Why?
Korea is blobbed with pre-Korean kingdoms because that's the official line in Korea.
When I asked for something like that? I dont ask for Shang civ. The ancient kingdoms of Korea are mainly the direct ancestors of Koreans on their small peninsula, while Tibetans, Jurchen or Hmongs are not the ancenstors of Hans on a way bigger region that is current China.
Why?
Japan is usually blobbed with the Ryukyuans (shamisen, karate,...) because that's the official line in Japan.
Ryukyuans have not the weight or size of Tibetans or Jurchen/Manchu. Of course Ryukyuans are not Japanese still you lose proportion, the cultural difference is less, while their numbers and area is way smaller than Hmongs.
By the way I would like to have an Ainu civ instead.
Why?
Vietnam is now blobbed with Dong Son and Nam Viet because that's the official line in Vietnam.
Lets have a Champ civ that could be nice. But again every country have something like that but the size of China on population, area and recorded history make others regions irrelevant.
Why?
China is blobbed however because that's, once again, how China presents itself.
I am mexican, México is named that way because the Mexica ("Aztecs"), so why are not on game the civ of México with either Nezahualcoóyotl or Benito Juárez as leaders?
It's not really a grand conspiracy of barking up the right tree to get permission to sell the game in East Asia. It's simply that Civ isn't that strongly interested in the region. Chinese don't consider Manchu Chinese. Nor do they think Hmong and others are the same as them. Minority villages are literally Disneyland tourist attractions in China where tourists pay lots of money to marvel at how not Chinese these people are. But just like you don't hear any Europeans cry for a Romani civ, they never have a reason to show these things when presenting themselves externally.
Romani are neither native or majority on any part of Europe. Did Romani conquered one of the biggest empires of the world twice? Did Romani built and empire that fought chinese, turks, arabs, etc on the Middle Age? Are Romani the native people that revolted century after century againts many dynasties with massive mortality?
After all, the western player/watchers wants China with their great walls and Japanese with their samurai, ...
Have on game Tibetans, Manchus or Hmongs should not be a problem then, because if Firaxis have no fear of what CCP would think you can just have Chinese civ like you can have USA and Haudenosaunee on the same game. China would still heve the lovely great wall like Ainu civ would not take the japanese samurai.
...not some people they never knew existed and have zero idea where they lived, how they lived or what they did.
Of course like all they knew and wanted Cree or Mapuche. I can put again the questions I did with Romani vs Tibetans or Manchu, and even with Hmong civs like Mapuche, Cree or Maori are less impressive since these ones resisted way less time way futher away of their imperial enemies.
I still think that Jurchen and Tibetan Empire are very easy inclusions into civ and both have a chance to make it into Civ7. Much more so than Hmong, Khitans, Hayato or Da Li, who all fall under the "sorry, but there's little to no interest for you here" category.
Actually agree, but the Hmong is a good example of how double standard is the civ selection considering the size, population, distance and time they resisted compared to other "native resistence" civs that are taken for granted just because were conquered by western powers.
EDIT: Many typos.
