[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Abaxial]

A shout-out to whoever it was said that this thread is something of an echo chamber for a bunch of well-educated dedicated players who know all about every tribe that ever ruled over some small corner of the globe. I imagine that if Firaxis's marketing department ever read this, they would either be horrified or fall about laughing. Surely the main criterion for Firaxis has to be cultural visibility, not just to you and me, but the wider gaming public? Putting in the Salish might increase sales in BC, but is this particularly where their target audience is?

So yes, I would love to see the Ghaznavids, but I imagine the general reaction would be the WHO?

Which brings us back to Portugal as a no-brainer, Byzantium - and the Assyrians, who, as every fule kno, came down like a wolf on the fold. And probably not the Taino.

Same with alternative leaders - as I have mentioned before, for Scotland, Mary Stuart has far more recognition than James IV, thanks partly to Friedrich Schiller. Not that I personally have any desire to see her in the game.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Which brings us back to Portugal as a no-brainer, Byzantium - and the Assyrians, who, as every fule kno, came down like a wolf on the fold. And probably not the Taino.

We already have a Taino CS, complete with Batay Suz UI. So you're right that we won't get them as a civ, but still somewhat incorrect; the devs are clearly paying attention to the community.

 

[Ezumiyr]

Surely the main criterion for Firaxis has to be cultural visibility, not just to you and me, but the wider gaming public?

That may have been true until Civ4, but it's no longer that simple since Civ5 and the Shoshone.
In Civ6 we have civs that are unknown by a lot of people, like the Mapuche, Georgia, the Cree ; and it also extends to leaders. They don't just take the most iconic civs and leaders anymore.

So it's a mix of different reasons, and I don't think there's one main rule.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I think Assyria is probably pretty high on the list of “newcomer” civs that have only been featured once in the game yet really seem notable in their absence. I think a lot of people would be happy to see them return.

I for one am excited for their upcoming release in the V Leaders Reborn mod.

From what I remember the Assyrian civilization was included mostly because Firaxis at the time happened to have somoene who actually had a high well of knowledge about them to begin with.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

From what I remember the Assyrian civilization was included mostly because Firaxis at the time happened to have somoene who actually had a high well of knowledge about them to begin with.

Yeah, you’re right, but now they’re a fan favorite, so who knows, we hopefully will see them back

I think Assyria is probably pretty high on the list of “newcomer” civs that have only been featured once in the game yet really seem notable in their absence. I think a lot of people would be happy to see them return.

I for one am excited for their upcoming release in the V Leaders Reborn mod.

I believe Ashurbanipal is one of the leaders. Deliverator is considering for the next reborn release.

A shout-out to whoever it was said that this thread is something of an echo chamber for a bunch of well-educated dedicated players who know all about every tribe that ever ruled over some small corner of the globe. I imagine that if Firaxis's marketing department ever read this, they would either be horrified or fall about laughing. Surely the main criterion for Firaxis has to be cultural visibility, not just to you and me, but the wider gaming public? Putting in the Salish might increase sales in BC, but is this particularly where their target audience is?

So yes, I would love to see the Ghaznavids, but I imagine the general reaction would be the WHO?

Which brings us back to Portugal as a no-brainer, Byzantium - and the Assyrians, who, as every fule kno, came down like a wolf on the fold. And probably not the Taino.

Same with alternative leaders - as I have mentioned before, for Scotland, Mary Stuart has far more recognition than James IV, thanks partly to Friedrich Schiller. Not that I personally have any desire to see her in the game.

this was mostly true until this game, I’d say, and even then, there’s notable exceptions.

You can obviously see where Firaxis used to go with only notable choices in terms of the civs: Huayna Capac leads the Inca bcs he’s got (to some extent) more knowledge in civ 4 compared to Pachacuti, for example.

But even this isn’t absolute: look at civ 3’s hittites, who were probably known by mostly people who were fairly knowledgeable about history already.

Especially in Civ 6, where not only do we have lesser known civs that became common knowledge through popular civ 5 mods, or memes, or simply being in civ, we see a lot of civs that were pretty obscure, compared to the norm: Kongo, Mapuche, Cree, Georgia. We see this even more with leaders: Casimir is better known than Jadwiga, Sejong than Seondeok, Louis XIV or Napoleon over Catherine di Medici, Isabella over Philip, Tokugawa or Meiji over Hojo Tokimune, Akbar and Ashoka over Chandragupta Maurya, Gustavus Adolphus over Kristina, Leonidas over Gorgo, Alexander over Gorgo and Pericles (until Macedon came out, likely BECAUSE of the outcry for Alexander), etc.

So I wouldn’t say that knowledgeability is as big of a chokepoint than it used to be. Especially with Native American civs, beyond the ‘Big Three’ and the Iroquois, any choice is going to be somewhat obscure outside of the region which that choice comes from.

With the Ghaznavids or Timurids, they were such important civs that at a point, the merit of them being civs is more important than whether ppl have heard of it.

I know this true of me, and a TON of other fans of this game— Civ is a big way that people become more knowledgeable about history, especially when it comes to more obscure people and civs. I don’t think that having a lesser known civ, or a few, would be that bad, because fans of the game would learn about them. Most ppl outside of SE Asia probably would’ve argued on the merits of Siam or Indonesia as civs, but now, they’re expectations, of high on wishlists, BECAUSE they were included in civ in the first place.

That may have been true until Civ4, but it's no longer that simple since Civ5 and the Shoshone.
In Civ6 we have civs that are unknown by a lot of people, like the Mapuche, Georgia, the Cree ; and it also extends to leaders. They don't just take the most iconic civs and leaders anymore.

So it's a mix of different reasons, and I don't think there's one main rule.

Yeah, this

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

That may have been true until Civ4, but it's no longer that simple since Civ5 and the Shoshone.
In Civ6 we have civs that are unknown by a lot of people, like the Mapuche, Georgia, the Cree ; and it also extends to leaders. They don't just take the most iconic civs and leaders anymore.

That's because one could say we got all the iconic ones finally in Civ 3 or Civ 4. Every game they've increased the number of civs so in the long run you will probably get all the iconic ones: Portugal, Byzantines, Babylon, plus extras in the process, because we are going to reach 50 by the time the pass is done.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Dumb half-baked hypothesis:

So far, many of the city-state additions seem somewhat selected to "pair" geographically with civs added in the same DLC/expack. I presume this is a matter of balancing, offering some reasonable assurance that as regions get filled and/or more dense there will be a proportionate amount of TSL city states nearby to keep politics interesting. Note that this doesn't apply to all of the CSs:

* Caguana (Maya)
* Fez/Ngazargamu (Mali)
* Hunza (Gran Colombia)
* Nazca (Inca)
* Rapa Nui (Maori)
* Cardiff (added after Scotland to put two British Isles CSs on the map to fight over)

This suggests two things to me.

One, there is a substantial chance that other city states added in the DLC packs are intended to be "neighbor's" with other NFP packs. Vatican might be pointing at something Italian, while Lahore might be pointing at the Timurids/Mughals or Kushans. Taruga might even be pointing toward Ashanti or Oyo.

Two, the absence of SE Asian city-states might be pointing at more than one new addition. The absence of Pagan, Hanoi, Bangkok (and Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Dhaka) might mean that multiple "civ-CS" pairings are planned.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Dumb half-baked hypothesis:

So far, many of the city-state additions seem somewhat selected to "pair" geographically with civs added in the same DLC/expack. I presume this is a matter of balancing, offering some reasonable assurance that as regions get filled and/or more dense there will be a proportionate amount of TSL city states nearby to keep politics interesting. Note that this doesn't apply to all of the CSs:

* Caguana (Maya)
* Fez/Ngazargamu (Mali)
* Hunza (Gran Colombia)
* Nazca (Inca)
* Rapa Nui (Maori)

This suggests two things to me.

One, there is a substantial chance that other city states added in the DLC packs are intended to be "neighbor's" with other NFP packs. Vatican might be pointing at something Italian, while Lahore might be pointing at the Timurids/Mughals or Kushans. Taruga might even be pointing toward Ashanti or Oyo.

Two, the absence of SE Asian city-states might be pointing at more than one new addition. The absence of Pagan, Hanoi, Bangkok (and Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Dhaka) might mean that multiple "civ-CS" pairings are planned.

I can see this, but I doubt it. You said yourself that they came out in tandem.

I’d also argue Caguana and Maya have nothing to do with each other.

Now, Lahore would primarily suggest the Ghaznavids or Mughals. Issue is, it was, for a time, the capital of both, and therefore would take them out of the running

What is more obvious is that the city states that we have are not going to be civs at least in this pack.

So No Ghaznavids, No Mughals.

I can, however, see multiple Mesopotamian and multiple South East Asian civs, since those regions haven’t gotten more city states, and mesopotamia’s only CSs are 1 which is undoubtedly going to become a civ and one which probably won’t become a civ, and no new ones.

 

[The Kingmaker]

I wonder what it would take for the Hittites to make another showing? I think the best we can hope for right now is for Sukritact to take an interest in them.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I wonder what it would take for the Hittites to make another showing? I think the best we can hope for right now is for Sukritact to take an interest in them.

i can see them possibly showing up in this pack over Assyria if Babylon is cultural/builder, or next pack if we get Assyria as science/military or science/builder and Babylon as culture/military or culture/science

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

* Caguana (Maya)
* Fez/Ngazargamu (Mali)
* Hunza (Gran Colombia)
* Nazca (Inca)
* Rapa Nui (Maori)
* Cardiff (added after Scotland to put two British Isles CSs on the map to fight over)

This suggests two things to me.

One, there is a substantial chance that other city states added in the DLC packs are intended to be "neighbor's" with other NFP packs. Vatican might be pointing at something Italian, while Lahore might be pointing at the Timurids/Mughals or Kushans. Taruga might even be pointing toward Ashanti or Oyo.

Two, the absence of SE Asian city-states might be pointing at more than one new addition. The absence of Pagan, Hanoi, Bangkok (and Kuala Lumpur, Manila, Dhaka) might mean that multiple "civ-CS" pairings are planned.

As stated above, the inclusion of Lahore means no Mughals.

I think if the theory was 100% accurate than we would have seen Italy with Vatican City, or Taruga with Ashanti or Oyo, as Hunza was put with Gran Colombia to basically confirm that the Muisca won't be in. Same as Rapa Nui with the Maori being the representative of Polynesia in this game.

Plus as I've said before we did just get a SE Asian city-state in Singapore and well Manila is a Spanish city. So SE Asia isn't totally being ignored. I still believe there is at least one more civ to be announced from that region. I do agree that another city-state could come from whether it be Hanoi/Pagan, or my preference Bangkok, depending on the playable civ.

I wonder what it would take for the Hittites to make another showing? I think the best we can hope for right now is for Sukritact to take an interest in them.

Replacing the Hattusa city-state would be a start.

 

[pokiehl]

I wonder what it would take for the Hittites to make another showing? I think the best we can hope for right now is for Sukritact to take an interest in them.

I want the Hittites back so badly. I cross my fingers for every dlc...

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I want the Hittites back so badly. I cross my fingers for every dlc...

me too, me too

As stated above, the inclusion of Lahore means no Mughals.

I think if the theory was 100% accurate than we would have seen Italy with Vatican City, or Taruga with Ashanti or Oyo, as Hunza was put with Gran Colombia to basically confirm that the Muisca won't be in. Same as Rapa Nui with the Maori being the representative of Polynesia in this game.

Plus as I've said before we did just get a SE Asian city-state in Singapore and well Manila is a Spanish city. So SE Asia isn't totally being ignored. I still believe there is at least one more civ to be announced from that region. I do agree that another city-state could come from whether it be Hanoi/Pagan, or my preference Bangkok, depending on the playable civ.


Replacing the Hattusa city-state would be a start.

hopefully we see the muisca in future games though, they’re with Purépecha in that tier of civs which were just under Maya, Aztecs and Inca in terms of their advancement and importance

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

hopefully we see the muisca in future games though, they’re with Purépecha in that tier of civs which were just under Maya, Aztecs and Inca in terms of their advancement and importance

I've stated this before but I think there's a possibility that in Civ 7, if South America has the same number of Civs, that they might switch up Gran Colombia and the Mapuche for Argentina and the Muisca.
Both sets cover the same geographical areas and one is indigenous while the other is a Spanish speaking post-colonial nation.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I can see this, but I doubt it. You said yourself that they came out in tandem.

I’d also argue Caguana and Maya have nothing to do with each other.

I think it's pretty casual if it does exist, plenty of CSs seem to be included simply because they are strong candidates and don't really beg to pair with anything. Seems they tend to do it more often where they want to fill larger spaces like Polynesia, the Caribbean, Africa, except in the case of Cardiff where Scotland and England needed more than one CS to fight over.

Now, Lahore would primarily suggest the Ghaznavids or Mughals. Issue is, it was, for a time, the capital of both, and therefore would take them out of the running

What is more obvious is that the city states that we have are not going to be civs at least in this pack.

So No Ghaznavids, No Mughals.

Agreed.

I can, however, see multiple Mesopotamian and multiple South East Asian civs, since those regions haven’t gotten more city states, and mesopotamia’s only CSs are 1 which is undoubtedly going to become a civ and one which probably won’t become a civ, and no new ones.

I can't really see many Mesopotamian civs also adding city states. We already have a lot of Mesopotamian CSs: Babylon, Akkad, Hattusa, Antioch, Yerevan. I also am not presuming Babylon will become a civ when Sumeria stole so much of its thunder.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I've stated this before but I think there's a possibility that in Civ 7, if South America has the same number of Civs, that they might switch up Gran Colombia and the Mapuche for Argentina and the Muisca.
Both sets cover the same geographical areas and one is indigenous while the other is a Spanish speaking post-colonial nation.

i’d prefer inca, mapuche and muisca and guarani with no post-colonial south american nation besides Brazil, and then have Costa Rica or Panama as a hispanophone post-colonial nation (although I do like Colombia)

I can't really see many Mesopotamian civs also adding city states. We already have a lot of Mesopotamian CSs: Babylon, Akkad, Hattusa, Antioch, Yerevan. I also am not presuming Babylon will become a civ when Sumeria stole so much of its thunder

I don’t think Sumer took that much out of Babylon tbh

Antioch, Yeravan and Hatussa aren’t technically Mesopotamian

 

[The Kingmaker]

Assuming Deliverator finishes the V Reborn project, we will have every past civ in the game except for Civ3’s Hittites and Civ2’s Sioux.

So the Hittites seem ripe for a high-quality mod.

I’d say the likelihood of an ancient Near Eastern civ occurring in NF is as follows:

Babylon: likely, precedent + fan favorite
Assyria: possible, new fan favorite
Hittites: unlikely, not as well-known as the other two

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Assuming Deliverator finishes the V Reborn project, we will have every past civ in the game except for Civ3’s Hittites and Civ2’s Sioux.

So the Hittites seem ripe for a high-quality mod.

I’d say the likelihood of a Mesopotamian civ occurring is as follows:

Babylon: likely, precedent + fan favorite
Assyria: possible, new fan favorite
Hittites: unlikely, not as well-known as the other two

This is a good point:
I’d imagine that there’s a possibility for a Sitting Bull mod by Suk, as there would be for Mutuwalli II, theoretically.

I see the Hittites as more likely coming from Firaxis, especially because they’re requested even outside of CivFanatics

I’m hoping that Civ 5 Reborn has Kamehameha represent Hawaii and Boudicca the Iceni, rather than Polynesia and the Celts respectively.

 

[SnowKomodo]

At this point I am open to any new civs from a place not geographically or historically represented.

I would want a western United States American Indian civ. I would have loved the Pueblo but that option obviously doesn't work.

My other choice would be a Southeast Asian civ. I bracket the likelihoods into three tiers:

I (Most Likely)
-Pagan or Burmese kingdom variation
-Champa or Vietnam

II (Less Likely)
-Ayutthaya
-Srivijaya

III (Longshots)
-Pick your choice of any major Sultanate within Nusantara
-The Philippines

If anyone here has a bias toward a SEA civ I did not mention, let me know who it is and which bracket you would put them in

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I don’t think Sumer took that much out of Babylon tbh

Ziggurats and river bonuses. Plus the cuneiform symbol kind of preempts any civ having a cuneiform bonus.

Antioch, Yeravan and Hatussa aren’t technically Mesopotamian

No they aren't but they are still adjacent to Mesopotamia and add to political complexity in the same way the Taino contribute to Mayan TSL gameplay.

As stated above, the inclusion of Lahore means no Mughals.

While I think the Mughals are pretty much not happening and the devs would pivot toward the Timurids, Agra would more appropriately be a definite reconfirmation of the Mughals. Lahore really only makes sense if we got Nur Jahan or maybe Akbar. I'm not completely dismissing them even if I find the Mughals extremely unlikely.

I think if the theory was 100% accurate than we would have seen Italy with Vatican City, or Taruga with Ashanti or Oyo, as Hunza was put with Gran Colombia to basically confirm that the Muisca won't be in. Same as Rapa Nui with the Maori being the representative of Polynesia in this game.

Well again I don't think it's a hard rule, just something elegant that the devs seem to throw together here and there when it works. While we aren't guaranteed that the CS will "pair" across the entire NFP pass (since the CS list for DLC 1 already pairs CSs with both the Maya and GC), it's still possible that some CSs are intended to balance other civs in NFP and point toward what they might be.

That said, I don't think any more DLC 1 civs beg this inference very strongly. Vatican City and Singapore are big enough to be included on their own merits. And at this point I would be surprised if the devs would be focusing their efforts on the Ashanti/Oyo when the Berber and Swahili coasts are still unfilled.

Plus as I've said before we did just get a SE Asian city-state in Singapore and well Manila is a Spanish city. So SE Asia isn't totally being ignored. I still believe there is at least one more civ to be announced from that region. I do agree that another city-state could come from whether it be Hanoi/Pagan, or my preference Bangkok, depending on the playable civ.

At least one more seems guaranteed. What I'm suggesting is the total absence of city states on the mainland might mean we could get multiple "pairings" over one or two season passes. Something like Burma and Bangkok/Dhaka AND Vietnam and Manila/Indrapura. The utter absence of anything in that region might just be pointing toward plans for more than a single civ.