[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Thenewwwguy]

I listed China as a kind-of terrain-ish ability.

Mapuche can only build chemamul on breathtaking tiles.
Scythian kurgans can't be built on hills.
Indian stepwells can't be built on hills or floodplains.

Ottomans are on the fence because they do have strategic resource tile bonuses. Classify them how you will.

Point being, there still aren't many civs that don't incorporate terrain-based bonuses or limitations. It's subtle, but definitely something that sets VI apart from V. Definitely seems like the devs want to cram at least some sort of terrain limitation on most civs to give them clearer settling niches and make them slightly more flavorfully distinct.



There definitely are design guidelines. We can try to glean what they are and argue as to how strictly the developers are adhering to them. But pretending that they don't exist at all just leads to disappointment when we get Georgia or Canada and not Babylon. At the very least considering these theories prepares you for the possibility that the developers design a different game than the one you imagined. I don't find the attempts at shutting down such discourse particularly fruitful, when VI is already quite brazenly doing whatever it wants.

Also, a Kudurru is not "infrastructure."



I think if we get anything it will be the Neo-Assyrians. Something that actually feels different enough from Sumeria. Though frankly I would prefer something even more culturally removed from Sumeria like Palmyra or Armenia. I could live with Assyria, even though I really have no use for another ancient Mesopotamian civ when there are entire regions and eras that have more potential to diversify the roster.

Well all three ‘big’ assyrian proposals are neo-assyrians: ashurbanipal, sennercharib snd tiglath-pileser 3 are all neo-assyrian, if i remember correctoy

And terrain limitations aren’t really terrain-based abilities, especially with infrastructure. Most of them are just there because logically, that improvement would not make sense to be built in a certain location

also, how is the kudurru not qualifying of a UI? They were stored in temples on the border to define that that, in fact, was the border.

This is a pretty good proposal. I do expect they’re going to have a science bonus in there somewhere, and I’m hoping for a more creative UU than the old bowman. Qurubuti perhaps?

I also somehow doubt that FXS would make another one-city civ. I don’t think VI would lend itself as well to that play style.

I don’t know enough about babylon to suggest a different UU, but the idea behind this was more aimed at conquering other civs if you wanted more cities, while a buffed out capital would make it easier to do so. I’m sure it’s a struggle though.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Well all three ‘big’ assyrian proposals are neo-assyrians: ashurbanipal, sennercharib snd tiglath-pileser 3 are all neo-assyrian, if i remember correctoy

I figured it would be Ashurbanipal again. Maybe a bit boring, but then again Mesopotamia bores me. At least Neo-Assyria expanded far enough that I can pretend it's not a second Mesopotamian civ and more akin to a blobby mess like Macedonia or Rome.

(which might have been the justification for including Assyria along with Babylon in V. Maybe that same rationale is what might bring us Sumeria (repping older, smaller "Mesopotamia") and Assyria (representing newer, larger "Mesopotamia+Levant+Anatolia+Egypt) with no Babylon, because Sumeria took Babylon's conceptual space.

And terrain limitations aren’t really terrain-based abilities, especially with infrastructure. Most of them are just there because logically, that improvement would not make sense to be built in a certain location.

Perhaps. But those improvements themselves might also have been chosen partly because they show off the native terrain, and encourage the civ to form a terrain niche. We didn't need chateaus to have a river limitation, but France has some prominent rivers compared to its neighbors so we now get a river-ish France. Scythia could build kurgans on hills, but by excluding hills Scythia is encouraged into settling more steppe-ish. I believe I've seen elsewhere observations that seowons really don't need the hill limitation either. In some instances like these the limitations seem almost arbitrary flavor, attached not to the UI but to the civ itself.

also, how is the kudurru not qualifying of a UI? They were stored in temples on the border to define that that, in fact, was the border.

Kudurrus are comparatively small marker stones. Most, if not all of them, are only a few feet high, and VI is a very visual game where even the smallest UI, a Chemamull, is about 2.5 times the height of the average person. Just plopping a small rock down is pretty underwhelming, especially when Sumeria next door is making massive Ziggurats.

Maybe the temple itself could work, but I wouldn't call that a Kudurru? And even then the temple themselves didn't mark territory; they just housed Kudurru documentation. It was the copies of the Kudurru stones themselves that were just plopped down on the ground to mark territory.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I figured it would be Ashurbanipal again. Maybe a bit boring, but then again Mesopotamia bores me. At least Neo-Assyria expanded far enough that I can pretend it's not a second Mesopotamian civ and more akin to a blobby mess like Macedonia or Rome.

(which might have been the justification for including Assyria along with Babylon in V. Maybe that same rationale is what might bring us Sumeria (repping older, smaller "Mesopotamia") and Assyria (representing newer, larger "Mesopotamia+Levant+Anatolia+Egypt) with no Babylon, because Sumeria took Babylon's conceptual space.



Perhaps. But those improvements themselves might also have been chosen partly because they show off the native terrain, and encourage the civ to form a terrain niche. We didn't need chateaus to have a river limitation, but France has some prominent rivers compared to its neighbors so we now get a river-ish France. Scythia could build kurgans on hills, but by excluding hills Scythia is encouraged into settling more steppe-ish. I believe I've seen elsewhere observations that seowons really don't need the hill limitation either. In some instances like these the limitations seem almost arbitrary flavor, attached not to the UI but to the civ itself.



Kudurrus are comparatively small marker stones. Most, if not all of them, are only a few feet high, and VI is a very visual game where even the smallest UI, a Chemamull, is about 2.5 times the height of the average person. Just plopping a small rock down is pretty underwhelming, especially when Sumeria next door is making massive Ziggurats.

Maybe the temple itself could work, but I wouldn't call that a Kudurru?

i mean, the model itself could be the temple itself with the rock visible inside. I think there’s capability to be creative.

I still don’t think Sumer is taking up Babylon’s space, but i can understand why you might think so, given you don’t really care for mesopotamia

Honestly, I’m just surprised that we haven’t seen any credible leaks about this besides the (debatedly reliable) GS leaker

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think if we get anything it will be the Neo-Assyrians. Something that actually feels different enough from Sumeria. Though frankly I would prefer something even more culturally removed from Sumeria like Palmyra or Armenia. I could live with Assyria, even though I really have no use for another ancient Mesopotamian civ when there are entire regions and eras that have more potential to diversify the roster.

Well the Neo-Assyrian Empire is mainly what I, and others, have been suggesting.
I don't see how that's not as diverse when the Timurids to me would feel like another Central Asian horse civ when we already have Scythia and Mongolia. At least that's how I feel.

 

[Codeword Iroquois]

They already tried a "city-State" civ with the Mayans, and people are already complaining about the fact that you're punished for going wide while you can have 7 cities quite comfortably. But for a lot of players 7 isn't enough and with the Mayans they made it clear. So a one-city civ would be out of question.

With a bit of Geometric trickery, one can fit up to 13 in the 6-tile radius.

 

[Kwami]

With a bit of Geometric trickery, one can fit up to 13 in the 6-tile radius.

Sure, but only if your land is perfect and has no dead tiles where a city would need to go. Also, you'll have 13 kind of bad cities because none of them will have enough tiles to work.

But you can easily get 7-9 pretty good cities as Maya and then as many 85% cities as you want. I have no idea why people keep pretending that Maya can't make more cities.

 

[The Kingmaker]

i mean, the model itself could be the temple itself with the rock visible inside. I think there’s capability to be creative.

I still don’t think Sumer is taking up Babylon’s space, but i can understand why you might think so, given you don’t really care for mesopotamia

Honestly, I’m just surprised that we haven’t seen any credible leaks about this besides the (debatedly reliable) GS leaker

Assuming Babylon comes instead of Assyria, I wouldn’t be surprised if Babylon ended up with something science-y like the Mayan observatory as a UB or UD. Almost anything is better than having “Walls of Babylon” again. Talk about phoning it in.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Well the Neo-Assyrian Empire is mainly what I, and others, have been suggesting.
I don't see how that's not as diverse when the Timurids to me would feel like another Central Asian horse civ when we already have Scythia and Mongolia. At least that's how I feel.

I agree, the Timurids don't feel like they offer a strong mechanical niche. However, map-gap filling theory to me says that something Gurkhani might be included, that the Mughals are pretty much out because of India's design and Lahore, and that Timur would actually pair up really well with Alexander. At least it all looks elegant on paper. So I'm left considering them primarily on principle rather than actually thinking they would be a fun design.

That said, if the Timurids are included, they could feasibly incorporate some Mughal elements and have a strong cultural bent. Which would set them apart from both Scythia and Mongolia. Might not be enough to make them interesting still, but they do seem to have at least some potential. Maybe.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Kudurrus are comparatively small marker stones. Most, if not all of them, are only a few feet high, and VI is a very visual game where even the smallest UI, a Chemamull, is about 2.5 times the height of the average person. Just plopping a small rock down is pretty underwhelming, especially when Sumeria next door is making massive Ziggurats.

Maybe the temple itself could work, but I wouldn't call that a Kudurru? And even then the temple themselves didn't mark territory; they just housed Kudurru documentation. It was the copies of the Kudurru stones themselves that were just plopped down on the ground to mark territory.

There are other means to make it work. Kudurru's could be a Monument replacement, or a unique type of relic.

 

[Zaarin]

From what I remember the Assyrian civilization was included mostly because Firaxis at the time happened to have somoene who actually had a high well of knowledge about them to begin with.

I recall reading that as well. It's kind of appalling that one of the most important civilizations in history got included because one of the devs happened to have a special interest.

Plus the cuneiform symbol kind of preempts any civ having a cuneiform bonus.

Sumer's cuneiform symbol is DINGIR, the symbol that's used as a classifier for gods--it's +1 reference to the Epic of Gilgamesh in the Epic of Gilgamesh civ (Gilgamesh was 2/3 divine and all that). There are over 2,000 more cuneiform symbols they can choose from if they want a cuneiform symbol for another Mesopotamian civ.

I agree, the Timurids don't feel like they offer a strong mechanical niche. However, map-gap filling theory to me says that something Gurkhani might be included, that the Mughals are pretty much out because of India's design and Lahore, and that Timur would actually pair up really well with Alexander. At least it all looks elegant on paper. So I'm left considering them primarily on principle rather than actually thinking they would be a fun design.

That said, if the Timurids are included, they could feasibly incorporate some Mughal elements and have a strong cultural bent. Which would set them apart from both Scythia and Mongolia. Might not be enough to make them interesting still, but they do seem to have at least some potential. Maybe.

I'm just going to point out again that the Sogdians would occupy the same space without being another horse-nomad civ. TBH, though, to Western audiences Central Asia is probably the most obscure spot on the map, more obscure than Africa even. I cynically and sadly suspect that the devs will be quite content to leave Central Asia sparsely occupied by Tomyris and the Kabul and Lahore city-states. (The only thing that gives me even a glimmer of hope is the lack of a Samarkand city-state.)

 

[Lord Lakely]

Assuming Babylon comes instead of Assyria, I wouldn’t be surprised if Babylon ended up with something science-y like the Mayan observatory as a UB or UD. Almost anything is better than having “Walls of Babylon” again. Talk about phoning it in.

"Here's the ancient, powerful and iconic civilization of Babylon. Their unique unit replaces the Archer and is called the... bowman."

 

[PhoenicianGold]

There are other means to make it work. Kudurru's could be a Monument replacement, or a unique type of relic.

Yes, that could definitely work. Although I wouldn't call either of those options a UI. Feels more like a UA, and we would still need something more substantial for a UI.

Suppose a Kudurru temple could work as a UB for some district, maybe the gov't plaza or city center. Iunno.

Sumer's cuneiform symbol is DINGIR, the symbol that's used as a classifier for gods--it's +1 reference to the Epic of Gilgamesh in the Epic of Gilgamesh civ (Gilgamesh was 2/3 divine and all that). There are over 2,000 more cuneiform symbols they can choose from if they want a cuneiform symbol for another Mesopotamian civ.

Yeah but if the "gimmick" of Babylon is a written code, then cuneiform anywhere in a Disney-level history game seems to preclude it appearing as any other civ's gimmick.

I'm just going to point out again that the Sogdians would occupy the same space without being another horse-nomad civ. TBH, though, to Western audiences Central Asia is probably the most obscure spot on the map, more obscure than Africa even. I cynically and sadly suspect that the devs will be quite content to leave Central Asia sparsely occupied by Tomyris and the Kabul and Lahore city-states. (The only thing that gives me even a glimmer of hope is the lack of a Samarkand city-state.)

There are also the Kushans. I do suspect that the Mughals/Timurids have been so highly requested over the years that it's either them or nothing.

As for Samarkand, I have noticed that none of the city-states which appear in scenarios also appear in the normal city-state list. No Prague or Vienna from Jadwiga's legacy. No Pagan or Samarkand from Path to Nirvana. No Luxembourg from War Machine. I am quite disappointed by this because these are all perfectly acceptable and deserving to be included as normal CSs. Perhaps Firaxis just presumes they will be modded in because they are so popular.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I think a Kudurru Temple as a improvement that can’t be made adjacent to another one and must be placed on your border is the best way to deal with it.

 

[The Kingmaker]

"Here's the ancient, powerful and iconic civilization of Babylon. Their unique unit replaces the Archer and is called the... bowman."

I know, right? Even Humankind was able to dig up “Sabu Sha Qashti” for a Babylonian unit, although they did just give Assyria the “Assyrian Raider.” Ugh.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I know, right? Even Humankind was able to dig up “Sabu Sha Qashti” for a Babylonian unit, although they did just give Assyria the “Assyrian Raider.” Ugh.

humankind struggles with names. ‘Mongol Horde’ instead of Qeshigs, for example

 

[Zaarin]

Yeah but if the "gimmick" of Babylon is a written code, then cuneiform anywhere in a Disney-level history game seems to preclude it appearing as any other civ's gimmick.

I mean, at least two Sumerian kings can claim to have the first written law code and the Sumerians had writing for millennia before the Babylonians existed so I really don't think that's Babylon's "gimmick."

As for Samarkand, I have noticed that none of the city-states which appear in scenarios also appear in the normal city-state list. No Prague or Vienna from Jadwiga's legacy. No Pagan or Samarkand from Path to Nirvana. No Luxembourg from War Machine. I am quite disappointed by this because these are all perfectly acceptable and deserving to be included as normal CSs. Perhaps Firaxis just presumes they will be modded in because they are so popular.

I've never played any of the scenarios except the Viking one so I didn't even know they existed.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I know, right? Even Humankind was able to dig up “Sabu Sha Qashti” for a Babylonian unit, although they did just give Assyria the “Assyrian Raider.” Ugh.

humankind struggles with names. ‘Mongol Horde’ instead of Qeshigs, for example

Yeah I read through the Humankind uniques and I frankly wasn't very impressed with the depth or variety. Either they are the same as their VI counterparts, or in some instances they are changed to make the culture feel even less unique (like how Egypt now builds pyramids instead of Sphinxes, on top of Nubia already building pyramids; or how Phoenicia now builds "havens"--whatever the hell those are--so Carthage can have cothons).

In some ways Humankind feels like a step backwards from VI culturally. Not respecting cultural continuity/contiguity by ignoring the history which preceded or followed each culture, and pigeonholing them into "eras" even if that means separating them conceptually from their modern legacies. And, after seeing how VI has tried hard to make cultural legacies relatable to modern nationalism, to suddenly have only ten cultures represented as "contemporary" while the others are represented as somehow "backwards" feels like it just won't satisfy. To some extent, VI skirts around this by creating "grand tour" civs that try to pull as much from different eras as they can and avoid pigeonholing (and even though most do not include modern elements, they can still modernize while still maintaining cultural identity). But when you have a strictly renaissance France in Humankind, for instance, how does that feel to the French that, despite being a world power, they can never "contemporary?" That they have to adopt an American or Japanese culture to further civilize themselves?

So far I still think VI has invested far more in cultural accuracy than Humankind has. And that's one of the major draws for me and why I hope they continue the direction they have been going. If people want Babylon eventually, fine, but I'm too excited to see what the devs might do with new cultures, particularly with the music, to care much about whether they check off the staple list.

I mean, at least two Sumerian kings can claim to have the first written law code and the Sumerians had writing for millennia before the Babylonians existed so I really don't think that's Babylon's "gimmick."

Yeah but that's not how pop history understands Babylon.

 

[Navelgazer]

Here is a mock-up:

Babylon:

UA: Gates of Ishtar: Walls provide +3 culture. Cannot build settlers. Cities have ancient walls when founded. Capital can work tiles 4 tiles away instead of 3, cannot lose loyalty, and has +15 city strength

UI: Kudurru: Can be built by builders. 1 per city. Culture bombs adjacent tiles. Cities with a Kudurru get +4 loyalty, +1 culture, +1 science

UU: Bowman: Replaces Archer. Can attack melee. +10 combat strength when garrisoned on a city with walls.

Hammurabi:

Hammurabi’s Code of Laws: Code of Laws is already researched. Policy Card changes can be made at any time for free. Changing to a new tier of government grants an inspiration.

Nebuchadnezzar:

Conquerer of Judah: +10 combat strength against civilizations who have researched less civics than Babylon. Cities captured from other civilizations do not lose loyalty if they have walls.

I'm down with the idea of a playable city state that can only gain ground through conquering, but considering the massive malus there, it needs a real bonus directly related to making that strategy work. The Bowman unit would have to be a real player in that arena, maybe a bonus to attacking city centers or defensible districts?

 

[The Kingmaker]

Some of us do actually like Babylon for its own merits, including its interesting history and culture. It’s not necessarily just checking a box.

I remember being excited about Civ2 because it depicted a diplomacy scene with Babylon on the back of the box. Mesopotamia wasn’t exactly featured in a ton of games. That alone indicated to me that Civ was more than just the usual Egypt-Greece-Rome or England-France-Germany type of historical game.

Even way back then, before we got the likes of Georgia and the Maori.

 

[Guynemer]

I fail to see how the Walls of Babylon is "phoning it in."

The Walls of Babylon were considered one of the Wonders of the World in early chronicles, before the Pharos was built.

We probably won't see the Walls of Babylon due to Tamar already having unique walls, of course.