1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

Discussion in 'Civ6 - General Discussions' started by Eagle Pursuit, May 11, 2020.

  1. DWilson

    DWilson Where am I? What turn is it?

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2012
    Messages:
    1,923
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI, USA
    What's even more impressive is the timeline in which they developed this skill and culture. Horses were extinct in the Americas prior to European re-contact, and the peoples of the plains adapted to them incredibly quickly, and did so in the midst of what truly was an apocalypse (some estimates suggest 90% of people in the Americas ultimately died in a wave of afroeurasian plagues hitting their communities without the relevant antibodies or diverse immunities which had long been developed naturally in the "old world" over millennia).
     
    Sirimiri, Zaarin and Thenewwwguy like this.
  2. Thenewwwguy

    Thenewwwguy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2020
    Messages:
    1,500
    Gender:
    Male
    Noted.
    I’m not suggesting we get full cultural coverage but in all honesty, the current and historic coverage of first nations and native americans in civ has been pretty bad. Civ 6 has done the best of any of the iterations so far imo, but there’s a ways to go, and at least having one more native american civ, if not two or three to fill out the geographical areas missed, would go a long way.

    Didn’t some Shoshone leaders advise on Assassin’s Creed or something? I don’t know if they specifically are against being in video games. I do understand and respect most first nations’ concerns in being in this game given how it plays. I mean, this is a game that mechanically can’t distinguish those who fought war to liberate or protect (Lautaro and Bolivar) from conquerors like Genghis. However, I can imagine the PNW peoples as effective tall civs with big bonuses towards working with bonus and luxury resources and general culture victory biases.

    Yeah this is a key point. Groups like the Sioux, Apache and Comanche adopted horses really fast in the grand scheme of things. It’s quite impressive
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  3. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,924
    I think the North American natives could do with at least 2-3 more representatives. Take your pick from the most famous of the PNW, NE, SE, SW or Plains tribes.
     
    Zaarin, CivLuvah and Thenewwwguy like this.
  4. Thenewwwguy

    Thenewwwguy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2020
    Messages:
    1,500
    Gender:
    Male
    Ideally, I think we could fill NA out with the Iroquois, Tlingit/Salish and Navajo


    unfortunately that’s probably not happening :/
     
    Zaarin and Alexander's Hetaroi like this.
  5. The Civs 6

    The Civs 6 King

    Joined:
    May 27, 2020
    Messages:
    730
    On this subject I think it is a little curious that Civ didn't steal the Endless Legend's Roving Clans' power to up and re-settle their cities and districts. I think the right nomadic group, even someone like the Goths maybe, would be a good candidate to introduce this concept.
     
    Kjimmet, Zaarin, Thenewwwguy and 2 others like this.
  6. PhilBowles

    PhilBowles Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2011
    Messages:
    5,323
    Oh yes, I fully agree with this. I imagine that the archaeological label 'Celts' did indeed come from an earlier source, but my essential point was that using the word in its modern sense to describe a civilisation is an anachronism. I'd be happy with a Gallic civilisation, though I'd prefer it not to use the name 'Celts'.
     
    Zaarin likes this.
  7. The Kingmaker

    The Kingmaker Alexander

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Messages:
    1,924
    Personally I’d be fine with the Iroquois, Cherokee, Navajo or Apache, and Sioux (they’re just so famous).

    I’d love to see a Cahokia moundbuilders civ but they seem mostly untenable given a lack of language and leaders unless very late era placeholders are used.
     
    Morningcalm and Thenewwwguy like this.
  8. Alexander's Hetaroi

    Alexander's Hetaroi Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    7,074
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    What are the problems of including the Portuguese and the Dutch in a game about world empires?

    I'm not sure by what you mean as a little Civ? We are past the days where only the top 20 or so world empires make the game. We're coming up on 50 so there is bound to be not so popular options, or ones that don't make some sense. I for one haven't really hated any inclusion so far and I hope not too. I've come around to Canada and have been thrilled at Australia and Scotland from the beginning. The golf course is kind of baffling but I've even got used to that.
     
    Meluhhan and Zaarin like this.
  9. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,826
    Well, culturally, mechanically, and historically, the Portuguese and the Spanish are very similar. So similar and related that Spain under Philip effectively incorporates the Portuguese empire in totality.

    The Dutch are also a weird overseas empire to include, if we already have the Zulu and Indonesia, although I think they have a lot more to differentiate themselves from Germany than Portugal does from Spain. I mean, how many cultures can claim to be so "expansionist" that they literally created more land to expand into? That's pretty unique and I think barely justifies cramming them into the European map.

    I was a little shocked by Georgia and Scotland, but I came around to them. The only civ I still think was kind of unnecessary was Nubia. I feel the concept and execution is some of the most underwhelming in the roster, and if we were only going to get vanilla civ ideas then Ethiopia should have had that DLC slot instead of cramming a civ so similar to Egypt and Ethiopia up between them. Would have rathered we dedicate the space to Morocco/Berbers, Swahili/Oman, or even something along the Guinea coast.

    I still think that VI is trying to focus on the "biggest" civs in each region, even if they weren't actually huge. The Dutch kind of qualify as an overseas empire occupying very different spaces from Britain and Spain/Portugal. And Scotland kind of qualifies as a second head of the British Empire. Scotland is really the biggest stretch away from it and I think wouldn't have happened if the devs weren't deliberately trying to make a more cohesive "celtic" civ. But point being, I don't see a lot of "smaller" kingdoms standing a chance as a civ in VI; they have generally been relegated to city-states.
     
    Thenewwwguy likes this.
  10. Jcturmer

    Jcturmer Chieftain

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2018
    Messages:
    39
    Gender:
    Male
    What if instead of Portugal, we get the Lusitanians under Viriato?
    They occupied the same geographical place (the west of the Iberian peninsula) and also take the place of the Celts of the classical era.
     
    Thenewwwguy likes this.
  11. Thenewwwguy

    Thenewwwguy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2020
    Messages:
    1,500
    Gender:
    Male
    I’d imagine that would function more as an alt leader like Chandragupta Maurya for India, as he represents an Empire which encompassed much of the subcontinent and was ethnically North India, but wasn’t India itself. I’d imagine this would function similarly
     
  12. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Idea Fountain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    The problem with the underrepresented regions is that the differences between the separate cultures isn't well-known to most people. If you take a look at central Africa, the Mali, Songhai, Hausa, Yoruba, Benin and Ashanti all blend together in a wash - despite being *objectively* as distinct as the French and the German are.

    Same issues apply to the near east - the Persians and Babylonians are well-known to casuals, but the rest? Would someone know the difference between Assyria and Sumeria? Between Phoenicia and Palestine? Between the Hittites and the Phrygians? Let alone the Aramites, Elamites, Medians, Nabateans, Kusshans,...

    Deserving or not has little to do with it. It's all about memorability and being able to establish their identity with a fanbase who are largely ignorant about their accomplishments. Good design can convince most of the sceptics - fingers crossed that, when a new culture makes their way into Civ, they also make their way into the hearts of the casual fans.
     
  13. Thenewwwguy

    Thenewwwguy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2020
    Messages:
    1,500
    Gender:
    Male
    This. Which is why more Native American civs is really good, because it mechanically adds more flavor to what casual fans may consider monolithic, and also serves to actually create some capacity of education that helps inform the players so they can explore more into lesser known civs in the future
     
    Hoppip22 likes this.
  14. The Civs 6

    The Civs 6 King

    Joined:
    May 27, 2020
    Messages:
    730
    Just think about the context. We assign a single Civilization for China's 6,000 years of history (and don't give me the PRC line about continuity. The Shang are as different from the Han as the Achaean Greeks are from Rome). But for basically different iterations of the Germanic peoples who settled Europe during the Great Migration (the Franks, Goths, etc.), we privilege every single one with their own place in civilization. I haven't studied the Mayan civilization too closely, but I'm sure that the sweep of having a bucket called "Mayan" is roughly the same as creating a blob of Western European nations.

    So if we are looking from that perspective, and I am saying this as an American, why can't we just have a single "Anglo-Saxon" civilization that encompasses the 5 Eyes? And if have to have each of the 5 Eyes (god forbid we get New Zealand, Quebec, Texas, or the Mormon state as new civilizations), why don't we have the Huns, the Xiong Nu, the Bulgars, and the various iterations of the Mongols each with their own Civ?
     
    j51 likes this.
  15. Lord Lakely

    Lord Lakely Idea Fountain

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2008
    Messages:
    1,928
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Belgium
    I agree, their characterization must be top notch - though this is generally really good with Firaxis. They've done a sterling job with the Cree and the Aztecs, and their designs for the Mayans and the Mapuche were very good as well. Not mentioning the Inca since that's basically a reskin of their Civ5 incarnation :p (where they were definitely one of the best designed civs so,sure why not)

    Overall, I think Firaxis did pretty well with the new civs their introduced. I don't think we've seen the last of Kongo and Maori, Nubia are *very* fun for both aggressors and builders and while Scythia's abilities are a one-trick pony, I don't think anyone has qualms about their portrayal in the game.

    Personally I'm fine with any bold choice firaxis want to make, as long as the design elements are good, which seems to be their overall philosophy. Let the games begin.
     
    Meluhhan and Thenewwwguy like this.
  16. riddleofsteel

    riddleofsteel Office Linebacker

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Down the pub
    I think there was just one Mayan group, though.
     
    Thenewwwguy likes this.
  17. Zaarin

    Zaarin Chief Medical Officer, DS9

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    8,977
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    Language isn't so much a problem--while with a few exceptions like Natchez and Chickasaw it's often difficult to say what mound was associated with what people, we know who the Mississippians' successors were--but leaders is a big problem. All of the Mississippian sites were already in sharp decline when De Soto marched through, and at next contact they were gone entirely.

    The Lusitanians were Celticized, but they probably weren't Celts (para-Celts, maybe). The Lusitanian language is so marginally attested that we can't even classify it beyond saying it was Indo-European and probably not Celtic (because it retains PIE *p). Plus Hispania didn't come close to the level of sophistication of Gallia; the Hispano-Celts (the Celtiberians and Gallaecians) and the Lusitanians were by comparison primitive and sparsely populated.

    TBH this is why I love when Firaxis makes surprising choices. They've even taught me about a few civilizations, and it's great to be able to get some of that out to the general audience as well. Unfortunately, though, you make a good point about Civilization being much more dependent on popular history (or, frankly, pop culture) than scholarly history. Though your comment about all the Near Eastern civs blending together is kind of making my Near Eastern-obsessed blood boil a bit. :p I mean, good grief, if you can't tell Assyria from Sumer what is wrong with you and how do you justify your existence? :p And the Nabataeans were Arabs! And the Kushans are Central Asian--they're not even from the Middle East! :p

    I think one could justify contrasting Classical Maya and Mayapan (the post-classical Maya), but the Maya definitely had a sense of ethnic identity, just like the Hellenes--except that the Maya spoke a smattering of related languages while the Hellenes all spoke Greek, which is pretty fascinating when you think about it.
     
  18. snakeboy

    snakeboy Chieftain

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2019
    Messages:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    This thread is getting surreal. To debate the inclusion of the Portuguese and the Dutch as world empires is insanity. They practically invented the modern world (for better or worse).

    Personally, I can't wait for the Portuguese 'feitoria' to finally arrive so I won't have to found complete cities anymore to get my strategic resources. Would be nice to get early caravels too :)
     
  19. riddleofsteel

    riddleofsteel Office Linebacker

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    675
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Down the pub
    Completely agree, almost mind boggling.

    Sure. I was just addressing the previously quoted text saying it seemed perfunctory to give the Mayans "one bucket" when that's essentially what the Maya were. Inclusion for inclusion's sake doesn't necessarily make for a good addition to a game.
     
    Meluhhan, Hoppip22, durfal and 4 others like this.
  20. Thenewwwguy

    Thenewwwguy Emperor

    Joined:
    May 12, 2020
    Messages:
    1,500
    Gender:
    Male

    while maya is technically a blob civ, it’s less so of one than some other civs in this game, like the majapahit empire representing all of indonesia, the existence of blob India, Arabia and Persia.

    Generally i’m ok with groups of city states being lumped into one civ like Greece or Maya because cultural differences were limited.


    Portugal, while having some mechanical redundancy with Spain, arguably is deserving of being in the game, as is the Netherlands. My point regarding seeing more native american civs is we seem to give *more* importance to worthy european civs. Portugal and Tlingit are, in my eyes, both worthy. the Tlingit were an advanced, urbanized first nation, while portugal was a colonial powerhouse. However, Portugal, mechanically, geographically and culturally, is somewhat redundant. It’s taking a slot from a culture and nation that are equally interesting and while not as successful (whatever that means), nonetheless qualifying of being in Civ.

    My point is, from our eurocentric, western world perspectives, we see places like what we historically call ‘China’ and ‘India’ as monolithic, while European kingdoms and post colonial nations seem more relevant to us than native americans because of our own educational biases regarding history. Being that Firaxis knows that a large amount of its fans care about history, and the devs themselves are generally history buffs, it’s important to challenge the way we were taught history with a more unbiased, holistic look at what cultures deserve entry.

    There are hundreds of cultures on every continent worthy of being in civ.

    Do we have to have some of the ones we do in Europe at the cost of unexplored cultures which are equally intriguing and regionally relevant?

    Yes, Hungary was important, but so were the Ashanti, or the Nez Perce.

    Yes, Macedon and Alexander were important, but so much so that it needed its own civ instead of replacing one of the two greek leaders, which would’ve opened up a spot for an underrepresented culture?

    Given Spain and Portugal, despite both having different literal histories, used similar tactics, have similar cultures, and colonized similar places, do we really need both?

    Can’t we, for example, alternate them the way we’ve down with Khmer and Siam, or Mali and Songhai, which are literally different historically but similar cultures which the devs recognized don’t both need to be in the same iteration of the game?

    That’s my point. No one is saying Portugal is unworthy. But many civs are worthy of being in this game. Implicitly, both the devs and the fans are looking at this from a eurocentric pov.
     
    Zaarin likes this.

Share This Page