[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Birch617]

I am a huge fan of the Muisca, my university is even trying to reconstruct their language, they're really interesting and have some quite interesting leader choices. However, I do think Gran Colombia or Colombia lead by Simón Bolívar is way more representative for a lot of peoples in Latin America than the Muisca. Just by having Bolívar in you're including territories from all the northern part of Spanish-speaking South America an large parts of central america and the Caribbean, as well as being a a society/culture(s)/civilisation that still exists to this day. So I'd still prefer Gran Colombia/Colombia over the Muisca, as much as I love them as well and I am glad that Hunza is a city-state and that the ancient theme of GC has Muisca and other indigenous and African influences, not just Spanish musical influence

And the Muisca would really overlap in TSL map with Gran Colombia, their capitals were located in the same spot, not more than 15 km away from each other in real life. I'd rather have another South American nation from the region around Argentina, be it native or even Argentina itself. Though I dont think it is very likely considering what has been speculated here thus far

What universty are you from; i find very interesting trying to reconstruct chibcha language; also yeah i do like a lot the inclusion of Gran Colombia, but if we talk overlap between civ on TSL maps then we should have more european civs then (and we already have civs that overlap with eachothers like England and Scotland)

 

[reddishrecue]

My main reason for not including the Sioux would be number 2. The Cree fill the "Great Plains" role fine without it being over the top and no horse raiding unit.

I agree. The music of the Cree sound similar to the Sioux music in earlier versions.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

My bet is still on the Timurids, if anything, since they snatch up some Mughal representation too, and both are the most highly requested civs in the region. Very long shot that they are instead just called the "Gurkhani" so they can be less horselord-ish and have Nur Jahan as a leader without being the Mughals proper and triggering India critics.

if im honest, the mughals called themselves gurkhani but were nothing like the timurids. I’d say it’s similar to how the byzantines called themselves romans but weren’t really roman in any sense of the word.

 

[Jkchart]

I’ve been reading about the Sogdians since @Zaarin mentioned them and they would be amazing to include as representing Central Asia. I sadly think it is not happening but I would be giddy to have them.

also since this sort of is about new Civs...unpopular theory that the R&F requires leader could be Mary Queen of Scots. I mean...they added the Courser last xpack, the Border Reivers (which were at their height during the Stuart dynasty) are mentioned directly in the civilopedia entry for the courser...and Ed just did a game called Border Reivers...and MQOS is a popular figure IIRC...idk just galaxy brain thoughts late at night

 

[8housesofelixir]

For Sogdians: I understand that if people hardly heard this group before, because they are definitely a group that always "work behind scenes."

For about one thousand years, before Muslim and Mongols entered the Inner Asia, before long-range naval trade flourished in Indian Ocean, it was primarily the Sogdians that connect the East and the West, acted as the ultimate "middleman" between two parts of the world. They controlled and maintained nearly the whole Silk Road, fueled the the exchange of goods, information, religion, cultural practices, and scientific technologies from Mediterranean to China and vice versa.

I'm not knowledgeable enough to talk about the Sogdians' influence to the West. But for China, it can be said that they are part of the backbone of the China in medieval period. The Sogdian communities produced a large amount of merchants, generals, and statesmen to Tang Dynasty, supported it's military and economic ambitions, and were powerful enough to trigger an all-out rebellion which contributed to Tang's downfall - Au Lushan, the famous rebel, was also a Sogdian.

The current in-game natural wonder, Zhangye Danxia, with it's great merchant and great general bonuses, can be also considered as a nod to the Sogdians: The Zhangye Danxia was a colorful mountain ridge on the silk road, near the town of Zhangye, and there are actually several large Sogdian communities (developed from Sogdian trade posts) lived near Zhangye since Jin Dynasty. (Most of them lived in Duhuang, which is also not far away.) And it was the Sogdians that produced many great merchants and generals.

As for the Sogdian language, besides the Yaghnobi people who still use an dialect of the Sogdian, the ancient/medieval Sogdian and their alphabet are all decipherable/readable. For instance, the Chinese name "An Lushan" can be identified as the transliteration of "Rokhshan" in medieval Sogdian, which means "light".

Edit: wording

 

[untitledjuan]

Regarding Irish heritage being so common, it's obvious that English heritage is very under represented. I think English ancestry in America is de-emphasised because of the fact that it had to fight to free itself from Britain in the first place. A lot of white Americans answer 'American' as their heritage in surveys and probably some and I think people are more likely to stress their non-English ancestory. I'm sure many of the Irish Americans are part English, mixing between Ireland and Britain has been very common historically. 10% of the UK population are a quarter Irish, myself included.

Something similar happens with Spanish ancestry in Latin America. Most people have some degree of Spanish ancestry, but they wouldn't identify with the word "Spanish", preferring to use terms such as Colombian, Argentinian, Venezuelan, Cuban, etc. This also applies to some people with indigenous ancestry as well. That's why having at least one "modern" Spanish American civ in the game is important. A person with Irish or Spanish ancestry in the New World, though acknowledging their heritage, won't necessarily identify as such and would feel more comfortable being identified by their current nation (USA, Canada, Colombia, Brazil, etc.) Obviously there are exceptions and everyone generally decides which label to use for "cultural identification"

Moderator Action: Please come back to the topic of the thread. leif

 

[Lord Lakely]

ISo we're combining America again plus some abilities of the Cree?

More or less, yes. I never claimed it would be a unique niche in Civ 6, especially with the Roosevelt split

I'm not quite sure that getting tourism from wonders in high appeal tiles would be appropriate for the Sioux and might even be offensive to them if you are referring to Mt. Rushmore.
If not then I apologize and wonder what you are referring to exactly considering the Sioux never built world wonders themselves?

I forgot Mt. Rushmore was even located in Siouxan lands. ( ) I was thinking more along the lines of Natural Wonders, rather than man-made ones. However, conceptually I envision the Sioux as being appeal-based warmongers: Draw inner [combat] strength from living around beautiful landscapes. Thematically it would make sense to extend that to their cities and construction as well. Not due to a historical basis, but because it would make the design of the civ more well-rounded and themed. If a Civ has a bonus fighting in X, wouldn't a peace time bonus with the same X make a lot of sense? (cf: Menelik's hill combat bonus + UI that must be built in hills + extra yields in cities on hills).

I'm not that bothered that the Sioux never built World Wonders anyway. Neither did the Cree. Or the Mapuche. Or the Mongols. Or the Zulu. Yet here they are in a game where they can build them anyway.

 

[cosmicmangobear]

also since this sort of is about new Civs...unpopular theory that the R&F requires leader could be Mary Queen of Scots.

Ohhh, Mary/CdM would be the best contemporary leader drama since Cyrus/Tomyris... *grabs popcorn*

 

[SMcM]

I don't think Scotland being a civilization to have multiple leaders is warranted at all, so far we've only had that for India and Greece which are both far more significant I would say.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

also since this sort of is about new Civs...unpopular theory that the R&F requires leader could be Mary Queen of Scots. I mean...they added the Courser last xpack, the Border Reivers (which were at their height during the Stuart dynasty) are mentioned directly in the civilopedia entry for the courser...and Ed just did a game called Border Reivers...and MQOS is a popular figure IIRC...idk just galaxy brain thoughts late at night

In case you missed it there was a leak in the game files that basically pointed to Kublai Khan and Vietnam. I'm 99% sure it will be them.

I'm not that bothered that the Sioux never built World Wonders anyway. Neither did the Cree. Or the Mapuche. Or the Mongols. Or the Zulu. Yet here they are in a game where they can build them anyway.

Yeah, that's not a problem at all. My only question was why the Sioux would get tourism from world wonders but you explained that you were thinking of natural wonders instead.

 

[SMcM]

In case you missed it there was a leak in the game files that basically pointed to Kublai Khan and Vietnam. I'm 99% sure it will be them.

Not for September though, right? Pack 3 is 2 civilizations, not one civilization and an alternate leader.



Unless Kublai Khan is going to lead a Yuan civilization, but I don't think that seems likely or necessary.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Not for September though, right? Pack 3 is 2 civilizations, not one civilization and an alternate leader.

Unless Kublai Khan is going to lead a Yuan civilization, but I don't think that seems likely or necessary.

I assume Kublai and Vietnam is for January - 1 civ and 2 leaders - although how they put a game file for January update inside the July update, which is half a year before January, is beyond my knowledge.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Not for September though, right? Pack 3 is 2 civilizations, not one civilization and an alternate leader.



Unless Kublai Khan is going to lead a Yuan civilization, but I don't think that seems likely or necessary.

no it’s in jan, he’ll be an alt for mongolia and maybe china

 

[Lord Lakely]

The general concensus is that the next pack are two Euro civs. the Kublai/Vietnam pack would then be suitable for Jan.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Mmm. I was thinking two Middle Eastern civs.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

The general concensus is that the next pack are two Euro civs. the Kublai/Vietnam pack would then be suitable for Jan.

Mmm. I was thinking two Middle Eastern civs.

Yeah there is no general consensus that I've seen. What we do know is that the next DLC comes with a new map and we already have a European map. I'm banking more on, in order of likelihood:

1) two Middle eastern civs;
2) two North American civs or one NA civ and Portugal;
3) two African civs.

I think more likely DLC 4 and 6 will both be European or Euro-adjacent.

EDIT: I suppose there could also be America map with two colonial powers like Portugal. But what else could we have? Denmark? Are we getting Denmark? Margaret, is that you?

 

[SMcM]

Mmm. I was thinking two Middle Eastern civs.

Two Middle Eastern civs? Which civs are you thinking they might add? Most of the speculation I've seen has said Assyria, Babylon or Hittites but usually not multiple. Were you thinking they might add a more recent Middle Eastern civilization as well?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Not for September though, right? Pack 3 is 2 civilizations, not one civilization and an alternate leader.

I was referring to the the 5th pack which the new leader requires R&F.

Two Middle Eastern civs? Which civs are you thinking they might add? Most of the speculation I've seen has said Assyria, Babylon or Hittites but usually not multiple. Were you thinking they might add a more recent Middle Eastern civilization as well?

There is a possiblity that the "Middle East" pack could give us a civ from North Africa. Alternatively I don't think it's a stretch to put the Byzantines there as well considering geographically they would fit better there than maybe with Portugal.

 

[Jeppetto]

Mmm. I was thinking two Middle Eastern civs.

Me too If you count Byzantium as Middle Eastern. Important thing is that the Pack includes new map so I strongly bet on it being tied with either Northern America (with Americas as map), Middle East and Central Asia or Africa and I would think NA would come later with Tribal Native American Civ. It could also be different type of map completely unrelated to TSL but I feel like those missing regions should be filled.

 

[Codeword Iroquois]

Pack three is probably Europe, simply due to the generally large quantity of European civs in Expansions. Pack 4 and Pack 6 are likely from other regions that have absences that many see needing filled: North Africa, North America, Central Asia, Middle East, etc.