[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[PhoenicianGold]

I said earlier it could be a possibility though one would have thought that Ethiopia should have come with an African map. I think Portugal would more likely come with the Berbers/Morocco from North Africa as the Swahili would have made sense to pair with Ethiopia for Sub-Sahara Africa.

Well maybe not though. Maybe the Swahili were never planned but Oman was.

Maybe Ethiopia wasn't released with an Africa map specifically because more Africa was planned, and they saved that for the "final" African civ(s). Maybe they wanted to let players have a pseudo-colonial Africa pack with Portugal dominating the west coast and Oman the east coast. Maybe Ethiopia and Oman were split because the devs wanted to give players the opportunity to choose whether they wanted one or both up in Somalia.

I'm tending to thinks along these sort of lines because you are right that if Ethiopia was the last African civ, we probably would have gotten an Africa map. But that didn't happen, so I'm left thinking they had some more African ideas planned, like, say, a Portugal/Oman pack plus colonies/vassal states.

The thing is I think MoorTires is a reference to Pack 4, and that sounds like it would be based off of North Africa or just Portugal.

I still don't believe the names are anything but arbitrary. Seems deliberately misleading to me.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Well maybe not though. Maybe the Swahili were never planned but Oman was.

Maybe Ethiopia wasn't released with an Africa map specifically because more Africa was planned, and they saved that for the "final" African civ(s). Maybe they wanted to let players have a pseudo-colonial Africa pack with Portugal dominating the west coast and Oman the east coast. Maybe Ethiopia and Oman were split because the devs wanted to give players the opportunity to choose whether they wanted one or both up in Somalia.

I'm tending to thinks along these sort of lines because you are right that if Ethiopia was the last African civ, we probably would have gotten an Africa map. But that didn't happen, so I'm left thinking they had some more African ideas planned, like, say, a Portugal/Oman pack plus colonies/vassal states.

It would still be weird if they released an Africa map alongside civs that didn't originate from Africa though.
I guess at least it wouldn't be Belgium.

I still don't believe the names are anything but arbitrary. Seems deliberately misleading to me.

Which is why I think Pack 4 will be Portugal considering the Moors did control modern-day Portugal for hundreds of years.
I still think Pack 3 will end up being Assyria and Byzantines and we might get a Middle East/Mediterranean Map.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

It would still be weird if they released an Africa map alongside civs that didn't originate from Africa though.
I guess at least it wouldn't be Belgium.

Perhaps. Honestly I think Berbers/Oman would make a more natural pairing for Africa, but Portugal may be one of those civs that just always gets tagged on as an afterthought. Also, I'm not sure if the devs would actually be fine with an Africa map pack with the two biggest colonizers of SS Africa accompanying it. It's definitely in a gray area of acceptability for me.

Which is why I think Pack 4 will be Portugal considering the Moors did control modern-day Portugal for hundreds of years.
I still think Pack 3 will end up being Assyria and Byzantines and we might get a Middle East/Mediterranean Map.

I was thinking along precisely those lines (except a new civ instead of Assyria) regardless of the MoorTires name, that is until Venice showed up.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I was thinking along precisely those lines (except a new civ instead of Assyria) regardless of the MoorTires name, that is until Venice showed up.

I'm 50/50 regarding Venice being either a Lisbon replacement or an Antioch replacement, since it has precedent as a Byzantine city in several games.

I guess it's always possible that Venice could come in November and they just wanted to show us it super early.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I'm 50/50 regarding Venice being either a Lisbon replacement or an Antioch replacement, since it has precedent as a Byzantine city in several games.

I guess it's always possible that Venice could come in November and they just wanted to show us it super early.

Yeah it might be a red herring, but that's not usually how the devs have revealed things. Usually they are very deliberate about limiting hints to the next reveal.

And I still think Antioch will remain a city-state after Byzantium, since it's civilopedia entry focuses on being founded by the Seleucids and generally lasting many regime changes. I just think the case for pulling it for the sake of the Byzantines isn't as strong as many other city-states which were more central to their respective empires, where Antioch has a quite a bit of history before and after Byzantium.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

And I still think Antioch will remain a city-state after Byzantium, since it's civilopedia entry focuses on being founded by the Seleucids and generally lasting many regime changes. I just think the case for pulling it for the sake of the Byzantines isn't as strong as many other city-states which were more central to their respective empires, where Antioch has a quite a bit of history before and after Byzantium.

If Antioch would have just come as a religious city-state, and not replaced Amsterdam, it would have made things much easier.

 

[SolInvictus]

Because a Muskogean tribe like the Choctaw or Chickasaw would represent them better? The heart of the Mississippian culture was Muskogean, after all.

You have a good point. I wouldn't oppose either the Choctaw or the Chickasaw. I chose the Caddo, in part, because in historiography and modern culture politics the Caddo have the least contested claims to one of the Mississippian cultures and the groups that evolved out of the Caddoan culture with them are culturally related or were under their political or cultural influence. There are fights about who has the "best" claim to the other Mississippian cultures and I did not think Firaxis would get in that and that they would not do a Mississippian blob civ.

Probably because there are only 6000 Caddo members? So far, the indigenous choices for civ have been generally appealed to broader demographic appeal. There are about 1.3 million people of Mapuche descent living in Chile and Argentina, over 750,000 people of Maori descent in New Zealand, and over 350,000 people of Cree descent living in Canada and the U.S. Seems quite clear to me that VI is going for very broad representation, where they are more likely to catch potential consumers who either identify with a particular heritage, or are more likely to have been exposed to people with that heritage. Even the Shoshone/Comanche currently have some 30,000 members and sprawl across most of the Western U.S., and the Iroquois currently number about 125,000.

Given how much of VI's design has attempted to cast very wide demographic nets, I think it's pretty obvious why there isn't much interest in the Caddo. Because they represent a fairly niche interest group in a much larger market, and if we were going to get anything Mississippian it almost certainly wouldn't be a subset of the Mississippians but a collective civ called "the Mississippians" to try to appeal to more than 6,000 people. And either way, I don't see it happening after we have a Cahokia city-state and there are still very large organized tribes like the Navajo, Sioux, Iroquois, Cherokee, etc. who are just far safer investments because they have some 100K, 200K, 300K tribal members.

I'm sorry, but the words "I don't understand" in contexts like this just trigger me. We know exactly why hundreds of smaller civs haven't been considered by devs or proposed by fans. Because it's already too much for us to hope for many large and influential civs to be added, and throwing ideas around for anything less is really just fanciful dreaming.

I viewed them as not only representing the Caddo or the Mississippians, but also geographic representation for the area of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma and the 40 million people living there who have the name rolling around in the back of their brains because of counties/parish, rivers, lakes, parks, streets, business names they encounter in their daily lives and for the millions of native Texans who had that states history hammered into their not one but two required history classes where they learned that the states name has a Caddo origin and that the state motto is derived from the original meaning. Apologies, you are mistaken about the Caddo being obscure in terms of Civ. They were part of speculation after the Civ 5 Pueblo drop was announce and they have always been part of the Mississippian civ discussion. People talk about the Haida as a civ and the population is smaller than the Caddo, so I really did not think bringing up the Caddo would be a controversial move.

I'm sorry if my poor word choice triggered you. Now, imagine you work hard on something you are passionate about, you share it, and the dominant response is that you are wasting everyone's time. I guess since there wasn't really any follow up on the civ design besides a like from @Thenewwwguy (thank you), that it must be the consensus. I rarely post things, I guess the truth is I'd like to be part of things, but even though I'm a very social person irl I just don't get all the rules here. Again, I am sorry for wasting everyone's time. Goodbye.

 

[Jeppetto]

Which reminds me of a thought I had today:

Age of Empires II added Portugal in the African Kingdoms pack, and it appeared on the African campaigns map rather than the European map (even though the campaigns themselves went further than Africa).

What do we think are the chances DLC pack 3 has an "Africa" map including Portugal and something Berber or Swahili? Certainly seems more likely to me than Portugal being paired with a North American civ and an Americas map.

Americas could come in last Pack that contains single Civ and map. The next map could very well be Middle East and Central Asia, since the Asian map we have only covers East.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

My wild guess for tomorrow:
Portugal lead by Joao I
Ireland led by Madb

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I viewed them as not only representing the Caddo or the Mississippians, but also geographic representation for the area of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma and the 40 million people living there who have the name rolling around in the back of their brains because of counties/parish, rivers, lakes, parks, streets, business names they encounter in their daily lives and for the millions of native Texans who had that states history hammered into their not one but two required history classes where they learned that the states name has a Caddo origin and that the state motto is derived from the original meaning. Apologies, you are mistaken about the Caddo being obscure in terms of Civ. They were part of speculation after the Civ 5 Pueblo drop was announce and they have always been part of the Mississippian civ discussion. People talk about the Haida as a civ and the population is smaller than the Caddo, so I really did not think bringing up the Caddo would be a controversial move.

Count me in as one of those millions that not only learned the name was of Caddo origin, but name of my town, and river that flows right next to it, is Caddo in origin.

That being said I think, speaking as a Texan, the better tribe to "represent" the state probably would be the Comanche as they were definitively the most talked about in Texas history class out of all groups of Native Americans, and more influential in the long run. They don't cover Louisiana and Arkansas though but instead add in New Mexico, Colorado, and Kansas.

 

[onepurpose]

Waiting for some new info tomorrow, here's my two cents..

As every DLC cover a geographical region (general consensus)... I do not expect civilizations from Africa nor Americas .

September DLC my bet is Middle Orient .. Byzantium & Assyria .. (though I would rather prefer Babylon)

November DLC fan favourite Portugal ... I 'd like to see new colonization mechanics and so all (new "great explorer" GP class, as I guess in another post) , but by the look of what have seen so far, maybe is to expect too much

January DLC general consensus is Vietnam & Kublai Kahn , as it have been leaked... I'm not a big fan of Vietnam .. but there is...

March DLC... everybody is expecting a NA civ .. I'm not too sure.. well.. we could see a Iroquese civ .. but I expect something different a là Civ V Venice ... a raider civ? (Huns) ... a single city civ?.. something new & unexpected

 

[gunnergoz]

I'll take anything new, fresh & unexpected as long as it's not vampires, ghouls, zombies or nazis. God I'm tired of game developers going nuts on that kiddie junk.

 

[Zaarin]

I chose the Caddo, in part, because in historiography and modern culture politics the Caddo have the least contested claims to one of the Mississippian cultures

The Chickasaw are the only ones, other than the Natchez (who continued a Mississippian lifestyle into historic times), who can be directly tied to a mound site: Chicaza.

I'm sorry if my poor word choice triggered you. Now, imagine you work hard on something you are passionate about, you share it, and the dominant response is that you are wasting everyone's time. I guess since there wasn't really any follow up on the civ design besides a like from @Thenewwwguy (thank you), that it must be the consensus. I rarely post things, I guess the truth is I'd like to be part of things, but even though I'm a very social person irl I just don't get all the rules here. Again, I am sorry for wasting everyone's time. Goodbye.

Don't be intimidated just because we like to debate things here! It's why they call us fanatics, after all.

 

[Josephias]

It would still be weird if they released an Africa map alongside civs that didn't originate from Africa though.
I guess at least it wouldn't be Belgium. .

But Portugal is greatly involved in Africa. You could say they were the first ones to map the complete shape of the continent, by circummnavigating it from Iberia to Arabia in its way to india (provided the Mediterranean coast and Egypt were already well-known). Portugal was also quite involved in trying to conquer Barbary coast, so pairing them with a Bereber civ is not strange.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

You have a good point. I wouldn't oppose either the Choctaw or the Chickasaw. I chose the Caddo, in part, because in historiography and modern culture politics the Caddo have the least contested claims to one of the Mississippian cultures and the groups that evolved out of the Caddoan culture with them are culturally related or were under their political or cultural influence. There are fights about who has the "best" claim to the other Mississippian cultures and I did not think Firaxis would get in that and that they would not do a Mississippian blob civ.



I viewed them as not only representing the Caddo or the Mississippians, but also geographic representation for the area of Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, and Oklahoma and the 40 million people living there who have the name rolling around in the back of their brains because of counties/parish, rivers, lakes, parks, streets, business names they encounter in their daily lives and for the millions of native Texans who had that states history hammered into their not one but two required history classes where they learned that the states name has a Caddo origin and that the state motto is derived from the original meaning. Apologies, you are mistaken about the Caddo being obscure in terms of Civ. They were part of speculation after the Civ 5 Pueblo drop was announce and they have always been part of the Mississippian civ discussion. People talk about the Haida as a civ and the population is smaller than the Caddo, so I really did not think bringing up the Caddo would be a controversial move.

I'm sorry if my poor word choice triggered you. Now, imagine you work hard on something you are passionate about, you share it, and the dominant response is that you are wasting everyone's time. I guess since there wasn't really any follow up on the civ design besides a like from @Thenewwwguy (thank you), that it must be the consensus. I rarely post things, I guess the truth is I'd like to be part of things, but even though I'm a very social person irl I just don't get all the rules here. Again, I am sorry for wasting everyone's time. Goodbye.

I am sorry if I came off as rude, I just get tired of all the whyyyning in this community that some small people or kingdom should be in the game. A lot of players don't really think about the practicalities of game design when proposing new civs. I do not, however, want to discourage creativity, and your civ design was quite interesting. My apologies.

That said, I do agree with @Zaarin that we are more likely to get a Muscogeon civ from the Five Civilized Tribes, since they generally capture a lot larger representation and interest groups. And I was always surprised that the devs were even considering the Haida when the Salish or even the Tlingit have far more people and territorial claims.

 

[SirMediocrity]

Chief Seattle of the Salish would be cool but I think he might feel a bit too much like Poundmaker in terms of personality. Personally, I think someone like the Apache or Comanche, or perhaps a Mississippian tribe are the most likely North American tribe.

The biggest problem with the Apache or Comanche is the risk of using "savage horse raider" tropes. However, given the fact that they've represented the Cree in a more positive light, these worries are somewhat alleviated.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Chief Seattle of the Salish would be cool but I think he might feel a bit too much like Poundmaker in terms of personality. Personally, I think someone like the Apache or Comanche, or perhaps a Mississippian tribe are the most likely North American tribe.

The biggest problem with the Apache or Comanche is the risk of using "savage horse raider" tropes. However, given the fact that they've represented the Cree in a more positive light, this worries are somewhat alleviated.

I think the Apache are more likely than the Comanche for that reason, because they facilitate non-warfare design much better than the Comanche. I definitely think we are more likely to get an Apachean or even a Shoshone design (including the Navajo and Comanche) over a Salish/Tlingit/Haida design. And I think just a smidge more likely than any Muscogean tribe.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Looking at all these native NA civ posts above It will be funny if we won't get any at all

 

[Zaarin]

Looking at all these native NA civ posts above It will be funny if we won't get any at all

That's unlikely.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

But Portugal is greatly involved in Africa. You could say they were the first ones to map the complete shape of the continent, by circummnavigating it from Iberia to Arabia in its way to india (provided the Mediterranean coast and Egypt were already well-known). Portugal was also quite involved in trying to conquer Barbary coast, so pairing them with a Bereber civ is not strange.

I was referring to the fact that having an African map with no civs that originated in Africa in the same pack would be strange. Having Portugal alongside the Berbers with a map of Africa would be fine.

The biggest problem with the Apache or Comanche is the risk of using "savage horse raider" tropes. However, given the fact that they've represented the Cree in a more positive light, this worries are somewhat alleviated.

I would rather stay away from the horse raider trope as well.
Part of my gut feeling is it will come down to two options: something new and different in the Navajo, or a familiar better designed Iroquois.

I think the Apache are more likely than the Comanche for that reason, because they facilitate non-warfare design much better than the Comanche. I definitely think we are more likely to get an Apachean or even a Shoshone design (including the Navajo and Comanche) over a Salish/Tlingit/Haida design. And I think just a smidge more likely than any Muscogean tribe.

I’d rather them keep the tribes separate and not blobbed them together, like the Navajo not having an Apache unique unit. Sure they were related but they also warred against each other too.
They’ve done a relatively good job so far in that regard on UUs for the most part.