[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Zaarin]

Plankhouse

Ḵwaan, in Tlingit.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

other options = the Diné (Navajo) under Lozen (she’s super famous to them, look her up); Hogan (Temple replacement); Code Talker unique Spy unit (probably has to remain in Allied territory as a defensive Spy that sabotages all enemy Spy activity — 5 Spy cap could cover all Allies; maybe gain a bonus for defending an Ally)

Lozen is Apache though?

 

[sukritact]

*Siam: I doubt it. There was some kerfuffle with Thailand last time. Besides Sukritact’s animated, voiced mod is top quality!

I suspect Firaxis will know better than last time and not accidentally make the leader look like a controversial prime minister AGAIN.

Other than that it should be fine as long as they avoid picking someone from the current dynasty. For the most part I think most Thais would be happy to be represented again.

Still unlikely for Civ 6 though, since they only JUST added Ayutthaya as a City-State.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Other than that it should be fine as long as they avoid picking someone from the current dynasty.

So it would be a problem for them to pick a leader like Rama I or Rama V for Siam in the future?

 

[Thenewwwguy]

So it would be a problem for them to pick a leader like Rama I or Rama V for Siam in the future?

i suspect that Firaxis would go for the low hanging fruit and pick Ramkhamhaeng like they did in Civ 5, just making him not have the passing resemblance of a living politician

 

[sukritact]

So it would be a problem for them to pick a leader like Rama I or Rama V for Siam in the future?

It’s not a problem to pick them per se, but given the reverence verging on worship given to them by a significant portion of the Thai population I don’t think it’s a good idea. Firaxis would have to be extra careful representing them and it’d be a disaster if they got it wrong (there’s a reason Chulalongkorn is the only unvoiced Siamese leader I made). Far safer to stick with monarchs from the pre-Bangkok era.

i suspect that Firaxis would go for the low hanging fruit and pick Ramkhamhaeng like they did in Civ 5, just making him not have the passing resemblance of a living politician

Personally, I hope they pick Narai instead. That was a very interesting period of Thai history. Though I imagine the most popular choice among most Thais might be Naresuan; not the biggest fan of that choice personally.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

i suspect that Firaxis would go for the low hanging fruit and pick Ramkhamhaeng like they did in Civ 5, just making him not have the passing resemblance of a living politician

I'd really like them to branch out a little bit and not usually make the all the SEA civs based around Medieval Era. Obviously the Khmer and Indonesia (Majapahit) would have to be though. However a leader from the later Ayutthaya Kingdom would work fine for Siam if an Industrial leader probably wouldn't be the best idea.

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

Speaking here as a historian, not in my role as writer.

I don't know how the Thaksin/Ramkhamhaeng thing came about - Thaksin's family is also Chinese-Thai, too - Ramkhamhaeng would have physically looked quite different (and also quite different from the often half-European, half-Thai actors that play historical heroes in present-day Thai films).

Each prospective leader - Ramkhamhaeng, Narai, Rama V, Rama IX - would have a distinct focus and problems associated.

Ramkhamhaeng's historical sources are sketchy, and large portions of his story have their historical veracity contested. He would hail from a semi-mythic time period just after the Khmer empire started to collapse and new city-states appeared on the frontier. Imagine King Arthur.

Narai I agree is an interesting figure. Ayutthaya was a thriving metropolis during his time, and had a large Japanese population, a Persian delegation, a Greek chancellor - in short, it was a real, independent, thriving Southeast Asian metropolis. Out of a partial fear of this cosmopolitanism, he was overthrown, but it remains a great choice for a medieval/Renaissance Siam/Ayutthaya. Imagine a strange king, one who embraced a new possibility (but was ousted for it) - hmmm I can't think of a good example.

What Sukrit is intimating about Naresuan, I agree with. He was a militaristic king who led a series of wars against Burma, but most significantly he is the poster hero for a new kind of media-led militarism in Thai society. A series of big-budget historical movies had Naresuan as the hero, and he becomes the handsome face of Thai militant nationalism. The question of whether or not he fought the Burmese king on elephant-back is likely a historical myth, but Thai historian Sulak Sivaraksa was charged with a potentially decades-long criminal charge for suggesting that this duel did not take place and urging people to not pay attention to propaganda, so I'm certainly not saying that right here (charges were dropped). Imagine Richard the Lionheart.

Rama V is a fantastic choice, I think. I understand Sukrit's hesitation in voicing his avatar, but he really transformed Siam from a shaky buffer state into an independent, industrializing state - not a free one, necessarily, as he modeled himself more on European absolute monarchs than either past Siamese monarchs or on constitutional monarchs, but really one of the architects of modern-day Siam/Thailand. Imagine Victoria.

Rama IX is not going to happen, but for a late atomic-age leader, this would be the choice. The American-born king moved the monarchy from being a symbolic anti-Communist figurehead to a real media-fueled source of a particular kind of nationalism. Way, way, way too recent and too controversial. I wouldn't even suggest him. I'm not going to suggest a comparison.

Looking beyond kings, though, there are other interesting choices. Pridi, for instance, was the democratically-minded statesman who sought to make a more open Thailand in between the aspirations of absolute monarchs on one side and fascist-adjacent military leaders on the other. He remains well-loved in Thai academic communities. I'd love to see a Pridi-led Thailand, but it's perhaps too niche a choice.

Phibul would be Pridi's frenemy - the nationalist and fascist-adjacent military leader who spurred the temporary abdication of the monarch and a new, nationalist Thailand (as opposed to the prior absolute monarchical Siam). Again, an architect of a possible Thailand, whose legacy is currently being hotly contested (and erased) as we speak. Never going to make it - "fascist" and "hotly contested" are two big red flags.

Sarit would define Cold War Thailand - a military dictator and US ally, with a long, long list of negatives to his name, but he did shape the country into what it would later become - restoring the monarchy and firmly putting Thailand in the US side of the Cold War - through violence, when he had to. Never going to make it. Imagine Suharto.

While I like Pridi best of all, it's not the popular choice. And various other reasons (controversy, an over-mythologization) put a bit of a damper on all except Narai and, I'd argue, a well-handled Rama V.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Personally, I hope they pick Narai instead. That was a very interesting period of Thai history. Though I imagine the most popular choice among most Thais might be Naresuan; not the biggest fan of that choice personally.

I totally agree, he’s my first choice for a leader of Siam/Thailand as well.

 

[sukritact]

Rama V is a fantastic choice, I think. I understand Sukrit's hesitation in voicing his avatar, but he really transformed Siam from a shaky buffer state into an independent, industrializing state - not a free one, necessarily, as he modeled himself more on European absolute monarchs than either past Siamese monarchs or on constitutional monarchs, but really one of the architects of modern-day Siam/Thailand. Imagine Victoria.

He’s my favorite historical monarch tbh. I’m just reluctant to say he’d be a good choice for an official civ leader given how touchy the Thai government and Thais can be about how important monarchs are represented (and considering he’s one of the most likely monarchs you’re likely to find a mini-shrine to in a a random person’s house/store). I’d rather some weird faux pas not cause my favorite game series to be banned in the country.

Yeah, there’s really not much to say about Ramkhamhaeng as a figure that’s concrete (though I would like to point out that this didn’t stop Dido, Kupe, or Gilgamesh being picked as leaders). I honestly just know him as that king who supposedly invented the Thai script and nothing else. I honestly just picked him as a base leader for the mod because recognisability. I’d have picked Narai as the base leader for my mod if Siam hadn’t been in Civ 5.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

So...How about the Chola

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

So...How about the Chola

Yes, please. They could be a strong Naval Civilization that can transition between Trading and Domination very easily, and maybe have some bonuses towards City-States because why not?

 

[Capanator]

Sorry if I felt rude in my previous posts, I just feel like any Navajo abilities not related to war would probably be better suited to the pueblo, except the code talker, which I have no idea how it would be implemented into civ, maybe it would be a support unit, because they didn't conduct espionage and did not see combat, idk.

On two different side notes, I feel like the fact that AOE4 used Delhi sultanate instead of "Indians" could lead to India being deblobbed in Civ 7, or just maybe spliting off Chola. that would be cool.

On the other side note, does anyone think that Byzantium could have been easily replaced with Bohemia or Armenia, We do miss out on the 2nd best OST and greek fire, but we could give Byzantium an actual Byzantine ability other than a cavalry printer under Irene of Athens, and Taxis would fit very well with Hussite Bohemia, and give the Tagma abilty to vozová hradba or wagenburg.

 

[Zaarin]

On two different side notes, I feel like the fact that AOE4 used Delhi sultanate instead of "Indians" could lead to India being deblobbed in Civ 7, or just maybe spliting off Chola. that would be cool.

Personal take: Despite being located in India, as a Persianized Turkic empire the Delhi Sultanate is more of a stand-in for Persia, which lacked major powers in the Middle Ages between the fall of the Sassanids and the rise of the Safavids. Both the Sassanids and the Safavids are on the margins of AoE4's timeline and unlikely to appear; this leaves the best Persian representation to Persianized Turks like the Delhi Sultanate (and maybe at some point the Ghaznavids). I think we're likely to see proper Indian representation from a southern Indian kingdom at some point in the future (Chola, Chalukya, or Vijayanagra, perhaps).

On the other side note, does anyone think that Byzantium could have been easily replaced with Bohemia or Armenia, We do miss out on the 2nd best OST and greek fire, but we could give Byzantium an actual Byzantine ability other than a cavalry printer under Irene of Athens, and Taxis would fit very well with Hussite Bohemia, and give the Tagma abilty to vozová hradba or wagenburg.

On the one hand, I'd be very disappointed in a civ game that didn't include Byzantium (even if I'm also very disappointed in Civ6's Byzantine design). However, I'm very much hoping for Bohemia and Armenia to fill Hungary and Georgia's slots in Civ7. (And welcome to Team Bohemia. There are a small handful of us. )

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I think we're likely to see proper Indian representation from a southern Indian kingdom at some point in the future (Chola, Chalukya, or Vijayanagra, perhap

Wouldnt mind Vijayanagara, although they represent a weird time, right before India collapses to colonial rule.

The Chalukyas are complicated given the various branch-offs and dynasties they encompasses, but considered they were broadly indo-aryan, I would say they defy the point of having a South Indian pick, since the goal there would be to represent the Dravidian heritages there.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

On two different side notes, I feel like the fact that AOE4 used Delhi sultanate instead of "Indians" could lead to India being deblobbed in Civ 7, or just maybe spliting off Chola. that would be cool.

I just talked about it on the other thread but I feel like the most probable way of getting some sort of deblobbed India would be by making a separate Mughal civ at least, in addition to an India lead by Gandhi, because I don't see him going anywhere. At least that would be a start.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

. . . does anyone think that Byzantium could have been easily replaced with Bohemia or Armenia, We do miss out on the 2nd best OST and greek fire, but we could give Byzantium an actual Byzantine ability other than a cavalry printer under Irene of Athens, and Taxis would fit very well with Hussite Bohemia, and give the Tagma abilty to vozová hradba or wagenburg.

Prehistoric Armenia has the earliest evidence of commercial wine-making (vats, pressing machinery - definitely a commercial operation) while Bohemia invented modern (hopped) Beer: those two facts alone are reason enough to include both in any game.

 

[Zaarin]

Wouldnt mind Vijayanagara, although they represent a weird time, right before India collapses to colonial rule.

The Chalukyas are complicated given the various branch-offs and dynasties they encompasses, but considered they were broadly indo-aryan, I would say they defy the point of having a South Indian pick, since the goal there would be to represent the Dravidian heritages there.

We're talking about AoE4, not Civ; I think being Indo-Aryan would likely be an argument in favor of the Chalukyas, versus the Turkic Delhi Sultanate. The point of a Southern Indian civ in this context would be that the north was mostly controlled by Turks in the Middle Ages. That being said, the Pala Empire might be another option--disadvantage being they'd be a second war elephant civ and they still wouldn't be Hindu.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

We're talking about AoE4, not Civ; I think being Indo-Aryan would likely be an argument in favor of the Chalukyas, versus the Turkic Delhi Sultanate. The point of a Southern Indian civ in this context would be that the north was mostly controlled by Turks in the Middle Ages. That being said, the Pala Empire might be another option--disadvantage being they'd be a second war elephant civ and they still wouldn't be Hindu.

Don't you mean 3rd or 4th war elephant civ, depending on how many SEA civs we have and if Hannibal returns?

 

[Zaarin]

Don't you mean 3rd or 4th war elephant civ, depending on how many SEA civs we have and if Hannibal returns?

I don't expect to see SEA in early DLC, and Hannibal is about 800 years too early for AoE4...So far Delhi Sultanate is the only civ likely to have elephants; I could see more space for elephants--but not too many or the Delhi Sultanate starts to lose its uniqueness.