[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[millansoft]

Yes, please--to excluding Canada, USA, Australia, Brazil, and Gran Colombia.

I didnt said that, you misundertood.

 

[Zaarin]

I didnt said that, you misundertood.

I didn't misunderstand anything. I understood perfectly well that you were requesting Argentina be included. However, you did say that the arguments against Argentina should exclude other postcolonial nations, and I agree entirely with that. I'd be delighted to have them all cut, USA included.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

As someone with the misfortune to live in Florida its bonuses should probably be to be overpopulated and to get Gold from Coast tiles and double Tourism for Seaside Resorts. Its UI is the Theme Park replacing the Entertainment District and Sea World replacing the Water Park, and its UU is Grandma Riding an Alligator who will hit you with her walker or cause an accident with her reckless driving. Baʿl yirʿeš šamēm, I want to get away from the cities and move to the mountains...

Probably not SeaWorld for copyright reasons, unless they don't exist anymore?
The only SeaWorld I've been to was in San Antonio, which was definitely inland, about 20 years ago.

I've accepted that they will be foisted upon us, but if we could limit it to a cap of three per game (including the USA) that would be nice. Also if they could be less meme-driven than Australia and Canada, but I guess that too is inevitable. It's a shame because I think something actually interesting could have been done with Canada.

Is that 3 inclucing America, or 3+ America? Because if so I'd like Australia to return and Argentina to get in for Civ 7. Oh yeah and Brazil is obviously not going anywhere.

I actually do not mind Canada being in Civilisation, if only because it offers an outlet for a "tundra" civilisation that is not named Russia - so that Russia in future games can finally move away from those stereotypes. For God's sake, it took until this most recent iteration for the developers to realise that St. Basil's Cathedral is not Moscow's medieval kremlin, and that neither were built in the 20th century Soviet Union.

I'd rather Russia be the "tundra" civ if that's the case.

 

[Zaarin]

Probably not SeaWorld for copyright reasons, unless they don't exist anymore?

That's why I put a space in the name.

The only SeaWorld I've been to was in San Antonio, which was definitely inland, about 20 years ago.

Same here, it's in Orlando just like all the other parks.

Is that 3 inclucing America, or 3+ America? Because if so I'd like Australia to return and Argentina to get in. Oh yeah and Brazil is obviously not going anywhere.

Three including America. I'd expect the second to be Brazil because heaven forbid we escape Dom Satan. I don't care who gets number three, but ideally not another Anglophone civ. Argentina, perhaps?

I'd rather Russia be the "tundra" civ if that's the case.

As much as Tundra bonuses do not remotely fit Russia, I have to say Russia is one of my favorite Civ6 civs. People have been asking for Saami or a Siberian civ like the Evenks--perhaps the Tundra bonuses could be given to them next time. I know people want a civ with Snow bonuses, but the simple fact is that the regions Civ6 labels Snow are inhospitable to human life. Small clans can survive there, but humans can't develop a flourishing culture there without advanced technology and lots of resources.

 

[DWilson]

The name Iroquois is well-established in academia, but the people themselves have been trying to encourage the use of Haudenosaunee. I think a lot of people have been inspired by Humankind's and AoE3DE's use of Haudenosaunee. I suspect the next time the civ returns to Civ (and it will) they'll be called Haudenosaunee.

I'll be disappointed not to see Haudenosaunee in the base CiVII

 

[Zaarin]

I'll be disappointed not to see Haudenosaunee in the base CiVII

I was very disappointed to see no indigenous New World civs in the Civ6 base game (the Aztecs as a pre-order bonus don't count) so I hope that will be the case. And that they'll be less absurdly stereotyped than last time.

 

[DWilson]

I'm slightly more forgiving since the Aztecs were free after, IIRC, 3 months. Hopefully they use a better pre-order gimmick next time, though. I would be fine with a map pack, whereas I liked the civ and scenario packs too much to want that to be one. (I'll pre-order, but that doesn't mean I want to see others get that again, especially when they couldn't even buy the pack to access it early at that point- it was simply locked content).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Three including America. I'd expect the second to be Brazil because heaven forbid we escape Dom Satan. I don't care who gets number three, but ideally not another Anglophone civ. Argentina, perhaps?

Yeah I guess I'd take Argentina. It could make room for an aboriginal civ and we could still get didgederoos in the theme.

As much as Tundra bonuses do not remotely fit Russia, I have to say Russia is one of my favorite Civ6 civs. People have been asking for Saami or a Siberian civ like the Evenks--perhaps the Tundra bonuses could be given to them next time. I know people want a civ with Snow bonuses, but the simple fact is that the regions Civ6 labels Snow are inhospitable to human life. Small clans can survive there, but humans can't develop a flourishing culture there without advanced technology and lots of resources.

That's why I put "tundra" in quotation marks. If someone must be the tundra civ let it not be Canada. Canada should have been the lumbermill/woods civ.

 

[millansoft]

I didn't misunderstand anything. I understood perfectly well that you were requesting Argentina be included. However, you did say that the arguments against Argentina should exclude other postcolonial nations, and I agree entirely with that. I'd be delighted to have them all cut, USA included.

No need to remove any civilization, I didn´t say that, adding new ones is always welcome.

 

[Menocchio]

That's why I put "tundra" in quotation marks. If someone must be the tundra civ let it not be Canada. Canada should have been the lumbermill/woods civ.

It is the end of April all of a sudden, and your wish is granted: Canada is transformed into the Iroquois from Civilisation 5. You awake in a cold sweat.

 

[Zaarin]

we could still get didgederoos in the theme.

You are evil.

No need to remove any civilization, I didn´t say that, adding new ones is always welcome.

You're as entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree with it. If there were no civs or leaders more recent than ca. 1650 I'd be delighted.

 

[millansoft]

You are evil.


You're as entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree with it. If there were no civs or leaders more recent than ca. 1650 I'd be delighted.

For me is ok your opinion, is just a game but just doesnt have sense because you can always customize it when starting the game and remove all the civs you dont want to see while playing the game.

 

[Zaarin]

For me is ok your opinion, is just a game but just doesnt have sense because you can always customize it when starting the game and remove all the civs you dont want to see while playing the game.

Perhaps, but where I'm coming from is that there are a finite number of civs that will be made; Canada, Australia, etc. are taking up slots that could have gone to more significant or interesting civilizations.

 

[millansoft]

Perhaps, but where I'm coming from is that there are a finite number of civs that will be made; Canada, Australia, etc. are taking up slots that could have gone to more significant or interesting civilizations.

Agreed

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

You're as entitled to your opinion as I am to disagree with it. If there were no civs or leaders more recent than ca. 1650 I'd be delighted.

Well I guess there goes Poundmaker and possibly Maria Theresa and Joseph/Molly Brant.

Perhaps, but where I'm coming from is that there are a finite number of civs that will be made; Canada, Australia, etc. are taking up slots that could have gone to more significant or interesting civilizations.

I mean I'm fine with Australia, as it's one of my favorites to play as.
Canada, I could take it or leave it, but I do find them unique as they are the only civ who can't declare a surprise war, declare war on city-states, or be declared war upon, unless denounced.

 

[DWilson]

Perhaps, but where I'm coming from is that there are a finite number of civs that will be made; Canada, Australia, etc. are taking up slots that could have gone to more significant or interesting civilizations.

The only distinction I would make is that America is more interesting than most of those. I'm inclined to say that current history is worth inclusion, and that America has sufficient global impact to continue to be a series regular.

For me, Georgia, Canada, Australia, Scotland, Macedon, and the Zulu are the least desirable of the existing civs (from the perspective of inclusion, not design). If any of them get a pass, it's Georgia.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Well I guess there goes Poundmaker and possibly Maria Theresa and Joseph/Molly Brant.

As well as Otto von Bismarck, Carolus Rex, Peter the Great, Menelik II, Haile Selassie, Pedro II, Teddy Roosevelt, George Washington, Victoria, Sitting Bull, Tecumseh, Toussaint Louverture, Kamehameha, Agaja...

 

[Zaarin]

Well I guess there goes Poundmaker and possibly Maria Theresa and Joseph/Molly Brant.

I should have said ~1750; that covers bother Maria Theresa and Joseph Brant. He just has to be depicted as a 7-year-old. TBH I'm also willing to make more allowances for indigenous civs that don't have earlier leaders attested (or have better leaders attested later)--like Poundmaker, Pushmataha, etc.

I mean I'm fine with Australia, as it's one of my favorites to play as.

Wouldn't know; never played them. I had the DLC disabled until leader picker became a thing--now they're enabled for Uluru. TBH one Anglophone colony is more than enough for me, and that is inevitably going to be the United States.

Canada, I could take it or leave it, but I do find them unique as they are the only civ who can't declare a surprise war, declare war on city-states, or be declared war upon, unless denounced.

Of all the postcolonial civs I think I'm the most okay with the idea of Canada, but the implementation was very poor. Instead of the Hockey and Maple Syrup meme civ we got it could have been the trade-and-diplomacy early French Canada. Except, oh, wait, the Cree already did that.

The only distinction I would make is that America is more interesting than most of those. I'm inclined to say that current history is worth inclusion, and that America has sufficient global impact to continue to be a series regular.

Impact, yes, interesting--well, as an American studying American history for lack of better options, I can't say I agree. American history is dry as chalk.

For me, Georgia, Canada, Australia, Scotland, Macedon, and the Zulu are the least desirable of the existing civs (from the perspective of inclusion, not design).

I agree with this list minus Georgia, but I'd prefer Armenia to Georgia in Civ7--but it was nice to have Tamar for one iteration, especially if it makes Firaxis more conscious of the Caucasus region. I'm torn on Macedon--I appreciate the more Greek Greece it allowed us to have...but honestly they could have given Alex Gorgo's spot. Agreed on all the rest.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

I should have said ~1750; that covers bother Maria Theresa and Joseph Brant. He just has to be depicted as a 7-year-old. TBH I'm also willing to make more allowances for indigenous civs that don't have earlier leaders attested (or have better leaders attested later)--like Poundmaker, Pushmataha, etc.

Catherine the Great is excluded then.

 

[Zaarin]

Catherine the Great is excluded then.

Nonsense. She was 21 in 1750.