Civilization VII Civs and Leaders Wishlist [Not a Prediction]

[Hellenism Salesman]

Having not really thought about this too much, I only have one tiny suggestion: should Persia return (which I do expect it to), please call it Iran! Especially if you pick a non-Achaemenid leader.

Persians are only one of the Iranian ethnicities encompassed by modern-day Iran, and though they are the majority and have the most cultural influence, they are far from the only ones!

The Safavid dynasty was founded by a non-Persian who led non-Persian armies. In between the major empires and dynasties, the Iranian peoples spent hundreds of years under the rule of non-Persians.

Persia is just one piece of the Iranian pie. Renaming the civ to Iran would be an easy change that would also represent the other peoples of the area, who don’t really have a better Civ to fall into.

That is all.

You may wonder why the Macedonian general knows so much about Iran… let’s just chalk it up to trying to “know thy enemy.”

 

[moondog385]

Italy - made "Greek style" of "united" city states and countries, focusing on medieval and renaissance eras, with some ruler of Florence, Milan or whatever (there are some female rulers to choose from)

Timurids led by Tamerlane
Franks led by Charlemagne (or him being alternate leader for France and Germany)
Carthago returning, led by Hannibal

Russia - medieval ruler and flavor
France - Louis XIV or medieval ruler
England - medieval ruler or prime minister (Alfred the Great would be amazing for Anglo-Saxon England)
Poland - non - medieval ruler
Persia - non - Achaemenid ruler
Rome - Marcus Aurelius, for personality
Germany - other HRE emperor, I don't want to return to Prussia militarist archetype yet; alternately some post war respected leader would make for a great Peaceful Germany archetype
Ottomans - not Suleiman
Egypt - Hatshepsut (very probable)
China - not Qi Shi Huangdi or Wu Zetian, somebody fresh pls
India - anybody but goddamn Gandhi

I want Al-Andalus, Bohemia, Ukraine, Ireland, Ashanti, Burma, Mughals, returning Assyria - no leaders specified

I don't really care for Canada, Australia, Scythia, Scotland, Norway, Cree, Colombia, Maori, Kongo, boring one note Zulu, and in a way Mali (they are very cool but there is a TON other civs for West Africa). Also Sweden tbh, it was not *that* major country for it to come back every time, especially as we have mandatory Vikings. Unless they made Swedish Vikings this time, this could be very fresh interesting take.

I like your picks! Al-Andalus, Bohemia, Ireland, Burma, Ashanti, Italy, and Assyria are all civs I’d like to see as well. In my original “design”, I had the Mughals and Timurids grouped together as Gurkani. And I agree with you that having new leaders is important, though unfortunately I expect we’ll get Gandhi again.

I’m hoping Canada and Australia get the boot this time, but given they were likely included for marketing reasons, I’m not gonna get my hopes up.

Having not really thought about this too much, I only have one tiny suggestion: should Persia return (which I do expect it to), please call it Iran! Especially if you pick a non-Achaemenid leader.

Persians are only one of the Iranian ethnicities encompassed by modern-day Iran, and though they are the majority and have the most cultural influence, they are far from the only ones!

The Safavid dynasty was founded by a non-Persian who led non-Persian armies. In between the major empires and dynasties, the Iranian peoples spent hundreds of years under the rule of non-Persians.

Persia is just one piece of the Iranian pie. Renaming the civ to Iran would be an easy change that would also represent the other peoples of the area, who don’t really have a better Civ to fall into.

That is all.

You may wonder why the Macedonian general knows so much about Iran… let’s just chalk it up to trying to “know thy enemy.”

I would probably separate Iran and Persia myself.

 

[Leyrann]

Having not really thought about this too much, I only have one tiny suggestion: should Persia return (which I do expect it to), please call it Iran! Especially if you pick a non-Achaemenid leader.

Persians are only one of the Iranian ethnicities encompassed by modern-day Iran, and though they are the majority and have the most cultural influence, they are far from the only ones!

The Safavid dynasty was founded by a non-Persian who led non-Persian armies. In between the major empires and dynasties, the Iranian peoples spent hundreds of years under the rule of non-Persians.

Persia is just one piece of the Iranian pie. Renaming the civ to Iran would be an easy change that would also represent the other peoples of the area, who don’t really have a better Civ to fall into.

That is all.

You may wonder why the Macedonian general knows so much about Iran… let’s just chalk it up to trying to “know thy enemy.”

I know that Iran was an internal name when the rest of the world still called it Persia, but is it that old as an internal name?

 

[pokiehl]

I know that Iran was an internal name when the rest of the world still called it Persia, but is it that old as an internal name?

Yes. "Persian" is an exonym. Iran or other words derivative of "Aryan" have been used since Sasanian times and likely before, since we even have ancient Greek transliterations. The Sasanians called their land "Iranshahr."

There's been a basic duality for thousands of years of "Iran" and "Aniran" (meaning not Iranian).

 

[Tomcraft]

I wish for several leaders for one nation and the feature to habe leader changes during a game, e.g. after a nation lost a war or If the people are not happy with its leader or after a bigger government change.

 

[Futumch]

I'd like to see Henry V for England, or Churchill.
Maybe Baldwin for the Crusader States?
Fred seems the best choice for Prussia. We'd probably have to use Frederick I instead of Drip-fed Fred though.
Hermann von Salza for the Teutonic State or Livonia.

 

[moondog385]

Yes. "Persian" is an exonym. Iran or other words derivative of "Aryan" have been used since Sasanian times and likely before, since we even have ancient Greek transliterations. The Sasanians called their land "Iranshahr."

There's been a basic duality for thousands of years of "Iran" and "Aniran" (meaning not Iranian).

I didn't know that. In that case, I retract what I said about separating Iran and Persia, but I don't know how I feel about having polities that far apart in history (e.g. Achaemenid/Safavid) under the same "banner".

 

[pokiehl]

I didn't know that. In that case, I retract what I said about separating Iran and Persia, but I don't know how I feel about having polities that far apart in history (e.g. Achaemenid/Safavid) under the same "banner".

That also feels very strange to me. I don't like having thousands of years of very different history represented under 1 civ. Feels incohesive and immersion breaking to have Nader Shah leading the Immortals.

I think there’s enough there to warrant a separate Achaemenid civ and another Iranian culture as a civ.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

I didn't know that. In that case, I retract what I said about separating Iran and Persia, but I don't know how I feel about having polities that far apart in history (e.g. Achaemenid/Safavid) under the same "banner".

Totally understandable discomfort on your part- I’m also open to the idea of a separate Iran and Persia. However, if we were to map this cultural continuity onto any Civ, Iran would probably be the best bet!

There’s a colloquial phenomenon where no matter who conquered Iran, they would inevitably end up becoming more Iranian than the people who were already there

It’s also a unique Civ/pair of Civs in the sense that very few outside powers really ever broke it up. If you tended to conquer Iran, you conquered all of it (reference Alexander and then the Seleucids, the Timurids, Safavids, etc.).

Of course there’s no set criteria on how we break up Civs, so it could be done either way. And we would want to avoid writing false narratives like the USA being a direct continuation of the Haudenosaunee, which does nothing but play into nationalist fantasy. I just feel like if we really couldn’t afford to split up Iran, it wouldn’t be as bad.

 

[Mekkh]

One leader I feel is long overdue for a civilization debut is Margaret I of Denmark. Extremely accomplished female leader that could work very well if vassalisation comes back.

Other than that I'd love to see Per Albin Hansson if Sweden comes back, I think it would make sense to portray them as a modern civ.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

Here's my unapologetic wishlist for the base game and its first three expansion passes, based in part on my Big Ideas for Civ VII: Cultures, Citizens, and Councils. This is civilization and leader list which Firaxis would never make and which the fans on this forum would find fault with, but which, if I had absolute control and no concern for profit, I would make despite the sea of salty tears that it caused. There would be twelve so-called "Cultures," with every civilization falling under one of the following cultural/geographical groupings:

1. African
2. Amerindian
3. British Isles
4. Colonial
5. Eastern
6. Far East Asian
7. Mediterranean
8. Mesoamerican
9. Middle Eastern
10. Northern
11. South East Asian
12. Western European

Civilization VII Base Game:

African

• Egypt - Akhenaten

Amerindian

• Apache - Geronimo
• Powhatan - Pocahontas
• Sioux - Crazy Horse & Sitting Bull

British Isles

• Anglo-Saxon - Hengest, Alfred the Great, & Godiva
• England - Edward III & Henry VII
• United Kingdom - Churchill

Colonial

• America - Thomas Jefferson, Dwight D. Eisenhower, John F. Kennedy, & Ronald Reagan
• Gran Colombia - Simón Bolívar
• Brazil - Pedro II

Eastern

• Kievan Rus’ - Vladimir the Great
• Soviet - Gorbachev

Far East Asian

• China - Chiang Kai-shek

Mediterranean

• Greece - Solon of Athens
• Rome - Lucius Junius Brutus & Cincinnatus

Mesoamerican

• Toltec - Cē Ācatl Topiltzin

Middle-Eastern

• Arabia - Mohammed
• Babylon - Hammurabi
• Israel - David & Solomon
• Outremer - Godfrey of Bouillon & Baldwin I
• Persia - Cyrus & Esther

Northern

• Sweden - Ragnar Lodbrok

South East Asian

• India - Nuclear Gandhi

Western European

• France - Louis IX
• Germany - Wilhelm II & Rommel
• Spain - Isabella

Expansion Pack 1

African

• Carthage - Hannibal

Amerindian

• Shoshone - Sacagawea

British Isles

• Wales - Madoc

Colonial

• México - Hernán Cortés

Eastern

• Goths - Theodoric

Far East Asian

• Japan - Meiji

Mediterranean

• Byzantium - Julian the Apostate

Mesoamerican

• Maya - Pacal

Middle-Eastern

• Ottoman - Mehmed II

Northern

• Iceland - Leif Erikson

Western European

• Dutch - William of Orange

Expansion Pack 2

Amerindian

• Hawaii - Kamehameha

British Isles

• Celts - Boudicca

Colonial

• Argentina - Eva Peron

Eastern

• Huns - Attila

Far East Asian

• Korea - Sejong

Mediterranean

• Italian City-States - Cosimo de' Medici & Machiavelli

Mesoamerican

• Inca - Pachacuti

Middle-Eastern

• Judea - Judas Maccabeus

Northern

• Norway - Harald Fairhair

South East Asian

• Siam - Ramkhamhaeng

Western European

• Portugal - Henry the Navigator

Expansion Pack 3

African

• Ethiopia - Haile Selassie

Amerindian

• Iroquois - Hiawatha

British Isles

• Brits - Arthur

Colonial

• Dixie - Robert E. Lee

Eastern

• Austria - Charles V

Far East Asian

• Tibet - Dalai Lama

Mediterranean

• Papal States - Urban II & Innocent III

Mesoamerican

• Aztec - Montezuma II

Middle-Eastern

• Akkad - Sargon

Northern

• Denmark - Hroðgar

Western European

• Holy Romans - Charlemagne

 

[Krajzen]

I didn't know that. In that case, I retract what I said about separating Iran and Persia, but I don't know how I feel about having polities that far apart in history (e.g. Achaemenid/Safavid) under the same "banner".

That also feels very strange to me. I don't like having thousands of years of very different history represented under 1 civ. Feels incohesive and immersion breaking to have Nader Shah leading the Immortals. I think there’s enough there to warrant a separate Achaemenid civ and another Iranian culture as a civ.

It's really the same "problem" as with China, India, Arabia, Egypt, European nation states, and even Rome and Byzantium, each of whom taken separatedly lasted one thousand years. Modern India differs quite a lot from Ashoka's empire, pre-Islamic Arabia and medieval Arabia and modern Arab states are three worlds, Cleopatra's Egypt was not Egypt of pyramid builders, HRE emperor Barbarossa didn't lead "Germany" in the Prussian sense, while early Rome was pagan Italian republic and late Rome was heavily Hellenized Christian multicultural empire with most of late emperors coming from Balkans (Illyria) iirc.

I think that, on the contrary, we should simply accept it as part of Civ's approach to history, same as the idea of "linear technological progress", immortal leader faces and "essential cultures divorced from their environment", without such basic axioms or conventions the entire game cannot work. We could see it on the example of Humankind's disastrous idea of cultures changing every era, or Millenia's utter blandness and boredom of cultures having no face and no soul.

I would also like to point out that rulers of medieval Islamic Iran, Safavid Iran and modern Iranians have very much proudly referred to pre-Islamic Iranian empires practices and had a feeling of continuity of "their" culture and that for me is enough to warrant Iran/Persia being unitary civilization - it's not about unchanging essence, its about the descendants narrative cultural identity; a travel, not a static entity. For the same reason, I'm pretty sure modern Iranians, Chinese, Indians etc would not be happy if you separated "Iran, China, India" from Cyrus, Shi Huangdi and Ashoka. Shahnameh, Iranian national epic, was written in the 10th century Islamic Samanid state, referred to the noble Iranian ancestors of ancient pre-Islamic Iran, and for a millenium to this day it has been cultural centerstone of Iranian peoples beliefs about "our ancestors". Shirin Ebadi, Iranian Nobel Prize winner and writer referred to Cyrus the Great as her ancestor during her Nobel speech. And you want to say Iranian Civ players "no actually guys Cyrus was not Iranian, it's a different long extinct culture"? They would be angry. It is their history and identity.

 

[moondog385]

It's really the same "problem" as with China, India, Arabia, Egypt, European nation states, and even Rome and Byzantium, each of whom taken separatedly lasted one thousand years. Modern India differs quite a lot from Ashoka's empire, pre-Islamic Arabia and medieval Arabia and modern Arab states are three worlds, Cleopatra's Egypt was not Egypt of pyramid builders, HRE emperor Barbarossa didn't lead "Germany" in the Prussian sense, while early Rome was pagan Italian republic and late Rome was heavily Hellenized Christian multicultural empire with most of late emperors coming from Balkans (Illyria) iirc.

I think that, on the contrary, we should simply accept it as part of Civ's approach to history, same as the idea of "linear technological progress", immortal leader faces and "essential cultures divorced from their environment", without such basic axioms or conventions the entire game cannot work. We could see it on the example of Humankind's disastrous idea of cultures changing every era, or Millenia's utter blandness and boredom of cultures having no face and no soul.

I would also like to point out that rulers of medieval Islamic Iran, Safavid Iran and modern Iranians have very much proudly referred to pre-Islamic Iranian empires practices and had a feeling of continuity of "their" culture and that for me is enough to warrant Iran/Persia being unitary civilization - it's not about unchanging essence, its about the descendants narrative cultural identity; a travel, not a static entity. For the same reason, I'm pretty sure modern Iranians, Chinese, Indians etc would not be happy if you separated "Iran, China, India" from Cyrus, Shi Huangdi and Ashoka Shirin Ebadi, Iranian Nobel Prize winner and writer referred to Cyrus the Great as her ancestor during her Nobel speech, and you want to say Iranian Civ players "no actually guys Cyrus was not Iranian, it's a different long extinct culture"? They would be angry.

That’s fair enough. Still, I really wish India could be split as opposed to covering literally every single polity that ever existed on the subcontinent. That seems to me the most egregious issue. Though YMMV on whether or not it is an issue.

Either way, I do think it’d be reasonable to split the Achaemenids and “Iran” given the Rome/Byzantine split. And I wasn’t a fan of Cleopatra leading Egypt in VI. But none of this is a “problem”. Just not what I would do if I was in charge haha.

I definitely think China should be portrayed as one continuous “civilization”, but I’d separate the Manchu-led dynasties from them.

 

[mitsho]

I see both sides of the argument. If you split them, you take away a past from a modern nation. If you combine them you get some weird mix. But then again you have that problem with all the ancient civs that run out of uniques after they disappeared, like Hittites or Babylon. In the other way, we reverse-engineer benefits for civs like America who otherwise wouldn't have anything until the 17th century.

Egypt is a great example as well, with the pyramid builders, then 2000 years later Cleopatra (and before that the first archeologists btw. ;-)) and then 2000 years later again their independence from the Turks first with Muhammad Ali. Inbetween you have the Fatimids who are also kinda Egyptian and now of course the modern nation. So is that one civilization or many?

I see different ways to solve this:
- shared uniques. So you have different flavours for the Persians and the Iranians, but they share uniques that clearly show they belong together.
- Civs and Variant civs. So there's a main civ like Iran, and the Achaemenids are a variant version of them. Works also great with the arabs and their dynasties. Or with a blob civ like India.
- change your civ over time as they are only available in the correct era. Like humankind did. Maybe tone it down to 1 or 2 changes. Not sure that's liked.
- civ change over time. Persia evolves into Iran, Franks evolve into France. With the Vikings you can chose - just like Pokemon - to evolve into Denmark, Norway or Sweden.

I'm not sure what's the best solution, but I agree they need to adress that. I want to play as Britain, but also as England and as Scotland after all.

 

[DeutschDachs]

Really want to see Charles IV of Bohemia. He made Prague the capital of the HRE and restructured the HRE with his Golden Bull which would shape the next several decades of Central Europe. A huge patron of sciences, arts, religion, and a master of diplomacy. He's such a natural fit for Civ, I desperately want him and Bohemia to finally be represented.

Hoping Russia gets some variety and we get to see Ivan the Terrible, the first Czar. His consolidation of power within the country and brutal treatment of his opponents would set the stage for what has become almost cultural despotism within Russia. He commissioned the building of St. Basil's in Moscow. He set laws the would enable serfdom to dominate Russia's peasantry for the next several centuries. Even 500 years later it is easy to see the affects of his reign on Russia's identity.

Getting outside of Europe, would love to see the Taino people have some representation as the Caribbean has always been unrepresented within Civ.

The Cherokee, Creek, or Seminole peoples would be interesting representatives for southeastern tribes within North America. The Mississippi and as others stated would be interesting as well.

Would like to see a Himilayan people represented but not sure if that will work with China. Tibet would be an obvious choice otherwise. Perhaps Nepal/Gorkha Kingdom would be able to fill that geographic region

 

[IgorS]

The issue here is that this isn't all that connected to the Netherlands as a whole otherwise - trade and water management/polders.

I'd say he fits better as a Great General.

It doesn't have to be connected to the Netherlands. I was talking about his leader ability, which is separate from the civ ability, which should, of course, be about trade and polders.

 

[Krajzen]

I mean, civ6 already developed a solution to the split/join civs debate: multiple leaders for one civ.

We just go one step further and introduce multiple "incarnations" for one civ. So you have Persia with pre-Islamic leader, unit and city list and Islamic leader, unit and city list, with some things being shared (soundtrack, graphic assets, some uniques) and others changing.
Similarly we have "India" and one of its "Incarnations" is Ashoka's empire, another is some medieval empire, another is modern India led by Nehru (ofc not Gandhi) etc, with all three having mostly different city lists and some unique aspects.

This is also probably the only solution to the old problem "we can't have Ptolematic or Islamic Egypt in game because it is completely different from ancient Egypt yet shares the same name". Just make a civ "Egypt" with its first incarnation being ancient pagan Egypt, and then some time later add its second incarnation with capital in Alexandria or Cairo and appropriate leader, unit, building etc. Soundtrack and graphic assets would be largely kept the same, maybe some abstract civ ability related to Nile as well.

 

[AlexandriaWolf]

I hope Secret Societies will return and would be great as part of the base game. But whether they do or not I REALLY want Vlad Dracula as a leader.
Elizabeth I
Cleopatra or Hatshepsut
Eleanor of Acquitaine
Aethelflaed, Lady of the Mercians
Theodora of Byzantium

 

[Pistol90]

Many leaders would probably be conected with game mechanics ... I liked that in Civ6, and probably will be the same in Civ7

 

[Lord Lakely]

Sure I'll bite, and I'll even include a suggestion for one of the unique abilities

1. England (led by Elizabeth I): Magna Carta: Tile improvements of the same type that are arranged in a triangular position (each touching the other two) get +1 yield from adjacency and cannot be pillaged.
(uniques: Ship of the Line, Yeoman, Royal Navy Dockyard, Redcoat, Market Cross)
2. France (led by Charlemagne): Grand Elan: Combat units receive +2 Strength for every promotion they have earned, and can be upgraded with Faith.
(Uniques: Paladin, Culverlin, Château, Salon, Foreign Legion)
3. Germany (led by Frederick II): Clausewicz Doctrine: Each time one of your military units destroys an enemy unit, receive Science equal to 1/4th of the destroyed units production cost.
(Uniques: Landsknecht, Panzer, Teutonic Knight, Domkirche, Rathaus)
4. The Rus' (led by Olga of Kyiv): Wrath of the Faithful: Your military units do +25% more damage against units belonging to players without a majority religion and barbarians. Clearing a Barbarian Camp grants +25 Faith. Razing a city with a different majority religion than your own grants +50 Faith. (uniques: Cossack, Lavra, Pogost, Strelets, Krepost)
5. Greece (led by Alcibiades): Paedeia: Cities receive +1 Knowledge for every 4 population living in the city. Military units receive +1 XP for each active specialist in the city upon completion.
(uniques: Hoplite, Lycaeum, Odeon, Agora, Pentekonter)
6. Rome (led by Livia Augusta): Marian Reforms: The maximum amount of military units that can be stacked on a single tile is increased by +1. (assumes 1UPT is gone: otherwise, allows you to add another unit to a Corps or Army)
(Uniques: Legionnary, Ballista, Basilica, Latifundium, Dromon)
7. The Abbasids (led by Harun al-Rashid): Proof of God: Double tourism and State religion pressure in all Holy Cities that you control.
(Uniques: Mamluk, Ansar, Madrasah, Noria, Bazaar)
8. Assyria (led by Ashurbanipal): Service to the Šarru: Upon conquering any enemy city, distribute the population that would otherwise be lost across your other cities (those with spare housing have priority). Captured Great Works provide +1 Knowledge and +1 Amenity in addition to their normal yields.
(Uniques: Qurubuti, Hupshu Militia, Siege Tower, Dunnu, Karum)
9. The Hittites (led by Puduhepa): Edict of Telipinu: Whenever you sign a peace treaty with an enemy, sign an alliance with them. Other players cannot break their alliances with you and must honour the aliiance. (but you can break the alliance, at no relationship penalty.)
(Uniques: Mesedi, Bloomery, Mine Factory, Storm Shrine, Golden Spearman)
10. Carthage (led by Hamilcar Barca): Mantle of Tanit: The first maritime building (Lighthouse, Harbour, Drydock, etc) you build in any city is completed instantly. Great Generals and Admirals grant +1 movement to all adjacent units at the start of the turn.
(Uniques: Numidian Cavalry, Quinquereme, Cothon, Tophet, Sacred Band)
11. Egypt (led by Hatshepsut): Valley of Kings: Each world wonder you complete in a city reduces the cost of the next one you build there by 5% (resets to +0% every 5 Wonders). Your Archaeologists can dig up an additional artifact from Dig Sites, and Artefacts of Egyptian culture provide double yields to the owner.
(Uniques: Maryannu, Medjay, Mastaba, Necropolis, War Barge)
12. Ethiopia (led by Taytu Betul): Eternal Flower: Each time you settle a new city, grant it +5 Production and +5 Faith per turn for 50 turns. (reduces by -1 every 10 turns until you hit 0 on the fiftieth turn.)
(Uniques: Beit, Hawult, Mehal Sefari, Oromo Cavalry, Shotel)
13. Persia: (led by Mithirdates I): Kvarenah: When declaring Friendship, automatically enter a Research Agreement with the other Civilization. Each consequetive Research Agreement signed with another player increases the Science boost by +5% for both.
(Uniques: Immortal, Pairidaza, Zradha Shirvatir, Satrapy, Farhangestan)
14. Mongolia (led by Mandukhai): Qural-Dai: Barbarians are friendly to you, while City States are hostile. Defeated Barbarian units have a chance to join (33%)), double if they're Cavalry. Clearing a Barbarian Camp grants an additional reward: (Choose between: A builder, A random military unit or a city on the spot of the camp.)
(Uniques: Keshik, Ger, Yurt, Mangudai, Huihui Pao)
15. China (led by Yongle): Feng Shui: Tile adjacency is decided by variation on the surrounding tiles. Each unique improvement (including World Wonders), feature (including Woods, Mountains, Rainforests, etc) and District type grants +1. Each recurring improvement, feature or District type grants -1. Featureless unimproved tiles are considered neutral. Cities with perfect Feng Shui are always Euphoric, regardless of amenities; Cities with a Feng Shui rating for 70% or higher are always Happy, regardless of Amenities.
(Uniques: Zen Garden, Theatre Pavillion, Chu-Ko-Nu, Fire Lance, War Junk)
16. Japan (led by Masako Hojo): Bushido: After receiving their third Promotion, All military units upgrade into Samurai, unlocking unique promotions and abilities that are otherwise unobtainable (cf: Samurai are a unit class on this occasion, rather than a unique unit)
(Uniques: Dojo, Shoen, Akatebune, Ashigaru, Torii)
17. India (led by Ashoka): Beloved of the Gods: Every city can support two Pantheons instead of one - one is picked when the city is settled and applies only to that city, the other when Maurya earns their overaching Pantheon, which applies to all cities. The same Pantheons can be chosen multiple times, and their effects stack.
(Uniques: Varu, Sepoy, Stepwell, Stambha, Sala)
18. The Inca (led by Topa Inca Yupanqui): Quipu: At the start of your turn, gain a 5% interest on your unspent Gold and Faith.
(Uniques: Kamayuk, Waraq'aq, Qhatuq, Andén, Pukara)
19. The Lakota (led by Sitting Bull): Ghost Dance: Your military units survive their first killing blow with one HP left.
(Uniques: Teton Rider, Heyoka, Inipi, Buffalo Pound, Sundance Circle)
20. America (led by Thomas Jefferson): The American Dream: Bonuses from positive happiness to city yields are double in your empire. Your Happy Cities provide +1 additional World Congress vote, while Extactic Cities provide +3.
(Uniques: Pioneer, Minuteman, Sherman Tank, Homestead, Football Stadium)

Feel free to C+P this, Firaxis.