[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Thenewwwguy]

Yeah, I heard about that, but if we're going to start stuffing the game with every tiny Slavic nation in the Balkans, we might as well maximize the controversy.

Will you play as Kosovo or Serbia in civilization 6, new frontier

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

did matthias actually have some historical precedent for being scientific?

His library was one of the biggest and most renowned in Renaissance Europe, with having the biggest collection of scientific writings in it's time.
I think he could have been both scientific and cultural if they decided to base his ability off of his library collection, but Kristina made more sense as both were in the same expansion.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I see Kronk.
Oh and Reyna is definitely Yzma.

He looks Kronk-ish but the meme was definitely Pacha.

Speaking of possible new civilizations I know this has been pointed at before but the flags of certain nations in the Diplomatic Victory Screen have not appeared in the game as playable, but some as city-states. With the release of Gran Colombia, it probably means Argentina won't happen which backs up the theory that the flags shown in the video probably won't make it in as playable in the future.

That means probably they have decided ahead of time that Mexico, Nigeria, Kenya, Thailand, Argentina, South Africa, Iceland, Kazakhstan, Czech Republic, Papua New Guinea, Morocco and Sri Lanka won't appear.
That opens up the room at least in the case of Morocco and Thailand that a Berber kingdom could appear like Numidia or Vietnam or Burma for SE Asia.

I unfortunately find this analysis persuasive; I was really hoping we would get Morocco again. But if we get something Berber instead I wouldn't miss Morocco much. I would also note that in the case of Scythia vicariously representing Kazakhstan, there is still hope for "equivalents" like the Berbers, i.e. the Swahili (Kenya). I suppose the Chola (Sri Lanka) and Bohemia (Czechia) are also possibilities, even if I think the Chola won't happen as a separate civ from India and Bohemia is much better represented as a city-state.

I would soundly dismiss Nigeria as not happening with the addition of the Nok city-state. I think most people are hoping for a Pretoria city-state so South Africa isn't a huge loss. And Iceland and New Guinea also fall pretty comfortably into city-state territory.

 

[Zaarin]

Bohemia is much better represented as a city-state.

In Civ6, I agree. In the future, I think there's plenty of design space for a Bohemian civ. (Same with Iceland, actually. I'm kind of hoping for Iceland as the "Viking" civ in Civ7, as I said earlier.)

 

[Thenewwwguy]

He looks Kronk-ish but the meme was definitely Pacha.

I unfortunately find this analysis persuasive; I was really hoping we would get Morocco again. But if we get something Berber instead I wouldn't miss Morocco much. I would also note that in the case of Scythia vicariously representing Kazakhstan, there is still hope for "equivalents" like the Berbers, i.e. the Swahili (Kenya). I suppose the Chola (Sri Lanka) and Bohemia (Czechia) are also possibilities, even if I think the Chola won't happen as a separate civ from India and Bohemia is much better represented as a city-state.

I would soundly dismiss Nigeria as not happening with the addition of the Nok city-state. I think most people are hoping for a Pretoria city-state so South Africa isn't a huge loss. And Iceland and New Guinea also fall pretty comfortably into city-state territory.

You could also consider perhaps the Kingdom of Jaffna or the Kingdom of Sri Lanka as civs, but that seems like a heavily controversial topic that the devs might want to just avoid, like Israel/Palestine, so I agree that the best way to represent Sri Lanka would be through the Chola.

I could imagine Benin or Yoruba as civs to represent Nigeria, however

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

He looks Kronk-ish but the meme was definitely Pacha.

Ah thanks, I missed that one. If he does that when he's happy with you I've never seen that side of him in game before. I always take his mountains.

I unfortunately find this analysis persuasive; I was really hoping we would get Morocco again. But if we get something Berber instead I wouldn't miss Morocco much. I would also note that in the case of Scythia vicariously representing Kazakhstan, there is still hope for "equivalents" like the Berbers, i.e. the Swahili (Kenya). I suppose the Chola (Sri Lanka) and Bohemia (Czechia) are also possibilities, even if I think the Chola won't happen as a separate civ from India and Bohemia is much better represented as a city-state.

I would soundly dismiss Nigeria as not happening with the addition of the Nok city-state. I think most people are hoping for a Pretoria city-state so South Africa isn't a huge loss. And Iceland and New Guinea also fall pretty comfortably into city-state territory.

I kind of figured we wouldn't get most of them anyway. Reykjavik is a Norwegian city and the closest thing I think we'll get to a modern African civ will probably be Ethiopia.
I personally would want Numidia as a Berber kingdom now that that space is open thanks to Carthage being under Phoenicia, but that might be also be a stretch to get in.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Ah thanks, I missed that one. If he does that when he's happy with you I've never seen that side of him in game before. I always take his mountains.


I kind of figured we wouldn't get most of them anyway. Reykjavik is a Norwegian city anyway and the closest thing I think we'll get to a modern African civ will probably be Ethiopia.
I personally would want Numidia as a Berber kingdom anyway now that that space is open thanks to Carthage being under Phoenicia, but that might be a stretch.

Bogota was a spanish city until now

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Bogota was a spanish city until now

No it wasn't. Granada was a Spanish city. Mitla was also an Aztec city but now is a city-state. I checked the map that @bite made and the Civ wiki. It did appear as a Spanish city in Civ II and was a city-state in Civ 5.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

No it wasn't. Granada was a Spanish city. Mitla was also an Aztec city but now is a city-state. I checked the map that @bite made and the Civ wiki. It did appear as a Spanish city in Civ II and was a city-state in Civ 5.

i stand corrected then. I swear it used to be on their city list but maybe not

what are ppl’s thoughts about Arwa al-Sulyahi representing Yemen?

 

[The Kingmaker]

(Same with Iceland, actually. I'm kind of hoping for Iceland as the "Viking" civ in Civ7, as I said earlier.)

Sukritact actually released a professional quality, animated and voiced Icelandic mod. So you can have them in Civ6 this very moment. If you don’t mind them sharing Norway’s music.

His Robespierre and Vercingetorix are also top notch.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

In Civ6, I agree. In the future, I think there's plenty of design space for a Bohemian civ. (Same with Iceland, actually. I'm kind of hoping for Iceland as the "Viking" civ in Civ7, as I said earlier.)

I would agree with this, provided one of two things occurs for Civ VII. Either:

1. The devs find a more efficient way to develop civs such that they can balloon the roster to twice the size, because there is no way anyone would buy a game filled with smaller substitutions (i.e. Bohemia over Poland or Iceland over Norway/Denmark). We would still need most of the big guys to return for historical pedants and casuals alike to be satisfied and make the game profitable.

2. Some weird new paradigm is invented wherein Civ VII no longer cares about sprawling empires or large cultural identities. Again I still suspect such a model would be unprofitable because it is precisely those civs which resonate and sell the concept. But VI clearly shifted the paradigm past V beyond imperialism into cultural appreciation, so I guess it is possible for VII to push that even further.

Honestly, I don't see the point of either when VI could theoretically keep adding smaller and smaller kingdoms on top of what we already have without cutting the big staples. But I also recognize the reality of diminishing returns from a playerbase that hates iterative DLC and has been trained by prior installments to get more bored with each expansion pack and more ready for "the next version."

You could also consider perhaps the Kingdom of Jaffna or the Kingdom of Sri Lanka as civs, but that seems like a heavily controversial topic that the devs might want to just avoid, like Israel/Palestine, so I agree that the best way to represent Sri Lanka would be through the Chola.

I could imagine Benin or Yoruba as civs to represent Nigeria, however

Yeah in a game that has so far limited itself to only making regional powers civs, it would be Chola or bust. And again I feel like both the Mughals and Chola were so integrated into the Indian cultural identity that it would feel weird to make them as separate civs.

Benin I thought would just represent Benin, not Nigeria. The Oyo is a bit more ambiguous but I still don't see it as a clear Nigeria substitute like the Nok, where Nigeria has just as much if not more people of Hausa and Fulani heritage than Yoruba.

Ah thanks, I missed that one. If he does that when he's happy with you I've never seen that side of him in game before. I always take his mountains.


I kind of figured we wouldn't get most of them anyway. Reykjavik is a Norwegian city and the closest thing I think we'll get to a modern African civ will probably be Ethiopia.
I personally would want Numidia as a Berber kingdom now that that space is open thanks to Carthage being under Phoenicia, but that might be also be a stretch to get in.

The great thing about Numidia, actually, is that it really fits with VI's geographic gap-filling and vicarious representation agenda. If you look at the way new civs fill other gaps on the map, we have:

* Georgia (also covering Armenia, Azerbaijan, and Ossetia at its height)
* Scythia (covering generally Kazakhstan and the northern stans)
* Hungary (covering Silesia, Croatia, Bosnia, and Romania under Corvinus)
* Mapuche (covering the Auracanian region of Chile and Argentina, i.e. the most populous regions)
* Colombia (covering Panama, Venezuela, and Ecuador)

A Moroccan civ would only cover the geographic and cultural span of Morocco. Numidia touches on Morocco but also covers Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya. The Almohad caliphate, another Berber polity, covered a similar territory. Looking at it more, I think a "Berber" civ would fit VI's design philosophy a lot better than Morocco, encapsulating a larger region of North Africa over a longer period of time.

 

[Zaarin]

Bohemia over Poland or Iceland over Norway/Denmark

This is exactly what I was proposing: Bohemia takes Poland's place as "the non-Russian Slavic civ" and Iceland takes Norway's place as "the Viking civ." Then we can either have Margaret I of Denmark or Gustav Adolphus of Sweden for the "non-Viking Scandinavian civ."

 

[Navelgazer]

what are ppl’s thoughts about Arwa al-Sulyahi representing Yemen?

I think that if we were to have Yemen represented it would be specifically because of what a good leader choice she would be. I imagine there's fruitful ground in Yemeni architecture, which is gorgeous and unique (I'm picturing a Vernacular Village UI that could be built on cliffsides and/or mountains, providing housing in addition to other benefits, for instance.)

Arwa herself would lend towards a faith/trade routes LUA, I imagine, which is somewhat in the same territory as Mansa Musa but could be designed very differently. I like the idea!

But I don't expect it.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I think that if we were to have Yemen represented it would be specifically because of what a good leader choice she would be. I imagine there's fruitful ground in Yemeni architecture, which is gorgeous and unique (I'm picturing a Vernacular Village UI that could be built on cliffsides and/or mountains, providing housing in addition to other benefits, for instance.)

Arwa herself would lend towards a faith/trade routes LUA, I imagine, which is somewhat in the same territory as Mansa Musa but could be designed very differently. I like the idea!

But I don't expect it.

yeah for sure. She’d fill the gap that a lot of people want filled with Kilwa Swahili or Oman, in a sense, although Yemen obviously didn’t expand as wide as those two, but with the exception of Ali ibn al Sulayman of Kilwa and Rajendra and Raja Raja of the Chola, she’s one of the most intriguing leader choices in the Red Sea/Indian ocean region.

Yeah in a game that has so far limited itself to only making regional powers civs, it would be Chola or bust. And again I feel like both the Mughals and Chola were so integrated into the Indian cultural identity that it would feel weird to make them as separate civs.

Benin I thought would just represent Benin, not Nigeria. The Oyo is a bit more ambiguous but I still don't see it as a clear Nigeria substitute like the Nok, where Nigeria has just as much if not more people of Hausa and Fulani heritage than Yoruba.

The Kingdom and Empire of Benin both led from Benin City, which is in Nigeria, and had little to do with the modern day nation, just as the Empire of Ghana had nothing to do with modern day Ghana

also, after playing a lot of games with the improved city lists + rosetta stone, i’m absolutely convinced this is how civ needs to go about doing city lists from now on. It allows for much more overlap in important empires like Songhai and Mali or Byzantium and Ottomans

His library was one of the biggest and most renowned in Renaissance Europe, with having the biggest collection of scientific writings in it's time.
I think he could have been both scientific and cultural if they decided to base his ability off of his library collection, but Kristina made more sense as both were in the same expansion.

they definitely could’ve given matthias abilities more like Kristina’s and then made Gustavus the leader of Sweden and given him abilities more like Matthias’s

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I think that if we were to have Yemen represented it would be specifically because of what a good leader choice she would be. I imagine there's fruitful ground in Yemeni architecture, which is gorgeous and unique (I'm picturing a Vernacular Village UI that could be built on cliffsides and/or mountains, providing housing in addition to other benefits, for instance.)

Arwa herself would lend towards a faith/trade routes LUA, I imagine, which is somewhat in the same territory as Mansa Musa but could be designed very differently. I like the idea!

But I don't expect it.

Sadly I think that Yemen would only be included for her sake, and she's not enough to get a pretty small kingdom on a roster more concerned with filling large geographic holes. However, I'd be happy with a Queen Arwa Mosque wonder as a nod to her and Yemeni architecture (just like the Taj Mahal seems to vicariously represent the Mughals).

In fact, that just reminded me that we already have Kilwa Kisiwani vicariously representing the Swahili coast (and Venetian Arsenal representing the Venetian empire, and Great Zimbabwe representing Zimbabwe and Potala Palace representing Tibet). Granted, Chichen Itza didn't preclude the addition of the Maya, but perhaps, in a similar vein, the devs decided that the only real draw of the Swahili was centered around Kilwa and their coral buildings, both of which are adequately represented by a wonder. Maybe the devs have been using wonders to represent smaller regional powers that are somewhat overshadowed by larger empires (like the Omani eventually controlled the Swahili coast).

It would make a fair bit of sense, given how many of the civs with multiple wonders represent different polities (India has the Tamil, Mughals, and Maurya with Meenakshi, Taj Mahal, and Mahabodhi; Spain has Moorish Iberia with the Alhambra; Russia has Muscovy/Tsardom with St. Basil's Cathedral; China has the Ming Dynasty with the Forbidden Kingdom; France has with the Franks/Gauls with Mont St. Michel and modern France with the Eiffel Tower; Arabia has Petra for ancient Arabia; England has some unrepresented eras with Stonehenge and Oxford

I would also note that there are only a few wonders which don't fall within one civ or another, and perhaps the intent is to ultimately have each wonder associated with some civ's cultural legacy. Potala Palace is already part of China's, and if we get Oman then that encompasses Kilwa Kisiwani. I have no idea what this might mean for Great Zimbabwe (and I don't think it means anything for the Great Baths or Amundsen Scott), but that might indeed be pointing toward some sort of unified Italian civ to give the Venetian arsenal a home. Just a theory.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Sadly I think that Yemen would only be included for her sake, and she's not enough to get a pretty small kingdom on a roster more concerned with filling large geographic holes. However, I'd be happy with a Queen Arwa Mosque wonder as a nod to her and Yemeni architecture (just like the Taj Mahal seems to vicariously represent the Mughals).

In fact, that just reminded me that we already have Kilwa Kisiwani vicariously representing the Swahili coast (and Venetian Arsenal representing the Venetian empire, and Great Zimbabwe representing Zimbabwe and Potala Palace representing Tibet). Granted, Chichen Itza didn't preclude the addition of the Maya, but perhaps, in a similar vein, the devs decided that the only real draw of the Swahili was centered around Kilwa and their coral buildings, both of which are adequately represented by a wonder. Maybe the devs have been using wonders to represent smaller regional powers that are somewhat overshadowed by larger empires (like the Omani eventually controlled the Swahili coast).

It would make a fair bit of sense, given how many of the civs with multiple wonders represent different polities (India has the Tamil, Mughals, and Maurya with Meenakshi, Taj Mahal, and Mahabodhi; Spain has Moorish Iberia with the Alhambra; Russia has Muscovy/Tsardom with St. Basil's Cathedral; China has the Ming Dynasty with the Forbidden Kingdom; France has with the Franks/Gauls with Mont St. Michel and modern France with the Eiffel Tower; Arabia has Petra for ancient Arabia; England has some unrepresented eras with Stonehenge and Oxford

I would also note that there are only a few wonders which don't fall within one civ or another, and perhaps the intent is to ultimately have each wonder associated with some civ's cultural legacy. Potala Palace is already part of China's, and if we get Oman then that encompasses Kilwa Kisiwani. I have no idea what this might mean for Great Zimbabwe (and I don't think it means anything for the Great Baths or Amundsen Scott), but that might indeed be pointing toward some sort of unified Italian civ to give the Venetian arsenal a home. Just a theory.

Tamils are an ethnic group. Meenakshi temple was built by the Chola empire

But like you mentioned, a theoretical Oman would overshadow Yemen and Kilwa/Zanzibar, so perhaps we will see Oman as a civ in New Frontier, which is too bad as I think Yemen and Kilwa have more interesting leaders

the great baths are included in Chandragupta’s india, which extended past the Indus, while perhaps Great Zimbabwe’s inclusion means we see the Mutapa Empire?

Also, Potala wasn’t a part of any historical iteration of China

 

[Zaarin]

France has with the Franks/Gauls with Mont St. Michel

Mont St. Michel is Norman and postdates the Gauls by centuries...

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Yeah in a game that has so far limited itself to only making regional powers civs, it would be Chola or bust. And again I feel like both the Mughals and Chola were so integrated into the Indian cultural identity that it would feel weird to make them as separate civs

returning to this point though, this is a difficult question. The mughals were heavily integrated into north indian culture, and the chola were a representation of south indian culture, but neither really is dominant over the other. there’s very little in common other than a shared religion, in fact. I’d posit, in fact, that there is no concept of an ‘Indian’ culture, because the languages, customs, foods, religious rituals are so different across indian regions.

North India was never influenced by the Chola, Pandya or Vijayanagar

South India was never influenced by the Maurya, Mughals or Gupta

so it’s hard to say if they don’t deserve seperate civs from the more continuous evolution from the sanskrit speaking, largely hindu and jain maurya subcontinent under Chandragupta Maurya to the hindi speaking, largely hindu hindustani subcontinent represented under Gandhi, which makes more sense, but still could theoretically be split up (I still argue that the Republic is too modern and lacking in possible directions for Gandhi to be sustainable in a representative fashion for India

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Tamils are an ethnic group. Meenakshi temple was built by the Chola empire

I guess I meant the Tamil kings. I wasn't quite sure if if was the Chola who built it but my point stands that Meenakshi appears to be token representation for Indian unification under the Chola.

the great baths are included in Chandragupta’s india, which extended past the Indus, while perhaps Great Zimbabwe’s inclusion means we see the Mutapa Empire?

I briefly considered Mutapa, but it seems too poorly attested and without clear leaders for the devs to make anything out of it. Plus, the Zulu exerted military dominance over half of what would be the Mutapa kingdom anyway? I guess you could say that Zimbabwe/Mutapa is kinda lumped in with the Zulu?

Also, Potala wasn’t a part of any historical iteration of China

Inasmuch as Firaxis has to bend to Chinese historical revisionism to keep the market open, the palace falls under Chinese imperial conquest for purposes of whether it would be associated with a separate civ, or just lumped in as part of "China." It and a Lhasa city-state may be the most we might ever see of Tibet in VI.

Though if there is even a small chance for Tibet to still happen (and consequently distinguishing Potala Palace as not Chinese) I'm all for it.

Mont St. Michel is Norman and postdates the Gauls by centuries...

It was built on the ruins of a Gallic village. Though I guess pre-Eleanor it also would have functioned as Norman representation. The model isn't perfect, I realize (America has three arbitrary wonders and Russia has two from the imperial era and nothing from Novgorod). But it does bring up the interesting notion that perhaps wonders from the "big" civs are preferentially chosen from eras or polities that will not be represented by alternate leaders or city-states.

returning to this point though, this is a difficult question. The mughals were heavily integrated into north indian culture, and the chola were a representation of south indian culture, but neither really is dominant over the other. there’s very little in common other than a shared religion, in fact. I’d posit, in fact, that there is no concept of an ‘Indian’ culture, because the languages, customs, foods, religious rituals are so different across indian regions.

North India was never influenced by the Chola, Pandya or Vijayanagar

South India was never influenced by the Maurya, Mughals or Gupta

so it’s hard to say if they don’t deserve seperate civs from the more continuous evolution from the sanskrit speaking, largely hindu and jain maurya subcontinent under Chandragupta Maurya to the hindi speaking, largely hindu hindustani subcontinent represented under Gandhi, which makes more sense, but still could theoretically be split up (I still argue that the Republic is too modern and lacking in possible directions for Gandhi to be sustainable in a representative fashion for India

I don't disagree with this, in the same vein that China, America, and Russia don't have a strong concept of a consistent "culture." Is China more Han or Mongol or Manchu? Is America more English or French or Spanish? I think China is a better analogue for this than America or Russia, but the fact is that it has been cohesively occupied for so long under different regimes that all of the cultures form a sort of consistent cultural admixture. It's a bit heterogenous, but there is definitely a prevailing population which a) wants to be seen as a united nation and b) has a general idea of what the "dominant culture" has become through all the intermingling. I'd say if anything India is less cleanly divided into "North" and "South" India but involves a sort of Chola-Maurya-Mughal spectrum.

I wouldn't mind a Chola leader for India if we keep getting alternate leaders. A naval India could be fun. I could pass on the Mughals if we get the Timurids.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

returning to this point though, this is a difficult question. The mughals were heavily integrated into north indian culture, and the chola were a representation of south indian culture, but neither really is dominant over the other. there’s very little in common other than a shared religion, in fact. I’d posit, in fact, that there is no concept of an ‘Indian’ culture, because the languages, customs, foods, religious rituals are so different across indian regions.

I don't see the need to split up Civs based off of cultural differences. In that case Normandy and Burgundy could be separate Civs as well.
India is a representation of the history of the whole subcontinent, to an extent, which the Maurya Empire mostly encompassed, and British ruled India which also held Pakistan and Bangladesh who Gandhi was trying to free. All of those different cultures were still under one political authority so I think it's acceptable to still keep them under the "Indian" umbrella.

I don't think it will happen for here, but I could at least possibly see the Mughals if they decided to use Akbar, ruling from Lahore, alongside several leaders from India in Civ 7.