Civilization VII Civs and Leaders Wishlist [Not a Prediction]

[Xandinho]

If I had to pick one, I'd go with Scotland. Not that Scotland couldn't have made a great civ, but it felt redundant when we already had an overly British designed England in the first place.

Besides, the Dutch have polders so...

And Gauls were added later, and this ended up being a much more interesting and fun Celtic representation, in addition to making the Scottish civ the one with the least claim and meaning to being in Civ - just a small European nation on an island already represented by a major civilization.

I think the design of the Scottish civilization didn't help either: its leader ability is non-existent, golf courses are boring (why not the iconic medieval Scottish castles?) and a civ that revolves around amenities isn't much fun. If they do Scotland again one day, I hope they do it in a way that's fun to play.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm onboard with ditching Scotland, but not onboard with ditching all post-antiquity celtic representation in the name of more German lamguage representation.

That's the problem here. The ones you list as fine to ditch, yes, but three of them are the only post 1000 AD representation of large cultural spheres. Ditch Sweden, and the only Scandinavian representation is Vikings. Ditch Hungary, there are no finno ugric civs at all. Ditch Scotland. Ditch Scotland, and the Celtic world stop existing in Roman times.

Meanwhile, Austria still speak German and was arguably part of German civilization until the 1800s if not later. It doesn't seem sensible to sacrifice the little representation those other groups do get to make room for more German-adjacent civs.

(Macedon, yes. Macedon we can ditch without remorse or meaningful loss of representation...but should we ditch it for Austria, when post-Roman Italy is right there unrepresented? Not so sold!)

I'm fine with replacing Sweden, considering the way Sweden was designed in Civ 6 being cultural and diplomatic is how I would have wanted them anyways, but that seems like a harder sell. As for Hungary I don't necessarily see them as essential for every game, though I do admit they were a fine new inclusion. I'd still personally lean more towards Austria over them at least for Civ 7. But watch us get Bohemia in Civ 7.

As for the others, I'd much rather have Ireland in Civ 6, and Denmark could possibly represent Scandinavia with Vikings and post-Viking elements, such as having Margaret as another leader.

Considering Italy is my most wanted new civ, sure I'd take that. But I think there is enough room in Europe and the world to have both. And as long as Alexander goes back to being a Greek leader, I'm fine with Macedon leaving.

 

[Patine]

Considering Italy is my most wanted new civ, sure I'd take that.

Although, given Italy after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire, has been a very heterogenous mix, what leader(s) and elements would be emphasized?

 

[Caesar of Bread]

Personally I'd say for European civs I'd be fine without Macedon, Scotland/Gauls (1 Celt civ's fine), Hungary (I'd be a bit upset though, but if Finland or maybe Bulgaria replaces Hungary I might feel a bit better), and then probably switching around the "Viking civ"

 

[Evie]

I'm fine with replacing Sweden, considering the way Sweden was designed in Civ 6 being cultural and diplomatic is how I would have wanted them anyways, but that seems like a harder sell. As for Hungary I don't necessarily see them as essential for every game, though I do admit they were a fine new inclusion. I'd still personally lean more towards Austria over them at least for Civ 7. But watch us get Bohemia in Civ 7.

As for the others, I'd much rather have Ireland in Civ 6, and Denmark could possibly represent Scandinavia with Vikings and post-Viking elements, such as having Margaret as another leader.

Considering Italy is my most wanted new civ, sure I'd take that. But I think there is enough room in Europe and the world to have both. And as long as Alexander goes back to being a Greek leader, I'm fine with Macedon leaving.

Oh, replacing Scotlsnd with Ireland I'm well onboard with. I could see Denmark over Sweden, but I doubt we ever not get a 100% Viking civ. Whatever you call it, I'm fairly certain it won't represent the last 1000 years of Scandinavian history. It should, but Vikings are pop culture giants.

As to enough room in Europe and the World...you're more enthusiastic than I am about getting a lot of new tags. If we get only 8 or so more than last installment (total), which is fairly traditional, there's a lot of demand and very little extra space to go around. If we get less than that, it's even worse.

 

[GeneralZIft]

Ah, yes, one of the major colonial power, and one of the European civs thad had the largest global impact.

Filler. Lol.

This goes for practically the majority of Western European Civs. Same old tired story about Colonialism, just in a different colour (yellow)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Although, given Italy after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire, has been a very heterogenous mix, what leader(s) and elements would be emphasized?

Because of the 'heterogenous mix' there are actually some intriguing possibilities.

1. You could attempt the Renaissance (and pre-renaissance) City States like Florence, Venice, Genoa - any one of which would make a solid basis for a Civ, or at least as solid as Athens/Sparta do for Classical Greece.

2. Throw in Garibaldi for a Leader and do a 19th century Gran Columbia/Bolivar-type Civ in Europe - and given that Garibaldi also supported 'revolutionary' movements in other countries like France, you could potentially do something really interesting with this Civ's Diplomacy for a change.

3. The In–Between: Medieval Sicily, Naples, the Papal States, all were unique in many ways from 'normal' Italy or the northern City States, and so could be modeled as something distinctive compared to what Everyone Expects.

Which of those would be 'best' or most commercial, or most rewarding/surprising/different to play? Beats me. I've stopped wasting my time trying to 'design' Civs for a current game that is Done and a new game that already doubtless has their initial line up of Civs largely complete in concept and currently on-going in execution.

BUT, like the German Civ-Strudel, there is more than one way to cut the Italian cake post-Roman to produce a Civ design . . .

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Although, given Italy after the Fall of the Western Roman Empire, has been a very heterogenous mix, what leader(s) and elements would be emphasized?

Any elements from Medieval to the modern Kingdom of Italy would work, though I think primarily focusing on Renaissance Italy would be the best.

Oh, replacing Scotlsnd with Ireland I'm well onboard with. I could see Denmark over Sweden, but I doubt we ever not get a 100% Viking civ. Whatever you call it, I'm fairly certain it won't represent the last 1000 years of Scandinavian history. It should, but Vikings are pop culture giants.

Well ideally, we could get two leaders for Denmark, one Viking and then Margaret that could represent post-Viking Scandinavia. But I agree that the latter is probably just wishful thinking and Sweden would be better off representing that.

This goes for practically the majority of Western European Civs. Same old tired story about Colonialism, just in a different colour (yellow)

Well, the Dutch would be the color orange.

 

[GeneralZIft]

Well, the Dutch would be the color orange.

Pshshshssh well....... You're right. I stand corrected

 

[pokiehl]

If anyone deserves his own civ it’s Alexander. I really hope Macedon returns!

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

If anyone deserves his own civ it’s Alexander. I really hope Macedon returns!

Only if done right. As an Empire, Alexander's lasted just as long as he did: his body was barely cold before the "Successors" began to fight over both the Empire and his corpse, and the Successor States lasted less than 300 years as political realities.

But, the Consequences of his Empire, in the resulting spread of Greek philosophies and teaching and the fusion of Middle Eastern and Hellenic thought and science that is Hellenistic, were Massive and long lasting. Arguably, right through to the end of the Middle Ages given their influence on Arabic polities after the Romans.

In game terms, Alexander established an Empire that Stood The Test of Time - but not as an Empire, as a set of ideas and ways of thinking. I suspect it would require a different interpretation and application of 'Uniques' to manage that in-game, but it wou ld definitely be Something Different.

 

[notNamed]

I'm onboard with ditching Scotland, but not onboard with ditching all post-antiquity celtic representation in the name of more German lamguage representation.

Scotland is a Germanic nation, though. They're as much of a Celtic representative as France or Belgium.
Doubly so with the way they were made in Civ 6. But that notwithstanding, using Scotland when you have Ireland with its actually distinct culture, language, names and international renown is practically a crime.
At least when you want to do something related to the Celtic languages and legacies.

 

[Xandinho]

If anyone deserves his own civ it’s Alexander. I really hope Macedon returns!

Yeah, me too. I know this isn't popular, but I also prefer Alexander to have his own civ, mainly for greater historical accuracy. If they decide to cut out Macedon and include Alexander in the Greek civilization, that wouldn't bother me, but I still prefer a little more that there be a distinction between the two civs.

 

[Patine]

Scotland is a Germanic nation, though. They're as much of a Celtic representative as France or Belgium.

Scotland's ruling elite became Germanic. Saying the whole nation did is very contentious and highly dubious, though.

 

[Patine]

Yeah, me too. I know this isn't popular, but I also prefer Alexander to have his own civ, mainly for greater historical accuracy. If they decide to cut out Macedon and include Alexander in the Greek civilization, that wouldn't bother me, but I still prefer a little more that there be a distinction between the two civs.

Whole civ's just to make one leader who ruled a short time and COULD fit into another, distinct, like Macedon, the Ptolemaic Kingdom, or Gran Columbia, are not something I get behind, as they don't seem to justify a civ slot when Firaxis puts a premium on them and there are many civ's in many untouched parts of the world who should make a debut, as a priority.

 

[pokiehl]

Yeah, me too. I know this isn't popular, but I also prefer Alexander to have his own civ, mainly for greater historical accuracy. If they decide to cut out Macedon and include Alexander in the Greek civilization, that wouldn't bother me, but I still prefer a little more that there be a distinction between the two civs.

Putting Alexander with Greece kind of shortchanges them both I think. Giving him his own civ gives us an entire synergistic warmonger kit, and allows Greece (which is far more versatile in concept) to have a totally different design.

 

[notNamed]

Scotland's ruling elite became Germanic. Saying the whole nation did is very contentious and highly dubious, though.

French ruling elite became Latin. Saying the whole nation did is very contentious and highly dubious, though.

I'm not talking about some mythical Nazi-influenced idea of Germanic as something more than language.
Purely that the modern culture came from Northumbrians expanding northwards and bringing their language (Scots) and culture with them.
The highlighting of Scottish Gaelic (Irish offshoot) cultural elements was a romanticism thing. And that's not even touching on the misconceptions brought with it (like the Celtishness of tartan... which really came into its own in the 17/18th cent or so, IIRC?). Just as US renamed 25 of its 50 states with Native American names... once it was mostly finished and content with the genocide of the people whose languages served as donors for those terms.

It's practically mental gymnastics. Just do Irish. They're not English 2.0, they haven't been made playable before, people will love you for giving them an option to play the world-renowned green guys.

 

[Patine]

French ruling elite became Latin. Saying the whole nation did is very contentious and highly dubious, though.

I'm not talking about some mythical Nazi-influenced idea of Germanic.
Purely that the modern culture came from Northumbrians expanding northwards and bringing their language (Scots) and culture with them.
The highlighting of Scottish Gaelic (Irish offshoot) cultural elements was a romanticism thing. And that's not even touching on the misconceptions brought with it (like the Celtishness of tartan... which really came into its own in the 17/18th cent or so, IIRC?). Just as US renamed 25 of its 50 states with Native American names... once it was mostly finished and content with the genocide of the people whose languages served as donors for those terms.

It's practically mental gymnastics. Just do Irish. They're not English 2.0, they haven't been made playable before, people will love you for giving them an option to play the world-renowned green guys.

I know what you're talking about. It's just a dubious and generalized claim that is not really as accurate as you think. And, it mostly affects those were traditionally affluent, who have been a minority. There was a sharp difference between the House of Stuart, the Kirk Theologians, and the Edinburgh Merchant Class compared to the Highlanders, or even the Lowland serfs, miners, and fishermen.

 

[Patine]

I know what you're talking about. It's just a dubious and generalized claim that is not really as accurate as you think. And, it mostly affects those were traditionally affluent, who have been a minority. There was a sharp difference between the House of Stuart, the Kirk Theologians, and the Edinburgh Merchant Class compared to the Highlanders, or even the Lowland serfs, miners, and fishermen.

And, considering ALL extantly-spoken Celtic languages either derive directly from Gaelic or Brythonic, the origin of Scottish Gaelic is not a strike against it.

 

[notNamed]

And, considering ALL extantly-spoken Celtic languages either derive directly from Gaelic or Brythonic, the origin of Scottish Gaelic is not a strike against it.

Yeah but it's not making their case better given that Irish haven't made an appearance in Civ yet. Pushing for repeats on Swiss without ever having done Germany, to return to the Germanic examples.

And as you said yourself, the "traditionally afluent" would not participate in it.
In Civ you're playing with the Scots-speaking ruler, not a sheep herder from the highlands, or a fisherman from some poor coastal village.