You're native american? Out of your name I guessed Scandinavian, though I guess I could be wrong
And I think you said it there. Unless we find another united Native American tribe who actually played a large role in the history of native america, I guess we should stick to Iroquois
What about the Pueblo nations? They didn't conquer anyone, but they had an interesting culture, and kicked the Spanish out in 1680 I believe. They also built the oldest towns in all of North America by a few hundred years
(there were other cities at the time, ie Cahokia, but none of them lasted to this day) The Comanche too were the most powerful Plains Indian tribe by far, and for all practical purposes had a "nation" known as Comancharia. The sioux would work too, since they united many plains Indian tribes under their leadership. Perhaps "Plains Alliance" or something, representing the combined force of the Sioux and their allies?
Mayans and Aztecs are mesoamericans, not Native Americans
Poland laid the foundation of modern day democrazy and had a sucsessful multicultural society with free religion on a continent who else were quite restrictive... and their government was sucsessfull. They should be in.
And Iroquois, they actually created a nation, something no other Native American tribe can say that they have done.
Multicultural? Not to be anti-polish, but the only minority I'm aware of being in Poland were Jews, and the Poles didn't really like them too much.
The Iroquois did found a nation, but other tribes did too, or tried at least. Tecumseh was an interesting leader for instance, and would be a cool one to play as. Other nations on the list, like the Celts, didn't found a nation in a 'proper' sense either (unless you include ireland
)
The list are already finalized (see first page).
Oh yes? That's too bad. Anyways, I think there are too many European civs on the final list... Spain makes sense to add, and maybe Poland too (though they have the Warsaw city-state). But them, the Celts and the Dutch? Maybe over the course of two expacs all those civs could be added, but I imagine they plan on releasing more than one (as the other Civ games) and they wouldn't have any European civs left to add! Not to mention, there are already more European civs, which is understandable because of Europe's unique relationship to world history, but the game does not even have many of the nations colonized by those Europeans anyhow!
I was always skeptical of the Celts as a "Civilization". I really don't see a reason to add them any more than, say "Native Americans", since the Celts never had one civilization per se but instead many culturally similar tribes.
I'm disappointed Indonesia/Majapahit is off, especially since holland is on the list... Indonesia is a nation of nearly 200 million people now, it has a completely unique culture/civilization, and is not represented in its part of the world by any other civ. It's NEVER been in a civ game at all, and in fact, it's a little silly to have Holland and no Indonesia since Holland's biggest colony was the ruins of Majapahit's Imperial domain. Perhaps the most important thing though is to know that there will be a Bali for my Civlization's middle aged yuppies to visit and have spiritual journeys! No Indonesia, no mystical island of Bali
.
The Chola, and perhaps the Sikhs, too, I think, deserve consideration, as the Tamil people are culturally distinct from the rest of India and the Punjab too founded an interesting civilization distinct in many ways from the rest of India. Both had unique imperial traits distinct from modern India, too. But I can see why they might not be considered for the list since India still more or less encapsulates both, despite the differences.
Another, last, civ which should really be on is Afghanistan. I know you say the list is final, but it is probably the most militarily influential nation in history NOT in Civ or the "final list", conquering northern India on numerous occasions, parts of Persia and Central Asia, and battling the British Empire, USSR, and finally USA/NATO. The many Battles of Panipat are probably the most world-influential battles that Westerners have never heard of... for instance, in the third, the Afghans crushed Maratha power, which they never recovered from before the British takeover. Imagine what the world would have been like if India had united against British imperialism? It was the Afghans who helped to break that unity. UUs would be: Jezzail soldier, Mujihadeen, LH could be Ahmad Shah Durrani, or perhaps one of the Lodi sultans.
His suggestion of Cuba is a good one too, which I am sympathetic towards too ... it is interesting to read up on Cuba's various interventions in Africa and Latin America ... Castro for all is faults certainly did his best to make himself a "world historical person" to use Hegel's language, although I don't know if it is a good idea to have a man who is still actually still alive as a Leader Head
Lastly, I think a West African civ from the Jungle region is necessary, since there has never been one. It is good that Songhai is in, but it only represents the Northern reaches of Sub Saharan Africa. Benin, Ashante, Yoruba and Dahomey can fit in that role, and ARE historically important insofar as their role in the slave trade basically created the world we have today.
If ur list is final, i understand, but I like my ideas too
EDIT: Idea for Zulu UB:
Kraal (Zulu name, not sure what that is)-replaces the Granary, +2 food and all pastures in the territory produce +1 gold
the cattle kraal was the center of many Zulu communities, and represented the tribe's wealth as a collective or royal cattle heard.
from lakes and marshes?
)
