Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,007
I, myself, would like to potentially see the Baganda and the Luba.
Dream Civs/Leaders for Civ 7
- Thread starter Navelgazer
- Start date
Caesar of Bread
Ronald Reagan's #1 Hater
Put me as number 2 then
I'm in the same boat as you on that one. Hopefully they make it in base game!!!
Yeah, hussar costumes have got the drip. The only issue I see there is that basically anyone in power around that time (Meiji, Churchill, Manuel Rodriguez, Alphonso of Spain, Kaiser Wilhelm, Tzar Nicolas and his daughters, Haburgs for obvious reasons,...) would have worn a hussar uniform to a photo shoot at one point or another since they were absolutely aware of just how hard it slaps.
It's not really a Meiji-specific uniform nor the one he was depicted wearing outside of one famous photo the card used as reference.
He had nothing to do with cavalry, after all.
Hellenism Salesman
Emperor
Side note: if Civ VII brings back Hussars as a unit, can we pretty pretty please have a super zoomed in camera to look at their uniforms? 
Oh, also, since this is a thread for dream Civs: gimme all the Balkans and Central Europe! Keep Poland and Hungary, throw in Bulgaria for a high medieval power, Croatia as well, Romania just because (definitely not an excuse to include Vlad), Byzantium to the east (sometimes), Serbia too, and have the Vatican present in some form over on Italy. Throw in a good HRE German Civ, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the Caucasus, as well as Russia and Ukraine to the northeast, and I’ll have myself a perfect roster of civs to roleplay my historical special interests!
Oh, and if the game must sell, add in the Ottomans, Safavids, Florence, and Armenia. While we’re talking controversial inclusions, chuck in War of Independence Greece, Tibet, and the less controversial Philippines.
With all of this, I can die happy.
Scratch that- with all of this and JFK leading America, I can truly die happy.
Thank you Firaxis for listening to my pitch for Civilization: Me Edition. I expect it by my birthday.
Edit: this is not a good list, this is just my pet interest wishlist. I try so hard to be reasonable on these forums that I deserve my unreasonable moments
Oh, also, since this is a thread for dream Civs: gimme all the Balkans and Central Europe! Keep Poland and Hungary, throw in Bulgaria for a high medieval power, Croatia as well, Romania just because (definitely not an excuse to include Vlad), Byzantium to the east (sometimes), Serbia too, and have the Vatican present in some form over on Italy. Throw in a good HRE German Civ, Georgia and Azerbaijan in the Caucasus, as well as Russia and Ukraine to the northeast, and I’ll have myself a perfect roster of civs to roleplay my historical special interests!
Oh, and if the game must sell, add in the Ottomans, Safavids, Florence, and Armenia. While we’re talking controversial inclusions, chuck in War of Independence Greece, Tibet, and the less controversial Philippines.
With all of this, I can die happy.
Scratch that- with all of this and JFK leading America, I can truly die happy.
Thank you Firaxis for listening to my pitch for Civilization: Me Edition. I expect it by my birthday.
Edit: this is not a good list, this is just my pet interest wishlist. I try so hard to be reasonable on these forums that I deserve my unreasonable moments
seasnake
Conquistador
I did my new world civs, here's some old world civs:
Assyria
Rome
Carthage
Greece
Egypt
Hittites
Parthia
Nothing really new here accept the Hittites. Arabian Empire is too much like saying European Empire if you break it down. Toughest out was Persia, who I expect to see, but ultimately are too well covered by Hittites and Parthia/Assyria, and I want some variety here.
Sub-Saharan Africa:
Kongo
Songhai
Mutapa
Zulu
The Mutapa Empire was the largest in s. Africa, originating in the large city-state of Great Zimbabwe and spreading its control throughout the region. Far better civilization than the Zulu as far as traditional hallmarks of civilization. that said, I'm okay with pretty much one nomadic civ per continent, so I would still include the Zulu.
Assyria
Rome
Carthage
Greece
Egypt
Hittites
Parthia
Nothing really new here accept the Hittites. Arabian Empire is too much like saying European Empire if you break it down. Toughest out was Persia, who I expect to see, but ultimately are too well covered by Hittites and Parthia/Assyria, and I want some variety here.
Sub-Saharan Africa:
Kongo
Songhai
Mutapa
Zulu
The Mutapa Empire was the largest in s. Africa, originating in the large city-state of Great Zimbabwe and spreading its control throughout the region. Far better civilization than the Zulu as far as traditional hallmarks of civilization. that said, I'm okay with pretty much one nomadic civ per continent, so I would still include the Zulu.
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,007
The Parthians are typically seen, historically, as a Persian Dynnsty, not as a seperate civ (especially given their non-Persian Empire-entangled status is quite limited - kind of similar to the Jurchens/Manchus with China).
seasnake
Conquistador
They're sort of a successor/breakaway from Seleucids who invoked the names of the old Persian emperors to justify their rebellion (like HRE deliberately trying to be the spiritual successor to Rome). But yeah, there's a lot of overlap. The itch for Parthia is for variety, and the overlap is why I don't also want Persia in the same game.
But I'm sure we will get Persia in some form.
But I'm sure we will get Persia in some form.
Morningcalm
Keeper of Records
Dream Civs and Leaders (some of them which I posted on before):
- America - John Adams (only founding father against slavery, second president). Wouldn't mind JFK for a science-focused America though.
- Babylon - Hammurabi (to represent a skillful backstabber)
- China - Kangxi Emperor (one of Chinese history's best, even though he was Manchu, he learned much of Chinese culture and created a harmonious unity)
- Egypt - Hatshepsut (last appeared in Civ IV and she was a great pharaoh)
- England - Henry V (for his military accomplishments, though I realise this is a lot of Henrys if we include Henry IV for France)
- Ethiopia - Taytu Betul (female leader, wife of Menelik II and apparently was known to be the power behind the throne, according to https://blogs.loc.gov/international-collections/2022/03/taytu-betul-the-cunning-empress-of-ethiopia/ where in the famous Battle of Adwa, "[t]he empress seemed to be the main architect of the battle" with her own contingent of around 5000 troops, and her command of provisional and medical operations during the battle, and because she commanded operations to prevent the Italian military access to potable water. In the words of an Italian count from that time, she "is a great lady, who perhaps in another milieu would have been a Christina of Sweden or a Catherine the Great.")
- France - Henry IV (a genuinely good king, and successor to Catherine de Medici, curiously enough, so chronologically a follow-up from Civ VI)
- Germany - Charlemagne (he was Frankish, and the Franks are a Germanic people, so this fits. Important figure in German history with an immense legacy)
- Greece - Themistocles (skilled military leader and statesman, not featured before)
- Hittites - Puduhepa (interesting diplomatic bonus possibilities, actually ruled her civ also)
- Inca - Topa Inca Yupanqui (in his father Pacachuti's footsteps, he succeeded militarily and expanded the empire and its road network vastly)
- India - Nur Jahan (high time we had a female leader, and she's a kickass tiger killing empress who actually ruled)
- Japan - Hojo Tokimune (ain't broke, don't fix it. Though I wouldn't mind Minamoto Yoritomo)
- Maori - Hongi Hika (Maori are among the most well-known Pacific Islander groups, and Hongi Hika is an important historical leader, unlike the somewhat more mythical representative we had in Civ VI)
- Maya - Yuk'noom the Great or Lady Six Sky (I love Lady Six Sky and suggested her to the devs way back when (proof is elsewhere in the Civ VI forums), but Yuk'noom the Great could be a good military leader)
- Rome - Hadrian (builder-focused, and Rome is known for building. Fact that he's not been featured before and fact that he was in a relationship with another man don't hurt for representation either)
- Russia - Catherine the Great / Ivan the Terrible (Ivan would make a great villain, and he was a decent ruler before he went mad)
- Sumeria - Ur-Nammu (code of law before Hammurabi)
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
Not 'went mad', went Madder: from the start he wasn't what any modern observer would call 'balanced'.
On the other hand, to chime in for Ivan the Mighty or Ivan the Terrifying (both better translations), in addition to imposing strict discipline in his military at a time when it was not common, he had the great Saint Basil's Sobor built, also established the first printing press in Moscow and personally wrote a number of religious tracts that are considered quite well-written and argued.
So, in addition to malevolent military potential, also could have serious Religious effects or even Scientific (the early printing presses, in addition to religious works like bibles and testaments, mostly printed up practical works on agriculture, crafts, industry : the spread of knowledge from even a single press could be Huge)
Oh, and for a completely Off The Wall argument, the latest Anno (city-building/production chain game) just announced last week is Anno 117, Pax Romana - set in the Roman Empire in the time of Hadrian. No real chance of a tie-in (their studio is in Mainz, Germany) but would be interesting to see how two almost completely different games handle the same period and people.
One problem I have with Charlemagne leading Germany is that Francia comprised mostly of present-day France, more than Germany.
That being said I think he'd be a better fit for his own Frankish civ, if that ever happens.
Caesar of Bread
Ronald Reagan's #1 Hater
Never heard of her so a nice pick!
I'd much rather if A. He was a dual leader or B. He wasn't really around for VII
Hittite agenda!
Three 11/10 choices
The Hadrian agenda will not fall!
Nice villain choice
Epic choice, but does that mean no Babylon since the law code that Babylon is famous for probably wouldn't be at hand?
Patine
Deity
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 12,007
Unless Nebuchadnezzar was the Babylonian leader, of course.
Nothing about Hammurabi's code was even mentioned for Babylon in Civ 6, except maybe an ability name, so I don't think that's an issue.
Caesar of Bread
Ronald Reagan's #1 Hater
Morningcalm
Keeper of Records
Nearly all ancient leaders in Civ weren't "what any modern observer would call 'balanced'. So I think that point is neither here nor there. I think having Ivan the Terrible would be an interesting choice and give us a nice "villain" character (like Enrico Dandolo from Civ V or Genghis Khan from Civ VI).
Taizong4Civ7
Chieftain
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2022
- Messages
- 36
1. see username
2. Absolutely agree on Amorite warlord Hammurabi, if the Babylonians are going to be nerds in every iteration, they ought to at least be aggressive so to make use of their science (military) bonuses.
Caesar of Bread
Ronald Reagan's #1 Hater
Hmm, this person really likes Taizong!
FishFishFish
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2021
- Messages
- 295
Nabopolassar could also fit the aggressive role.
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
There are degrees of balance which you, yourself acknowledge in wanting Ivan Grozhny as a 'villain' for Civ VII. Obviously, then, you think he'd make a better villain than Pericles or Darius or Trajan.
A judgement with which I agree, but I think is flawed in that the game does not need Leaders as 'villains' it needs Leaders with traits and potential Unique Attributes peculiar to them and (ideally) them only.
Ivan Vasilyevich abounds in such. In addition to his religious and Wonder-constructing chops already posted, he formed the first Russian Secret Police/ Authorized Terrorist organization, the Oprichina, who absolutely terrified the Russian nobility. He formed the first Russian standing army, and his own Unique Unit, the Streltsi. He and his armies displayed a rather distressing habit of massacring the populations of towns after they had taken them, which could be a singularly Negative Unique for him. He was one of the first Russian/Muscovite Leaders to get any control over a Cossack host, in that he got the Don Cossacks to attack the Crimean Khanate for him. Finally, through the Stroganov family he started the first serious expansion of Russian/Muscovite power into Siberia.
So, potentially a militant, religious, expansionist, murderous Leader. Precisely the sort to make one nervous about having him on your borders, which is, I think, a good definition of Villainous in Civ game terms.
Morningcalm
Keeper of Records
Framing it around a "need" is misleading - the core things the game "needs" are not intractably divided from those things we as gamers might "want" so there's nothing inherently wrong with wanting villain leaders for some spice (particularly if some become meme-worthy and inject some drama into the game).
That said, I think you've pinned nicely that "villain" leaders in Civ are those who are militant and murderous. Having leaders like that has inherent value in Civ, particularly as they add more flavor to diplomacy and strategic maneuverings in general (should I build walls? Or keep building that wonder? I mean, he is a scary guy...)
