[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[8housesofelixir]

Currently on the steam there is an achievement related directly to Hattusa with a reference to the Hittite storm god; it is the only city-state specific steam achievement among all the city-states. I feel like the devs invested a little bit than usual to the Hattusa, but as a CS. Also, if FXS introduced Hittites eventually, they need to re-design that achievement as well.

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah, the AoE2 developers kind of explain the rationale for fudging the name by saying that westerners called all steppe peoples “Tatars,” but it’s a lame excuse if you ask me.

AoK names are the worst. Saracens, Britons--with a separate "Celts" civ that ought to be "Irish"...Ugh.

They basically made that faction a Chagatai/Timurid/Tatar blob... while also including a separate Cuman faction.

My money is that the Cumans got in because of Kingdom Come: Deliverance (which is a great game), especially as they're depicted with them same ahistorical Gurkani-style armor as they wear in KCD.

Currently on the steam there is an achievement related directly to Hattusa with a reference to the Hittite storm god; it is the only city-state specific steam achievement among all the city-states. I feel like the devs invested a little bit than usual to the Hattusa, but as a CS. Also, if FXS introduced Hittites eventually, they need to re-design that achievement as well.

If they replaced it with another Anatolian or Hurrian city, they'd still worship Tarḫunz/Tarḫunna/Teshub.

 

[The Kingmaker]

AoK names are the worst. Saracens, Britons--with a separate "Celts" civ that ought to be "Irish"...Ugh.

Yep, pretty bad. The surprising thing is that there hasn’t been any improvement in the 20 years between vanilla and the new Tatars and Cumans.

Anyway, my point is that general audiences would probably have difficulty figuring out who we’re talking about with a Gurkhani civ.

 

[Zaarin]

Yep, pretty bad. The surprising thing is that there hasn’t been any improvement in the 20 years between vanilla and the new Tatars and Cumans.

At least AoE4 seems to be doing better--at least so far we know they're calling the English the English.

Anyway, my point is that general audiences would probably have difficulty figuring out who we’re talking about with a Gurkhani civ.

TBH I think the general audience is unlikely to recognize anything from Central Asia.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

At least AoE4 seems to be doing better--at least so far we know they're calling the English the English.


TBH I think the general audience is unlikely to recognize anything from Central Asia.

I can imagine an empire which shares a name with a modern country (namely Uzbekistan or the Kazakhs) could become popular, since as I earlier mentioned, the general public usually requests empires which share names with modern countries or modern countries outright

 

[The Kingmaker]

TBH I think the general audience is unlikely to recognize anything from Central Asia.

I know. Doesn’t stop me from wanting both the Gurkhani-Timurids and the Kushans though.

 

[Zaarin]

I know. Doesn’t stop me from wanting both the Gurkhani-Timurids and the Kushans though.

Or me the Sogdians. It's just a very overlooked region in the public consciousness.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I know. Doesn’t stop me from wanting both the Gurkhani-Timurids and the Kushans though.

there’s generally a glut of catholic civs but a dearth of Muslim and Hindu ones in this game, in terms of the Big 4 religions and how many civs follow them in relation to their total following/historical influence (I’d say there’s an adequate amount of Buddhist civs, counting the Khmer as one even though they were more historically hindu)

So I’d be happy to see the Kingdom of Jaffna, for example, as well as Nepal, the Kushans, Chola and Champa (and Mittani, if you’re of the opinion that their ruling class followed Ancient Vedic religion) for Hindu nations, while in terms of Islam, the Gurkhani (both Timurids and Mughals), Oman, Yemen, Swahili and Berbers are the civs I’d want to see

 

[Guandao]

When I hear the term Gurkhani, I think of the Gurkhas, not the Timurids or the Mughals.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

When I hear the term Gurkhani, I think of the Gurkhas, not the Timurids or the Mughals.

they’d also be a very cool civ to see, or a perfect UU under Nepal

 

[Zaarin]

and Mittani, if you’re of the opinion that their ruling class followed Ancient Vedic religion

Technically they're pre-Vedic so it depends on how much you want to get into the weeds of "Is pre-Vedic Indo-Aryan religion Hindu?" (Which of course is much more complicated than talking about pre-Zoroastrian Iranian religion because Zoroastrianism is, of course, monotheistic.)

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Technically they're pre-Vedic so it depends on how much you want to get into the weeds of "Is pre-Vedic Indo-Aryan religion Hindu?" (Which of course is much more complicated than talking about pre-Zoroastrian Iranian religion because Zoroastrianism is, of course, monotheistic.)

my understanding of it is that they did reference what we’d now call Hindu gods, like the ashwins, etc in obstensibly sanskrit pronunciations. I think there’s a decent amount of evidence that at least some of their language was heavily influenced by Proto-Sanskrit to an extent too, so while I’m definitely not the most knowledgeable about these subjects, I’d be at least somewhat surprised if the mittani didn’t have some relationship with vedic Indo-Iranians or the Dravidian peoples, since we know Vedic religion was essentially a combination of both groups’ beliefs

Compare this to the Hittites who probably had some more general Indo-European gods but seemingly didn’t have any Sanskrit-esqe pronunciations or vedic-reminiscent god names.

The timeline is definitely interesting since Mittani was coexistent with the period of time in which the Indian subcontinent was completely Dravidian, but given the specific evidence and word choice we’re aware of, in my opinion, the Mitanni ruling class were at least more Vedic-influenced than other Indo-European peoples

 

[Zaarin]

my understanding of it is that they did reference what we’d now call Hindu gods, like the ashwins, etc in obstensibly sanskrit pronunciations. I think there’s a decent amount of evidence that at least some of their language was heavily influenced by Proto-Sanskrit to an extent too

Oh, no, there's no argument that the language of the Mitanni elite was Indo-Aryan (for a long time it was assumed to be Iranian, which is logical, but it was shown to have features that are distinctly Aryan). There's also no question that it was not Sanskrit. So I think the best way to describe their religion is "Indo-Aryan paganism," since its exact relationship to Vedic religion is nebulous and the Vedic gods are clearly descended from pre-Vedic gods (many of them have parallels in both Iranian and Greek myths).

Compare this to the Hittites who probably had some more general Indo-European gods but seemingly didn’t have any Sanskrit-esqe pronunciations or vedic-reminiscent god names.

They didn't have Sanskrit-esque pronunciation because they spoke an entirely different branch of Indo-European. To say they had no parallel gods, however, is quite wrong. You can't really find an Indo-European religion that doesn't have Sky Father, for example, even if they call him something else (Tarḫunna, in this case). Also worth noting that Hittite religion was profoundly influenced by Hattic, Hurrian, and Mesopotamian religion.

The timeline is definitely interesting since Mittani was coexistent with the period of time in which the Indian subcontinent was completely Dravidian, but given the specific evidence and word choice we’re aware of, in my opinion, the Mitanni ruling class were at least more Vedic-influenced than other Indo-European peoples

Again, that they were Indo-Aryan, there's no question, but being pre-Vedic it's much more accurate to call them Indo-Aryan pagans (or polytheists, if you prefer). Their religion would be in relation to Hinduism what the Scythian religion would be to Zoroastrianism, except that Vedic religion remained polytheistic (mostly).

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Oh, no, there's no argument that the language of the Mitanni elite was Indo-Aryan (for a long time it was assumed to be Iranian, which is logical, but it was shown to have features that are distinctly Aryan). There's also no question that it was not Sanskrit. So I think the best way to describe their religion is "Indo-Aryan paganism," since its exact relationship to Vedic religion is nebulous and the Vedic gods are clearly descended from pre-Vedic gods (many of them have parallels in both Iranian and Greek myths).


They didn't have Sanskrit-esque pronunciation because they spoke an entirely different branch of Indo-European. To say they had no parallel gods, however, is quite wrong. You can't really find an Indo-European religion that doesn't have Sky Father, for example, even if they call him something else (Tarḫunna, in this case). Also worth noting that Hittite religion was profoundly influenced by Hattic, Hurrian, and Mesopotamian religion.


Again, that they were Indo-Aryan, there's no question, but being pre-Vedic it's much more accurate to call them Indo-Aryan pagans (or polytheists, if you prefer). Their religion would be in relation to Hinduism what the Scythian religion would be to Zoroastrianism, except that Vedic religion remained polytheistic (mostly).

ah yeah, im not the most familiar with mittani so that clarifies things

 

[8housesofelixir]

Or me the Sogdians. It's just a very overlooked region in the public consciousness.

Sogdians are one of (if not the most) important civilization in Central Asia of the first millennium, single-handedly connects East and the West before the Mongols. The problems may be they usually shown up in history as great merchants/immigrant communities in other civilizations, which makes them less well-known (compare to, say, great conquerors of the Mongols). The most famous Sogdian "leader" besides Roxana is probably... An Lushan.

I really wish civ series can have Sogdians included, however the most possible scenario is probably a re-introduce of the Samarkand city-state (which would still make me happy enough).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

well since we have Mohenjo-Daro as a cultural City State, I wouldn’t mind seeing Harappa as a scientific one. I don’t remember Hatussa’s specific bonus, but Baikonur would be a good scientific city state.

Hattusa grants you one copy of a strategic resource for everyone one you've revealed but not improved.
If by Baikonur, you mean the site of the world's first space launch that originally was a small coal mining town, that could possibly work too.

I'd choose Tarsus, the capital of Cilicia and a possible location of Biblical Tarshish--and a vital source of all sorts of metals that were used throughout the region, including tin, copper, iron, silver, and gold.

You mean the city that's already Persian.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Hattusa grants you one copy of a strategic resource for everyone one you've revealed but not improved.
If by Baikonur, you mean the site of the world's first space launch that originally was a small coal mining town, that could possibly work too.


You mean the city that's already Persian.

yeah, i mean the location of the big cosmodrome

 

[Zaarin]

Sogdians are one of (if not the most) important civilization in Central Asia of the first millennium, single-handedly connects East and the West before the Mongols. The problems may be they usually shown up in history as great merchants/immigrant communities in other civilizations, which makes them less well-known (compare to, say, great conquerors of the Mongols). The most famous Sogdian "leader" besides Roxana is probably... An Lushan.

I would have chosen Oxyartes (Huxšaθra). He may have been ethnically Bactrian or Sogdian, but he led Sogdia at any rate.

I really wish civ series can have Sogdians included, however the most possible scenario is probably a re-introduce of the Samarkand city-state (which would still make me happy enough).

The absence of Samarkand as a city-state is what makes me hold out hope we'll eventually see something in the region...

You mean the city that's already Persian.

Is it on Persia's list? Well, it could be removed easily enough, like Granada.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I would have chosen Oxyartes (Huxšaθra). He may have been ethnically Bactrian or Sogdian, but he led Sogdia at any rate.


The absence of Samarkand as a city-state is what makes me hold out hope we'll eventually see something in the region...


Is it on Persia's list? Well, it could be removed easily enough, like Granada.

im honestly surprised samarqand isn’t a city state. It’s probably one of the most historically importnat cities which isn’t a city in any capacity, alongside (off the top of my head) Vienna, Kiev, Dublin, (maybe) Thanjavur, Jaffna, Kilwa, Hanoi (for now), Bangkok, Pegu, and Aden

 

[TahamiTsunami]

I'm definitely just catching up on posts so sorry that I've replied to some older comments!

From Wikipedia: "Sebastian (Portuguese: Sebastião I Portuguese pronunciation: [sɨbɐʃˈti.ɐ̃w̃]; 20 January 1554 – 4 August 1578) was King of Portugal from 11 June 1557 to 4 August 1578 and the penultimate Portuguese monarch of the House of Aviz." So for a little over a year he was king...

Actually a little over 20 years going by those dates. No worries though, I've certainly been guilty of mistaking dates and times more often than I care to admit! From what I've read, Sebastian was crowned when he was 3 and didn't start ruling on his own until around 1568 or so which would still be around a decade. I'd probably still prefer Manuel I but Sebastian doesn't sound boring from what I can tell (he actually sounds like a pretty good choice based on what I've seen)!

I hate to sound like a broken record but, just to counter the 'All the Mississippian kingdoms were in decline by the time of European arrival' thought or that Tuskaloosa is the only Mississippian leader worth mentioning, the Natchez were actually in their ascendancy at the time of the de Soto expedition and Quigualtum would be a good leader choice. Getting this mound builder civ in game is at least a possibility.

I haven't thought of Maria Theresa as a leader for Germany before but, now that I'm thinking about it, it doesn't sound like a bad idea to have her as a German alt leader if Austria is out.

I think the reason Scotland is in the game is Firaxis is moving away from the way they represented the Celts before. They could add Britons lead by Boadicea, Gauls under Vercingetorix, or other Celtic civs like Picts and Welsh and etc. with leaders relevant to their history.

Agreed. After Bulgaria, I think one of the specific Celtic civs like Gaul and Ireland would be the next new European civ.

Merging the ancient Maurya empire into the Indian Civilization seems to mean they at least will include all Indian dynasties originating in northern India as 'Indian Civilization'.

I imagine that, even without Gandhi, Firaxis will have a hard time ditching a civ called India. Whether it's for simplicity, pleasing the Indian gamer base, etc. who knows but I think that India might not be leaving anytime soon (I wouldn't mind being wrong but I just don't think it will be too likely). If nothing else, I'd at least hope that the devs can take some steps to improve things for India and the subcontinent such as:

1. Removing Gandhi as an Indian leader and make him a Great Person instead. Perhaps even find a way to include his atomic memes into his great person abilities if necessary.
2. Have a Gurkani civ to have the highly requested Timurids and Mughals under their unifying name so as to not worry about a Mughal alt leader 'taking up space' in India. A separate Sri Lanka civ would be a nice bonus but the Gurkani would be my top choice.
3. Have the civ called India be led by the Maurya with alt leaders for the Maratha and Chola (if they can't be their own civ) for 3 leaders in total.

It's probably not perfect but I'd consider it to be a vast improvement.

Since Kublai Khan seems to be confirmed, it seems unlikely that there will be an alt leader for a different civ. While I'll be happy to see the Byzantines, I still can't help but feel that it would've been better to include them as a Roman alt leader with their own Greek fire ship unit and a UD or UB added to the leader ability. In a game with alt leaders, it would've made sense to me to include them under the same Roman civ.

I also know it's somewhat controversial but I'd prefer Assyria slightly over Babylon, though I'd be fine with either one. I'm not realistically going to expect both.

As much as I'd also like to have Babylonia (or better yet, Babylonia and Assyria), I have to agree that if I have to pick only 1 of the 2 then I'd pick Assyria as the full civ and have Babylonia reluctantly stick its representation to the Babylon citystate.

As for Native America my preference is the Navajo but I wouldn't mind the Iroquois returning again, or the Tlingit to represent the PNW. Those would be my top 3 choices for North America.

If we can't have the Hopi instead of the Navajo then those are my top 3 as well!

A lot of ppl don’t know a lot about Kongo/Angolan history. The Kingdom of Kongo was really a Kingdom in present-day Angola. The Kingdom of Angola was a client state until Ana Nzinga ruled. A lot of ppl think Ana was related to Mvemba, but she wasn’t. The Dynastic name is a coincidence. Ana would make a fine ruler of Angola if they decide to rotate between Angola and Kongo going forward.

I admittedly didn't know much of either before this game so I for one certainly appreciate the curiosity about them that this game gave me! Kongo has been quite fun to play as so I'd be happy to have them returning as a mainstay in future games. Angola with Ana Nzinga has plenty of potential so it would great to see them joining in as well. I'd just prefer and hope that Firaxis won't have swap out Kongo in order to get Angola.

Having to swap civs is something that I see as a bit annoying as well, especially because it seems to happen to civs that the devs see as either unimportant (at least to gamers overall as opposed to importance in history) or similar enough to another civ that it doesn't matter. We know that there will NEVER be a concern about future games where France might need to be swapped with England, Rome with Greece, or China with Japan just to name some examples yet important civs like Mali, Khmer, Iroquois, can have a shred of doubt about whether or not they can be on the chopping block. It's especially annoying when some places struggle to get consistent beyond a core 3 or so mainstays such as Africa (Egypt, Ethiopia, Zulu) and the native Americas (Aztec, Inca, Maya). It still sucks that Austria might've been swapped in order for Hungary to appear but at least by that time it's after 10 to 12 other favorites have appeared. Similarly, I'd also hope for both Georgia and Armenia without having to swap one for the other.

For me, Tlingit, Salish, Navajo, Shawnee and Chinook are the ones i’d like to see the most.

I'd personally love to see that day when the PNW gets that much love!

With Kublai Khan and Vietnam seemingly confirmed, I'm also guessing that the rest of the lineup will be:

- Assyria or Babylonia (with a slight edge to Assyria)
- Portugal
- Byzantine
- A Native American civ (hopefully one of Iroquois/Haudenosaunee, Tlingit, Hopi/Navajo, Choctaw/Natchez, or Powhatan)

If that above example is the case, it definitely appears that they're going with more of the returning favorites rather than doing the 4 Returning and 4 New split. It's quite a long shot that I won't hold my breath for but perhaps if one of the big mainstays doesn't show up here in the New Frontier it could hopefully indicate and a Final Frontier expansion.