Civilization Wishlist for Civ VII

[Boris Gudenuf]

I dont realy see Maya's design/leader on civ going beyond 16th century, the appeal of classical Maya is too big, just wanted to add an example of heterodox design with an extra of usefull reason for that (on this case to acknowledge indigenous resistence).

Talking about Moctezuma costume, please Firaxis never again that "Mayincatec" clothes! Have cartoon like art design does not mean fantasy dress. Also about the feathers would be great to have more cultural related luxury resources like "Exotic Feathers" for many cultures included Mesoamerican ones clothes, accesories, banners and art/painting made of feathers was one of the more expensive goods on their societies, even on colonial time and even now there are things like Catholic Art made with feathers. Just think about your Aztec Empire conquering some region on South America, Africa, South Asia or Oceania for the lucrative feather commerce to your homeland. I think if you are going to change history what is valuable can change also to fit your culture.

As another example of a major trade good that is totally forgotten today. By volume one of the largest trade items brought to Song China from southeast Asia/Indonesia was aromatic wood: tropic woods like candlewood or sandalwood that acted like incense when burned, that were of major interest to the Song nobility who were obsessed with concocting 'personal fragrances' for their own dwellings, clothes, and surroundings. We are talking about tons of wood imported every year for 'court fashion' at great expense from far away.

And about three feet from my left shoulder is a Russian icon of Saint Barbara depicted in meticulous beadwork, a gorgeous piece of art in a distinctly non-traditional (for Russia, anyway) form (and before you ask, Saint Barbara is the Patron Saint of artillerymen, and I was an artilleryman for 17 years in the US Army). Beads, in fact, were a very early art/fashion form, since lead and copper beads have been found in archeological sites dating to 5000 BCE in Anatolia and the Middle East: trading beads made with 'exotic' (for the time and place) metals or seashells was apparently a major Neolithic trade.

Beads, feathers, exotic woods, seashells - lots of 'cultural' o 'fashionable' reasons for trade or exploitation . . .

 

[Zaarin]

As another example of a major trade good that is totally forgotten today. By volume one of the largest trade items brought to Song China from southeast Asia/Indonesia was aromatic wood: tropic woods like candlewood or sandalwood that acted like incense when burned, that were of major interest to the Song nobility who were obsessed with concocting 'personal fragrances' for their own dwellings, clothes, and surroundings. We are talking about tons of wood imported every year for 'court fashion' at great expense from far away.

You see this in other places as well. We all remember the Phoenicians for their rich purple dye, but sturdy and aromatic cedar of Lebanon was also a major export for them all over the Near East. Same with deodar cedar in South and Central Asia.

And about three feet from my left shoulder is a Russian icon of Saint Barbara depicted in meticulous beadwork, a gorgeous piece of art in a distinctly non-traditional (for Russia, anyway) form (and before you ask, Saint Barbara is the Patron Saint of artillerymen, and I was an artilleryman for 17 years in the US Army). Beads, in fact, were a very early art/fashion form, since lead and copper beads have been found in archeological sites dating to 5000 BCE in Anatolia and the Middle East: trading beads made with 'exotic' (for the time and place) metals or seashells was apparently a major Neolithic trade.

You also see this in the New World where whelk and quahog shells ("wampum") were traded as far inland as the Great Lakes, and on the West coast beads of dentalia and abalone shells from California were traded as far north as Alaska and as far inland as Montana and Alberta.

 

[Sirsquier]

AMERICA

LEADER
Dwight Eisenhower
Industrial and Military Super Power. Prosperity and American exceptionalism was everywhere. The American reach around the World reached alarming heights. The Eisenhower era saw the rise of Television, Nuclear Power, Urban population explosion. it's been said the 20th Century was an American century. Seeing the evolution from World power in the beginning to absolute Super power. Eisenhower represents that transformation. The US Military became dominant in the 50's. Especially transformed was The US Navy. As the Super Aircraft Carrier became the centerpiece of the Naval Battle Group.

Unique Buildings.
TV Studio, CIA Headquarters, Camp Pendleton, Football Stadium

Unique Units
Marines, M60 Battle Tank, B-52 Bomber, The Super Aircraft Carrier

please not Eisenhower....

 

[jsciv69]

please not Eisenhower....

Ike is not exactly my favorite person in history. It was he who started direct American involvement(as the French withdrew) in Vietnam. Eisenhower saw the CIA lead a coup in Iran. Provoking hostilities there that remain today. And his stance during the Civil Rights movements was shaky at best. And having Nixon as VP. But Ike represents an era where American prosperity was at a great height. The military was everywhere. The Navy went nuclear. And I think having a game with Eisenhower and Khrushchev as rival leaders. This can bring some real intense Cold War Drama in the late game era's.

 

[Krajzen]

I have a feeling many people from outside US perceive Eisenhower as 'that badass president who was a general before and who fought nazis and communists', which is why he is often on favourite lists for people who don't know many US presidents and much about politics
Similarly, a ton of Eastern Europeans (especially Poles) adore Reagan for his approach to USSR, he is often credited here as one of men who did the most job in toppling communist regimes, Of Course in the secondary row after the primary row being local heroes and movements (and the Pope in the cause of Poland lol).

So generally Eastern Europeans are highly likely to especially like US presidents who were hostile interventionists hawks against communism in general. Poland in general is among the most US - friendly countries in Europe to this day, even after Trump, partially because US is an archenemy of Russia since Cold War, and whoever is an enemy of Russians and communists gets a ton of points in Poland, rest of the world and biography be damned. Nazis are obviously an exception from
this rule, but again, Americans and Eisenhower fought them as well, therefore they get even more points than Japanese in 19O5, who only get points for beating Russia.

Napoleon will also always be a hero in my country for beating Germans, Austrians and Russians, he is mentioned in Polish anthem due to his alliance with Polish legions.


So anyway, expect FDR, Einsenhower and Reagan to be recommended by Eastern Europe forever, until sun explodes.

 

[jsciv69]

I have a feeling many people from outside US perceive Eisenhower as 'that badass president who was a general before and who fought nazis and communists', which is why he is often on favourite lists for people who don't know many US presidents and much about politics
Similarly, a ton of Eastern Europeans (especially Poles) adore Reagan for his approach to USSR, he is often credited here as one of men who did the most job in toppling communist regimes, Of Course in the secondary row after the primary row being local heroes and movements (and the Pope in the cause of Poland lol).

So generally Eastern Europeans are highly likely to especially like US presidents who were hostile interventionists hawks against communism in general. Poland in general is among the most US - friendly countries in Europe to this day, even after Trump, partially because US is an archenemy of Russia since Cold War, and whoever is an enemy of Russians and communists gets a ton of points in Poland, rest of the world and biography be damned. Nazis are obviously an exception from
this rule, but again, Americans and Eisenhower fought them as well, therefore they get even more points than Japanese in 19O5, who only get points for beating Russia.

Napoleon will also always be a hero in my country for beating Germans, Austrians and Russians, he is mentioned in Polish anthem due to his alliance with Polish legions.


So anyway, expect FDR, Einsenhower and Reagan to be recommended by Eastern Europe forever, until sun explodes.

I chose Ike. Not so much Ike the person. I pick him because of the Era. US standing around the World was pretty high in the 50's. Population started to boom. Military was a strong as ever. Also the US became 50 states(Hawaii coming in 1959) during the Eisenhower era. Eisenhower is also a great pick as a counterpart to my choice for Russian Leader Nikita Khrushchev. The two superpowers going at it full scale. That would make this game exciting. I know most think of JFK when Khrushchev is mentioned. But Ike had two full terms and JFK(thanks to Lee Harvey Oswald) too short of a tenure. Also most of the nuclear tests happened under Ike. Reagan might be too polarizing to be considered. FDR was used before.

 

[Zaarin]

So anyway, expect FDR, Einsenhower and Reagan to be recommended by Eastern Europe forever, until sun explodes.

Well, Eisenhower is at least the least polarizing of the three; Reagan is recent enough to evoke strong political sentiments (to put it mildly) and FDR was the father of modern American partisan politics and is as utterly hated by one side as he is apotheosized by the other. Eisenhower, by contrast, has a generally positive reputation in the US regardless of one's politics, perhaps in part because the 50s were an era of booming post-War prosperity that have a glamorous image thanks to the rise of superstars like Elvis Presley, Audrey Hepburn, and Marilyn Monroe. (I'm not arguing in favor of Eisenhower. I'm personally hoping for a US leader from the first quarter of the 19th century, particularly John Adams, after having a Gilded Age president in Civ6.)

 

[jsciv69]

Well, Eisenhower is at least the least polarizing of the three; Reagan is recent enough to evoke strong political sentiments (to put it mildly) and FDR was the father of modern American partisan politics and is as utterly hated by one side as he is apotheosized by the other. Eisenhower, by contrast, has a generally positive reputation in the US regardless of one's politics, perhaps in part because the 50s were an era of booming post-War prosperity that have a glamorous image thanks to the rise of superstars like Elvis Presley, Audrey Hepburn, and Marilyn Monroe. (I'm not arguing in favor of Eisenhower. I'm personally hoping for a US leader from the first quarter of the 19th century, particularly John Adams, after having a Gilded Age president in Civ6.)

Washington(Civ V) was already used from the Founding Era. Lincoln was used twice. And both Roosevelts. Reagan or Clinton would be way too polarizing. And please no Bush. The Cold War Era was quite intense to say the least. In the 1950's came so many Nuclear tests. The World began to hold it's breath after any incident between US and Russia. Including the U2 incident. I would like to bring that to the Civ game. Which is also why I would like Khrushchev to represent Russia. That time saw Russia become the perfect counter to American power. Sputnik sure made the West sit up and take notice. And that Era saw some very impressive Military production on both sides. I think the next Civ installment, if there is one, should feature such rivalries. Just makes things more fun. So let the World hold it's breath again.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Washington(Civ V) was already used from the Founding Era. Lincoln was used twice. And both Roosevelts. Reagan or Clinton would be way too polarizing. And please no Bush. The Cold War Era was quite intense to say the least. In the 1950's came so many Nuclear tests. The World began to hold it's breath after any incident between US and Russia. Including the U2 incident. I would like to bring that to the Civ game. Which is also why I would like Khrushchev to represent Russia. That time saw Russia become the perfect counter to American power. Sputnik sure made the West sit up and take notice. And that Era saw some very impressive Military production on both sides. I think the next Civ installment, if there is one, should feature such rivalries. Just makes things more fun. So let the World hold it's breath again.

Many years ago, in the old (original) Strategy and Tactics magazine, they published a board game based on a hypothetical war in central Europe between the USSR/Warsaw Pact and the USA/NATO. Both sides had the option to turn the tactical war into a nuclear war. The way the game portrayed that was that when you 'went nuclear', you were supposed to take a can of lighter fluid, spray it on the map and the pieces, and light them, destroying the game completely. This both showed the results of such a decision and also gave you a good financial reason not to do it.

For Civ VII, going nuclear could involve a large electromagnet placed next to your CPU with a button to turn it on right next to your keyboard . . .

 

[Zaarin]

Washington(Civ V) was already used from the Founding Era. Lincoln was used twice.

Funny, I'm pretty certain there were 14 presidents in between Washington and Lincoln. Personally I'm hoping for John Adams, like I said. He's a sorely underappreciated president. I wouldn't object to seeing Washington again, though. No Lincoln, please.

Reagan or Clinton would be way too polarizing. And please no Bush.

Clinton and Bush are alive; Reagan was recently alive. None of them is even a possibility.

Which is also why I would like Khrushchev to represent Russia.

Hard pass. The Soviet Union was a low point in Russian history; I'd rather they choose someone earlier and less Westernized than they usually do--Alexander Nevsky or Ivan III, for instance.

 

[jsciv69]

Many years ago, in the old (original) Strategy and Tactics magazine, they published a board game based on a hypothetical war in central Europe between the USSR/Warsaw Pact and the USA/NATO. Both sides had the option to turn the tactical war into a nuclear war. The way the game portrayed that was that when you 'went nuclear', you were supposed to take a can of lighter fluid, spray it on the map and the pieces, and light them, destroying the game completely. This both showed the results of such a decision and also gave you a good financial reason not to do it.

For Civ VII, going nuclear could involve a large electromagnet placed next to your CPU with a button to turn it on right next to your keyboard . . .

In the 1990's came the Sega CD. There was a game called WWIII. A very intriguing Cold War scenario based game. At the time it was a very addictive game. Maybe Civ VII can feature competing factions such as NATO and Warsaw. Pitting one group of Civs against another. And bring back the ICBM from Civ III. capable of being launched continent to continent. Range was not an issue.

 

[jsciv69]

Funny, I'm pretty certain there were 14 presidents in between Washington and Lincoln. Personally I'm hoping for John Adams, like I said. He's a sorely underappreciated president. I wouldn't object to seeing Washington again, though. No Lincoln, please.


Clinton and Bush are alive; Reagan was recently alive. None of them is even a possibility.


Hard pass. The Soviet Union was a low point in Russian history; I'd rather they choose someone earlier and less Westernized than they usually do--Alexander Nevsky or Ivan III, for instance.

The Soviet post WWII expansion was impressive to put it lightly. Even rivaling some of the more famous empires in history. The Soviets produced some of the most impressive Military hardware of the time. Their Tanks, MIG fighters, and Submarines were among the best in the World. Sputnik made the West tremble at what Russia could be capable of. Today Russia is still strong. But nothing like they were in the times of the Cold War. Especially during the Khrushchev Era. They became the necessary counter to the powers of the West. Especially the US.

 

[8housesofelixir]

I'm personally hoping for a US leader from the first quarter of the 19th century, particularly John Adams, after having a Gilded Age president in Civ6.

I never seriously considered it before, but a Federalist Americans or even Hamiltonianism Americans would really bring something into Civ series.

We had a Money plus Happiness Americans in Civ IV, Manifest Destiny Americans in Civ V, Monroeism plus Environmentalist Americans in Civ VI - but a coastal, industrial, export-oriented, centralized America is something many Americans long forgot (while strangely reincarnated in Japanese Economic Miracle, Four Asian Tigers, Dengism PRC, etc.)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

In the 1990's came the Sega CD. There was a game called WWIII. A very intriguing Cold War scenario based game. At the time it was a very addictive game. Maybe Civ VII can feature competing factions such as NATO and Warsaw. Pitting one group of Civs against another. And bring back the ICBM from Civ III. capable of being launched continent to continent. Range was not an issue.

Actually, what Civ VII (and its predecessors, but for them it's Too Late) need is a representation of the very important NGOs and 'Supra-State Organizations' throughout history: the Hanseatic League and International Banking Families of medieval Europe, the international corporations, regional Military/Diplomatic 'Leagues' (including Warsaw Pact and NATO) of the19th and 20th centuries - all of which have immense potential to modify a Civ's behavior. By comparison, any 'World Congress' has never had a whole lot of influence on a Civ's behavior, whereas the prospect of never getting another loan from an international banker made even the Holy Roman Emperors 'toe the line'!

 

[Sirsquier]

I'd much rather have an older president, but if I had to choose cold war presidents, either Regan or Kennedy who actually did things in the cold war.... and we're well liked.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Clinton and Bush are alive; Reagan was recently alive. None of them is even a possibility.

Depends on which Bush you are talking about.
But neither should make it in at least until Civilization 20.

I'd much rather have an older president, but if I had to choose cold war presidents, either Regan or Kennedy who actually did things in the cold war.... and we're well liked.

I personally want Thomas Jefferson so we could finally have all 4 Mt. Rushmore Presidents. If we had to get a later president, Kennedy would be interesting especially if he had bonuses toward a scientific victory.

 

[Zaarin]

I'd much rather have an older president, but if I had to choose cold war presidents, either Regan or Kennedy who actually did things in the cold war.... and we're well liked.

Eh, Kennedy was woefully incompetent. If he hadn't been assassinated and turned into a martyr he would have been forgotten at best and far more likely despised.

Depends on which Bush you are talking about.
But neither should make it in at least until Civilization 20.

I took for granted he was talking about W., the Bush who actually did something worth remembering, for good or for ill.

 

[Phrozen]

For America I would say: Calvin Coolidge or Grover Cleveland. I could see Coolidge in the Civ 6 art style of being this dour figure that just stares at you giving one word answers.

 

[Zaarin]

For America I would say: Calvin Coolidge or Grover Cleveland. I could see Coolidge in the Civ 6 art style of being this dour figure that just stares at you giving one word answers.

Coolidge would be delightful (though maybe for Civ8 since we had a Gilded Age president for Civ6), though I'd say he was taciturn and reserved rather than dour--though he did have a bit of New England Puritan austerity about him. I'm a big fan of Coolidge: he restored confidence in the integrity of the White House after the Harding scandals, fought for civil rights for women and minorities, restored abrogated treaties with the Native Americans and granted them full citizenship, and he tried to balance the budget and cut government overreach--in short, no matter where you sit on the political spectrum you can find something to admire about Coolidge. His laconic personality and trim figure would make a great fit for a civ leader.

Cleveland, on the other hand, was just kind of...blandly competent. Don't get me wrong: I'd be ecstatic to have a blandly competent president IRL, but I want someone a little more interesting in a civ leader.

 

[jsciv69]

For America I would say: Calvin Coolidge or Grover Cleveland. I could see Coolidge in the Civ 6 art style of being this dour figure that just stares at you giving one word answers.

Coolidge would be an interesting twist. Certainly would be unexpected. Maybe he can be part of a scenario involving prohibition, the rise of the Mafia. But the name may not spark a lot of interest. One reason I would pick Ike. Is he would be instantly recognized as a WWII General. And Allied leader at that. Plus he was Leader when America reached 50 States(Hawaii in 1959). A Cold War President brings instant drama. America was a World Power under Coolidge. But a Super Power under Ike.