Civ Representation in Civilization VI

[malekithau]

Scythia should have a much larger territory including the Crimea and much of what is today Romania.

 

[MAHRana]

Scythia should have a much larger territory including the Crimea and much of what is today Romania.

Problem with Scythia is that many nomad tribes in Europe may have wrongly been referred to as "Scythians"

 

[cools0812]

Problem with Scythia is that many nomad tribes in Europe may have wrongly been referred to as "Scythians"

That's not our problem here.

According to greek sources, King Ateas of Scythia fought the Triballi (a tribe in Bulgaria) and subjugated an area of Thrace in 4th century BCE.

The Kingdom of Scythia (its territory was roughly equal to nowadays Ukraine plus Romania)was the first nation that greek called "Scythians". They were much more “Scythian” than the Massagetaens (where Tomyris came from) and Sakas (where the UU "Saka Horse Archers" were from).

And Crimea was the core land of Late Scythian Kingdom (Third Scythian Kingdom, in some sources). In 2nd century BCE, King Skilurus of Scythia placed his capital, Scythian Neapolis, in Crimea.

 

[SMcM]

I didn't shade some areas of Australia because I wanted to represent the aboriginal or indigenous communities of Australia that don't speak English, which are actually not very numerous, as you mentioned, but also those aboriginal communities that use English, because their languages have been forgotten, but who wouldn't identify themselves as being culturally similar to the English-speaking world, as language wasn't the only aspect I considered. I used these maps (links belowe) as a reason to not shade certain areas of Australia. As the maps seem to be correct in what they show in other areas of the world, I assumed they'd be correct for Australia too.

Maybe Aboriginal Australians currently reside in smaller areas, but that's all the info I could obtain in 30 minutes of free time that I had. This would show that there are Native Australians that are not represented in the game and could have their on in-game civ, something that I neither support nor reject, and which can be discussed.

Also, Antarctica doesn't have a permanent population nor people who are born there, and it is technically not part of any country, so I will not shade Antarctica at all for those reasons (excuse the gray part of Antarctica that's on the maps, that's how it came in the base map I used), and I would shade all of Russia when it is announced, as I represented the current borders of the civ, its owned territory today, and, in a softer shade of the colour, places where people could feel represented by that civ, even if not being de facto part of that civ's borders today.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Primary_Human_Language_Families_Map.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Distribution_of_languages_in_the_world
http://www.ethnologue.com/country/AU/maps

You have shaded plenty of separatist regions where most people don't identify as having the nationality of the rest of the country they live in and speak a different language, as if they were culturally no different from the rest of the country, e.g. Catalonia, but have decided to mark large regions of Australia with English speaking, English descended majorities as being Australian indigenous land; seems a little contradictory.

Also, if being culturally English is the criteria; Australia definitely has developed its own culture, Canada is far more similar to the USA (even if all three of these are closely related) and I'm fairly sure that Bermuda, the Bahamas, Jamaica and Belize are far from being culturally English.

 

[El Castellano]

I based the maps on linguistic and cultural aspects, and the native language of most of the African nations you mentioned is not French or English, something that is shown in your maps, they are only official languages used by the government of those countries, not as a native language. Also, I assume most people in these African countries have lots of particular cultures with their own languages that aren't related to French or English culture, though perhaps influenced by. That's why Civilization VI needs to have African civs, like Ethiopia, Zulu, Mali or Kongo, in order to represent those particular African cultures.

In that case, where the countries are represented by members of the same cultural group and by have a similar history more than the official language of those countries, makes more meaningful the map:
Ireland has been historically and culturally closely related with England.
Austria and Germany also.
The Walloon culture is a French culture.

But in this case Portugal would be better represented by Spain that by Brazil, since the Spanish and Portuguese culture are Iberian cultures, and the two countries share a common history and culture (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iberian_federalism).

 

[demidyad]

You have shaded plenty of separatist regions where most people don't identify as having the nationality of the rest of the country they live in and speak a different language, as if they were culturally no different from the rest of the country, e.g. Catalonia, but have decided to mark large regions of Australia with English speaking, English descended majorities as being Australian indigenous land; seems a little contradictory.

You don't seem to understand. The grey areas of Australia in the 2nd map do not have English speaking, English descended majorities. The vast majority of what little population there is in these areas are Aborigines, sticking to their own communities, speaking in primarily their native tongues.

Here are a couple of examples:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ngaanyatjarra
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Warlpiri_language

 

[LDiCesare]

A map that I'd find somewhat more relevant is the map of civs with their maximum extent. Note that scythian map is already about that, since they are more or less restricted to Ossetia and nothing else.

 

[untitledjuan]

You have shaded plenty of separatist regions where most people don't identify as having the nationality of the rest of the country they live in and speak a different language, as if they were culturally no different from the rest of the country, e.g. Catalonia, but have decided to mark large regions of Australia with English speaking, English descended majorities as being Australian indigenous land; seems a little contradictory.

Also, if being culturally English is the criteria; Australia definitely has developed its own culture, Canada is far more similar to the USA (even if all three of these are closely related) and I'm fairly sure that Bermuda, the Bahamas, Jamaica and Belize are far from being culturally English.

Catalonia is to Spain as Wales is to the UK. Spain is the union of various peoples (Castilians, Catalans, Aragonese, Galician, Basque, Andalusian, etc.), and the UK too (English, Scottish, Welsh, etc.). As the game uses the word "Spain", this refers to all the Spanish peoples that got together to form Spain, including Catalans. Also, Spain was formed by the union of the kingdoms of Castile and Aragon, which included Catalonia at the time, just as the UK got formed by the kingdoms of England, which included Wales, and Scotland. Also, the word Spain comes from the word Hispania, which refers to the people of all the Iberian peninsula, even Portugal, but they separated from Spain just as Ireland did from the UK. Therefore, Catalans are Spanish, just as Welsh are British, both different from the "dominant" culture of their country, Castilian and English respectively, but both part of their respective cultural, historical or geographic group, Spanish and British. Also, Spain currently owns Catalonia, so thats another reason why I included it as part of modern Spanish territory, if it were independent, I'd shade it with the lighter shade that I used for Spanish America.

Secondly, it is obvious that Australia, Canada, the USA and even Northern and Southern England have different cultures, but it is also evident that the cultures of these areas share a common ancestor in medieval English culture. So, even though they are different, they are English cultures, or English-derived cultures, whose people might feel represented by the English civ in game, or maybe even by the American civ for Canada, as you mentioned.

 

[untitledjuan]

Portugal's situation in Civ 6 is awkward so far. As some of you guys mentioned, they do share cultural and historical aspect with Spain, but Brazil's culture mostly derives from Portugal. So Portuguese people could be represented by either of these civs, but that's hard to determine, as neither of them fully represent Portugal, as Portugal came first than Brazil and it wouldn't exist if Portugal didn't exist. Also, Portugal did all sorts of great stuff in history to be simply put it together with a Spanish civ. Considering the existence of Brazil in the game, I think it would be appropriate to have a Portuguese civ in the game somewhere in the future, as that'd be like having the USA without England.

I'll be updating the maps by adding the announced Kongo, as well as a revised Scythia, and I could maybe make a third map showing the maximum extent of the announced civs.

 

[untitledjuan]

I've updated the maps including Kongo and some predicted civs.

 

[Manetheren]

That's not fully accurate. French is set to be the most spoken language in the world within the next few decades almost entirely due to quickly growing populations in Francophone Africa. It's not just a language of government in many of these countries.

French would be spoken more than Mandarin Chinese? The population in Africa really must be growing quickly...

 

[Staler87]

Portugal's situation in Civ 6 is awkward so far. As some of you guys mentioned, they do share cultural and historical aspect with Spain, but Brazil's culture mostly derives from Portugal. So Portuguese people could be represented by either of these civs, but that's hard to determine, as neither of them fully represent Portugal, as Portugal came first than Brazil and it wouldn't exist if Portugal didn't exist. Also, Portugal did all sorts of great stuff in history to be simply put it together with a Spanish civ. Considering the existence of Brazil in the game, I think it would be appropriate to have a Portuguese civ in the game somewhere in the future, as that'd be like having the USA without England.

I'll be updating the maps by adding the announced Kongo, as well as a revised Scythia, and I could maybe make a third map showing the maximum extent of the announced civs.

To be honest I have no idea why Brazil warranted being in the base game while Portugal was left out.

 

[Ebrim]

To be honest I have no idea why Brazil warranted being in the base game while Portugal was left out.

Really? I can think of a few reasons pretty easily. I'm curious what criteria you set for which civilizations warrant inclusion. (though obviously they differ from those of Firaxis)

 

[rastak]

Really? I can think of a few reasons pretty easily. I'm curious what criteria you set for which civilizations warrant inclusion. (though obviously they differ from those of Firaxis)

I would agree. How exactly is the criteria weighted? An early interview indicated TSL was being considered, but not being perfect in the initial release. I suspect that played a part here.

 

[Staler87]

Really? I can think of a few reasons pretty easily. I'm curious what criteria you set for which civilizations warrant inclusion. (though obviously they differ from those of Firaxis)

Actually I do. Because there are way more Brazilian people who purchase civ than Portuguese.

Because this is a world history simulator (well somewhat more like an alternate world history simulator) it is far more interesting to play with civs that, well, influenced world history. Although this is a subjective category I'm sure anyone with a knowledge of world history can agree, with a certain level of objectivity, that Portugal had a greater impact on world history than Brazil.