Designing Spain in Civ7

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

1. What should be their focus? (Religious conqueror OR Transcontinental Power)
2. Leadership
3. Unique units
4: Unique Infrastructure
5. Leader's Unit (If Applicable)

Personally I never agree with Conquistadores being Spanish UU. Theirs are actually Continental European military backbone. The Tercio. Since the unit's inception in Italy (To response against French Gendarmerie along with their military prowess which perfectly matched what Spanish had before then, the Gendarmerie themselves actually reformed Medieval Knights but now a standing army belonged to the King and not overlords). Also their Tercio were used WORLDWIDE throughout the tenure of Pike and Shot era. and the term itself was ported into Enlightenment Era even with tactics had changed entirely. Spanish Royal Army Fusiliers were still called Tercio, even some units today were still called as such. While Conqustadores can be represented differently (Either as stand-in Musketeers in Civ6 or stand-in Knights in Civ5), they're all active OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL EUROPE. and so often referred to commanders of a band of adventurers waging war against Mesoamerican Golden Empires, going after their golds and cities. I'm not sure if they went to what's now The Phillipines too. Conquistadores only active for a short time, particularly by early half of the 16th Century when there were still so much Mesoamerican Empires to plunder and so much gold deposites elsewhere in Continental Americas to mine (too bad they missed Californian Motherlodes and other lodes in Northwestern America wasteland). When Spanish Crown began a serious tamings of Continental American Holdings. Conquistadores lost their roles, no new hosts were sent out from Spain by the latter half of the same century, while Tercios were still raised and deployed against Dutch rebellions throughout the long drawn out conflicts, in which Mighty Tercios had met with REAL challenge-Maurice of Nassau whom developed Countermarching Musketry to the great effect against Spanish superior Tercios. (Before that no one can beat Tercio pike squares). Also I don't agree with 'Missions'. Practically every World Religions made uses of 'Missions' and even within Catholic Christendom, Spanish ain't no only empires that made use of (Franciscan) Missions. Both Portuguese (Jesuits) and French (i'm not sure but they became rivals to Spain after the latter became wealthy due to their loots and colonies.) too did develop Missions system as a religious complex built in foreign lands to spread Catholicism (under their respective doctrines which all three were competed to win Papacy favor), Portuguese 'Missao' focused alot on medical services (To the point that Inquisitors sent to Missaos in Gao did use surgery in a very very bad way, as torturing instruments, and even the missaos use them as a means to 'convert natives', in Ayutthaya however, Portuguese priests were several times invited to Royal Court to attend sick members of royal family, even the King himself (King Naret was treated by Portuguese priest doctor particularly in his final days after decades of hard campaigns took a toll on him)

Leader: Charles V.
UU: Tercio (Superior Pike&Shot: Firepower class, may have religious agents tagged to gain extra strenghts)
UI: Presidio (What should it be? A stand-in for Fort or Encampment? but Spanish built ones BOTH in Italy and elsewhere outside Continental Europe).

What's yours??

 

[Zaarin]

It would be interesting to see something different from Spain, and tercios make sense as a different UU. That being said, the conquest of the New World really is Spain's most lasting impact on history, and so the conquistador just makes sense as UU.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Considering Spain in Civ 6 is designed to be a religious/ transcontinental conquering civ having both the conquistador and the mission is as appropriate as even having tercios and presidios, in my opinion.

I'd love for Isabella to come back personally. She could possibly get the conquistador as her own UU while Tercio could be the Civ's UU. The opposite could also be true if Charles V was leader.

 

[Zaarin]

If Isabella returns, I hope they pay attention to the fact that she was strawberry blonde for once.

 

[BuchiTaton]

1. What should be their focus? (Religious conqueror OR Transcontinental Power)

Both, make their design a synergy of both aspects.

Personally I never agree with Conquistadores being Spanish UU. Theirs are actually Continental European military backbone. The Tercio. Since the unit's inception in Italy (To response against French Gendarmerie along with their military prowess which perfectly matched what Spanish had before then, the Gendarmerie themselves actually reformed Medieval Knights but now a standing army belonged to the King and not overlords). Also their Tercio were used WORLDWIDE throughout the tenure of Pike and Shot era. and the term itself was ported into Enlightenment Era even with tactics had changed entirely. Spanish Royal Army Fusiliers were still called Tercio, even some units today were still called as such.

UU are usually based on just one era, so it is not like be on two add something. What do you mean by "Continental European military backbone" and some examples of "Tercio were used WORLDWIDE".

While Conqustadores can be represented differently (Either as stand-in Musketeers in Civ6 or stand-in Knights in Civ5), they're all active OUTSIDE CONTINENTAL EUROPE. and so often referred to commanders of a band of adventurers waging war against Mesoamerican Golden Empires, going after their golds and cities. I'm not sure if they went to what's now The Phillipines too. Conquistadores only active for a short time, particularly by early half of the 16th Century when there were still so much Mesoamerican Empires to plunder and so much gold deposites elsewhere in Continental Americas to mine (too bad they missed Californian Motherlodes and other lodes in Northwestern America wasteland). When Spanish Crown began a serious tamings of Continental American Holdings.

Depent what you mean by Conquistadores, the militar comanders of expeditions wanted land grants to be new feudal lords of the americas so that fit with Knights, BUT the mass of conquistadores were basically adventurers, some of them veterans from european wars, mercenaries and even convicts.
On terms of gameplay the better option should be a explorer unit with huge autonomy and bonus to recruit native auxiliaries.

Now there were not more titles granted after 16th century to "conquistadores" but the expeditions on the frontiers still won the rights over massive propiertes that turned to be Haciendas and their Hacendados practical feudal lords.

Also Muketeers is a terrible representation for conquistadores, most natives on America or Asia learned very fast that was not point to fight spaniards on their terms, early firearms were very impractical and most spanish frontierman turned to be Lanceros and Rodeleros.

Also I don't agree with 'Missions'. Practically every World Religions made uses of 'Missions' and even within Catholic Christendom, Spanish ain't no only empires that made use of (Franciscan) Missions.

The real point is WHO DID IT THE MOST?
Spaniard conquest was the "The Sword and the Cross" the missionaries were always next to or just behind the conquistador, no other kingdom on the history of christianity put such effort and focus on the conversion of their conquered. Outside christians the only close example are the Arabic Caliphates. Spaniards added a whole new continent to european domains and christianity, and if is not Spain the conquistador and missionary civs who would be?

The spanish conquests are "La cruz que tendran que cargar", now Spanish is one of the main languages on the world on population and area because that, the world beyond Europe know Spain because this.

Also Tercios are significative but said me, Who is more unique on terms of in game mechanics Tercios or Conquistadores?

And about the idea that Spain is allways the same, so what about the others civs CIV need new and heterodox forms of any recurrent civ?

 

[Zaarin]

Spaniard conquest was the "The Sword and the Cross" the missionaries were always next to or just behind the conquistador

Often sharply criticizing the conquistadors' barbarism, e.g., Bartolomé de las Casas. "How are we supposed to evangelize the heathens when you're busy brutalizing them?!"

 

[BuchiTaton]

Also about change designs what about Portuguese being CIV6 Aztecs.
You know the main slavers and luxury goods oriented nation , Bandeirantes are basically Eagle warriors on gameplay terms.

 

[Zaarin]

Also about change designs what about Portuguese being CIV6 Aztecs.
You know the main slavers and luxury goods oriented nation , Bandeirantes are basically Eagle warriors on gameplay terms.

I wonder if Firaxis would dare...

 

[BuchiTaton]

Often sharply criticizing the conquistadors' barbarism, e.g., Bartolomé de las Casas. "How are we supposed to evangelize the heathens when you're busy brutalizing them?!"

Still missionaries never relased those natives from their Reducciones, maybe they dont like the ways of conquistadores but their certainly wanted the gain of new souls to convert.
Also conquistadores hated each other anyway, literal wars between expeditions and mutual accusations of cruelty to natives was also common for conquistadores.

 

[Zaarin]

Still missionaries never relased those natives from their Reducciones, maybe they dont like the ways of conquistadores but their certainly wanted the gain of new souls to convert.
Also conquistadores hated each other anyway, literal wars between expeditions and mutual accusations of cruelty to natives was also common for conquistadores.

It depends on time and place (and sometimes on holy order--the Jesuits were usually, but not always, more culturally sensitive than the Franciscans and Dominicans; the Jesuits made a mess of things among the Hurons [albeit not as badly as the Franciscans] and in India* but were much more effective among the Guaraní [whom they actually supported in armed rebellion] and Japan [until the Franciscans came in calling down hellfire]). Also De las Casas specifically roundly criticized virtually everything the Spanish had done in the New World, though, yes, his goal was the salvation of souls. The Spanish Crown also frequently criticized their conquistador-governors' treatment of the natives, though New World treasure seems to have mollified their conscience since they never actually did much beyond protesting.

*ETA: The issue the Jesuits ran into in India was less a cultural problem than the Jesuits' own intolerance of Orthodox Christians. When the Jesuits treated the Malankara Orthodox Christians with contempt, the Hindus were like, "Why should we listen to you when you can't even get along with other Christians?"

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

UU are usually based on just one era, so it is not like be on two add something. What do you mean by "Continental European military backbone" and some examples of "Tercio were used WORLDWIDE".

I think it's a reference to the pike and shot formation spread from Europe to eventually East Asia.

The real point is WHO DID IT THE MOST?
Spaniard conquest was the "The Sword and the Cross" the missionaries were always next to or just behind the conquistador, no other kingdom on the history of christianity put such effort and focus on the conversion of their conquered. Outside christians the only close example are the Arabic Caliphates. Spaniards added a whole new continent to european domains and christianity, and if is not Spain the conquistador and missionary civs who would be?

Living in Texas I definitely associate missions with Spain, most of all.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I think it's a reference to the pike and shot formation spread from Europe to eventually East Asia.

And how mighty Tercio actually was back then. Not many can beat them in open battles. Not until late 16th-17th Century with Maurice of Nassau finally discovered different infantry tactics that worked against them. then Swedes (Under Gustavus Adolphus) and French (Conde') invented different infantry tactics that worked against Tercios.

 

[dagriggstar]

I'd like them to have an ability where, if Spain declares war on a civ it just met straight away, it gets a bunch of units (scale with era) to appear on that civs border. Encourage them to seek out and kill off any civs in game that are lagging behind in tech.

 

[Zaarin]

I'd like them to have an ability where, if Spain declares war on a civ it just met straight away, it gets a bunch of units (scale with era) to appear on that civs border. Encourage them to seek out and kill off any civs in game that are lagging behind in tech.

It would make more sense if those units scaled with the other civ's era. Conquistadors relied heavily on Native alliances. E.g., Cortes's forces were overwhelmingly disaffected non-Mexica Nahuans like the Tlaxcaltec with only a few Spaniards.

 

[BuchiTaton]

And how mighty Tercio actually was back then. Not many can beat them in open battles. Not until late 16th-17th Century with Maurice of Nassau finally discovered different infantry tactics that worked against them. then Swedes (Under Gustavus Adolphus) and French (Conde') invented different infantry tactics that worked against Tercios.

The problem is that what you suggest is a civ with sinergy of religion and a strong militar units, but there are many other civs that could have that, for example BOHEMIA, their War Wagons were a tactic againts knights and are linked to the Hussites so you have a new european civ with very similar design. While Spain still could do what they do the best take over new civilization and convert their peoples.

It would make more sense if those units scaled with the other civ's era. Conquistadors relied heavily on Native alliances. E.g., Cortes's forces were overwhelmingly disaffected non-Mexica Nahuans like the Tlaxcaltec with only a few Spaniards.

Maybe a bonus like this could be related to city states, like Conquistadores recruiting units from both independent and enemy-controled city states.
Apart from my heterodox idea of aztecs as cultural civ, my more orthodox design is "the city-state extortioner" civ, so that way Spanish civ would allways have the chance to turn the bullied city states againts the aztecs.

Aztecs:
UU- Pochteca, a mix of trader, envoy and spy that always have a eye on city states.
UB- Tzompantli, show the tributaries your militar power.

 

[Zaarin]

The problem is that what you suggest is a civ with sinergy of religion and a strong militar units, but there are many other civs that could have that, for example BOHEMIA, their War Wagons were a tactic againts knights and are linked to the Hussites so you have a new european civ with very similar design. While Spain still could do what they do the best take over new civilization and convert their peoples.

Yes, yes, yes, YESSSSS!!! A strongly Hussite Bohemia is a dream civ of mine.

Maybe a bonus like this could be related to city states, like Conquistadores recruiting units from both independent and enemy-controled city states.
Apart from my heterodox idea of aztecs as cultural civ, my more orthodox design is "the city-state extortioner" civ, so that way Spanish civ would allways have the chance to turn the bullied city states againts the aztecs.

That would fit perfectly.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Yes, yes, yes, YESSSSS!!! A strongly Hussite Bohemia is a dream civ of mine.

Graphically-distinctive Hussite wagon UU and the original hop-based Beer: A Can't Miss Civ - are you listening, Firaxiatics?

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ Hussite gunwagon a countermeasure against Imperial Knights? so this means this unit is 'Infantry' class (has anticav attributes) (and can be 'ranged' if HK combat rules is implemented )

 

[Krajzen]

It would be cool if we got Spanish leader from the medieval era for once, tercio instead of tired conquistadors, but my greatest desire is Soain being superoower in culture, art, literature and architecture.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Some european civs that could do good use of infantry and/or anti-cavalry medieval or early modern UU
IRISH - Gallowglass
BOHEMIAN - War Wagon
GERMAN - Landsknecht
SWISS - Reisläufer

Irish, Bohemians and Poles are good options for strong army + religion european civs. CIV7 do not need to "reinvent the the wheel" on the spanish design just for the sake of, it is a very specific gameplay model that almost no other could do. And outside Europe there are more civs that could aslo be represented as infantry+religion+culture on some way.

Are Tercios powerfull, prestigious and inovative european infantry? Yes, like the ones Greeks, Romans, Swiss, Germans, Prussians, Swedish, etc. could have.

Now. Spanish is the second language with most native speakers and there are almost as much catholics on Europe (total) as there are in America, Asia and Africa that are catholic just because the spanish colonial expansion not by reading El ingenioso hidalgo don Quijote de la Mancha. Spain can do that, do not force one more generic design than many others civs could have just because Conquistadores are "too mainstream".

*Edit: Actually there are way more catholics on ex-spanish colonies than the total of european catholics.