[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Unmitigated Gaul]

A little tangential to the current discussion, but I think Transoxiana is an area that’s a little underserved and could fit a really cool Civ.

Timur is a great general and Samarkand and Kabul are city states, and Persia is in the general geography, but a Khwarazam or Safavid inspired Civ would be distinct and a great addition.

Think you could find a lot of cool possibilities with trade- trade routes can go 30 tiles instead of 15, a cheaper commercial hub would be your UD and maybe provide +1 to all adjacent districts and extra great merchant points (gives you the opportunity to bolster your faith/science/whatever) and activating a great merchant grants culture (equal to your gold per turn? Based on era and scaling? Maybe just boosts civics?)

Could also have some neat synergies with faith and trade, although it seems like that’s kind of been done with Ethiopia.

then you can have a Medieval or Renaissance era military spike. You could either give them some sort of horse archer with Timur or with a later ruler you could do something like a unique musket or field cannon.

Maybe a leader bonus like trade routes from the capital to conquered cities provide the benefits of both foreign and domestic trade (gold and production/food)?

 

[PhoenicianGold]

A little tangential to the current discussion, but I think Transoxiana is an area that’s a little underserved and could fit a really cool Civ.

Timur is a great general and Samarkand and Kabul are city states, and Persia is in the general geography, but a Khwarazam or Safavid inspired Civ would be distinct and a great addition.

Think you could find a lot of cool possibilities with trade- trade routes can go 30 tiles instead of 15, a cheaper commercial hub would be your UD and maybe provide +1 to all adjacent districts and extra great merchant points (gives you the opportunity to bolster your faith/science/whatever) and activating a great merchant grants culture (equal to your gold per turn? Based on era and scaling? Maybe just boosts civics?)

Could also have some neat synergies with faith and trade, although it seems like that’s kind of been done with Ethiopia.

then you can have a Medieval or Renaissance era military spike. You could either give them some sort of horse archer with Timur or with a later ruler you could do something like a unique musket or field cannon.

Maybe a leader bonus like trade routes from the capital to conquered cities provide the benefits of both foreign and domestic trade (gold and production/food)?

I still think the Timurids would have been an excellent addition in a game where we had both Macedon and Persia, but the Maurya and Mughals were lumped together into India.

Also, it was proposed earlier that their UU could be a Zamburak. Cannon-back camels.

 

[Unmitigated Gaul]

Mughals would also be very cool and could fit a sort of similar niche, although I think it would be hard to carve out an interesting pre Renaissance identity for them.

It’s been a while since I played Persia but I remember many of their city names coming from somewhere in Asia Minor. Clearly a westward looking take on that part of the world, considering they sold Persia with Macedon.

Persia is a lot of fun to play though.

It would be neat to have a more eastward looking Central Asian Civ.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

To be fair to the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Egypt, they were not the first "foreign" dynasty of that country. In the approximately 1400 years before Ptolemy Soter grabbed the kingdom, there were Canaanite, Hyksos, Nubian, and 2 Persian 'dynasties' cluttering up the lists. What does set the Ptolemies apart is that none of the other 'foreign' dynasties lasted more than a little over a century, while the Macedonians ruled for 275 years. Making allowances for the fact that some of the early dating is pretty approximate, they were in fact one of the longest-lasting of any Egyptian dynasty, native or foreign.

And on a broader view, ALL Empires that lasted any length of time got pretty messy genealogically and culturally with their rulers. A bunch of "Chinese" Dynasties were in fact, only partially or not at all ethnic Chinese, the "Persian" Empire kept getting 'renewed' by new Persianoid people coming out of Central Asia, the Roman Empire ruled from the city of Rome included Emperors from as far away as Spain and North Africa, and of course, there hasn't been a purely English King of England for over two centuries.

All of which makes the Ptolemies practically Egyptian Homeboys . . .

 

[Zaarin]

A little tangential to the current discussion, but I think Transoxiana is an area that’s a little underserved and could fit a really cool Civ.

Timur is a great general and Samarkand and Kabul are city states, and Persia is in the general geography, but a Khwarazam or Safavid inspired Civ would be distinct and a great addition.

Think you could find a lot of cool possibilities with trade- trade routes can go 30 tiles instead of 15, a cheaper commercial hub would be your UD and maybe provide +1 to all adjacent districts and extra great merchant points (gives you the opportunity to bolster your faith/science/whatever) and activating a great merchant grants culture (equal to your gold per turn? Based on era and scaling? Maybe just boosts civics?)

Could also have some neat synergies with faith and trade, although it seems like that’s kind of been done with Ethiopia.

then you can have a Medieval or Renaissance era military spike. You could either give them some sort of horse archer with Timur or with a later ruler you could do something like a unique musket or field cannon.

Maybe a leader bonus like trade routes from the capital to conquered cities provide the benefits of both foreign and domestic trade (gold and production/food)?

Yep, I've been advocating a Sogdian civ for quite some time. Central Asia really needs some love.

To be fair to the Ptolemaic Dynasty of Egypt, they were not the first "foreign" dynasty of that country. In the approximately 1400 years before Ptolemy Soter grabbed the kingdom, there were Canaanite, Hyksos, Nubian, and 2 Persian 'dynasties' cluttering up the lists. What does set the Ptolemies apart is that none of the other 'foreign' dynasties lasted more than a little over a century, while the Macedonians ruled for 275 years. Making allowances for the fact that some of the early dating is pretty approximate, they were in fact one of the longest-lasting of any Egyptian dynasty, native or foreign.

I'd argue what sets the Ptolemies apart from the many other Egyptian conquest dynasties is that most of the conquest dynasties assimilated to Egyptian culture very quickly, while 275 years later the Ptolemies were as Hellenistic as anyone in Athens. The Canaanites and Hyksos seem to have kept some of their native flavor...but they also didn't last long. The Nubian and Libyan dynasties, however, were very Egyptianized virtually from the outset. I'm not sure the Persian shah conquering Egypt and calling himself pharaoh from Pathragada or Susa really counts as a foreign dynasty in the same sense...

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Yep, I've been advocating a Sogdian civ for quite some time. Central Asia really needs some love.


I'd argue what sets the Ptolemies apart from the many other Egyptian conquest dynasties is that most of the conquest dynasties assimilated to Egyptian culture very quickly, while 275 years later the Ptolemies were as Hellenistic as anyone in Athens. The Canaanites and Hyksos seem to have kept some of their native flavor...but they also didn't last long. The Nubian and Libyan dynasties, however, were very Egyptianized virtually from the outset. I'm not sure the Persian shah conquering Egypt and calling himself pharaoh from Pathragada or Susa really counts as a foreign dynasty in the same sense...

More to the point, as has already been mentioned, we're talking 6 'foreign' dynasties out of 34 total since the beginning of the Old Kingdom and there are many, many completely Egyptian leaders available without ringing in any furriners.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Mughals would also be very cool and could fit a sort of similar niche, although I think it would be hard to carve out an interesting pre Renaissance identity for them.

It’s been a while since I played Persia but I remember many of their city names coming from somewhere in Asia Minor. Clearly a westward looking take on that part of the world, considering they sold Persia with Macedon.

Persia is a lot of fun to play though.

It would be neat to have a more eastward looking Central Asian Civ.

I think that's the niche that Scythia kind of fills, at least to me currently.

That being said I wouldn't mind seeing a separate Mughal civ separated from India, but I doubt it will happen in Civ 6.

 

[Zaarin]

I think that's the niche that Scythia kind of fills, at least to me currently.

Historically, Central Asia has been inhabited by two broad groups of people: horse tribes like the Scythians, Huns, Parthians, Sarmatians, etc. and Silk Road merchants like the Sogdians, Khwarazmians, Kushans, etc. I'd love to see the latter group get some representation. The problem is Central Asia has really low visibility for Western audiences. We've spent 20 years at war there, and most Americans still don't know that Afghanistan is not in the Middle East...

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I still think the Timurids would have been an excellent addition in a game where we had both Macedon and Persia, but the Maurya and Mughals were lumped together into India.

Also, it was proposed earlier that their UU could be a Zamburak. Cannon-back camels.

prefer the Zamburak for a indigenous Afghan/Pashtun civ lead by Ahmad Shah Durrani, personally

A Zunbil civ would be cool as well

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

prefer the Zamburak for a indigenous Afghan/Pashtun civ lead by Ahmad Shah Durrani, personally

The Pashtun could be their Unique Unit, though.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Two quick thoughts:

1) I still keep coming back to the reality that building on VI more instead of moving to VII makes a lot of sense. I struggle to think of how they could release a new base game that a) covered most of the basic mechanics of VI and its expacks, b) introduced enough new mechanics that weren't already included as game modes in NFP, and c) promised enough potential new features in the future that didn't already exist in the completed VI game. Yes, they could streamline a few things, but I think they would need a radical paradigm shift in the entire format of the game to justify jumping off VI.

2) While we can totally expect DLC pack 6 to just be Portugal led by Joao II (who I assert is the leader who makes the most sense as "personifying" the expected Portuguese playstyle)--a decision which would buck the soft rule of including three women and four new leaders each year--I think there is still enough "missing" that the devs might consider pushing Portugal back (along with, probably, Austria/Denmark, Assyria, and perhaps the Iroquois or Morocco) to sell a second DLC pack. We can be fairly certain that three, if not four of those civs, would be incredibly well-received. In which case, I have a sneaking suspicion that we may see Italy led by Matilda of Tuscany. I recognize that Matilda also does not exactly fit with the expected Italian playstyle identity, but it's a pretty decent stand-in for what I think we might get. I definitely think that a third European civ is extremely likely. Long-shot Nanyehi leading the Cherokee.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

2) While we can totally expect DLC pack 6 to just be Portugal led by Joao II (who I assert is the leader who makes the most sense as "personifying" the expected Portuguese playstyle)--a decision which would buck the soft rule of including three women and four new leaders each year--I think there is still enough "missing" that the devs might consider pushing Portugal back (along with, probably, Austria/Denmark, Assyria, and perhaps the Iroquois or Morocco) to sell a second DLC pack. We can be fairly certain that three, if not four of those civs, would be incredibly well-received. In which case, I have a sneaking suspicion that we may see Italy led by Matilda of Tuscany. I recognize that Matilda also does not exactly fit with the expected Italian playstyle identity, but it's a pretty decent stand-in for what I think we might get. I definitely think that a third European civ is extremely likely. Long-shot Nanyehi leading the Cherokee.

I still think that whoever it is it will be a female leader, not that I wouldn't like Joao II of Portugal. The first "year" of DLC we got only three new civs (Australia, Macedon, and Nubia) so I can see NFP following that trend considering these are also sold in individual packs. And in that case we would have already gotten them: Gran Colombia, Gaul and Vietnam.

I also don't see Austria (unfortunately) or Denmark appearing either.
Best case scenario I think which nobody would complain is Iroquois in March and for a second season we get Portugal and Italy (in some form) along with Berbers/Morocco and another Egyptian leader.

Another scenario is Dihya/Sayyida al Hurra for Berbers/Morocco in March. Then we could get Iroquois and Navajo pack, Portugal and Italy, then Assyria and Egyptian leader.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I still think that whoever it is it will be a female leader, not that I wouldn't like Joao II of Portugal. The first "year" of DLC we got only three new civs (Australia, Macedon, and Nubia) so I can see NFP following that trend considering these are also sold in individual packs. And in that case we would have already gotten them: Gran Colombia, Gaul and Vietnam.

I do also think it will be a female leader, but as we both seem to agree if that is the case it probably is not Portugal. But I also figure that if they did deliberately go for a female leader, and Portugal was left for next year, then there's no reason not to go with a new civ, since there are so few civs left that they could bring back to anchor next year's sales.

I also don't see Austria, Denmark, or Assyria even making it in a second season unfortunately.
Best case scenario I think which nobody would complain is Iroquois in March and for a second season we get Portugal and Italy (in some form) along with Berbers/Morocco and another Egyptian leader.

We still do not have an Assur/Nineveh CS. And prior to the Babylon release, Assyria had a lot of supporters. I think it would sell well.

Austria too would sell well. I see a lot of people wanting the music, or an opera house, or Maria Teresa to return.

Both have a lot of staying power. I personally don't really want Austria and could live with Assyria, but as far as giving fans what they want, those are definitely strong candidates. I would argue moreso than my beloved Morocco.

I still feel like the last DLC will be Europe again. They've tended to have three European leaders in each expack. Although you are probably correct that if not European, we are looking at North American civ.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I do also think it will be a female leader, but as we both seem to agree if that is the case it probably is not Portugal. But I also figure that if they did deliberately go for a female leader, and Portugal was left for next year, then there's no reason not to go with a new civ, since there are so few civs left that they could bring back to anchor next year's sales.

I never said that Portugal was off the table for a female leader. Though I would prefer someone like Joao II or Manuel I, I think Maria I has a good chance of returning and being the final leader in March.

We still do not have an Assur/Nineveh CS. And prior to the Babylon release, Assyria had a lot of supporters. I think it would sell well.

Austria too would sell well. I see a lot of people wanting the music, or an opera house, or Maria Teresa to return.

Both have a lot of staying power. I personally don't really want Austria and could live with Assyria, but as far as giving fans what they want, those are definitely strong candidates. I would argue moreso than my beloved Morocco.

I mean I would love Austria, especially Maria Theresa, and Assyria too but I'm not too sure of their chances of returning. Austria's niche feels covered by HRE Germany and Hungary, not to mention that Portugal and Italy are probably the more in demand European civs.

If for some reason we get another ancient era civ it will probably be Assyria, at least I see it over the Hittites, but I don't see us getting 3 Mesopotamian civs in this game, though I wouldn't mind.

For that reason I think Morocco might have the best chance at returning considering North Africa doesn't have a lot except Egypt and Nubia, and the Maghreb is empty of a civ.

 

[Zaarin]

Though I would prefer someone like Joao II or Manuel I, I think Maria I has a good chance of returning and being the final leader in March.

TBH if we get a Maria I think it will be Maria II. They just have to put Wilhelmina's head on Victoria and they have her ready.

 

[Luxerne]

I really wish that someday we could see multiple civs from certain regions, like how with the introduction of Vietnam we have finally gotten more than one civ from mainland Southeast Asia in the same game.

I'd love to see multiple civs for:
West Africa (especially if Ashanti or medieval Benin and Ghana get to make their debuts)
Central Asia (Timurids, anyone?)
East Africa (Kilwa)
Europe south of the Carpathians, but not Hellenistic (Serbia)
potentially even South Asia, if they ever decide to differentiate between modern nation-state India and the historical subcontinent... I'd love to see the Cholas or Mughals in civ

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I really wish that someday we could see multiple civs from certain regions, like how with the introduction of Vietnam we have finally gotten more than one civ from mainland Southeast Asia in the same game.

I'd love to see multiple civs for:
West Africa (especially if Ashanti or medieval Benin and Ghana get to make their debuts)
Central Asia (Timurids, anyone?)
East Africa (Kilwa)
Europe south of the Carpathians, but not Hellenistic (Serbia)
potentially even South Asia, if they ever decide to differentiate between modern nation-state India and the historical subcontinent... I'd love to see the Cholas or Mughals in civ

Did ideas for all of those except Benin and Ghana, so they're all on my wishlist.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

I really wish that someday we could see multiple civs from certain regions, like how with the introduction of Vietnam we have finally gotten more than one civ from mainland Southeast Asia in the same game.

I'd love to see multiple civs for:
West Africa (especially if Ashanti or medieval Benin and Ghana get to make their debuts)
Central Asia (Timurids, anyone?)
East Africa (Kilwa)
Europe south of the Carpathians, but not Hellenistic (Serbia)
potentially even South Asia, if they ever decide to differentiate between modern nation-state India and the historical subcontinent... I'd love to see the Cholas or Mughals in civ

I would love to see Benin.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I mean I would love Austria, especially Maria Theresa, and Assyria too but I'm not too sure of their chances of returning. Austria's niche feels covered by HRE Germany and Hungary, not to mention that Portugal and Italy are probably the more in demand European civs.

I actually think Austria is a good candidate for a clone civ. They could just replicate Hungary's niche with different assets (opera house instead of a thermal bath, uhlan instead of a huszar). Same general playstyle, different aesthetic, new leader (Maria Teresa could have a similar city-state bent too). Again, if creativity is running low among the devs but players still want their iconics in the game, clone and semi-clone civs would be an excellent way to go; effectively functioning as alternate leaders but with broader representation. A "you liked this playstyle? Here's another way you can enjoy it."

If for some reason we get another ancient era civ it will probably be Assyria, at least I see it over the Hittites, but I don't see us getting 3 Mesopotamian civs in this game, though I wouldn't mind.

We have two Canadian and two British civs. Given how popular ancient Mesopotamia is, I could absolutely see the balance shaking out to three in a larger roster.

For that reason I think Morocco might have the best chance at returning considering North Africa doesn't have a lot except Egypt and Nubia, and the Maghreb is empty of a civ.

I do think that we will likely get that in a second season. But I don't think it will necessarily be Morocco occupying the Maghrebi slot, in which case it wouldn't be a "returning" civ anyway.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I actually think Austria is a good candidate for a clone civ. They could just replicate Hungary's niche with different assets (opera house instead of a thermal bath, uhlan instead of a huszar). Same general playstyle, different aesthetic, new leader (Maria Teresa could have a similar city-state bent too). Again, if creativity is running low among the devs but players still want their iconics in the game, clone and semi-clone civs would be an excellent way to go; effectively functioning as alternate leaders but with broader representation. A "you liked this playstyle? Here's another way you can enjoy it."

I'd rather not civ go the route of making "clone" civs. They can easily come up with a unique playstyle that doesn't have to piggy back off the design of Hungary.
Besides an opera house would best be saved for an Italy civ, or a universal building in the Theater Square, not an EC. And the uhlan was Polish-Lithuanian in origin.
That being said I wouldn't mind Maria Theresa getting in as an alt for both Germany and Hungary if they decided to go that route while making her capital Vienna for both civs, considering this time around Germany is more HRE based.
It's not ideal but I'd rather her in the game than if we get Austria with another leader.

We have two Canadian and two British civs. Given how popular ancient Mesopotamia is, I could absolutely see the balance shaking out to three in a larger roster.

Considering I wanted Assyria slightly over Babylon, I won't complain if they decided to give us another proper Mesopotamian civ.

I do think that we will likely get that in a second season. But I don't think it will necessarily be Morocco occupying the Maghrebi slot, in which case it wouldn't be a "returning" civ anyway.

I mean I'd personally rather someone like Numidia, or just a pre-Islamic Berber civ, over Morocco anyway. I only mentioned Morocco returning because it's the only civ from that region, besides Carthage who is under Phoenicia this time, that has been in a game.