Design your own Civ VI civ

[Zaarin]

Koyah and Cumshewa seem to be the only options for the Haida.

They work, but I still think Sheiyksh of the Tlingit is a better option. The civ design would be the same--Haida and Tlingit cultures are quite distinct, but in terms of mechanical bonuses I think they would translate the same. On the other hand, Sean Bean could probably pronounce "Haida" correctly, whereas he'd probably pronounce "Tlingit" with a T instead of a K.

 

[Kimiimaro]

They work, but I still think Sheiyksh of the Tlingit is a better option. The civ design would be the same--Haida and Tlingit cultures are quite distinct, but in terms of mechanical bonuses I think they would translate the same. On the other hand, Sean Bean could probably pronounce "Haida" correctly, whereas he'd probably pronounce "Tlingit" with a T instead of a K.

So the correct pronunciation is Klingit? Tlingik? Klingik?

 

[Amrunril]

Re: the Haida idea, I see the leader bonus, but what leader would you suggest?

I didn't have a specific leader in mind, not because of any lack of options, but because I personally find this aspect of civ design less interesting than mechanical bonuses (I didn't choose leaders for my Carthage or Indonesia concepts either). @IgorS and @Zaarin seem to have some good ideas.

 

[Morningcalm]

Well, at least the Haida have actual figures who can be perceived as leaders for their civilization. They are not, as Zaarin would have the Tlingit be, led by someone who was more a title rather than a man.

Sheiyksh I of the Tlingit. What was this leader known for? What did this leader accomplish? What agenda would this leader have? There is such a scant record on this leader, and his impact on world history so very tiny (if we are talking about Gush X’een), that I can't possibly see how Tlingit would end up in Civilization. The Olmecs led by a stone faced chieftain would be only slightly worse at that rate.

 

[IgorS]

Agreed. Also, it is super easy to make a city list for the Haida.

 

[Zaarin]

So the correct pronunciation is Klingit? Tlingik? Klingik?

/kliŋgɪt/ "cling-git" or /kliŋkɪt/ "cling-kit"--though ironically in Tlingit it's actually /ɬiŋkɪt/. There are so many "tl" sounds in the PNW that the English-speaking explorers just threw one in there where there wasn't one.

 

[Uberfrog]

I think it'd be a shame to include the Haida or the Tlingit and not feature their spectacular armour (about which I learned on this very website: https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/the-armour-thread.511587/page-8#post-13512659).

Spoiler Tlingit Armour :

I think a Warrior replacement makes the most sense, and I like the idea of a raider focus rather than just promoting a militaristic style of play like the Eagle Warrior.

Perhaps they can embark from the beginning of the game and get bonus movement when disembarking. However they don't have a boosted combat strength like the Berserker. Their armour gives them resistance to ranged units, which lets them pillage with more impunity.

 

[Zaarin]

@Uberfrog Wood-slat armor is pretty awesome, though like plate armor only the nobility used it. I'd make it a non-replacing UU (like the samurai) that's expensive (again, only nobles wore it) and sturdy.

 

[Morningcalm]

Frankly, I think given the scant record for the Haida/Tlingit and their really minor importance on the world stage, it would be a shame to take a major civilization slot away from a more deserving Native American group. Yea, the Haida and Tlingit, like the Eskimos/Aborigines/Pygmies and any number of other groups are interesting culturally, and would diversify the game's cultural representations, but that doesn't warrant including them as a major civilization in Civilization VI, particularly with the agenda system being what it is, and given the scant record for Haida and Tlingit leaders. I think they are better included as citystates for now, perhaps with abilities alluding to the fur trade or something more culturally native.

I would rather the Civilization slot went to a differently group, whether a different Native American entity (the Iroquois Confederacy) or a civilization never before represented, like the Ashanti or Benin, who had empires.

Nonetheless, I am glad there I see interest in the Haida and Tlingit, as they are interesting; I just don't think they fit as a major civilization.

 

[Zaarin]

@Morningcalm I get where you're coming from, but is influence on other regions the only metric for inclusion? The PNW natives achieved a level of cultural and social sophistication that is best described as medieval, which is quite fascinating given that they were hunter-gatherers technologically; culturally they had no equals in North America. Also I don't think they fit well for a fur trade mechanic. They dealt in sea otter furs, but they weren't really a part of the more massive fur trade in the interior that was dominated by the Cree (who I'd also love to see as a civ). If they were included as a city-state, a crest pole UI would be the most likely suzerain bonus in my eyes.

 

[Uberfrog]

Yeah, I don't think City-States really do justice as cultural representations. Unique Improvements (and potentially units - a Swiss Pikeman mercenary for instance) go someway, but there are just too many different aspects that you don't want to reduce to a +1 faith or +1 culture on a tile.

 

[IgorS]

I agree that influence on other regions should not be the criterion for a civ. It should be influence on its own region, and the Haida were very influential and powerful in the Pacific North-West. And the same goes for African empires, most of which did not really influence other regions, but were still important in their own right.
The criteria for a civilization should be:
1. Being an important regional power during civ's height
2. Being an actual civilization, a nation with its own established culture and identity
3. Having good leaders that can be incorporated into the game
4. Having unique components, UUs, UIs, etc...
5. Having a list of settlements for a proper city list

I believe the Haida answer to all five criteria.

 

[Morningcalm]

I never said influence on others was the only factor in picking a major Civ. Having at least *somewhat* well attested leaders is of vital import in Civ VI, given its agenda system for interacting with leaders, and the inclusion of individualized but leader abilities.

Also, I disagree with IgorS' statement above as to Haida meeting his five criteria. The Haida do not have "good leaders that can be incorporated into the game". Show me where such people are.

As far as Haida influence goes, how populated was their territory? How much did they interact with people's who were not Haida? I think we would be overstating Haida influence by including them in the game. For good or ill, most nearly all civilizations included in the past were major regional powers, influential beyond their borders (Venice, Huns, Polynesia, etc), or has major climactic interactions with others (Zulu, Aztecs, Iroquois). Haida lack such interactions.

As far as citystates go, many civilizations and nations are represented via citystates. Maybe this is too small a representation in your eyes, but having the Haida as a major civ in Civilization VI would be overstating their influence, let alone their interaction with others.

 

[Uberfrog]

I think we just differ in our priorities... I think that interesting cultures and gameplay dynamics are the core things when choosing/designing a civ. It's a what-if game to some extent after all. The only requisite fantasy is in leading a historical group of people from the Stone Age into outer space. I don't think a Civ roster needs to be seen as a hall of fame of the most influential civilisations in history.

 

[Morningcalm]

It does seem we have different priorities, but my priorities are also influenced here by my understanding of Civ VI's focus on leader agendas/abilities as well as Civ abilities, etc.

The problem I see with the Haida/Tlingit is not that they lack unique culture. It's that they lack leaders, cool stories of struggle, and the scale of civilization (whether Amanitore with her hundreds of pyramids or Tomyris with her climactic defense against Cyrus). As such, it's hard to create leader-based gameplay mechanics for such civs, which would be less of a problem for the PNW groups if Civ VI didn't have leader abilities and leader agendas.

I do think that there should be a mix of (somewhat) obscure groups and somewhat iconic ones--but for me the priority is also that the Civ have some scale beyond mere villages. A Civilization in Civ need not be an empire, but Koyah and his village are hardly fitting to take away the slot of more influential Native American groups like the Iroquois Confederacy.

 

[Amrunril]

There's a lot of interesting discussion of civ choice going on here, but I do think it would seem out of place to someone reading this thread without the context of the ongoing elimination thread. In general, this thread's focus has been on putting forward ideas and getting collaborative feedback on them, while the elimination thread (and threads like it) have been the place for questioning which civs belong in the game. I think that preserving that distinction is a good idea, both in terms of making discussions easier to follow (we've been having more or less parallel conversations in the two threads for three days now) and in terms of thread atmosphere: I don't mind the criticism of the Haida and other Pacific Northwesterners as a civ choice (I wouldn't be part of the elimination thread if I did), but I could see others being dissuaded from posting unfinished or outside-the box ideas if having to rigorously defend every element of proposed civs were to become the norm.

As an aside, I'll note that, in addition to the disagreements about specific civs, there definitely seem to be some broader philosophical disagreements about what qualities make for a good civ choice. It might be a good idea to have a thread focusing on those ideas in the abstract, rather than only discussing them when the come up through the lens of a specific civ idea.

 

[Morningcalm]

Fair points.

I don't think every Civ idea need be rigorously defended, but I think when providing ideas for potential civs in Civ VI we ought to follow the criteria of civs in VI--one of those being having a leader with an ability and agenda. The lack of such need not mean that idea is disqualified, but I do think it worthwhile to try to encourage people to fill out gaps in their ideas to present more colorable concepts for Firaxis developers to peruse while here.

This thread has ideas for civs led by Trump among others, though, so that should be a clear sign not all Civ ideas in this thread need necessarily be seriously intended for inclusion in the game. In previous pages in this thread I've asked posters to provide a bit more detail in their ideas. That the Haida post of yours we are discussing lacked a leader (when originally posted) is something I think worthy of discussion. I'm not trying to clamp down on someone's idea so much as engage with it and its potential for inclusion and broader discussion related to Civ VI.

 

[IgorS]

I am definitely not saying the Haida should come instead of the Iroquois. I think the Iroquois are the most important civilization among the North American natives, and should be prioritized, with the Cherokee in second place. The Haida should be a nice addition to the western part of North America, and are much better than the Shoshone of Civ V or the Sioux of Civ II.

 

[Zaarin]

As far as Haida influence goes, how populated was their territory? How much did they interact with people's who were not Haida?

To the first question: the PNW was the most densely populated region in North America at the time of contact. The richness of the seas and the temperate rainforests supported enormous populations impossible elsewhere on the continent. To the second: extensively. The Haida were the traders par excellence of the region; their trade canoes wandered the coast from California (source of much-coveted abalone) to Washington (source of slaves from the Nuu-chah-nulth, Salish, and other "Flathead" Indians) to British Columbia (source of fine Chilkat blankets and transformation masks from the Tsimshian and Kwakwaka'wakw) to Alaska (source of sea otter pelts, bear pelts, and drift iron tools from the Tlingit, as well as goods from Aleuts to the north and Athabaskan tribes from the Interior). While not firmly demonstrated, some scholars believe Haida Gwaii may have also had intermittent contact with Kamchatka in Siberia based on certain shared folktales and customs.

I am definitely not saying the Haida should come instead of the Iroquois. I think the Iroquois are the most important civilization among the North American natives, and should be prioritized, with the Cherokee in second place. The Haida should be a nice addition to the western part of North America, and are much better than the Shoshone of Civ V or the Sioux of Civ II.

Iroquois I agree on, Cherokee I do not. Like the Sioux, they're mostly known for losing, except in the case of the Cherokee it was losing by submission. They were easily the least powerful of the Five Civilized Tribes other than the Seminole. The Creek Confederacy or the Chickasaw make much more sense for a tribe from the Southeast; at least they weren't sold out by their own leaders (well, the Creek were, but the Red Sticks at least resisted it--and prior to that, the Creek were by far the most powerful tribe in the region). As for the Iroquois, I agree that they're the most significant, but they've also been done several times. That's why I propose the Powhatan as their replacement, a tribe that would fill a similar niche and have a much better leader option (Powhatan himself). For the Iroquois, you either have to go with someone attested only in oral traditions (like Hiawatha) or someone who did not lead the entire League (like Joseph Brant); not that either is a bad option, but Powhatan was both historically attested and the singular ruler of his civilization (a confederacy of over forty tribes, in fact).

 

[Morningcalm]

To the first question: the PNW was the most densely populated region in North America at the time of contact. The richness of the seas and the temperate rainforests supported enormous populations impossible elsewhere on the continent. To the second: extensively. The Haida were the traders par excellence of the region; their trade canoes wandered the coast from California (source of much-coveted abalone) to Washington (source of slaves from the Nuu-chah-nulth, Salish, and other "Flathead" Indians) to British Columbia (source of fine Chilkat blankets and transformation masks from the Tsimshian and Kwakwaka'wakw) to Alaska (source of sea otter pelts, bear pelts, and drift iron tools from the Tlingit, as well as goods from Aleuts to the north and Athabaskan tribes from the Interior). While not firmly demonstrated, some scholars believe Haida Gwaii may have also had intermittent contact with Kamchatka in Siberia based on certain shared folktales and customs.

Good to hear re: the population. Problem re: the trading is that trading trinkets and furs hardly seems fitting for a major civilization. As far as their warfare with Europeans, there's not much there that smacks of a good story, especially given the lack of distinctive leaders, which I must continue to mention is the central reason why the Haida/Tlingit are unlikely to make it into Civ VI (well, aside from their small impact on world history--I mean, even supposing they entered civ I hardly think bonus resource trade buffs are going to be a compelling civ ability). Extolling the virtues of a Native American group aside, a group must have distinctive leaders to appear in Civ in general. This is why the Olmecs, Zapotecs, pygmies, Eskimos, etc are unlikely to make it into Civ VI, no matter how fascinating their culture or artifacts may be.