(poll) What civs would you like to see in a hypothetical third expansion?

What 8 civs would you like in a third expansion?

  • Babylon

    Votes: 128 55.9%
  • Portugal

    Votes: 142 62.0%
  • Maya

    Votes: 162 70.7%
  • Byzantium

    Votes: 122 53.3%
  • Ethiopia

    Votes: 118 51.5%
  • Italy

    Votes: 65 28.4%
  • Vietnam

    Votes: 96 41.9%
  • Morocco/Moors

    Votes: 70 30.6%
  • Assyria

    Votes: 55 24.0%
  • Austria

    Votes: 41 17.9%
  • Burma

    Votes: 18 7.9%
  • Chola/Tamil

    Votes: 23 10.0%
  • Timurids

    Votes: 20 8.7%
  • Armenia

    Votes: 36 15.7%
  • Afghanistan

    Votes: 15 6.6%
  • Hittites

    Votes: 50 21.8%
  • Benin

    Votes: 18 7.9%
  • Ashanti

    Votes: 24 10.5%
  • Swahilli

    Votes: 30 13.1%
  • Zimbabwe

    Votes: 14 6.1%
  • Bulgaria

    Votes: 26 11.4%
  • Bohemia

    Votes: 15 6.6%
  • Ireland

    Votes: 34 14.8%
  • Romania

    Votes: 31 13.5%
  • Goths

    Votes: 40 17.5%
  • Gran Colombia

    Votes: 44 19.2%
  • Mughals

    Votes: 28 12.2%
  • Olmec, Toltec, Zapotec etc

    Votes: 21 9.2%
  • Navajo

    Votes: 66 28.8%
  • Native Americans - other than Navajo

    Votes: 76 33.2%

  • Total voters
    229
Right now, as I understand it, the 'Ancient DNA' databases are most complete for Europe and western Asia (Russia to Siberia) but are expanding rapidly. IF they can get enough samples from eastern/northern Asia and the pre-European migrants into the Americas, there is now a real possibility of confirming or denying some of the scant linguistic an archeological evidence as to relationships. It's a real crapshoot, because to get useable samples from thousands of years back requires that specific small bones survive to be found (a bone in the inner ear is the densest bone in the body, and I've read that microscopic DNA can survive in it for up to 4 - 6000 years and still be analyzed, which was an Absolute Impossibility just ten years ago - but the bone is tiny and whether it survives to be found at all is by no means certain, even in intact graves)
Stay tuned: everything we thought we knew is subject to change . . .
The two big problems with that are that first, genetics and linguistics are not necessarily equivalent (e.g., Finns are genetically Indo-European but linguistically Uralic) and second, Na-Dene are genetically ~98% Amerindian, which isn't much to work with. :( So even proving that the Ket and Tlingit share common genetic ancestors, for instance, wouldn't prove Dene-Yeniseian.
 
The two big problems with that are that first, genetics and linguistics are not necessarily equivalent (e.g., Finns are genetically Indo-European but linguistically Uralic) and second, Na-Dene are genetically ~98% Amerindian, which isn't much to work with. :( So even proving that the Ket and Tlingit share common genetic ancestors, for instance, wouldn't prove Dene-Yeniseian.
Proto-Indo-European..
Spoiler from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yamnaya_culture :

Eastern Europe and Finland

In the Baltic, Jones et al. (2017) found that the Neolithic transition – the passage from a hunter-gatherer economy to a farming-based economy – coincided with the arrival en masse of individuals with Yamnaya-like ancestry. This is different from what happened in Western and Southern Europe, where the Neolithic transition was caused by a population that came from the Near East, with Pontic steppe ancestry being detected from only the late Neolithic onward.[34]

Per Haak et al. (2015), the Yamnaya contribution in the modern populations of Eastern Europe ranges from 46.8 % among Russians to 42.8 % in Ukrainians. Finland has one of the highest Yamnaya contributions in all of Europe (50.4 %). Per Haak et al. (2015), adding a north-Siberian people as a fourth reference population improves residuals for northeastern European populations. This accounts for the higher than expected Yamnaya contribution and brings it down to expected levels (67.8–50.4 % in Finns, 64.9–46.8 % in Russians).
 
I did not go back and read all 32 pages of post, so apologies if my comments below have been mentioned already.

Here are three I'd like to see:

Vietnam. Survived invasion/colonization of three military superpowers (Japan, France, US) and got rid of each of them within the span of 30 years. Had a major cultural impact on one of those they won a war against (US).

Comanche. They were the most feared Native Americans among US settlers. Mastered the use of horses and raiding on the plains.

Israel. Not many other nations/civilizations have had more of an impact on post-WWII society.

I could foresee all of these having interesting leaders, UAs, and UUs.
 
Last edited:
Vietnam. Survived invasion/colonization of three military superpowers (Japan, France, US) and got rid of each of them within the span of 30 years. Had a major cultural impact on one of those they won a war against (US).
Among others, they also survived as a next-door neighbour to China, and were also victorious against the Mongols when Kublai Khan decided to send his armies to Vietnam.
 
Israel. Not many other nations/civilizations have had more of an impact on post-WWII society.
Well, that's new. Amid the many, many requests for the Kingdom of Israel, I don't think I've ever seen a request for the State of Israel. If the Kingdom is controversial, I think we can safely say that the State isn't even on the table. :p
 
^ Why Firaxis NEVER considered playable Israel.? regardless that Judaism existed in Civ series since Civ4.
.
Because most of the modern state is considered to be "occupied territory" and some don't even consider it a state at all. I'll just leave it at that.

To avoid any controversy they could always elect to call the civ Hebrews without using the name Israel. I don't know if that would be less controversial or not.
 
India is still only nominally a 'single' Civ: my wife and I have several friends from India (she nannied some of their kids for several years) and they have less in common with each other than they have with us! One family is from the Punjab and is Sikh, the other from south of Mumbai and are Pentacostal Christians! Linguistically, culturally, genetically and religiously they are very diverse. . .
In addition, and in this India is like China, the area has had Civilizations in it for over 3000 years, leading to a lot of temporal diversity as well: even Indian states that covered roughly the same area geographically could be so different in time period, religion, and culture as to be separate civilizations.

It's like having one civ called Europe and led by Churchill for every single Civ game for eternity.
 
An Indian classmate of mine once said Indians are only Indian when dealing with non-Indians (he was Punjabi).

My brother had a classmate in Elementary School who was a second-generation immigrant from India. Every time he was called East Indian (the "East," was always a prefix in Canada back in the '80's, because First Nations were still commonly called "Indians," back then), he always politely corrected and said, "Punjabi."
 
Because most of the modern state is considered to be "occupied territory" and some don't even consider it a state at all. I'll just leave it at that.

To avoid any controversy they could always elect to call the civ Hebrews without using the name Israel. I don't know if that would be less controversial or not.

Politics and gaming - the toxic brew...
 
Seeing in this poll, I just realizing how requested Portugal was before NFP (and now the most popular, once Maya is already in the game) makes me more sure that they will not be cut from the game.
They are second.
Interestingly enough Gran Colombia doesn't have as many votes as highly requested ones, and yet they made it.
 
They are second.
Interestingly enough Gran Colombia doesn't have as many votes as highly requested ones, and yet they made it.

I still think they shouldn't have gotten a civ slot, and were a very odd and inexplicable choice - especially of all the possibilities out there.
 
They are second.
Interestingly enough Gran Colombia doesn't have as many votes as highly requested ones, and yet they made it.

Yeah, although Civ6 has a strong focus on personality leaders, which most certainly justified the inclusion of Simon Bolivar. Also, Gran Colombia was the most popular request among Hispanic nations, although less than Vietnam, Navajo and Italy, as we can see in the poll.

Given that Firaxis is including common fan requests, I wonder what happens unce they haven't added an Italian representation yet :think:. If they think that a civilization called "Italy" would be overlapping with Rome, they could at least add Florence, Venice (unlikely now) or Genoa.

I still think they shouldn't have gotten a civ slot, and were a very odd and inexplicable choice - especially of all the possibilities out there.

I think it would be very bizarre not to have a Hispanic nation in the game while we have three former British colonies. My personal choice would be Argentina, but I'm perfectly fine with Gran Colombia.
 
Yeah, although Civ6 has a strong focus on personality leaders, which most certainly justified the inclusion of Simon Bolivar. Also, Gran Colombia was the most popular request among Hispanic nations, although less than Vietnam, Navajo and Italy, as we can see in the poll.

Given that Firaxis is including common fan requests, I wonder what happens unce they haven't added an Italian representation yet :think:. If they think that a civilization called "Italy" would be overlapping with Rome, they could at least add Florence, Venice (unlikely now) or Genoa.



I think it would be very bizarre not to have a Hispanic nation in the game while we have three former British colonies. My personal choice would be Argentina, but I'm perfectly fine with Gran Colombia.

Or the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. I mean, why not, if they already another short-lived nation like Gran Columbia. I mean, who couldn't not like Ferdinand II, with his unique hybrid of Conservative and Liberal Policy called "lazzaroni," (could make a good unique civic), built the first railroads and steamship lines ever built on the Italian Peninsula, was one of the biggest exporters of sulphur in Europe (which meant, in World Wars munitions technology, a big and profitable hand in the gunpowder trade), had Pope Pius XIII as a political ally, and had a very complex and, seemingly contradictory, response to the Revolutions of 1848. And, even though it was under two years after his death under his son, Francis II, there was, of course, the surreal scene that was so typical of Italian media when Giuseppe Garibaldi was coming up from Sicily and King Vittorio Emmanuel II of Sardinia-Piedmont (soon to be King of Italy) coming south from Abruzzo, I believe, during the Risorgimento, Francis II, his wife Maria Sophie, his other family members, his household, his generals and admirals, and his government ministers departed Naples, and the people of city came out onto their balconies and gave a thunderous round of applause as they headed to the docks and boarded their steamer.
 
Yeah, although Civ6 has a strong focus on personality leaders, which most certainly justified the inclusion of Simon Bolivar. Also, Gran Colombia was the most popular request among Hispanic nations, although less than Vietnam, Navajo and Italy, as we can see in the poll.
This poll and the countless requests gives me hope. :please:

I think it would be very bizarre not to have a Hispanic nation in the game while we have three former British colonies. My personal choice would be Argentina, but I'm perfectly fine with Gran Colombia.
That's exactly how I felt though I was indifferent on Gran Colombia or Argentina, because they both would be good inclusions.

I think Canada though is supposed to represent a former "French" colony considering the choice of leader who speaks better French than the actual French leaders. :lol:
 
I think Canada though is supposed to represent a former "French" colony considering the choice of leader who speaks better French than the actual French leaders. :lol:

Which is odd (and perhaps misinformed and stereotyped by Firaxis), because all of Canada's legal and political, and the great majority of it's social and cultural institutions are derived from it's heritage as a British Dominion. Laurier did not officially speak French abroad, and only spoke it domestically in Quebec - all business of the Canadian Federal Government was in English back then. Also, Quebec culture tends to be insular to a significant degree within Canada. So the "Francophone," civilization portrayal makes no sense.
 
Top Bottom