Civilizations you would like to see in DLC

[Liufeng]

In my humble opinion (for DLC; not for Expansions) :
Ancient : Maori (warmonger and intercontinental expansionist civ) and Babylonians (scientific and diplomatic civ)
Classical : Persia (expansionist and warmonger civ) and Carthage (Naval and warmonger civ)
Medieval : Mali (trade, faith and gold focus), Khmer (production on wonders and food growing focus civ), Mongols (warmonger and expansionist civ) and Incas (warmonger and production focus civ)
Early Modern : Ottomans (Amenities and expansionist civ) and Portugal (Naval and trade focus civ)
Industrial age civs : Navajos (faith and culture civ), Italy (culture and great people civ)

 

[Myth and Legend]

Is there anything preventing Firaxis from making a WWII DLC? With uncle Adolf, friend Stalin and the likes?

 

[Zaarin]

The difference is there is a clear path between Germania and modern Germany, as there is between the Franks and modern France. There is an evolution from one people to the next, giving heritage between modern and ancient. Whereas the Gauls see their path fall off a cliff, before meandering into non-existence. When Gaul was conquered they lost a lot of their population. Then they spent centuries under Roman occupation and were one of the most "Romanised" of all the peoples that fell under Roman banners. The Gallic heritage was basically bred out of existence. Anything that survived (ie not much) was dealt with by plague and war, before being subjected to Gothic and Frankish mastery.

Sure people with Gallic bloodlines bred into the Franks, but their culture, customs and ways of life, were totally eradicated.

100% this. The number of Gaulish words in French is comparable to the number of British (i.e., Brythonic) words in English, and most of them were borrowed into Latin first. The only significant way that Gaulish culture has affected French culture (aside from their influence on general Roman culture) is that French nationalists claim them as a "glorious heritage," the same way Queen Victoria identified herself with Boudicca. By the time the Franks invaded France, there was precious little left of Gaulish ethnic identity; by the time they were done there was none. The only thing Gaul and France have in common is that they occupied some of the same territory and some Gaulish genes (mixed with Latin and Germanic genes) got passed down to the French--but Gaul actually included more territory, extending into modern Benelux, Germany, Lichtenstein, Switzerland, Italy, Spain, and Turkey.

 

[MooFreaky]

Is there anything preventing Firaxis from making a WWII DLC? With uncle Adolf, friend Stalin and the likes?

In previous games they have had WW2 scenarios. I think that is a perfect workaround, where people can get to play as these modern rulers without the baggage and potential backlash of having them as standard leaders.
Yes it's confined to a single scenario, but I cannot see Firaxis ever allowing Hitler, or allowing the return of Stalin and/or Mao.

 

[Myth and Legend]

A scenario sure, but I want the animated leader screens. I want to see Adolf flip his lid when I DoW him as Poland

 

[ComradeDavo]

The top 2 Civs i'd like to see as DLC are Vietnam and the Khmer Empire.

Vietnam I would go for Emperor Gia Long as leader with Huế as the capital. It also means Ho Chi Mihn could be an alternative leader with Hanoi as his capital. The civ ability could be to have a significant combat bonus when fighting inside it's own territory, to represent how Vietnam has fought off the Chinse, French and Americans in it's past. Leader ability's i'm not sure. Maybe something to do with the Imperial city for Gia Long (cultural or industrial?).

Khmer Empire I am unsure about the leader, there's a few candidates, ability's of course based around wonder building, religion and culture make sense.

 

[steveg700]

The top 2 Civs i'd like to see as DLC are Vietnam and the Khmer Empire.

Vietnam I would go for Emperor Gia Long as leader with Huế as the capital. It also means Ho Chi Mihn could be an alternative leader with Hanoi as his capital. The civ ability could be to have a significant combat bonus when fighting inside it's own territory, to represent how Vietnam has fought off the Chinse, French and Americans in it's past. Leader ability's i'm not sure. Maybe something to do with the Imperial city for Gia Long (cultural or industrial?).

Khmer Empire I am unsure about the leader, there's a few candidates, ability's of course based around wonder building, religion and culture make sense.

If you check out the idea I had for Vietnam in Civ V, you can kind of see some parallels with what Civ VI did with apostles and their choice of two promotions. As you can see, I liked the Trung Sisters and Le Loi, as they exemplify Vietnam's long history of guerilla tactics, but Gia Long seems like a find choice as well.

Khmer is tricky. Essentially, India and Kongo horn in on its act, as Khmer would be focused around high-population cities and faith, and a unique unit would probably be another type of war elephant.

 

[ComradeDavo]

If you check out the idea I had for Vietnam in Civ V, you can kind of see some parallels with what Civ VI did with apostles and their choice of two promotions. As you can see, I liked the Trung Sisters and Le Loi, as they exemplify Vietnam's long history of guerilla tactics, but Gia Long seems like a find choice as well.

Khmer is tricky. Essentially, India and Kongo horn in on its act, as Khmer would be focused around high-population cities and faith, and a unique unit would probably be another type of war elephant.

Nice work!

Yeah I know Khmer is a tricky one, but I do really want them in. I think a wonder construction + faith combo would be good for them.

 

[steveg700]

Nice work!

Yeah I know Khmer is a tricky one, but I do really want them in. I think a wonder construction + faith combo would be good for them.

Thanks.

Yes, some way to focus on their ability work with terrain is essential to distinguishing the Khmer. They're master builders to be sure. Something involving quarries, flood plains, marshes....But then we're talking about distinguishing them from Egypt. Have to marinate on it.

Here is my Civ V idea for the Khmer. Maybe it has salvageable parts.

 

[ComradeDavo]

Thanks.

Yes, some way to focus on their ability work with terrain is essential to distinguishing the Khmer. They're master builders to be sure. Something involving quarries, flood plains, marshes....But then we're talking about distinguishing them from Egypt. Have to marinate on it.

True that.

What would make me really happy is a South East Asia pack that as well as Vietnam and Khmer included either Siam and/or Myanmar (maybe in the form of the Pagan empire with Bagan as the capital). That would be awesome. Indonesia making an appearance again would be welcome too. Basically...I want more South East Asian civs!!!!

 

[steveg700]

So, safe to say Mongolia has to come at some point, right? I mean, it was a true empire amongst empires, right up there with Rome. And moreover, Genghis Khan deserves a spot with Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon....You name'em.

Kublai Khan is a good alternate, but other leaders need not be other khans. Could be a leader from a descendent empire, like Tamerlane (the Timurids) or Akbar (the Mughals). The core package could be your low-hanging fruit for the Mongols--bonuses with mounted units, mounted archers, terrifying city-states, yadda yadda. Then the leader-specific abilities could get into the more industrious aspects of the empire. Genghis might focus on getting to use the Mongol cities for trade routes, Kublai might focus on cultural districts. Tamerlane could be focused around his construction projects, and Akbar could be about accumulating luxury resources (and maybe really big cannons).

Agendas could be something like:

Genghis: Respects civilizations that produce military great persons and have a strong contingent of mounted units. Dislikes civilizations that have smaller empires and that send trade routes to other civilizations and not his.

Kublai: Likes civilizations from other continents that produce great merchants, writers, artists, and musicians, and loves receiving gifts (resources, gold, great works). Dislikes wealthy civilizations on the same continent unless they engage in trade with him.

Tamerlane: Likes civilizations with strong land forces and high faith, especially if they have a religion that provides a faith building. Dislikes civ's that achieve suzerainty of city-states near him.

Akbar: Respects wealthy civilizations whose cities have high defense values. Dislikes wealthy civilizations with weak cities.

 

[TonyBiH]

1.SFR Yugoslavia (Josip Broz Tito)
2.Bosnia (Tvrtko I of Bosnia)
3.Croatia (Tomislav of Croatia)
4.Serbia (Stefan Dušan)

 

[VermelhoRed]

Thanks.

Yes, some way to focus on their ability work with terrain is essential to distinguishing the Khmer. They're master builders to be sure. Something involving quarries, flood plains, marshes....But then we're talking about distinguishing them from Egypt. Have to marinate on it.

Here is my Civ V idea for the Khmer. Maybe it has salvageable parts.

How about something like extra housing from wonders?

So, safe to say Mongolia has to come at some point, right? I mean, it was a true empire amongst empires, right up there with Rome. And moreover, Genghis Khan deserves a spot with Alexander, Caesar, Napoleon....You name'em.

Kublai Khan is a good alternate, but other leaders need not be other khans. Could be a leader from a descendent empire, like Tamerlane (the Timurids) or Akbar (the Mughals). The core package could be your low-hanging fruit for the Mongols--bonuses with mounted units, mounted archers, terrifying city-states, yadda yadda. Then the leader-specific abilities could get into the more industrious aspects of the empire. Genghis might focus on getting to use the Mongol cities for trade routes, Kublai might focus on cultural districts. Tamerlane could be focused around his construction projects, and Akbar could be about accumulating luxury resources (and maybe really big cannons).

Agendas could be something like:

Genghis: Respects civilizations that produce military great persons and have a strong contingent of mounted units. Dislikes civilizations that have smaller empires and that send trade routes to other civilizations and not his.

Kublai: Likes civilizations from other continents that produce great merchants, writers, artists, and musicians, and loves receiving gifts (resources, gold, great works). Dislikes wealthy civilizations on the same continent unless they engage in trade with him.

Tamerlane: Likes civilizations with strong land forces and high faith, especially if they have a religion that provides a faith building. Dislikes civ's that achieve suzerainty of city-states near him.

Akbar: Respects wealthy civilizations whose cities have high defense values. Dislikes wealthy civilizations with weak cities.

Mughals should be part of Indian Civ, not Mongols. The similar names and the distant origins are definitely not enough! Also, I'm hoping we get Ogedai actually, this time!

 

[blciv4]

The Shoshone led by Pocatello. OP

 

[daft]

If it's Navajo you're voting for it's got to be a Navajo/Hopi combo, just like Sioux(Lakota) and Cheyenne (Dog Warrior and all).

My vote is for: HITTITES or, using the formal name of their country (they used it by themselves) HATTI (although they weren't the original Hatti).

Anyway, Hatti were a major Ancient Era power civ in their time (2nd milllenia B.C.) and a very fine civilization which left many written (cuneiformed) writings behind to document their level of advancement for such an ancient nation. They were very cultured, with excellent diplomatic skills and a mighty military (mainly chariots). They were also among the first nations to use IRON!

Lots of great leaders to choose from, an expansionistic, scientific and diplomatic(commercial) civ, with the 3 man Chariot as it's main UU.
This civ used to be a major superpower in the middle East, on par with the superheavyweight Civs of their time, namely ancient Egypt and Assyria.

I just love the Hittite city names as well:
Hattusa, Kussara, Sapinuwa, Zalpuwa, Tiggaramma, Zazzissa, Kammama, Tarhuntassa, Isuwa, Nerik, Kanesh, Samuha, Nenassa, Tabigga, Anguwa... lots more to add.

So far the Hatti only featured in Civ III expansion-what a daylight robbery! (as far as I recall)

Come on Firaxis!
Add the Hatti, please! for the love of actual history! do it!-it is worth it.

 

[daft]

People!
Please read about Assyria!
Major Superpower of Ancient Era and one of the largest and longest lasting Empires of all time!
Without Assyria Civilizartion is just plain wrong!
Yes, they were on occasion known to be very aggressive (and even cruel), but they built one of the finest Civilizations ever!
Sargon or Tiglath Pileser should be the rulers, but hey, there even is a great female queen to consider as well...

ASSYRIA - not only has to, must be added! (at least in an expansion)
Assyrian Chariots and the famous Assyrian (Horn)Bowmen-yes, they were Assyrian, not Babylonian, like the previous versions of Civilization would have you believe!

 

[Zaarin]

If it's Navajo you're voting for it's got to be a Navajo/Hopi combo

You know the Navajo and Hopi were not only unrelated but archenemies, right? Maybe we should lump together Persia and Byzantium or Korea and Japan while we're at it.

 

[daft]

You know the Navajo and Hopi were not only unrelated but archenemies, right? Maybe we should lump together Persia and Byzantium or Korea and Japan while we're at it.

Hopi and Navajo as enemies, well, never occurred to me, thought they were more like an allegiance of good neighbours, Hopi the wise, Navajo the warriors-got to read more about both tribes, sorry.
Byzantium and Persia, as enemies-yes, but try more the like Byzantium and Turks (Ottomans).

About Byzantine and Turkish wars:.
Byzantium fought fair, but hey, the Turks (Ottomans)! You should read about some of those battles or campaigns!!!
They would just run away on their horses (predominantly horse archer army), shooting their arrows as they ran, scorch Earth so that the pursuing (noble) Byzantine army had no food and grass to feed their army and horses. After bleeding the Byzantines out like this for days, the glorious-lol!! Turks (Ottomans) would finally attack the bloodied and exhausted Byzantine army until they killed them all (except the French mercenary knights-who ran away as fast as they could!).

After they conquered Byzantium, many Greeks converted to Islam, giving the Turks (Ottomans) all those great scientists and such!
In fact, Turks (Ottomans) were barbarians who managed to conquer a great, culturally advanced empire (Byzantium), and most of you, so called knowledgables, demand Ottomans be included in the game prior to the country they learned most civilized things from, meaning the country they conquered, and that is BYZANTIUM!

 

[MooFreaky]

Hopi and Navajo as enemies, well, never occurred to me, thought they were more like an allegiance of good neighbours, Hopi the wise, Navajo the warriors-got to read more about both tribes, sorry.
Byzantium and Persia, as enemies-yes, but try more the like Byzantium and Turks (Ottomans).

About Byzantine and Turkish wars:.
Byzantium fought fair, but hey, the Turks (Ottomans)! You should read about some of those battles or campaigns!!!
They would just run away on their horses (predominantly horse archer army), shooting their arrows as they ran, scorch Earth so that the pursuing (noble) Byzantine army had no food and grass to feed their army and horses. After bleeding the Byzantines out like this for days, the glorious-lol!! Turks (Ottomans) would finally attack the bloodied and exhausted Byzantine army until they killed them all (except the French mercenary knights-who ran away as fast as they could!).

After they conquered Byzantium, many Greeks converted to Islam, giving the Turks (Ottomans) all those great scientists and such!
In fact, Turks (Ottomans) were barbarians who managed to conquer a great, culturally advanced empire (Byzantium), and most of you, so called knowledgables, demand Ottomans be included in the game prior to the country they learned most civilized things from, meaning the country they conquered, and that is BYZANTIUM!

This is ridiculously ignorant on multiple fronts. The byzantines were also a very aggressive civilization.
But their traditional rival was Persia not Turkey. The Romans and persians had been rivals since the BCs. turkey dodnt come onto the scene until the Romans were a shell of their former glory.
Plus the Romans in the east had been using horse archers themselves for a thousand years. they learned it from the Parthians (ie the persians).

The Romans crushed enlightened people left and right and finally had their line ended. it happens. it doesn't mean the turks were evil or bad, just different.

Also note the Romans loved to used scorched earth against their enemies so criticising the Turks for it is hilarious. there is a reason there is a saying "they create a desert and call it peace".

 

[daft]

This is ridiculously ignorant on multiple fronts. The byzantines were also a very aggressive civilization.
But their traditional rival was Persia not Turkey. The Romans and persians had been rivals since the BCs. turkey dodnt come onto the scene until the Romans were a shell of their former glory.
Plus the Romans in the east had been using horse archers themselves for a thousand years. they learned it from the Parthians (ie the persians).

The Romans crushed enlightened people left and right and finally had their line ended. it happens. it doesn't mean the turks were evil or bad, just different.

Also note the Romans loved to used scorched earth against their enemies so criticising the Turks for it is hilarious. there is a reason there is a saying "they create a desert and call it peace".

Right, most of what the Turks learned about CIVILIZATION, science and culture, was from the BYZANTINES, a nation they'd just conquered.
The people you're defending fought without HONOR. Fleeing away from BYZANTINE troops en masse, while shooting their arrows at them! They would not give the Byzantines a proper battle!
Only after the bled/tired/hungry/thirsty Byzantines were exhausted, "glorious" Turkish warriors would attack them. (the only ones among the Byzantine ranks fleeing from the Turkish attacks were predominantly the well paid French/Frankish mercenary-knights, while the Varangs fought to the last man standing).
Read about the battles between the two, you will learn more about actual facts, before raising your voice at me.

BYZANTIUM does not equal (=) ROME!
So don't give me that! Byzantium was Greek dominated, not Roman. The official language of the country was Greek! LEARN YOUR FACTS!

Turks fought the already weakened Byzantines the best way they could and it was successful. Their tactics were spot on, no denying that! But were they honorable?
You are defending a nation that conquered (in a very bloody way) a civilized empire and built their own empire in its place! Turkey is not an original nation! It's made out of conquest of already pre-existing GREAT NATION.

And another thing:
Check the facts about how many of the great Turkish scientists and such were actually GREEKS - forced to convert to ISLAM! - in order to keep themselves (and their families) alive and prosper in the new (Turkish/Muslim) society.

Sorry, but Turks were invaders, far inferior culturallly! as compared to the Byzantines, they conquered the lands of a great empire, with fire and sword, for that there's not denying, and built their own on the ruins of BYZANTIUM.