

The “pope” thread here made me realize that a Papal States or Vatican civ would be interesting.

 

[Evie]

If we cannot get Italy, that would be an interesting path to take, though I have a feeling it might be considered controversial.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

If we cannot get Italy, that would be an interesting path to take, though I have a feeling it might be considered controversial.

If we can't get a full-fledged Italy, my preference would be Tuscany.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

If we can't get a full-fledged Italy, my preference would be Tuscany.

Much as I love modern Tuscan cooking and culture, I would not feel we could do it right unless we could include the Beginnings: the Etruscans. Unfortunately, while there is a lot of archeological and written information about them from later Roman sources, we don't have a really good handle on their language, because virtually no original Etruscan writing has survived - we only have later Greek or Roman derviations of Etruscan words.

Leaving out the Etruscans, 'Tuscany' included a lot of the later Renaissance Italian City States or Republics, notably Florence, Pisa, Siena and Lucca, culminating in the Medici's Grand Duchy of Tuscany, which gives us a useful Leader in Cosimo I de Medici, the first Grand Duke.

 

[Vahnstad]

"Break up India"

But into what? What would the Civs, other than "India" that are in that region, be? If it's the Mughal Empire, that covers most of what is today India... so, why not call it India, is that really breaking it up at all? I've asked multiple times and I'm still just as confused about what "breaking up India" even entails here.

Overlap already exists

Mughals didn't really extend into Southern India. There's never been really a Tamil civ. India is a lot more complex that having one India civ led by Gandhi isn't doing it justice. Vijy and Mughals can certainly co-exist, there isn't even that much overlap. Secondly, the Mughal dynasty also had a different culture (and followed a different religion) which could warrant or justify the inclusion of a third India civ, like a Maurya civ.

India has a lot of separate cultures and languages, than one at first glance would think: gujarati, rajputani, maratha, telugu, kannada, punjabi, bengal, harappan etc... with lots of different religions: brahmanism, jainism, zoroastrianism, hindu, sikh, sunni, shia, etc.

 

[Evie]

And of course, it need be said, "breaking up India" is a bit of a misnomer because it implies we can't have India as a separate civ. If the problem is that modern India is actually a very marketable civ for a very large market and Gandhi is sort of a mascot for Civ...then yes, that's all true.

We can have India. But we should also have representation of the pre-modern Indian subcontinent, as more than just one unified blob.

 

[Bestbank Tiger]

My dream is the ability to create your own civ from scratch.

Technically you could in II by editing the mk.dll and text files, but it would be awesome to have in-game tools to do it.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

And of course, it need be said, "breaking up India" is a bit of a misnomer because it implies we can't have India as a separate civ. If the problem is that modern India is actually a very marketable civ for a very large market and Gandhi is sort of a mascot for Civ...then yes, that's all true.

We can have India. But we should also have representation of pre-modern India, as more than just one unified blob.

Yeah. I remember someone (I think it might have been you) said that modern India could work well as a 1st day DLC

 

[pokiehl]

I think day 1 DLC tends to annoy people, since it’s clearly reflective of holding back completed content for extra money.

 

[Evie]

I believe the original idea was more in the nature of a Preorder/Ultimate Edition bonus that would *eventually* be available to everyone else as DLC.

A practice that, I understand, is generally more accepted.

 

[pokiehl]

You’re describing how the Aztec were in Civ 6. There was a ton of grumbling about that, angry articles written, and the dlc while it was still separate from the game was review bombed heavily on Steam. (Even though it was free!)

 

[Evie]

I missed that, I'll take your word for it. In most other fanbase I know preorder bonuses are not generally met with hostility, so it's quite the bewildering reaction from where I stand.

(Of course the concept of a review bomb imply an angry *minority* overhwelming rating systems via systematic use, but I assume you simply mean there was an overwhelming number of negative review, not a concerted campaign to game the system).

In any event, I don't recall preorder bonus being my suggestion, simply one I was clarifying,

 

[GeneralZIft]

And of course, it need be said, "breaking up India" is a bit of a misnomer because it implies we can't have India as a separate civ. If the problem is that modern India is actually a very marketable civ for a very large market and Gandhi is sort of a mascot for Civ...then yes, that's all true.

We can have India. But we should also have representation of the pre-modern Indian subcontinent, as more than just one unified blob.

This comes to me a little more naturally than completely axing Gandhi/Modern India

I'm sure a lot of people enjoy that representation, as a whole nation. But it would obviously be nice to see some of the more classic Medieval era and such Indian empires.

(somehow, despite what I said about Rome / Italy, I do feel like this makes sense, am I a hypocrite, lol?)

 

[Evie]

I mean, I call him Gandhichu for a reason. He's to civilization as Pikachu is to Pokémon: annoying and overhyped to many of the more vocal fans, but inseparable from the franchise in popular perception.

I don't like him, but I don't think Civ would be wise to skip him more than maybe once in a very long while.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I missed that, I'll take your word for it. In most other fanbase I know preorder bonuses are not generally met with hostility, so it's quite the bewildering reaction from where I stand.

I think most of the hostility was the fact that the Aztecs had been in the game at launch, Day 1, for every other game. Not to mention they were the only pre-colonial civ in the Americas and many would have rather them than Brazil.

I mean, I call him Gandhichu for a reason. He's to civilization as Pikachu is to Pokémon: annoying and overhyped to many of the more vocal fans, but inseparable from the franchise in popular perception.

Wait, that's not Charizard?
I guess "Gandhizard" doesn't roll off the tongue quite as well.

 

[Patine]

My dream is the ability to create your own civ from scratch.

Technically you could in II by editing the mk.dll and text files, but it would be awesome to have in-game tools to do it.

Empire Earth, with it's Xpac, had some wonky system for that. As I recall, it recall, it didn't work well and ended up being broken. Such a system would hve to VERY carefully made.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

My dream is the ability to create your own civ from scratch.

Technically you could in II by editing the mk.dll and text files, but it would be awesome to have in-game tools to do it.

The new Millennia game says explicitly that its goal is to give you a blank slate to create your own Civ.
The problem with that, at least when I tried to play it, is that it gives you, as a result, no Leaders or any other named peoples, no Unique anything, and such generic attributes from the various Eras and constructions that it was so bland I couldn't stand it.

Maybe Civ spoiled me, but it made it impossible to identify with my faction and the game too boring to play. That doesn't mean the concept isn't viable, just that it's not easy to make it work.

 

[Naokaukodem]

The new Millennia game says explicitly that its goal is to give you a blank slate to create your own Civ.
The problem with that, at least when I tried to play it, is that it gives you, as a result, no Leaders or any other named peoples, no Unique anything, and such generic attributes from the various Eras and constructions that it was so bland I couldn't stand it.

Maybe Civ spoiled me, but it made it impossible to identify with my faction and the game too boring to play. That doesn't mean the concept isn't viable, just that it's not easy to make it work.

You have your Civ name AND cities names as uniques, it's enough to identify yourself, no need of spreadout uniques like there is in Civ6 really, the more when you have to check them multiple times in some panel, and sometimes they don't seem to work or are so odd that it sounds like a joke.

But I guess it's a matter of taste, eventhough we can elaborate one's taste a!ong stuff that excites the imagination. (although I have to admit that the terrace farms are neat graphically, and they give amazing yields too !... provided you start near mountains... happilly enough, the restart button makes for a relatively quick reroll, but I tend to not use it enough - bad habits from Civ2 Ironman mode all since)

 

[pokiehl]

sometimes they don't seem to work

Not sure what you mean. I don’t think any Civ abilities in 5 or 6 are bugged.

 

[Naokaukodem]

Not sure what you mean. I don’t think any Civ abilities in 5 or 6 are bugged.

In 6 I've seen descriptions likely written by a mad man on crack. The simpler I can recall is "+ 1 science near Seowons" or even less specified, while in fact it was "+1 science to MINES near Seowon". It has never been corrected it seems ?