[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Boris Gudenuf]

Thinking about it, it would be quite fun. Swahili happening in Civ6 sounds unlikely, but who knows Civ7?

@sukritact has done a very nice Swahili Mod Civ for Civ VI: definitely Trade based.
There are also Songhai, Somalia, Morocco, Ashanti and Great Zimbabwe Mods for those who want to 'fill in' Africa some more . . .

 

[Thenewwwguy]

I was also talking about VII or any future iterations that prioritize civs similarly to IV, V, or VI. Again, I just don't feel much need for Carthage and Phoenicia being represented, and Dido is just a really convenient staple leader.



I think there's a decent chance we could get two alternate leaders. Now that they've exhausted the only clear/good choices for dual leaders, I think the only direction for feature creep to go is two leaders lol.

they could do a pack full of just alt leaders, lol, and ppl woudl buy it


some choices i’d suggest:

if Austria doesn’t get added to civ, Maria Theresa for Germany,

one of the proper Egyptian pharaohs for Egypt,

Harun al-Rashid for Arabia,

Ivan the Terrible or Alexander II for Russia,

if you view Civ Persia as per-Islamic persia, then Shapur II, if you want to include Islamic Persia, then Shah Abbas

for China, the third leader should be Wudi, We Zetian, or another great leader of China

for India, third leader should either be a Chola king, namely Rajendra or Rajaraja Chola, or a Mughal ruler, such as Akbar, Babur or Nur Jahan

Rome is just *waiting* for either Hadrian or Constantine the Great to make an entry, especially since until this game, the Roman choices were always a lot earlier in their history. a important Consul or senator from the Republic would also be interesting

getting Mehmed II as an alt Ottoman leader, or Alexios Komnenos as an alt Byzantine leader is less important than the above, but would be interesting.

Carthage/Phoenicia is definitely worthy of a second leader imo, but im not knowledgeable enough to suggest who it should be besides a low-brow pick like Hannibal

 

[Zaarin]

Carthage/Phoenicia is definitely worthy of a second leader imo, but im not knowledgeable enough to suggest who it should be besides a low-brow pick like Hannibal

Hiram II of Tyre; Hamilcar Barca; Hanno I the Great--but I don't think Phoenicia desperately needs a second leader.

 

[TeddyMain]

@sukritact has done a very nice Swahili Mod Civ for Civ VI: definitely Trade based.
There are also Songhai, Somalia, Morocco, Ashanti and Great Zimbabwe Mods for those who want to 'fill in' Africa some more . . .

He's also working on a mod for the Akan right now:

https://www.reddit.com/r/civ/comments/l2qmxn/oson_leads_the_akan_in_civilization_vi/

 

[GenyaArikado]

The "cheaper" option for leaders would be going full Humankind, adding Create a Sim Leader, X number of clothes/anims and making some premades each xpack

 

[ManoftheHour333]

they could do a pack full of just alt leaders, lol, and ppl woudl buy it


some choices i’d suggest:

if Austria doesn’t get added to civ, Maria Theresa for Germany,

one of the proper Egyptian pharaohs for Egypt,

Harun al-Rashid for Arabia,

Ivan the Terrible or Alexander II for Russia,

if you view Civ Persia as per-Islamic persia, then Shapur II, if you want to include Islamic Persia, then Shah Abbas

for China, the third leader should be Wudi, We Zetian, or another great leader of China

for India, third leader should either be a Chola king, namely Rajendra or Rajaraja Chola, or a Mughal ruler, such as Akbar, Babur or Nur Jahan

Rome is just *waiting* for either Hadrian or Constantine the Great to make an entry, especially since until this game, the Roman choices were always a lot earlier in their history. a important Consul or senator from the Republic would also be interesting

getting Mehmed II as an alt Ottoman leader, or Alexios Komnenos as an alt Byzantine leader is less important than the above, but would be interesting.

Carthage/Phoenicia is definitely worthy of a second leader imo, but im not knowledgeable enough to suggest who it should be besides a low-brow pick like Hannibal

I like the idea for a leader pack-they could simultaneously add in some more representation while also giving us more options for more diverse play.

The ones I'd like to see:

Akbar the Great leads India
-->Focus on culture and science generation with some link to population

Maria Theresa leads Germany AND Hungary (I know Austria *could* be in the game...but I'd just want to see M.T. come back swinging)
-->BRING BACK THE CITY STATE BUYING

Hateshput leads Egypt
-->Bonus to building construction with increases if the district is on a floodplain

Harun al'Rashid leads Arabia AND Persia
-->Bonuses to internal trade routes and great people generation


Catherine the Great leads Russia
-->Give her some sexy...combat bonuses...for mounted units/cossaks XD


Constantine leads Byzantium AND Rome
-->Faith from monuments, can purchase all civilian units with faith

 

[Zaarin]

Hateshput leads Egypt
-->Bonus to building construction with increases if the district is on a floodplain

That's not a great fit for Hatshepsut, who was more outward focused than most Egyptian leaders; that would be a better fit for Ramesses II, Akhenaten, Djoser...Honestly Cleopatra's ability is already more or less what Hatshepsut's ought to be.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

they could do a pack full of just alt leaders, lol, and ppl woudl buy it


some choices i’d suggest:

if Austria doesn’t get added to civ, Maria Theresa for Germany,

one of the proper Egyptian pharaohs for Egypt,

Harun al-Rashid for Arabia,

Ivan the Terrible or Alexander II for Russia,

if you view Civ Persia as per-Islamic persia, then Shapur II, if you want to include Islamic Persia, then Shah Abbas

for China, the third leader should be Wudi, We Zetian, or another great leader of China

for India, third leader should either be a Chola king, namely Rajendra or Rajaraja Chola, or a Mughal ruler, such as Akbar, Babur or Nur Jahan

Rome is just *waiting* for either Hadrian or Constantine the Great to make an entry, especially since until this game, the Roman choices were always a lot earlier in their history. a important Consul or senator from the Republic would also be interesting

getting Mehmed II as an alt Ottoman leader, or Alexios Komnenos as an alt Byzantine leader is less important than the above, but would be interesting.

Carthage/Phoenicia is definitely worthy of a second leader imo, but im not knowledgeable enough to suggest who it should be besides a low-brow pick like Hannibal

If we are treating India as northern India, I think it's Nur Jahan or bust. But in absence of a separate Chola civ I would support a Chola leader.

And I still support Cixi for our third Chinese leader, although I would be totally okay with Wu Zetian. I would just prefer we get a Qing leader and Cixi is the obvious frontrunner, not to mention quite a character.

I could see Constantine added as a Roman/Byzantium double leader at this point. Otherwise I don't see either getting a second leader.

Don't really want Catherine the Great. There is so much more Russian history, from Olga to Lenin, that I don't want it wasted on the same time period as Peter.

That's not a great fit for Hatshepsut, who was more outward focused than most Egyptian leaders; that would be a better fit for Ramesses II, Akhenaten, Djoser...Honestly Cleopatra's ability is already more or less what Hatshepsut's ought to be.

This is a good point. Although they could always retool Cleo to accommodate Hatshepsut. Also, Sukritact's recent rework of Egypt makes me kind of hate the official design; why didn't it always have a unique industrial zone?

 

[ManoftheHour333]

That's not a great fit for Hatshepsut, who was more outward focused than most Egyptian leaders; that would be a better fit for Ramesses II, Akhenaten, Djoser...Honestly Cleopatra's ability is already more or less what Hatshepsut's ought to be.

You're right-one of the things she's known for is expanding trade. However, she was also one of the most prolific builder-pharaohs as well and was responsible for a variety temples, city projects (Including marketplaces for all those external trade routes : ) ). I went with more of an emphasis on that...and because it'd be super synergistic/give more weight with Iteru (Which tbh isn't the greatest ability). I do agree that it would fit Ramses II as well but...female leaders are cool and we haven't had Hateshut since IV

This is a good point. Although they could always retool Cleo to accommodate Hatshepsut. [/QUOTE]

Very true. Given all her alliance shenanigans I'm surprised her abilities aren't supercharged for the diplomatic victory...not sure what they'd be but they could totally make a new Cleo ability.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

This is a good point. Although they could always retool Cleo to accommodate Hatshepsut.

Very true. Given all her alliance shenanigans I'm surprised her abilities aren't supercharged for the diplomatic victory...not sure what they'd be but they could totally make a new Cleo ability.[/QUOTE]

Yeah I was surprised as well, given that it would have happened along with the flooding retool Egypt received in Gathering Storm. But I guess they figured they didn't have to fix Cleo until Hatshepsut were actually confirmed for a second leader.

(and yes, I think Hatshepsut is far and away the best option for a second leader. One, because Hatshepsut is an actually powerful female figure and serves as a soft redo or balancing out of Cleo. And two, because I think Egypt is unequivocally one of the better equipped civs to feature two female leaders like England has...and to a lesser extent France.)

 

[Republic of San Montuoso]

and to a lesser extent France

As a French, I would have been surprised to see France with a female leader, not mentioning two. France had the particularity of a very strict "no girls allowed" policy for official positions (because women might marry a foreigner and the throne would fall into the hands of a foreign prince... yeah, the justification is weak). It was odd in medieval/early modern Europe, where every other monarchy allowed women to take the throne under special circumstances, but for France, it was a big fat NO, even under the most special circumstances (Henri IV was the cousin 14 times removed from the previous king, and they chose him over any lineage that passed through a woman). So the only "evident" leaders (meaning "official" leaders) would always be male (kings, presidents, even ministers). Meaning that finding women to fill the position of French leader seemed to me very tricky.

I was reluctant about CdM at first (mostly because she wasn't French after all), and if we had to have a spy-related leader for France, I'd have prefered Richelieu (especially for the fancy hats), but I learnt to love her. And for Eleanor, I automatically loved her.

But, honestly, if someone would have said to me that France would have two female leaders, I would have laughed in disbelief. Say what you want about "being woke" or "SJW" or "cancel culture" that Firaxis might be accused of doing, but their politics opened my eyes about the place of women in France politics. Good for them.

 

[ManoftheHour333]

If we are treating India as northern India, I think it's Nur Jahan or bust. But in absence of a separate Chola civ I would support a Chola leader.


At this point I'd prefer a tamil/chola civ too focused on trading but I think they'd add more north Indian leaders as they are more indicative of the period of Indian history. Nur Jahan would be a pretty awesome leader too and would fill the female leader slot decently. I still Akbar is more emblematic of Mughal India however. I also think that dividing the Indian leader based on abilities could be:

Gandhi: Faith+Diplomacy (Hoping for a buff in April lol)
Chandragupta: Domination
Akbar: Culture+Science (Focus on specaiists would be cool!)

Nur Jahan *could* fit here but I think her abilities would be pretty diplomatic based on what little I know about her...and that would overlap a bit with Gandhi IMO. I'da rather see a culture/science leader like Akbar that could supercharge India into a cultural civ with the stepwells being perfect for flight tourism bonuses, a large population to support more specialists.

As a French, I would have been surprised to see France with a female leader, not mentioning two. France had the particularity of a very strict "no girls allowed" policy for official positions (because women might marry a foreigner and the throne would fall into the hands of a foreign prince... yeah, the justification is weak). It was odd in medieval/early modern Europe, where every other monarchy allowed women to take the throne under special circumstances, but for France, it was a big fat NO, even under the most special circumstances (Henri IV was the cousin 14 times removed from the previous king, and they chose him over any lineage that passed through a woman). So the only "evident" leaders (meaning "official" leaders) would always be male (kings, presidents, even ministers). Meaning that finding women to fill the position of French leader seemed to me very tricky.

I was reluctant about CdM at first (mostly because she wasn't French after all), and if we had to have a spy-related leader for France, I'd have prefered Richelieu (especially for the fancy hats), but I learnt to love her. And for Eleanor, I automatically loved her.

But, honestly, if someone would have said to me that France would have two female leaders, I would have laughed in disbelief. Say what you want about "being woke" or "SJW" or "cancel culture" that Firaxis might be accused of doing, but their politics opened my eyes about the place of women in France politics. Good for them.

Yeah as crazy as it is, France was at one point on of the most feministically-progressive states in Europe during the revolution...until the Napoleonic code brought the older practice back. In general, women have been more "visually" important in French history with Joan of Arc, CdM, EoA, and even queens like Marie Antoinette becoming hugely famous and often powerful. Hats off to Firaxis for choosing to educate us in a unique way and view history a little bit differently! That being said...I would have liked for at least one French leader to have been more militaristic (Cough, cough, Napoleon) as that was a big part of French history...I think a viable domination/culture strategy would have been really cool-regardless of leader.

 

[Henri Christophe]

I think the Oyo are generally a better option than the Ashanti, given that they lasted longer, were a major influencer of the larger Yorubaland, and again catch some highly desirable Yoruba representation.

I think both, Oyo and AShante, should appear in this game.
Oyo is more magic with Odudwa or Shango as leaders and Ashante more Shiny with a full of gold Osei Tutu.

 

[Lord Lakely]

That's not a great fit for Hatshepsut, who was more outward focused than most Egyptian leaders; that would be a better fit for Ramesses II, Akhenaten, Djoser...Honestly Cleopatra's ability is already more or less what Hatshepsut's ought to be.

Exactly this. Hatchepsut should be trade based. She can also function as Builder based leader, but bear in mind that the Valley of Kings, her main building site, is located AWAY from Flood Plains. If anything, her builder ability should allow her wonders to provide yield and appeal bonuses to surrounding tiles, or adjacency/production bonuses to all surrounding districts.

 

[onepurpose]

As a French, I would have been surprised to see France with a female leader, not mentioning two. France had the particularity of a very strict "no girls allowed" policy for official positions (because women might marry a foreigner and the throne would fall into the hands of a foreign prince... yeah, the justification is weak). It was odd in medieval/early modern Europe, where every other monarchy allowed women to take the throne under special circumstances, but for France, it was a big fat NO, even under the most special circumstances (Henri IV was the cousin 14 times removed from the previous king, and they chose him over any lineage that passed through a woman). So the only "evident" leaders (meaning "official" leaders) would always be male (kings, presidents, even ministers). Meaning that finding women to fill the position of French leader seemed to me very tricky.
.

It dates from late antiquity and did not only applied in France

That rule was brought to Spain by Borbon dynasty (XVIII century) and caused serious trouble.. being two lines of succession .. the tradicional spanish that allowed women to access to the throne and the french imported that did prevent it..

In UK, it caused the separation of Hanover and UK, since the former applied it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salic_law

 

[PhoenicianGold]

As a French, I would have been surprised to see France with a female leader, not mentioning two. France had the particularity of a very strict "no girls allowed" policy for official positions (because women might marry a foreigner and the throne would fall into the hands of a foreign prince... yeah, the justification is weak). It was odd in medieval/early modern Europe, where every other monarchy allowed women to take the throne under special circumstances, but for France, it was a big fat NO, even under the most special circumstances (Henri IV was the cousin 14 times removed from the previous king, and they chose him over any lineage that passed through a woman). So the only "evident" leaders (meaning "official" leaders) would always be male (kings, presidents, even ministers). Meaning that finding women to fill the position of French leader seemed to me very tricky.

I was reluctant about CdM at first (mostly because she wasn't French after all), and if we had to have a spy-related leader for France, I'd have prefered Richelieu (especially for the fancy hats), but I learnt to love her. And for Eleanor, I automatically loved her.

But, honestly, if someone would have said to me that France would have two female leaders, I would have laughed in disbelief. Say what you want about "being woke" or "SJW" or "cancel culture" that Firaxis might be accused of doing, but their politics opened my eyes about the place of women in France politics. Good for them.

Fair point. And as I was typing it, I still didn't feel quite comfortable with the assessment because both CdM and Eleanor, though clearly influential women, were kind of out of left field.

At any rate, I think Egypt is a much clearer cut case, especially since we already have Cleo.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

This entire thread after FXS released Portugal:
View attachment 590549

Don't you mean "What Nau?"
Can't believe no one else made that joke.

Except the Dutch aren't really designed much to play as a colonial power in civ VI. If anything, it was Spain that was poaching on Portuguese design space (which it always wants to naturally do). But Spain has a continental and religious bias, and Portugal sticks mostly to coastlines and science...we have some differentiation.

But yeah looking at the things renaissance Italy wants to be: maritime, coastal, trading, decentralized...Phoenicia lightly touches on already. And whatever Phoenicia didn't, Portugal kind of filled up more space.

I really think Italy needs something more at this point to justify its existence.

How about the birthplace of the Renaissance in culture and Science?

Maria Theresa leads Germany AND Hungary (I know Austria *could* be in the game...but I'd just want to see M.T. come back swinging)
-->BRING BACK THE CITY STATE BUYING

Yes please. Though the city-state buying can go into an Italian civ whether it be a Risorgimento or Italic League ability.
I'd rather her get something else like sending her children to another civ you are allied with as another "delegation" that provides both culture and diplo favor per turn for the both of you.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

How about the birthplace of the Renaissance in culture and Science?

So...Russia.

 

[Republic of San Montuoso]

Yeah as crazy as it is, France was at one point on of the most feministically-progressive states in Europe during the revolution...until the Napoleonic code brought the older practice back. In general, women have been more "visually" important in French history with Joan of Arc, CdM, EoA, and even queens like Marie Antoinette becoming hugely famous and often powerful. Hats off to Firaxis for choosing to educate us in a unique way and view history a little bit differently! That being said...I would have liked for at least one French leader to have been more militaristic (Cough, cough, Napoleon) as that was a big part of French history...I think a viable domination/culture strategy would have been really cool-regardless of leader.

I'm a fierce advocate against Napoleon for France. Sincerely, he did some incredible things, but I see him more as a bloody dictator than a ruler we ought to look upon. Do you know that he's responsible for the fact that French are waaaay more prone to suffer from varicose veins because of him? Varicoses were a reason to be exempted to serve in Napoleonic armies, and so much soldiers died for Napoleon that it completely shift the genetic inheritage of French people. We often talk how Gengis Khan is the father of so much of the population, but Napoleon managed to screw the genes of a whole country.

Moreover, if we ought to have a second leader for France, I'd rather have a republican one rather than another monarchist (even if he's an imperial one). Sure, the Third Republic had her share on the Scramble of Africa, but as much as Victoria, so it's not that bad. Jules Ferry could be a good one, especially a scientific leader for France, to show his school and education reforms quite fundamental for contemporary France. But, look at the wonderful sideburns.

But if we want a militaristic leader for France, Louis XIV could work for both the cultural and militaristic aspect. Sure, he ruined the country... But didn't all kings did that? And Louis IX (Saint Louis) could be used as a military/religious leader, if you really want a militaristic leader. But... Please, not Napoléon (except if his ability is what I thought: make Great Scientists and Great Engineers act as Great Generals too).

Fair point. And as I was typing it, I still didn't feel quite comfortable with the assessment because both CdM and Eleanor, though clearly influential women, were kind of out of left field.

At any rate, I think Egypt is a much clearer cut case, especially since we already have Cleo.

Egypt is more "legitimate" to have female leader because they truly had "queens", while in France they always have been consorts of regents.

Cleopatra is a great choice because she was undoubtfully a great leader (sadly reduced to a role of evil seductress by the ROmans) and Hatchepsut too.
Having more female leaders, if only to learn more and open consciousnesses, is always a good thing.

Yes please. Though the city-state buying can go into an Italian civ whether it be a Risorgimento or Italic League ability.

To be fair, the best candidate civ to have a "peacefully gobble up city-States" is most probably Switzerland, who truly accepted new cantons that wanted to be part of it. The RIsorgimento was more... violent let's say.
And while I know it would never happen, I'd love a Swiss civ. There is so much unique, asymetric, fun elements that we could use: the only true conteporary federative nation as one of the most democratic in their political apparatus, their armed neutrality, their banking system, their use of mountains and skiing, chocolate... Think of everything that could be done! Even get William Tell to be their leader!

How about the birthplace of the Renaissance in culture and Science?

Ulug Bel, the Prince-Astronomer, lead the Timurids in Civ VI, with a bonus to campuses and universities!

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

So...Russia.

Maybe after Peter sends his trade routes.

To be fair, the best candidate civ to have a "peacefully gobble up city-States" is most probably Switzerland, who truly accepted new cantons that wanted to be part of it. The RIsorgimento was more... violent let's say.

I never said it would have to be 100% peaceful.