Dream Civs/Leaders for Civ 7

I already tried to make an Argentina mod focused on science and culture, based on Argentina's importance in paleontology - there is evidence that the earliest dinosaurs lived in South America, most of these dinosaurs were discovered in Argentina. I think it would be a very interesting way to portray Argentina without appealing to Argentine (or Amarica Latin) stereotypes.
 
PetrusvonDoom said:
I already tried to make an Argentina mod focused on science and culture, based on Argentina's importance in paleontology - there is evidence that the earliest dinosaurs lived in South America, most of these dinosaurs were discovered in Argentina. I think it would be a very interesting way to portray Argentina without appealing to Argentine (or Amarica Latin) stereotypes.
Click to expand...
I could get behind an Argentina civ as long as the leader's last name wasn't Peron.
 
Alexander's Hetaroi said:
Trung Trac or Le Loi.
Click to expand...
Neither of those is even Vietnamese. And while Civ 6 intentionally went with the invented fantasy, if we're picking a historical leader this time around you might as well go with the top choice and pick Le Thanh Tong.
Rather than Le Loi who was essentially a successful mountain tribesman steered by other people.
 
notNamed said:
Neither of those is even Vietnamese. And while Civ 6 intentionally went with the invented fantasy, if we're picking a historical leader this time around you might as well go with the top choice and pick Le Thanh Tong.
Rather than Le Loi who was essentially a successful mountain tribesman steered by other people.
Click to expand...

If one called Trung Luoyue you'd 99.99% of people, including those that grew up in Vietnam, not recognize it at all. And I'd expect the general goal is to have people recognize things in the game, so saying "Vietnam" seems like a find compromise to reach that goal
 
notNamed said:
Neither of those is even Vietnamese. And while Civ 6 intentionally went with the invented fantasy, if we're picking a historical leader this time around you might as well go with the top choice and pick Le Thanh Tong.
Rather than Le Loi who was essentially a successful mountain tribesman steered by other people.
Click to expand...
Napoleon Bonaparte once made the claim, backed up by his nepotistically-empowered siblings, that he was the first baby born in Corsica after the annexation to the Kingdom of France, defending how, "French," he was. His claim is very difficult to ascertain, given only baptismals, not birth certificates, were issued in Christian Europe at that time.
 
notNamed said:
Neither of those is even Vietnamese. And while Civ 6 intentionally went with the invented fantasy, if we're picking a historical leader this time around you might as well go with the top choice and pick Le Thanh Tong.
Rather than Le Loi who was essentially a successful mountain tribesman steered by other people.
Click to expand...
How is Le Loi not Vietnamese?
 
AffineConstant said:
If one called Trung Luoyue you'd 99.99% of people, including those that grew up in Vietnam, not recognize it at all. And I'd expect the general goal is to have people recognize things in the game, so saying "Vietnam" seems like a find compromise to reach that goal
Click to expand...

I mean the name is kinda funky but yeah by Civ conventions it's always going to be Vietnam and nothing else.

However, she'd follow the precedent set by Ba Trieu. Palatable to the uninvolved, but wildly standing out in a historical game if you are familiar with the clothes, the artifacts and the history in question. Thus my preference to pick someone else.

It's basically "France (Vietnam), lead by Vercingetorix (Ba Trieu/Trung), wearing a tuxedo (ao dai) and a tophat (the Nguyen turban) holding a bronze antenna(e) (Dong Son) sword." They could always top it off by adding an elephant riding element to her so we'd have this Vercingetorix sit on a cataphract-equipped warhorse.
Fine for Rise of Kingdoms but strongly out of place with the rest of Civ leaders.

Bonyduck Campersang said:
How is Le Loi not Vietnamese?
Click to expand...
The historical Vietnamese were in an antagonistic/foreign relationship with Thanh Hoa people, his birthplace.
The records about him were fairly unanimous about portraying him as an outside force that walked into civilisation proper.
His original rebellion resulted in him being content with an agreement which gave him land in the mountains. And he had to be convinced to lead another rebellion by an official from would-be Hanoi looking for military assistance.

Mountains being the land of the barbarians that no historical Vietnamese would willingly live in.
After his successful campaign against the Ming, you get a Mac state which is literally built on the idea of certain Vietnamese families fleeing from what they saw as foreign rule. Similarly, many of his exploits afterwards are about pacification of the locals... he wasn't a liberator as you'd hear in a tourist guidebook, he was another conqueror.
Finally IIRC his grave goods were consistent with a Muong grave, not one of a Kinh (i.e. modern Vietnamese). Which is pretty damning considering this is an emperor we're talking about.

Does this disqualify him from modern Vietnamese history? No.
But since Vietnamese history is just a void for most of people playing this game, I would really prefer if Firaxis tried to tackle the topic with the care used in any modern historic research. We don't dress Qin in Peking opera clothes because we know better, Roman buildings are painted as they should be, etc.
Hence if I had a choice, I would 100% pick a valid, unquestionably Vietnamese emperor known for a golden age and having a large part in shaping modern Vietnam (being the guy who conquered Champa and opened up the south).
Rather than a person whose life and story is a tool used to push certain narratives. Part of the narrative is relatively harmless since the Vietnamese crushed the last hopes of the culture standing on its own during the last century (tellingly, both the French and Americans used the "Montagnard" people against them), kind of in line with calling Ryukyuans Japanese, their language a dialect and their religion Shinto... at the end of the day it is now almost really true.
But tit's used to push narratives that both distort understanding of Vietnamese history (from a multifaceted state of nations with their own cultures and agendas into a modern Kinh nationstate) and argue for unanimous hatred of the Chinese (it's never "so and so event lead to an invasion" "so and so people abused the locals and the authorities were either unable to respond to it or complicit because they got something out of it"... It's always all of China out to enslave every single man, woman and child for the sheer and pure joy of causing suffering).
And support of these modern narratives is definitely against what historical academia stands for and I'd hope Firaxis as well.
 
Last edited:
Dream list:

Mississippi
Pueblo
Sioux
Salish
Iroquois

Really flesh out North America. These five would all play wildly different from one another. Honestly, I’d be happy to skip America.

Meso America:
Maya
Aztec
Zapotec

Zapotec were contemporaries of the Mayans and Aztecs and their artworks are found in burial chambers of both. Wholly underrated.

South America:
Inca
Mapuche
Muisca

The Muisca were a prominent civilization in northern Colombia that endured in some form for 2000 years. Their gold work probably inspired the story of el dorado.
 
notNamed said:
The historical Vietnamese were in an antagonistic/foreign relationship with Thanh Hoa people, his birthplace.
The records about him were fairly unanimous about portraying him as an outside force that walked into civilisation proper.
His original rebellion resulted in him being content with an agreement which gave him land in the mountains. And he had to be convinced to lead another rebellion by an official from would-be Hanoi looking for military assistance.

Mountains being the land of the barbarians that no historical Vietnamese would willingly live in.
After his successful campaign against the Ming, you get a Mac state which is literally built on the idea of certain Vietnamese families fleeing from what they saw as foreign rule. Similarly, many of his exploits afterwards are about pacification of the locals... he wasn't a liberator as you'd hear in a tourist guidebook, he was another conqueror.
Finally IIRC his grave goods were consistent with a Muong grave, not one of a Kinh (i.e. modern Vietnamese). Which is pretty damning considering this is an emperor we're talking about.

Does this disqualify him from modern Vietnamese history? No.
But since Vietnamese history is just a void for most of people playing this game, I would really prefer if Firaxis tried to tackle the topic with the care used in any modern historic research. We don't dress Qin in Peking opera clothes because we know better, Roman buildings are painted as they should be, etc.
Hence if I had a choice, I would 100% pick a valid, unquestionably Vietnamese emperor known for a golden age and having a large part in shaping modern Vietnam (being the guy who conquered Champa and opened up the south).
Rather than a person whose life and story is a tool used to push certain narratives. Part of the narrative is relatively harmless since the Vietnamese crushed the last hopes of the culture standing on its own during the last century (tellingly, both the French and Americans used the "Montagnard" people against them), kind of in line with calling Ryukyuans Japanese, their language a dialect and their religion Shinto... at the end of the day it is now almost really true.
But tit's used to push narratives that both distort understanding of Vietnamese history (from a multifaceted state of nations with their own cultures and agendas into a modern Kinh nationstate) and argue for unanimous hatred of the Chinese (it's never "so and so event lead to an invasion" "so and so people abused the locals and the authorities were either unable to respond to it or complicit because they got something out of it"... It's always all of China out to enslave every single man, woman and child for the sheer and pure joy of causing suffering).
And support of these modern narratives is definitely against what historical academia stands for and I'd hope Firaxis as well.
Click to expand...
I had no idea about any of this. But considering he founded a Vietnamese dynasty I am sure that is as much as a qualifier as any, even if he wasn't proper Vietnamese by ethnicity.
I mean we have Kurdish Saladin leading Arabia, and well it seems like more Italians lead France (Catherine and Napoleon) than actual French people. :mischief:
 
Alexander's Hetaroi said:
I had no idea about any of this.
Click to expand...
And that's my point. None of that would be reflected in the intro, the abilities or the guy's design if he was used in Civ7.
Because much like the ladies before him, the invented character, who has to look and act a certain way, outgrew him.

He won't have period appropriate clothing for a warrior because that doesn't fit the fictional Le Loi. He won't be dressed as an emperor because that doesn't fit the focus of the story. I just don't see a way he could turn out as anything more than the caricatures you get if you type Le Loi into Google or Wikipedia right now.

And all for a guy who's not really more interesting or accomplished than the other options. Only the one highlighted due to communist theories (a rebel vs bourgeoisie leaders) and pragmatic politics (anti-Chinese hero).
 
I have a long list - but here are a few:
  • Hittites (led by Puduhepa): The first large empire to implement iron weaponry, the first large empire to sign a peace treaty AND the first large empire to publicize legislative texts which they then communicated to their population as a means of organized law enforcement. They would be an excellent choice for a diplomatically oriented warmonger, especially when led by Puduhepa, the queen who signed the aforementioned first peace treaty. (with Nefertiti who is currently being spec'd as Egypt's leader)
  • Assyria (led by Ashurbanipal or Samurrammat): An underrated pick for the Ancient Middle Eastern Civ: They could work as early expansionists into a cultural builder endgame if designed right.
  • Muisca (led by Diego de Torres?): One of the four urbanized cultures of South America, and the only one not represented in Civ. They're well attested, and built a society based on salt and precious gem mining. They could be a religious version of Civ 6's Gaul, which is quite fun.
  • Lakota (Sitting Bull): IMO the slam dunk pick for a Native American civ focused on raiding, warfare, exploration and hunting. Their culture is also focused around natural beauty (which is a retcon - putting that in here in case Zaarin sees this post), which leaves a window for unique interactions with Natural wonder (cf: Spain in Civ 5 or Bull Moose Teddy in Civ 6)
  • Arsacid or Sassanid Persia - The two flavours of Persia that haven't been introduced in a Civ game yet. Arsacid Persia (or commonly known as Parthia) would be a cool warmongering Horse Archer Civ like Scythia was, while Sassanid Persia could provide a Cultural Builder fix if Assyria get the shaft.
  • Bulgaria (Led by Simeon the Great or Boris I): Invented the Cyrillic alphabet, spread Orthodox lithurgy, the most powerful empire in Eastern Europe in the 8th and 9th century AD. They're not a basegame civ imo (although I suppose they could replace Russia if you want something similar to Civ 6's Russia), but as a DLC Civ paired with Byzantium? Bring it on!
  • Ireland (Led by Brian Boru or Grace O'Malley): The obvious choice for a Celtic Civ after Gaul's introduction in Civ6. Naval Celts that build crannogs, and specialize in heavy cavalry. Seems fun and unique to me!
  • Berbers (Led by Dihya) or the Tuareg (led by Tin Hinan): Similar to Civ 5's Morocco, but a more contemporary adaptation, led by a woman. Both the Berbers and Tuareg have a distinct desert-based culture which could allow for a more commerce and/or pirate based Civ that contrast well against Arabia which is often Religion, Expansion or Science focused. Also, both the Berbers and the Tuareg have a clear choice for a female leader, which Arabia don't really have (Arabia only has the very obscure but daring choice of Arwa al-Sulayhi, amidst a strong roster of male Caliphs and sultans)
 
Last edited:
Lord Lakely said:
Bulgaria (Led by Simeon the Great or Boris I): Invented the Cyrillic alphabet, spread Orthodox lithurgy, the most powerful empire in Eastern Europe in the 8th and 9th century AD. They're not a basegame civ imo (although I suppose they could replace Russia if you want something similar to Civ 6's Russia), but as a DLC Civ paired with Byzantium? Bring it on!
Click to expand...
I'd love for a Bulgarian civ to lean more into their Turkic roots
 
Baganda
Luba or Igibo
Middag, Cebu-Mactan, or Tondo
Some Attractively Assembled, but not too blobby Micronesian Civ (preferably with Shark-Tooth weapons, Stone Money, Stick Charts, and City of Leluh)
Celtic Icenii and Allies (Boadiccea)
Croatia (Brannigan)
Seminole
Sikh Confederacy
 
Really, my primary hope is that Civ 7 gives Native America some more representation. These are a few of the civs I'd like to see. I'm going to shy away from leaders for now, just because that's more fluid in the sense in that who's chosen isn't as important to me.

North America
  • Iroquois (Haudenosaunee) return (really should be a staple at this point)
  • Diné (Navajo)
  • Choctaw
  • Haida
  • Taino
  • Purépecha
South America
  • Muisca
  • Guaraní
Europe
  • Ireland
  • Al-Andalus
  • A Gothic civ of some kind. At the moment, I'm not too educated as to how this could be put together
  • Italy as a collection of city-states
  • Kievan Rus'
  • Bohemia would be nice, but I don't really want to lose Poland or Hungary
Africa
  • Amazigh
  • Ghana (Ashanti)
  • Yoruba (Benin/Nigeria)
  • Shona (Zimbabwe)
  • Angola
  • Swahili
  • Madagascar
  • Nubia returns
Middle East
  • Judah
  • Hittites
  • Armenia
  • Sumer, Assyria, and Babylon all return
Asia
  • Sogdia
  • Gurkani
  • Maurya
  • Chola
  • Afghanistan
  • Tibet (lol)
  • Siam, Khmer, and Vietnam all return
  • Manchu
Pacific
  • Tonga
  • Hawai'i
That's all for now. I'm fully aware of how unreasonable this is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

O
Allow switching leaders not civs.
Replies
1
Views
404
Zaarin
Zaarin
S
New/Alternate Leaders from In-Game Civs
Replies
5
Views
708
socratic
S
sTAPler27
The Civ/Leader Pairings Could Use Some Tweaks
Replies
5
Views
342
Ryansinbela
Ryansinbela
Krajzen
Mods which you'd like to see in the future
Replies
14
Views
724
infiniterocks
I
Gedemo
Thoughts after some games
Replies
2
Views
359
GeneralZift
GeneralZift
Back
Top Bottom