[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Wielki Hegemon]

What I mean is there is not much original Celtic culture in modern Nations, the same way there is not much Sumerian culture in modern Iraq. Maori and Hawaiian people still exist as well as their culture. Celtic culture is extinct. The fact some modern people refer to it it doesn't mean it's still there.
What I mean here well-designed civilization can be still named The Celts. It's design problem not naming. Problem with Pictish warriors is they were not the most fortunate pick to represent Celtic UU, but not a problem of The Celts as a Civ. Same way Ceilidh Hall was a very poor pick to represent Celtic infrastructure. And because of those bad picks in Civilization V (they tried to make them more look like Scots or Irish, not a Celts), we recognized the whole idea with The Celts is bad. I think it's just wrong and things are much more complex than you want them to be.
Picking Gauls would only add the question of why Gauls, not Helweti or Belgae? All those tribes share Celtic culture, tradition, etc. and can just be named The Celts. There is no need to distinguish them. Just my opinion.

 

[untitledjuan]

So would Kublai Khan pair well with Italy/Venice over Vietnam?

After all, Marco Polo visited him

 

[Thenewwwguy]

What I mean is there is not much original Celtic culture in modern Nations, the same way there is not much Sumerian culture in modern Iraq. Maori and Hawaiian people still exist as well as their culture. Celtic culture is extinct. The fact some modern people refer to it it doesn't mean it's still there.
What I mean here well-designed civilization can be still named The Celts. It's design problem not naming. Problem with Pictish warriors is they were not the most fortunate pick to represent Celtic UU, but not a problem of The Celts as a Civ. Same way Ceilidh Hall was a very poor pick to represent Celtic infrastructure. And because of those bad picks in Civilization V (they tried to make them more look like Scots or Irish, not a Celts), we recognized the whole idea with The Celts is bad. I think it's just wrong and things are much more complex than you want them to be.
Picking Gauls would only add the question of why Gauls, not Helweti or Belgae? All those tribes share Celtic culture, tradition, etc. and can just be named The Celts. There is no need to distinguish them. Just my opinion.

looks like we can combine all of europe, persia and india into the Indo-European Civ, led by Gandhi, with the Immortal as it’s UU, and the Roman Bath as its UI. Any takers, since we’re just combining distinct cultures into a blob civ based on origin and nothing more?

 

[zhugejingqi]

After all, Marco Polo visited him

To be honest, I can't understand why you are so sure that Kublai Khan will appear.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I find it unlikely we'd go from 2 Ancient Civs to 4 in a single pass.

I find it unlikely either.

Picking Gauls would only add the question of why Gauls, not Helweti or Belgae? All those tribes share Celtic culture, tradition, etc. and can just be named The Celts. There is no need to distinguish them. Just my opinion.

Who would be your ideal leader for them in this situation and how would you design a hypothetical Celts?

After all, Marco Polo visited him

I'm honestly thinking that a Silk Road ability would be good for a Kublai Khan leader ability anyway.
I think the unused ability found in the game files, you gaining either an eureka or an inspiration upon completing a foreign trade route, can easily be implemented for him synergizing with Mongolia's Ortoo ability and even possibly China's Dynastic Cycle.

To be honest, I can't understand why you are so sure that Kublai Khan will appear.

The new alt. leader will have to require R&F, so it has to be a leader from one of those civs. A leader from Mongolia seems the most likely and he's popular.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

The new alt. leader will have to require R&F, so it has to be a leader from one of those civs. A leader from Mongolia seems the most likely and he's popular.

also there aren’t necessarily good alternatives.

The only ones i can think of are Gwangaeto as a more militaristic alternative to Seondeok, Cetshwayo to go diplo and military instead of pure military for Zulu.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I
Who would be your ideal leader for them in this situation and how would you design a hypothetical Celts?

If I said Vercingetorix is that means they should be named The Gauls? Good try, but this does not mean they shouldn't be named The Celts. As I said Gauls was just a roman name for them. If you want to be correct he was from Arverni tribe. Does no one say they should be named Arverni, not Gauls? Do we really want to be as minute in a game where Menelik II covers all Ethiopian History including the Axumite period?
I would surely make them warrior civ synergized with faith or maybe culture, nature (forest/rivers/appeal)
The reason why I would like The Celts in a game is all European Civs in a game now represent the Christian period of the history of the continent. It would be fun to play pagan pre-Christian European Civilization. We have a wide range of Civs based on modern European nations.

looks like we can combine all of europe, persia and india into the Indo-European Civ, led by Gandhi, with the Immortal as it’s UU, and the Roman Bath as its UI. Any takers, since we’re just combining distinct cultures into a blob civ based on origin and nothing more?

Sorry but this exaggeration and hyperbole are just rhetoric discreditation, not an argument... I hope you see a small difference between The Celts and your example.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

If I said Vercingetorix is that means they should be named The Gauls? Good try, but this does not mean they shouldn't be named The Celts. As I said Gauls was just a roman name for them. If you want to be correct he was from Arverni tribe. Does no one say they should be named Arverni, not Gauls? Do we really want to be as minute in a game where Menelik II covers all Ethiopian History including the Axumite period?
I would surely make them warrior civ synergized with faith or maybe culture, nature (forest/rivers/appeal)
The reason why I would like The Celts in a game is all European Civs in a game now represent the Christian period of the history of the continent. It would be fun to play pagan pre-Christian European Civilization. We have a wide range of Civs based on modern European nations.

Well I wanted Axumite Era Ethiopia anyway.

The "Celts" covered territory from Anatolia to modern-day Spain and Portugal and then up to British Isles. Gaul was the name given to basically modern-day France not all of the territory.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Well I wanted Axumite Era Ethiopia anyway.

The "Celts" covered the territory from Anatolia to modern-day Spain and Portugal and then up to the British Isles. Gaul was the name given to basically modern-day France not all of the territory.

The Celts represent a culture that covers a large part of Europe in the same manner China covers a large part of eastern Asia, the Mongol empire covered a large part of Asia or Roman Empire covered a Mediterranean sea. The factors that bonds this territory were either authority and state institutions (Roman empire for example) or common cultural identity (Mapuche for example). Or both (France for example). Celtic people have this glue, common cultural identity that makes them a distinct group of people or civilization despite their internal diversity. Putting them in quotation marks doesn't change it. In my opinion, this is enough for a historical video game, not academic historians to make them a Civilization. Calling them just Gauls is a little bit like calling Polish the Polans or The Germans Allemani. In fact, Germany in French is Allemagne from the Allemani tribe, but this french term is relating to all Germans, not only historical german tribe Allemani.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Sorry but this exaggeration and hyperbole are just rhetoric discreditation, not an argument... I hope you see a small difference between The Celts and your example

Nope, i’m just expanding on your argument. If cultures as disparate as britons, gauls, irish, welsh, pictish and scottish can be blobbed into a celt civ, we might as well blob together any slightly related cultures.

 

[berlin88]

If we are going to do a Celtic based civ, then the most obvious choice is the Gauls, since they are the most well known to the general public. On the other hand, that would conflict with the fact we have France, Britain and Scotland already in the game. The modern French are a mixture of Scandinavian Vikings, Germanic tribes like the Franks and Alsatians, Celtic Tribes, Greeks, etc.

Could we have a Celtic civ in the same game, as the civs who now occupy the former celtic territories?

In regards to lumping all the Celtic groups together into one giant civ, a lot of folks already do that. For example, if you take a DNA test like ancestry or 23 and me, they classify everyone with Celtic ancestry as Irish / British / Scottish, since they don't know what a Belgae or a Gaul is. According to the DNA tests, I am 8.6% British & Irish, despite the fact I have zero ancestors from that region and no relatives there. I have some Gaul / Saxon / Norman / Viking ancestry, so the DNA tests just assume I must be British / Irish, since the British / Irish people also have some Viking / Saxon / Norman / Celtic DNA.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Nope, i’m just expanding on your argument. If cultures as disparate as britons, gauls, irish, welsh, pictish and scottish can be blobbed into a celt civ, we might as well blob together any slightly related cultures.

This is not an expanding the argument. This is reducing it to absurdity
Irish are Irish. Not Celts. This is the mistake you are making. You mix The Celts with their bad version from Civilization V which has little in common with The Celts. Keeping your point of view. Isn't China blobed? Or India? If you consider Gauls so distinctive, China is for sure a blob. So what? Do you think China shouldn't be a civilization in the game?

 

[Lord Lakely]

A celtic civ doesn't necessarily have to be the Gauls. Ireland is right there, with two really good leaders (Brian Boru and Grace O'Malley), the Gallowglass UU, the Hobilar UU, the Cèilidh Hall as a UB, the Cranogh as a possible UI. There's plenty to work with.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Could we have a Celtic civ in the same game, as the civs who now occupy the former celtic territories?

People still want renaissance Italy despite having Rome. People still want Native North Americans despite having the USA. People still want Babylon despite having Sumeria.
Civilization is a culture, not genetics. Civilization develops in a certain period of time and many civilizations may develop in the same geographic territory in the course of history. Do you really want yo reduce it to the one region one Civilization rule?

A celtic civ doesn't necessarily have to be the Gauls. Ireland is right there, with two really good leaders (Brian Boru and Grace O'Malley), the Gallowglass UU, the Hobilar UU, the Cèilidh Hall as a UB, the Cranogh as a possible UI. There's plenty to work with.

It would be Irish Civ not Celtic...

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

This is not an expanding the argument. This is reducing it to absurdity
Irish are Irish. Not Celts. This is the mistake you are making. You mix The Celts with their bad version from Civilization V which has little in common with The Celts. Keeping your point of view. Isn't China blobed? Or India? If you consider Gauls so distinctive, China is for sure a blob. So what? Do you think China shouldn't be a civilization in the game?

The Irish aren't of Celtic origin? That's news to me. I'm not going to argue this anymore because I kind of fully believe that Scotland was intended to be the Celts representative in the game anyway, no matter how not Celtic they are in their design.
The Kingdom of Scotland was made by the uniting of various Celtic groups like the Gaels (who the modern day Irish come from as well) and the Picts. Having an overarching Celtic civ to me personally would be weird especially since we already have Scotland in the game, not to mention Irish and Welsh city-states who I would consider to have more Celtic influences.

A celtic civ doesn't necessarily have to be the Gauls. Ireland is right there, with two really good leaders (Brian Boru and Grace O'Malley), the Gallowglass UU, the Hobilar UU, the Cèilidh Hall as a UB, the Cranogh as a possible UI. There's plenty to work with.

Ireland would work to. The argument that we are trying to have is there is no need for a civ called the Celts when we could have Ireland or Gauls that would serve the same purpose.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

This is not an expanding the argument. This is reducing it to absurdity
Irish are Irish. Not Celts. This is the mistake you are making. You mix The Celts with their bad version from Civilization V which has little in common with The Celts. Keeping your point of view. Isn't China blobed? Or India? If you consider Gauls so distinctive, China is for sure a blob. So what? Do you think China shouldn't be a civilization in the game?

what? The Irish are celts, both linguistically and anthropologically...

China and India are blob civs. In India’s case, I’ve advocated for it to be split up into three or more civs for ages.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

The Irish aren't of Celtic origin? That's news to me. I'm not going to argue this anymore because I kind of fully believe that Scotland was intended to be the Celts representative in the game anyway, no matter how not Celtic they are in their design.
The Kingdom of Scotland was made by the uniting of various Celtic groups like the Gaels (who the modern day Irish come from as well) and the Picts. Having an overarching Celtic civ to me personally would be weird especially since we already have Scotland in the game, not to mention Irish and Welsh city-states who I would consider to have more Celtic influences.


Ireland would work to. The argument that we are trying to have is there is no need for a civ called the Celts when we could have Ireland or Gauls that would serve the same purpose.

They're little differences between Nation's origins and former cultures/empires. Why do we want Italy if they are of Roman origin? Or maybe let's get rid of this Roman Empire blob and just have Italy. It is this way of thinking. Guys please try to think about it once again and not repeat some conclusions because someone once said The Celts is a blob. End. Why they are blob? Because they are blob. They were blob in Civilization V and they put Ireland and Scotland into one bag once.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

They're little differences between Nation's origins and former cultures/empires. Why do we want Italy if they are of Roman origin? Or maybe let's get rid of this Roman Empire blob and just have Italy. It is this way of thinking. Guys please try to think about it once again and not repeat some conclusions because someone once said The Celts is a blob. End. Why they are blob? Because they are blob. They were blob in Civilization V and they put Ireland and Scotland into one bag once.

Sorry, from what I have looked up they have always been kind of a blob civ, maybe just not to the extent that it was in Civ 5.
In Civ 4 Boudicca was a possible leader while having a Gallic Swordsman as a UU. I will give you the benefit of the doubt that this version is at least bearable with Brennus.
In Civ 3 Boudicca was considered one of their great leaders, as well as Gruffud ap Lleweyen, a Welsh king lead by a Gaul leader in Vercingetorix.
In Civ 2 well they had close to the same city list as in Civ 5 with Cardiff as the capital. I won't even talk about the leaders of Civ 2.

Civ 6 in my opinion is trying to steer away from that and I'm not too sure how to make it work the way you would want it to.

Besides Italy doesn't just have Roman origins. Modern day Italians are genetically diverse with more Greek heritage in the south while also having both Germanic and Celtic heritage the farther up north you go.

 

[Lord Lakely]

The issue with the Celts though is that the Celts never had an empire. They were an urbanized culture and there was a *VERY* shortlived Gallo-Roman amalgam of sorts, but there's no empire to model them after. You kind of either have to pick one of the Celtic cultures or go with a descendant nation. The alternative is blobbing, which is... a dicey take, I'm sure you'll agree.

It's not entirely the same as saying Italians and Romans are equal, but to some degree it rings true, yes. Rome and Italy are to some degree equivalent and Italy could feasably replace Rome in a Civ game. They could also coexist in the same game, in the same vein that Rome and Byzantium co-existed in past games and in the EXACT same vein Greece and Macedon and Ptolemaic bleeping Egyot all co-exist in Civ 6. Sweden and Norway are very similar culturally yet rep two completely different historical angles of basically the same history (viking kingdom and enlightened despotism respectively)

Celts function in the same way. You can have multiple Celtic civs, just like how you can have multiple Chinese Civs, Arabic Civs, Nordic Civs or Roman Civs in the same game, as long as the umbrella is wide enough. "Celts" is a bloody wide umbrella. You can also go with just the one Celtic rep and call it a day.

Personally, I don't really care whether we get another Celtic civ. Scotland already represent them, albeit a WEAK flimsy representation at that if you desire a more uproarious Furor Celtica. It would be as if Kristina's Sweden was the ONLY representative of Viking culture and yes, while a technical fit, it doesn't exactly feel like one.

A classical era Celtic civ (Gauls, Britons/Iceni) or a medieval era one (Ireland) would round the collection up very nicely.

 

[zhugejingqi]

Even if the production team had told you they're going to make Maya. It's hard to predict the leader accurately.