[NFP] Civilization VI: Possible New Civilizations Thread

[Duke William of Normandy]

now that this whole genshin impact thing has gone down, i’m glad that firaxis cares enough about cultural sensitivity to get better at representing cultures (esp. indigenous ones) every iteration of this game.

Here’s to the Dine and Tlingit showing up eventually

Genshin Impa-What on Earth are you talking about, no offense meant. We were talking about LOTR earlier.

Also, here's to the Haida getting into Civilization sometime soon.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Genshin Impa-What on Earth are you talking about, no offense meant. We were talking about LOTR earlier.

Also, here's to the Haida getting into Civilization sometime soon.

Gneshin Impact’s a big open world gacha game. It’s really fun and a good game but apparently the based the killable grunt enemies off indigenous people and made their dances spoofing native american dances, so a lot of people, myself included, are boycotting the game.

I didn’t talk about LOTR since we were asked to stop, and so I thought i’d bring up indigenous civs instead.

 

[Villager720]

Since we are led to understand that development of Civ VI is over, it's difficult to see that discussing possible new civilisations has much point to it. As for Civ VII, one assumes it will come with the "regulars" before there is any question of obscure tribes or defunct kingdoms.

As far as I know, we haven’t been led to believe that development is over.
Last I heard, all we definitively know is that April is the last update for the NFP and that they haven’t ruled out a second pass.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Oh, I thought you meant the actual Dutch. I'm being idiotic today.

Yeah, I can live without former Dutch colonies as well.

No, Civ 7 needs polders too.

now that this whole genshin impact thing has gone down, i’m glad that firaxis cares enough about cultural sensitivity to get better at representing cultures (esp. indigenous ones) every iteration of this game.

Here’s to the Dine and Tlingit showing up eventually

If you mean the Navajo and Tlingit I agree as they are my two most wanted new tribes.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Gneshin Impact’s a big open world gacha game. It’s really fun and a good game but apparently the based the killable grunt enemies off indigenous people and made their dances spoofing native american dances, so a lot of people, myself included, are boycotting the game.

Huh. Don't pay much attention to news about other games, so that's new to me.

No, Civ 7 needs polders too.


If you mean the Navajo and Tlingit I agree as they are my two most wanted new tribes.

I barely know much about the Tlingit, can someone fill me in on these particular guys and why they would be good in a civ game? Thanks.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Huh. Don't pay much attention to news about other games, so that's new to me.

I barely know much about the Tlingit, can someone fill me in on these particular guys and why they would be good in a civ game? Thanks.

They are a PNW tribe like the Haida but live to the north along the Southern Alaskan coast. I think my only preference for them is I think the Haida would be portrayed as a little more militaristic than the Tlingit, but I'd take either considering I'd want a PNW civ.
I mean they took the Maori and made them not as militaristic as I'd thought so who knows what they would do to the Haida?

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I barely know much about the Tlingit, can someone fill me in on these particular guys and why they would be good in a civ game? Thanks.

People really want them for the totem poles. They are roughly interchangeable with the Haida and Salish because none of them were totally dominant in the region, they all had similar art styles and cultures typical of the region, and it's hard picking a more appropriate choice over the other two.

I wouldn't mind them because the way they draw fish is really cool.

I still don't think they are especially likely. I think the Haida were our best opportunity (and the closest thing to an "expansionist" civ between the three of them) before then devs pivoted to the Cree. And at this point, I think very large and landed native populations like the Navajo, Cherokee, or even the Sioux would pair better with the Cree, Mapuche, and Maori than smaller tribes.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

They are a PNW tribe like the Haida but live to the north along the Southern Alaskan coast. I think my only preference for them is I think the Haida would be portrayed as a little more militaristic than the Tlingit, but I'd take either considering I'd want a PNW civ.
I mean they took the Maori and made them not as militaristic as I'd thought so who knows what they would do to the Haida?

People really want them for the totem poles. They are roughly interchangeable with the Haida and Salish because none of them were totally dominant in the region, they all had similar art styles and cultures typical of the region, and it's hard picking a more appropriate choice over the other two.

I wouldn't mind them because the way they draw fish is really cool.

I still don't think they are especially likely. I think the Haida were our best opportunity (and the closest thing to an "expansionist" civ between the three of them) before then devs pivoted to the Cree. And at this point, I think very large and landed native populations like the Navajo, Cherokee, or even the Sioux would pair better with the Cree, Mapuche, and Maori than smaller tribes.

Thanks for the information, guys. I agree with PhoenicianGold about the expansionist NA Civ thing.

 

[Cooleatack]

No, Civ 7 needs polders too.


If you mean the Navajo and Tlingit I agree as they are my two most wanted new tribes.

Civ VII with polders and thiccc queens or riot

 

[Zaarin]

People really want them for the totem poles. They are roughly interchangeable with the Haida and Salish because none of them were totally dominant in the region, they all had similar art styles and cultures typical of the region, and it's hard picking a more appropriate choice over the other two.

I wouldn't say they're interchangeable with the Salish. The PNW is divided into three zones: Northern (Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian), Middle (Kwakwaka'wakw, Makah, Nuu-chah-nulth), and Southern (mostly various Salishan groups). The further south you go, the less sophisticated the art and ceremonies become until eventually you transition into the California region. I really think the Northern and Middle regions are therefore better candidates for a civ from the region. Also personally I think a Clan House (with a Crest Pole attached) is a better unique infrastructure than a Crest Pole. Indeed, if I were designing the Tlingit for Civ7, they'd look like Kongo and Gaul/Vietnam and Maori had a baby: Clan Hall as early Neighborhood, all districts (including City Center) must be built adjacent to the Coast, bonus Food from coast, unimproved resources generate yields, and bonus yields from Relics and Great Works of Art.

 

[SandFli]

unless somehow we magically get an Aboriginal civ from that area.

Aborigine? The oldest surviving civilization on Earth? Yes please! There are so many elements in Civ VI to play with in their design that could make for a very different game. They'd be a perfect fit with a Prehistoric or Neolithic start as well..

My question is, when representing such populations without many-to-any city names, would naming settlements after individual tribes, or regions, be acceptable?
Is a leader from one particular tribe sufficient to lead such a Civ, or is even a mythical or legendary character acceptable? I'm aware that representing individual Aboriginals is culturally unacceptable.
And would a general Aboriginal Civ be considered too much of a cultural blob?
Genuine questions..

I think the Haida were our best opportunity (and the closest thing to an "expansionist" civ between the three of them) before then devs pivoted to the Cree. And at this point, I think very large and landed native populations like the Navajo, Cherokee, or even the Sioux would pair better with the Cree, Mapuche, and Maori than smaller tribes.

Regarding the role of their design, I'd imagine a choice between the Haida or Hawaii, and the Maori already touch on some of these features (from a game design perspective, that is).
I agree that either the Navajo or Sioux would be a better fit in the Americas at this time, and are also, in short, more widely recognizable outside of the US, in terms of selling DLC specifically.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Aborigine? The oldest surviving civilization on Earth? Yes please! There are so many elements in Civ VI to play with in their design that could make for a very different game. They'd be a perfect fit with a Prehistoric or Neolithic start as well..

My question is, when representing such populations without many-to-any city names, would naming settlements after individual tribes, or regions, be acceptable?
Is a leader from one particular tribe sufficient to lead such a Civ, or is even a mythical or legendary character acceptable? I'm aware that representing individual Aboriginals is culturally unacceptable.
And would a general Aboriginal Civ be considered too much of a cultural blob?
Genuine questions..

The Aborigines don't allow the recording of their dead Leaders, so... yeah, we aren't seeing an Aborigine Civilization anytime soon.

 

[Zaarin]

The oldest surviving civilization on Earth?

...That's an incredibly contentious claim, and one that would be hard to justify.

And would a general Aboriginal Civ be considered too much of a cultural blob?

Yes.

My objection to an Australian Aboriginal civ is the same as my objection to an Inuit civ: super low population density, no cities, no agriculture, no bows, no technology beyond a paleolithic level. They don't make sense in a game like Civ. Even if Civ developed a better model to represent nomadic civilizations like the Scythians or the Mongols, bear in mind that these are civilizations that developed agriculture and a sedentary lifestyle before developing nomadic pastoralism. That still wouldn't represent Mesolithic tribes like the Aboriginal Australians or the Inuit. Inuit and Aboriginal Australians would be better represented by ditching Barbarians and fleshing them out into minor factions.

I agree that either the Navajo or Sioux would be a better fit in the Americas at this time, and are also, in short, more widely recognizable outside of the US, in terms of selling DLC specifically.

As I've said before, that's specifically why I don't want the Sioux. Most Americans and virtually all non-Americans already think all Native Americans are Sioux.

 

[SandFli]

The Aborigines don't allow the recording of their dead Leaders, so... yeah, we aren't seeing an Aborigine Civilization anytime soon.

Yes, I'm aware, which is why I wonder whether players would accept a mythological or legendary leader? Which as far as I'm aware, would be more respectful, and probably more fitting.

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Yes.

My objection to an Australian Aboriginal civ is the same as my objection to an Inuit civ: super low population density, no cities, no agriculture, no bows, no technology beyond a paleolithic level. They don't make sense in a game like Civ. Even if Civ developed a better model to represent nomadic civilizations like the Scythians or the Mongols, bear in mind that these are civilizations that developed agriculture and a sedentary lifestyle before developing nomadic pastoralism. That still wouldn't represent Mesolithic tribes like the Aboriginal Australians or the Inuit. Inuit and Aboriginal Australians would be better represented by ditching Barbarians and fleshing them out into minor factions.

We all know you don't want them because of the digeredoos.

 

[Zaarin]

We all know you don't want them because of the digeredoos.

Counterpoint: the Inuit would come with more throat singing and I still don't want them.

 

[Menocchio]

...That's an incredibly contentious claim, and one that would be hard to justify.

Having seen the article this claim originates from, it is truthfully just a case of an idea being over-exaggerated for attention's sake: it isn't so much that they are the "oldest civilisation," rather they are the group of humans extant today most similar genetically to Paleolithic humans. Yes, if you were wondering, the source of this headline is indeed History.com. Proceed to the rolling of eyeballs: https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization

 

[Duke William of Normandy]

Having seen the article this claim originates from, it is truthfully just a case of an idea being over-exaggerated for attention's sake: it isn't so much that they are the "oldest civilisation," rather they are the group of humans extant today most similar genetically to Paleolithic humans. Yes, if you were wondering, the source of this headline is indeed History.com. Proceed to the rolling of eyeballs: https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization

I can't believe the History Channel would stoop so low as to spread misinformation. It's obvious the Aborigines are the most related to Aliens out of all the human race through archaeological studies.

 

[Zaarin]

Having seen the article this claim originates from, it is truthfully just a case of an idea being over-exaggerated for attention's sake: it isn't so much that they are the "oldest civilisation," rather they are the group of humans extant today most similar genetically to Paleolithic humans. Yes, if you were wondering, the source of this headline is indeed History.com. Proceed to the rolling of eyeballs: https://www.history.com/news/dna-study-finds-aboriginal-australians-worlds-oldest-civilization

Ah, so typical clickbait title. I could never be a science journalist (or, frankly, any kind of journalist) because the demand for clickbait titles would drive me out of my mind.

 

[SandFli]

My objection to an Australian Aboriginal civ is the same as my objection to an Inuit civ: super low population density, no cities, no agriculture, no bows, no technology beyond a paleolithic level. They don't make sense in a game like Civ. Even if Civ developed a better model to represent nomadic civilizations like the Scythians or the Mongols, bear in mind that these are civilizations that developed agriculture and a sedentary lifestyle before developing nomadic pastoralism. That still wouldn't represent Mesolithic tribes like the Aboriginal Australians or the Inuit. Inuit and Aboriginal Australians would be better represented by ditching Barbarians and fleshing them out into minor factions.

So, they are a challenge to design.. But Civ has lots of Culture-focused mechanics.. It appears that some Aboriginal groups were aware of the bow (and agriculture) via seafaring visitors, but continued to prefer use of the Atlatl on flat ground, and the Boomerang as a distracting hunting tool. Their environment and relative lack of native crops meant honing their land management techniques, notably fire stick farming and eel traps. In some regions at least they made buildings grouped into villages, particularly in close proximity to aquaculture. I guess they'd be more exploration oriented than expansion..
I do agree with your point on population density. Thanks for sharing your views.
Indeed, a better model to diversify play styles for nomadic Civs would help a lot.

As I've said before, that's specifically why I don't want the Sioux. Most Americans and virtually all non-Americans already think all Native Americans are Sioux.

Sadly, yes. But that's no reason to exclude the Sioux, particularly as they would not be the only Native American Civ in the game, and are no less worthy than many other choices for the Americas.

I can't believe the History Channel would stoop so low as to spread misinformation. It's obvious the Aborigines are the most related to Aliens out of all the human race through archaeological studies.

I thought that was the Pilgrims.