[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Onii-chan]

For China, the difference lies more in different time period rather than different regions (different regions are very different, yes, but not enough to make a full civ). For instance, Qin and Tang are obviously culturally and politically different.

Oh absolutely, but I'm pretty sure you could make the same argument for a ton of other civs that have existed for thousands of years in that case. I feel like that kind of cultural evolution of the same country/area over time would probably be better represented in Humankind than Civ tbh. An alternative leader from a different dynasty could probably do the job just as well in this game though

 

[8housesofelixir]

An alternative leader from a different dynasty could probably do the job just as well in this game though

Yes, I think under the current system, different leader for different time periods is good enough - for instance, having Qin and Kublai (and Gandhi and Chandragupta) as different leaders will (partly) do the job.

IMHO it is an adequate way of de-blobbing other "long period" civs, such as the current Germany, or like previously suggested, another Roman Emperor.

 

[Jkchart]

Oh, was I complaining about Eleanor? No, no, no, Eleanor is great. Eleanor is wonderful. Eleanor is just the best.

He will reappear in one of the next games, I'm sure it's a nice break from him (even though I'm more fond of him than most), next time though Louis XIV should be the main rep

 

[Zaarin]

He will reappear in one of the next games, I'm sure it's a nice break from him (even though I'm more fond of him than most), next time though Louis XIV should be the main rep

France has plenty of great Medieval kings to cycle through before Napoleon has to show up again. I mean, we could just take a Louis run: that's eighteen Louis + Louis-Philippe + Louis Napoleon; without consulting any other names that brings us to Civ 27 before Napoleon Bonaparte has to show up.

 

[8housesofelixir]

He will reappear in one of the next games, I'm sure it's a nice break from him (even though I'm more fond of him than most), next time though Louis XIV should be the main rep

I know a lot of people have said this before, but again, Magnificence CdM coupled with the France UA really, really looks like Louis XIV - Give the Sun King a chance next time!

I mean, we could just take a Louis run: that's eighteen Louis + Louis-Philippe + Louis Napoleon; without consulting any other names that brings us to Civ 27 before Napoleon Bonaparte has to show up.

I mean, someone will try a Louis XVI design someday

 

[Zaarin]

I know a lot of people have said this before, but again, Magnificence CdM coupled with the France UA really, really looks like Louis XIV - Give the Sun King a chance next time!

Just...not in his dinner outfit.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Same, but I think the former is more likely unfortunately. The only thing that gives me a glimmer of hope is that we've already had a Europe pack.

On twitter Anton called it the "Fall of Rome" pack, so not necessarily saying that it was it for Europe.

Yes, I think under the current system, different leader for different time periods is good enough - for instance, having Qin and Kublai (and Gandhi and Chandragupta) as different leaders will (partly) do the job.

IMHO it is an adequate way of de-blobbing other "long period" civs, such as the current Germany, or like previously suggested, another Roman Emperor.

Considering Babylon's new abilities made China not as great anymore, I have a good feeling that they did that on purpose to implement Kublai having an interesting leader ability that would help them out.

 

[8housesofelixir]

Considering Babylon's new abilities made China not as great anymore, I have a good feeling that they did that on purpose to implement Kublai having an interesting leader ability that would help them out.

That is an interesting line of thinking, although I would say the +1 builder charge alone already make Qin-China really OP, not to say wonder-rushing or 6 gold 6 culture Great Wall spam. I don't think anyone playing China because of the Eureka bonus, to be honest.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

That is an interesting line of thinking, although I would say the +1 builder charge alone already make Qin-China really OP, not to say wonder-rushing or 6 gold 6 culture Great Wall spam. I don't think anyone playing China because of the Eureka bonus, to be honest.

I agree that the +1 builder charge is probably the better ability but I was going off a lot of other comments saying that Babylon's civ ability blow's China's out of the water.

 

[Zaarin]

On twitter Anton called it the "Fall of Rome" pack, so not necessarily saying that it was it for Europe.

Well, both of its civs were European, and we have not yet had a pack from Native North America. So I'm going to hope until I can no longer rationally hope.

 

[notNamed]

I'm not gonna pretend to know everything about Chinese history because I don't, but like even though China has historically split apart and reunited again tons of times throughout history with all of its different dynasties, ultimately it's still China. Were the cultural differences between each kingdom within China at times of it being split apart really big enough to warrant being considered a separate civilization entirely in a game like Civ? That feels a little bit stretched

The issue with de-blobbing China is that it is a blob. If you look at it from a modern standpoint, it's some 3000 years of Chinese folks establishing random kingdoms and vying for power, where one ultimately dominates and get all the hen in row until the next rooster comes along and so on. And sure, imagine if Roman Empire never fell apart, why would you ever add Gallia as a civ? It's just a province where people speak funny. England? Spain? Why would you add random provinces that never amounted to anything?

Making separate Han and Ming civs is just like making Rome and Italy separate civs. It's a fairly arguable point, but ultimately one you can live down.The real bummer is all that history that doesn't get shown. The Xiongnu empire or the state they established in Northern China after the Three Kingdoms period. The foreign juggernaut that was Chu during the Warring states period. The Khitan Liao dynasty, Nanman shenanigans in the Dali Kingdom. Hmong folks and their own civilisation.
Obviously none of these are as Civ-positive as the Jurchen or Vietnamese who have the benefit of having modern successors (unlike Chu or Carthage), but it should be enough to show that there is more to Chinese history than just China and Chinese fighting Chinese, occasionally letting the door open for some nomads they then kick out before returning to continue the millennia long slap fight. It was not so much China falling apart and coming back together over and over as much as it was an active area of many civilisations clashing, though ultimately what we consider Chinese today happened to hold the favorable positions (think Germany compared to Poland or Ukraine) in this fight and thus the usurpation of power balance (Mongol and Manchu conquests, Jin and Song never being able to control the Central Plains,...) in the region was rare.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

The best rendition of China I ever saw in Civ was a Modded China in Civ V in which you started as the very first semi-mystical Dynasty and then at various events you Had to change Dynasties. I believe the triggers were taking someone else's capital or losing yours. This meant that in an ordinary game you might wind up playing anywhere from 1 - 2 to a half-dozen different 'China' civilizations. As I remember, the differences among the Dynasties were not that great, but in principle, and with a new Leader for every potential Dynasty (costing, unfortunately, a bucket-load of graphic resources for the Leader animations) one potentially could show something resembling the grand sweep of China's history without having to 'ring in' outside Influences and Civs.

 

[8housesofelixir]

I believe the triggers were taking someone else's capital or losing yours.

I do like how losing Luoyang turned China from a Confucian-Legalist state into an Aristocratic and Buddhism one. Oh wait that's what happened in IRL history.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I do like how losing Luoyang turned China from a Confucian-Legalist state into an Aristocratic and Buddhism one. Oh wait that's what happened in IRL history.

Sacred Blue! An In-Game mechanism for a Civ that actually mirrors actual events in its history!

Will wonders never cease . . .

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

Oh......my memory is wrong here. The science-giving religious building is Wat (because it means school or something similar). I think I messed up Stupa from Humankind, which gives Science to nearby tiles.

OK let's talk this. The problem is that there's a few terms, all from different languages and even those (vihara) that are from similar languages have changed over time.
A stupa (Pali: cetiya, Sinhalese: dagoba) refers to the central spire in a Buddhist temple. The related cetiya in India refers to a hall that contains a stupa, but in Southeast Asia a jedi (coming from that word cetiya - pronounced properly it is an unaspirated ch, written c but sounding closest to the English j) means the same as a stupa. A stupa or jedi contains a relic of a famous monk or, especially, the Buddha himself. Stupa is common in South Asia, jedi in Southeast Asia.
A pagoda is the same thing, but with a different architectural style and more common in East Asia, in the Mahayana tradition.
A vihara is a Buddhist university in the South Asian tradition, but in Southeast Asia refers to only the ordination hall. Thai: wihan, Cambodian: vihear.
A wat (Cambodian: vat, as in Angkor Wat) is a Southeast Asian Theravada Buddhist temple complex. These were important in terms of science in that they focused on literacy amongst the everyday population (historically only men). A wat contained a vihara as well as a jedi.
FYI, if you hear the word "maha" in any of these related languages, it just means "great".

So - stupa, pagoda, jedi (contained within a wat) - all these things essentially mean the same thing, but might point towards the three big divisions in Buddhism: vajrayana (South Asian) Buddhism, mahayana (East Asian), and theravada (Southeast Asian and Sri Lankan), and the three big religious languages: Sanskrit, Chinese (with Sanskrit as well), and Pali.

Pop-culture fans have probably heard one or two words that they think that they recognize from a popular movie series. I'd advise them not to over-think this. The creator of said series was into Buddhism and tossed around religious terms a lot.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ I'm not sure if East Asian Pagoda (often represented with single chinese character that means 'tower' (one that has either 'wood tree' or 'earth' on its left) has interior that contains scriptures as well as relics and if it is divided into multiple rooms. I'm sure that Stupa (Chedi) has similar functions to Old Egyptian Pyramid. but i don't know if Borobudur serves the same purpose or not. but it has carvings regarding to Buddhism teachings with the lowest tier involves the basic Ethics (Five Preceps) , something F'xis FORGET when implementing religion but it is a very core of every religions and why religions replaced Pantheons in the end. Actually Ethics should be Civics but not the same as Code of Laws because in a volume of laws. particularly the ancient ones. some laws are unethical particularly those involving with God King concepts.

Just saw Humankind tweet regarding to Siam and 'Gatling Elephants'. this unit is both correct and incorrect but the team didn't say what it does. it should be ranged unit, the Gatling with extra range due to the use of mobile towering platform, but with less cover bonus because such platforms are quite visible.

 

[8housesofelixir]

OK let's talk this. The problem is that there's a few terms, all from different languages and even those (vihara) that are from similar languages have changed over time.
A stupa (Pali: cetiya, Sinhalese: dagoba) refers to the central spire in a Buddhist temple. The related cetiya in India refers to a hall that contains a stupa, but in Southeast Asia a jedi (coming from that word cetiya - pronounced properly it is an unaspirated ch, written c but sounding closest to the English j) means the same as a stupa. A stupa or jedi contains a relic of a famous monk or, especially, the Buddha himself. Stupa is common in South Asia, jedi in Southeast Asia.
A pagoda is the same thing, but with a different architectural style and more common in East Asia, in the Mahayana tradition.
A vihara is a Buddhist university in the South Asian tradition, but in Southeast Asia refers to only the ordination hall. Thai: wihan, Cambodian: vihear.
A wat (Cambodian: vat, as in Angkor Wat) is a Southeast Asian Theravada Buddhist temple complex. These were important in terms of science in that they focused on literacy amongst the everyday population (historically only men). A wat contained a vihara as well as a jedi.
FYI, if you hear the word "maha" in any of these related languages, it just means "great".

So - stupa, pagoda, jedi (contained within a wat) - all these things essentially mean the same thing, but might point towards the three big divisions in Buddhism: vajrayana (South Asian) Buddhism, mahayana (East Asian), and theravada (Southeast Asian and Sri Lankan), and the three big religious languages: Sanskrit, Chinese (with Sanskrit as well), and Pali.

Pop-culture fans have probably heard one or two words that they think that they recognize from a popular movie series. I'd advise them not to over-think this. The creator of said series was into Buddhism and tossed around religious terms a lot.

Thank you for your detailed explanation. I roughly know the connection between Stupa and Pagoda (as an East Asian) but I don't know about vihara or Wat.

In terms of "education" and "science", after contemplated a bit, I think it is probably a cultural context thing:

In a lot of places of modern East Asia, when you speak of "education" (教育 in both Chinese and Japanese), it usually connotes "cultural education", and would put an emphasis on the moral or ethic or cultivation part of the education, instead of the technical or "scientific" parts. And when speaking of "science" (科学 in both Chinese and Japanese) we usually use it in the narrow sense as "all the academic fields that is not Social Science" (such as natural science, physics, mathematics, etc.), instead of "cultural knowledge" such as literacy.

On the other hand, every generation of the Civ series has "educational institutions" such as "libraries'" and "universities" generating "science". For someone with an East Asian cultural background this can look really confusing, as we don't naturally think "(cultural) educational institutions" would produce "science output", especially after the Civic tree and the Tech tree are separated - the examples are Seowon being a "scientific district", Wat generating "science", and people suggesting that Nalanda should be a "scientific CS".

Just my 2 cents.

I'm not sure if East Asian Pagoda (often represented with single chinese character that means 'tower' (one that has either 'wood tree' or 'earth' on its left) has interior that contains scriptures as well as relics and if it is divided into multiple rooms.

It has. Many East Asian Pagodas were built for storing Buddhist relics - the Famen Temple Pagoda in China and the Horyu-ji Pagoda in Japan are perfect examples (Horyu-ji is a UNESCO Heritage Site), both have a Śarīra of Buddha.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I understand that Nalanda is not really an independent city-state, but I don't think it is a "city" on an Empire's "city list" either.

It was like an autonomous Buddhism university that enjoyed a long history of semi-independence under a lot of different regimes - which, in terms of Civ's categorization of polities, is more of a City State. (See also Bologna, which only developed into an important city after the establishment of the university.)

true, but it was also an semi-autonomous city within the maurya and gupta empires

To be fair,with all prevailing motion on this topic, I haven't yet seen any good argument on deblobing India.
Either,the proposal is of short lived empires i.e to represent at least 3500 year continuous culture thru a short lived 100-150 year big empire.

Or suggestion for distant regions or linguistic entity or modern province( Tamil,Punjab,Bengal)
Tbh, I m not knowledgeable enough to talk about distant region like Tamil. But I don't see why at least Northern India can't be seen as something like China. It was even politically united for most of its history.

my main reasoning is modern india is not historically representative of the history of the subcontinent. It’s basically a cult of personality civ for gandhi. the maurya and mughals were as different, temporally and culturally, as the gauls and england in civ 6. the chola (and tamilians as a whole) share literally nothing with the north besides a religion.

At minimum, the Chola should be a Macedon to India’s Greece, but ideally they’d break off the Maurya and Mughals too

 

[j51]

I'm gonna through this out there: Civs should be blobbier. That way there will be less of them, but they will be far more flavorful, with several unique mechanics, units, infrastructure items, and leaders each. The German civ should contain the early HRE, Austria, and Prussia. The Mesopotamian civ should contain Sumer, Akkadia, Babylonia, and Assyria. The Norse civ should contain Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The Persian civ should contain Achaemenid, Sassanian, and various Islamic dynasty's and leaders. The Chinese civ should contain multiple dynasties and leaders. The Greeks should contain Macedon and Byzantium. Maybe there just be an Italian civ that contains Rome, the Etruscans, as well as the various Italian states and modern Italy?

 

[Zaarin]

I'm gonna through this out there: Civs should be blobbier. That way there will be less of them, but they will be far more flavorful, with several unique mechanics, units, infrastructure items, and leaders each. The German civ should contain the early HRE, Austria, and Prussia. The Mesopotamian civ should contain Sumer, Akkadia, Babylonia, and Assyria. The Norse civ should contain Denmark, Norway, and Sweden. The Persian civ should contain Achaemenid, Sassanian, and various Islamic dynasty's and leaders. The Chinese civ should contain multiple dynasties and leaders. The Greeks should contain Macedon and Byzantium. Maybe there just be an Italian civ that contains Rome, the Etruscans, as well as the various Italian states and modern Italy?

While I'm all in favor of more unique factions, tossing together everyone who happened to live in the same area sounds like a horrible idea to me. This is just begging for the return of "the Native Americans," "the Polynesians," and "the Celts."