[R&F] Based on the new features - which civilizations and leaders should be introduced in R&F?

[Eagle Pursuit]

Or high loyalty pressure against cities with works of art.

 

[liv]

Yes, if there is to be an Italy it should have a culture or ages ability. Leave the war advantages fro some one else. But they could have some kind of special ability to buy units for Condottiero

 

[blackcatatonic]

Garibaldi.

Expedition of the Thousand. Combat bonus against cities with low loyalty to their owner.

This could be a good shout.

I feel like a post-unification incarnation of Italy with Garibaldi as leader would be more appropriate than picking someone representative of one of the Renaissance city-states and having them lead a united Italy. You could argue it would be little different from how they tend to treat the Celts (Boudicca of the Iceni as leader, with Edinburgh as her capital!), but then again, there never was a single united Celtic kingdom made up of all the component tribes we think of as Celtic, whereas Italy as a united country has obviously been around for over 150 years.

 

[Vahnstad]

Please no modern Italy. I'm fine with renaissance Italy, though i would prefer the actual city-states like Florence, Venice and Genoa. If you want more modern leaders, they should add a soviet leader (though unlikely because of the civ ability).

 

[Kheznik]

I gotta be honest-- I don't get why Italy needs to be post-unification in order to qualify. The game is called Civilization, not Nation-States of History, and the renaissance Italian civilization more than checks all the boxes to appear in Civ, but has always taken the backseat because of Rome.

Civ VI is obviously aiming to change all that, as we've seen with Macedon and others. An Italian civ circa 1880 would be a poor idea, because when people think "Italy", they think Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Machiavelli, etc, and not so much Garibaldi or Mussolini. It would be such a missed opportunity to have Italy, but not make any reference to the renaissance in spite of being its birth place.

 

[Vahnstad]

I gotta be honest-- I don't get why Italy needs to be post-unification in order to qualify. The game is called Civilization, not Nation-States of History, and the renaissance Italian civilization more than checks all the boxes to appear in Civ, but has always taken the backseat because of Rome.

Civ VI is obviously aiming to change all that, as we've seen with Macedon and others. An Italian civ circa 1880 would be a poor idea, because when people think "Italy", they think Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Machiavelli, etc, and not so much Garibaldi or Mussolini. It would be such a missed opportunity to have Italy, but not make any reference to the renaissance in spite of being its birth place.

It actually already feels more like nation-states of history to be honest.

 

[pgm123]

Garibaldi.

Expedition of the Thousand. Combat bonus against cities with low loyalty to their owner.

More like a Great General. Should be Cavour, sort of how we had Otto von Bismarck before.

 

[pgm123]

It actually already feels more like nation-states of history to be honest.

Yes, but there are plenty of exceptions. You wouldn't have Pericles leading the Nation-State of Greece. Or a Nation-State of Scythia at all. You also have plenty of multi-ethnic empires instead of nation-states, but the game no longer handles minority citizens.

 

[blackcatatonic]

I gotta be honest-- I don't get why Italy needs to be post-unification in order to qualify. The game is called Civilization, not Nation-States of History, and the renaissance Italian civilization more than checks all the boxes to appear in Civ, but has always taken the backseat because of Rome.

Civ VI is obviously aiming to change all that, as we've seen with Macedon and others. An Italian civ circa 1880 would be a poor idea, because when people think "Italy", they think Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Machiavelli, etc, and not so much Garibaldi or Mussolini. It would be such a missed opportunity to have Italy, but not make any reference to the renaissance in spite of being its birth place.

As far as I know, you're the first person to suggest Mussolini

Italy as a Civ certainly doesn't need to be post-unification, and definitely not in its entirety. The great thing about Civs and the range of unique abilities, leader traits and assorted wossnames that comes with them is that they get to represent multiple periods in said Civ's history at the same time. I actually do think that any representation of Italy as a Civ should have lots of references to the medieval and Renaissance history of the Italian peninsula and definitely be themed in that way, with a cultural and possibly mercantile focus. But I don't see why it should be at all odd for it to also have a leader who actually ruled Italy as a whole at the same time, rather than a bit of it. I mean, look at England: Victoria obviously post-dates Sea Dogs, for example.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I wouldn’t expect a unified Italy civ to be anything other than based off the renaissance era with taking names from the various city states like they have always done with Greece.

 

[Ever Adrift]

I'd much rather see the Boers/Afrikaners than the Zulus.

So... you want white European settlers to be included as a civilization representing Sub-Saharan Africa, one of the most under-represented regions of the world throughout all civ games?

 

[Mr Jon of Cheam]

I wouldn’t expect a unified Italy civ to be anything other than based off the renaissance era with taking names from the various city states like they have always done with Greece.

Totally agree. A renaissance era Italy would be very cool, I'd love them to be included at some point!

I don't really play TSL, how do they resolve Greece/Sparta? I guess only one can be included when playing TSL?

 

[Naktis]

If they release renaissance Italy , then its clear that civ will be culture power , well at least its welcome sight , from so many warmongers there. Tho playing against them could be pain , remember Kongo.

 

[Haig]

Didn't Ed Beach wrote "one leader could be a leader of many civs" or something?

Sounds like Garibaldi to me.

 

[Ever Adrift]

I'll be extremely disappointed if we don't get an African civilization - the continent is already under-represented and the developers have indicated they are aiming at better global representation so I would also be surprised. Personally, I'd like to see Madagascar but would be happy with Songhai/Ghana/Mali, Zulu or some other sub-Saharan civilization. Mali's absence is especially glaring.

My guess for the remaining civs:
1. Mali
2. Inca
3. Georgia
4. Ottomans

I don't see why everyone is so convinced of Italy/Italian City States. It's possible, but I don't consider the trailer to be particularly informative (or believe it is meant to be - after all, we should have gotten another Roman leader after the gladiator scene). The lack of Italian city-states isn't particularly convincing either - they could add some actual city states. Besides, did they really plan since before the release of Vanilla to have Italian city-states so they could do a special city-state civilization in the expansion? Firaxis doesn't give the appearance that they plan individual civs and themes that far in advance. Moreover, other civs have been added that did have city states - it's a simple fix to rename city-states so why not have included city-states like Florence in vanilla anyway? There are quite a few surprising city-state omissions, likely due to their desire to be more representative of the broader world and bring in more new cities and civs.

 

[Duuk]

I'm going to have to watch the trailer again, because I'm not as 100% sold on Ottomans as everyone else.

I'm with you on Inca and Georgia, I'm thinking Zulu for Africa (because how can we have Civ without Shaka?), and I'm 100% on Italy.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I'm dubious about the inclusion of an African civ in R&F, as I have stated before. I suspect Nubia is the "token African" until the second expansion. And of the African possibles, Mali seems the least likely. Because if they were going to highlight Mansa Musa's extreme wealth, they wouldn't give Wilhelmina an agenda called Billionaire.

 

[Ever Adrift]

I'm going to have to watch the trailer again, because I'm not as 100% sold on Ottomans as everyone else.

I'm with you on Inca and Georgia, I'm thinking Zulu for Africa (because how can we have Civ without Shaka?), and I'm 100% on Italy.

I'm dubious about the inclusion of an African civ in R&F, as I have stated before. I suspect Nubia is the "token African" until the second expansion. And of the African possibles, Mali seems the least likely. Because if they were going to highlight Mansa Musa's extreme wealth, they wouldn't give Wilhelmina an agenda called Billionaire.

Inca is the one I feel most certain about. I can't imagine them not adding one indigenous civilization from Central or South America. The Inca not only fit the expansion theme well, they were the most advanced indigenous civilization in the Americas when the Spanish arrived (there is increasing evidence that an even more advance civilization once lived in the Amazon).

Georgia has evidence, represents a region and civilization that is quite old and historically significant. It has a famous female leader from the medieval period who reigned during a golden age for Georgian culture. The connections to the R&F theme are blatant, and Firaxis is clearly interested in including more female leaders. Thus, I think they are almost as certain as the Inca.

I think it is really unlikely the Ottomans, or at least some Turkic civilization. The Turks were immensely important throughout history - not just in the form of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey either. Turkic culture and broader ethnic identity is the basis for many different pre-modern states and modern nation-states (the Uzbeks, Kazakhs, Azerbaijani, Turkmen, Kyrgyz and groups throughout Siberia). They seem too significant to overlook - even moreso than the Inca perhaps.

Still not at all convinced about Italy, unless there has been some leaks I am unaware of and I can't imagine an African civilization not being included. If it comes down to a choice between the Ottomans, and African Civilization, or some form of Italy I don't see how Italy beats the others. Europe is already heavily over-represented in the game and this is especially important in light of the stated desire to be more diverse and representative of the whole world. You can't have eight new civilizations and not include a single one from the entire African continent. Of the 5(ish) continents that can still get civlizations it's hard to justify not including one from each. One DLC does not make up for this.

Now, given the new game mechanics there could definitely be an introduction of not only more city-states, but perhaps new city-state mechanics. I could see them having a non-playable Italian 'league' of city-states or simply introduce a slew of new city states from the Italian peninsula.

As for which African civilization, I'm happy as long as it is Sub-Saharan. Mali is the most significant of these in terms of global influence, if we are talking about pre-modern times. Of course, Zulu would be great and help diversify southern Africa. I also still think Madagascar could be a real possibility. The last patch was supposed to improve naval AI/play and religion - the two things that would be of most significance for the Kingdom of Madagascar under the reign of Queen Ranavalona I (fitting the important female leader checkbox). It has never been included, it would fit TSL better than almost any other civ...

 

[Remmert]

We have Korea, Netherlands and Mongolia as the first 3 civs.

4: The Cree, leaked, not confirmed yet.
Sounds like a good choice to me, to represent a North American Civ.

5: The Inca for a South American civ, they were like the Roman Empire of the Andes; people of the mountains with a great road network
6: The Ottomans should be in, they became a regional powerhouse after the fall of Constinapolis not to be messed with.
7: The Zulu's for Africa, a war-civ and Southern Africa is still an empty slot on TSL Earth, I prefer them more than Mali to represent Africa.
8: A hard guess, could be Portugal or maybe Georgia, both can deliver a female leader. I'll put my bet on Georgia.

The alt-leader will be India, leaked and almost confirmed.

 

[CPWimmer]

Still not at all convinced about Italy, unless there has been some leaks I am unaware of and I can't imagine an African civilization not being included. If it comes down to a choice between the Ottomans, and African Civilization, or some form of Italy I don't see how Italy beats the others. Europe is already heavily over-represented in the game and this is especially important in light of the stated desire to be more diverse and representative of the whole world. You can't have eight new civilizations and not include a single one from the entire African continent. Of the 5(ish) continents that can still get civlizations it's hard to justify not including one from each. One DLC does not make up for this.

100%

I personally don't think an Italian Civ is in the cards at all, and I do think that Africa will get a representative of one kind or another.
Although it's not 100% yet, the leak of the Cree and Not-Gandhi goes to show that the trailer doesn't indicate every Civ that will be in R&F. Unless I am missing some clue, neither of them are referenced in the trailer.