Filling in the gaps - Charting the optimal Civ Switches

Finally had enough time to sit and read your idea @Lord Lakely , and I really like it as a middle ground between the "everything goes" we have right now, and a more "classic" mode from past civs. Personally I still think playing a modern civ starting from Antiquity is just as immersion breaking and nonsense as going from Maya to Bulgaria because I built some shrines.

I'm one of the weirdos that likes the civ switching, but even when the choice is there, I'd rather keep it flavourful, and I think I, like many others already do a similar thing to what you are proposing...imagining what kind of game do I want to play right a the start of the game, and choosing civ and leader accordingly. If this system was already in place I could even visualize the path I could take, (instead of going through the era start menus to glimpse it)

I really hope the devs are taking the game in a similar direction, flavourful culturally adjacent civs make for some of the most fun games. things like Han-Ming-Qing, Rome-Norman-Britain should be the norm. They've got enough fan favourites out of the game right now, that again, I hope they make a strong comeback mechanically with the first expansion: Mexica, Byzantium, Gaul, Edo Japan, Danes, Brazil, HRE, the Ottomans, Scythians, the Netherlands, etc. (and the current system could just as well be another option for people who like it)

But as it's very clear, it needs a whole bunch of civs and leaders to smooth it out. many parts of the world still could use better paths. Poor mesoamerica has to cling to Pachacuti for a leader, and he clings to mesoamerica because there's nothing for South America besides Inca.

For Mesoamerica I'd love to see as essential

Antiquity
Maya
Teotihuacan
Zapotec

Exploration
Mexica
Itza
Purepecha

Modern
Mexico




In the case of the Maya are perfectly capable of covering the Exploration Era with ease, they could go all the way to modern with Noj Kaaj Santa Cruz, but that's pushing it.

Maya- This is the classical Maya we have now, with the Yax Mutal temple complex as wonder. (man I hate "mundo Perdido" as a name)

Teotihuacan - Largest city in the continent, by a large margin, the Pyramid of the Sun is already in game, and should they ever take another look at quarters mechanically, they would be an excelent candidate for a 1 city challenge.

Zapotec - They just like the Mayans, could cover antiquity and exploration by themselves, but they are way less known, but sites like Monte Alban, Zaachila, and Guiengola, could provide inspiration for another rough terrain, mountain adjacent civ. (besides Benito Juarez, one of the main candidates for Mexican leader, was or Zapotec origin)

Mexica - Also known as "The Aztecs". Now in the game as Mexica with Tenochtitlan as independent peoples, and I'm hopefull Firaxis will leave the correct naming when they are added as a full civ. Not much to talk about them besides wondering how in the hell will they portray the canals and mix of urban an rural quarters the Mexica had going.

Purepecha - Also incorrectly called Tarascan, they were the western Mexico empire builders the Mexicas just couldn't break a bit. They have very unique ceremonial architecture, they made metal and weapon tools, and even come with a semi legendary female hero in Erendira, if Firaxis would be so inclined.

Itza- would cover the post classical period, they would get Temple of Kukulkan as a wonder ("Chichen Itza" is the name of the city not the temple, but I digress). Era wise it covers the whole Exploration era, if we take into account Maya kingdoms with strong ties to the Mayapan league, like Noh Peten, which was conquered until 1697

There's so many that at the very least should be Independent peoples, Mixtecs, Totonacs, Toltecs, Tlaxcallans, Olmecs, Otomi

and for leaders, man, there's a handfull to choose, from semi mythical, to kings, presidents, translators and Spanish conquistadors turned native, but I'm going for most representative, or very..."Firaxizeable":

Spear Thrower Owl - Teotihuacan backed ruler of Yax Mutal, could also provide a nice bridge for both Maya or Teotihuacan antiquity age.
8 Deer Jaguar Claw - Mixtec ruler that through marriages, alliances and conquest unified much of the Mixtec and Zapotec lands. (besides the name is just so metal)
Nezahualcoyotl - The Texcocan warrior philosopher king, founding member of the Mexica triple alliance, we really could use less Montys and go for Nezahualcoyotl, we even have so much of his poetry that could be used for leader dialogue, Its such awesome potential wasted on any Monty.

and two historical figures that famously "switched sides"

Malintzin - Yes I went there, the native translator for Hernan Cortez, she is such an interesting figure, still maligned to this day as a "traitor" even tho she wasn't Mexica, and if anything went from a slave to a translator, to being the face of the conquest (take a look at codexes depicting her and Cortez, she is always in front)
Gonzalo Guerrero - To balance things, a conquistador gone native, Gonzalo Guerrero was a spanish marooned on the Yucatan peninsula that also rose from captured slave to Mayan warchief, he was later found by Cortez and refused to return to Spain, he was fully Mayan by then and had family. He would resist the conquistadors early attempts to enter Yucatan.

EDIT_added Mexica description
 
Last edited:
Mamluk Sultanate -
The Mamluk is already a UU for the Abbasids though. So, the Mamluk Sultanate is already being vicariously represented by the Abbasids.

@ehecatzin: I'm glad you enjoyed it the discussion! For Mexico itself, I believe the natural transition is Maya => Aztec => Mexico with an arm via Spain. Adding other ethnicities are major powers would be cool, but they're have to be distinct enough to players. Similar to how the Inca and Mapuche in Civ6 were nothing alike.

I haven't mapped out my plans for Latin America, but I do have Eréndira written down as a potential leader for the Mexican line. The other name I'm considering is Spearthrower Owl.
 
The Mamluk is already a UU for the Abbasids though. So, the Mamluk Sultanate is already being vicariously represented by the Abbasids.
It is not! The slave soldier of the Abbasids can't represent to any satisfiable adequacy an entire Sultanate anymore than the Mongolian horse archer represent every single steppe nomad culture.

Besides anything else, the Abbasids and the Mamluks weren't even contemporary. The Abbasid slave soldier system wasn't even the same as that of the Mamluks. Even the term 'Mamluk' for the Abbasid UU is arguably anachronistic
 
It is not! The slave soldier of the Abbasids can't represent to any satisfiable adequacy an entire Sultanate anymore than the Mongolian horse archer represent every single steppe nomad culture.

Besides anything else, the Abbasids and the Mamluks weren't even contemporary. The Abbasid slave soldier system wasn't even the same as that of the Mamluks. Even the term 'Mamluk' for the Abbasid UU is arguably anachronistic
I agree with you there. 'Mamluk' is a fine UU for a Saladin-led Arabia, but the Abbasids should have had the Ansar as its UU. The Abbasids are just too generically Arabian by design, and hopefully this is retconned down the line, just like how the Indian Civ was split up in AoE 2.

Doesn't take away that the Mamluk Sultanate is anachronistically and incorrectly represented by the token Arabian Civ as it stands.
 
Why y’all arguing between the Ayyubids and the Mamluks when the Fatimids are right there! They emerged from the Maghreb but relocated to Egypt and founded Cairo. (So they can represent both North African paths.) They were the first Muslim dynasty to really make Egypt their center. Also being a Shia dynasty they could fill a unique role in the exploration age religious game when that gets expanded into something acceptable.
 
Finally had enough time to sit and read your idea @Lord Lakely , and I really like it as a middle ground between the "everything goes" we have right now, and a more "classic" mode from past civs. Personally I still think playing a modern civ starting from Antiquity is just as immersion breaking and nonsense as going from Maya to Bulgaria because I built some shrines.

I'm one of the weirdos that likes the civ switching, but even when the choice is there, I'd rather keep it flavourful, and I think I, like many others already do a similar thing to what you are proposing...imagining what kind of game do I want to play right a the start of the game, and choosing civ and leader accordingly. If this system was already in place I could even visualize the path I could take, (instead of going through the era start menus to glimpse it)

I really hope the devs are taking the game in a similar direction, flavourful culturally adjacent civs make for some of the most fun games. things like Han-Ming-Qing, Rome-Norman-Britain should be the norm. They've got enough fan favourites out of the game right now, that again, I hope they make a strong comeback mechanically with the first expansion: Mexica, Byzantium, Gaul, Edo Japan, Danes, Brazil, HRE, the Ottomans, Scythians, the Netherlands, etc. (and the current system could just as well be another option for people who like it)

But as it's very clear, it needs a whole bunch of civs and leaders to smooth it out. many parts of the world still could use better paths. Poor mesoamerica has to cling to Pachacuti for a leader, and he clings to mesoamerica because there's nothing for South America besides Inca.

For Mesoamerica I'd love to see as essential

Antiquity
Maya
Teotihuacan
Zapotec

Exploration
Mexica
Itza
Purepecha

Modern
Mexico




In the case of the Maya are perfectly capable of covering the Exploration Era with ease, they could go all the way to modern with Noj Kaaj Santa Cruz, but that's pushing it.

Maya- This is the classical Maya we have now, with the Yax Mutal temple complex as wonder. (man I hate "mundo Perdido" as a name)

Teotihuacan - Largest city in the continent, by a large margin, the Pyramid of the Sun is already in game, and should they ever take another look at quarters mechanically, they would be an excelent candidate for a 1 city challenge.

Zapotec - They just like the Mayans, could cover antiquity and exploration by themselves, but they are way less known, but sites like Monte Alban, Zaachila, and Guiengola, could provide inspiration for another rough terrain, mountain adjacent civ. (besides Benito Juarez, one of the main candidates for Mexican leader, was or Zapotec origin)

Mexica - Also known as "The Aztecs". Now in the game as Mexica with Tenochtitlan as independent peoples, and I'm hopefull Firaxis will leave the correct naming when they are added as a full civ. Not much to talk about them besides wondering how in the hell will they portray the canals and mix of urban an rural quarters the Mexica had going.

Purepecha - Also incorrectly called Tarascan, they were the western Mexico empire builders the Mexicas just couldn't break a bit. They have very unique ceremonial architecture, they made metal and weapon tools, and even come with a semi legendary female hero in Erendira, if Firaxis would be so inclined.

Itza- would cover the post classical period, they would get Temple of Kukulkan as a wonder ("Chichen Itza" is the name of the city not the temple, but I digress). Era wise it covers the whole Exploration era, if we take into account Maya kingdoms with strong ties to the Mayapan league, like Noh Peten, which was conquered until 1697

There's so many that at the very least should be Independent peoples, Mixtecs, Totonacs, Toltecs, Tlaxcallans, Olmecs, Otomi

and for leaders, man, there's a handfull to choose, from semi mythical, to kings, presidents, translators and Spanish conquistadors turned native, but I'm going for most representative, or very..."Firaxizeable":

Spear Thrower Owl - Teotihuacan backed ruler of Yax Mutal, could also provide a nice bridge for both Maya or Teotihuacan antiquity age.
8 Deer Jaguar Claw - Mixtec ruler that through marriages, alliances and conquest unified much of the Mixtec and Zapotec lands. (besides the name is just so metal)
Nezahualcoyotl - The Texcocan warrior philosopher king, founding member of the Mexica triple alliance, we really could use less Montys and go for Nezahualcoyotl, we even have so much of his poetry that could be used for leader dialogue, Its such awesome potential wasted on any Monty.

and two historical figures that famously "switched sides"

Malintzin - Yes I went there, the native translator for Hernan Cortez, she is such an interesting figure, still maligned to this day as a "traitor" even tho she wasn't Mexica, and if anything went from a slave to a translator, to being the face of the conquest (take a look at codexes depicting her and Cortez, she is always in front)
Gonzalo Guerrero - To balance things, a conquistador gone native, Gonzalo Guerrero was a spanish marooned on the Yucatan peninsula that also rose from captured slave to Mayan warchief, he was later found by Cortez and refused to return to Spain, he was fully Mayan by then and had family. He would resist the conquistadors early attempts to enter Yucatan.

EDIT_added Mexica description
Yes to all of the above. Will never say no to fleshed out indigenous America representation. Itza is an inspired choice.
 
Maybe I’m being pessimistic, but it’s likely some civs have general names like “Egypt” or “Bulgaria” were chosen because those are the only version of those civs that are being considered. Persia getting Qajar could disprove this, but considering Persia was coined specifically to refer to the Achaemenids, I’m not sure.
I was surprised they were going with Qajar, after they announced the generic Persia. There's always the possibility that they could rename civs. I do think they should rename Persia into the Achaemenids, or rename Qajar into Iran, for continuity's sake.
Itza- would cover the post classical period, they would get Temple of Kukulkan as a wonder ("Chichen Itza" is the name of the city not the temple, but I digress). Era wise it covers the whole Exploration era, if we take into account Maya kingdoms with strong ties to the Mayapan league, like Noh Peten, which was conquered until 1697
What would you give them as a unique improvement or quarter? The only thing I could come up with is an "observatory" which were built later than other structures.
 
What would you give them as a unique improvement or quarter? The only thing I could come up with is an "observatory" which were built later than other structures.
First I'd like to say that I think adding the ballgame court to classical Maya probably was a mistake , with the most emblematic ballcourts being from the postclassical (I would have put the observatory in Antiquity and ballcourt in exploration),., but here we are.

Chichen Itza and much of the lowlands has a clear Toltec influence, specially notable in structures like the temple of warriors. this layout and buildings can also be seen in other sites like Mayapan

So I would mix both the Observatory and the Temple of warriors to form "the thousand columns complex/palace"
Chichen_Itza_4.jpgTemplo_de_los_Guerreros.jpg


They could also go with an improvement instead of a quarter, and use the sacbe, the Mayan road system, that has this...particularity of going in a straight line and without elevation changes, from city center to city center. It could maybe provide some of the gameplay Mayans in civ VI had, about rewarding careful planning of city placements. and you could maybe add a Sacbe with a Mayan arch for both ends of it.

and man, a Mayan city packed with both quarters and a couple of temple pyramids would look awesome.
 
Exploration German civs could also lead to America since Germans were the 2nd largest immigrant group to the US until after the Civil War with large influence in Texas, the Midwest, southern Ohio, northern Kentucky, and Pennsylvania. America does have cities called: Germantown, King of Prussia, Fredericksburg, Pittsburg, Franconia, Carlsbad, Humboldt, and Vienna. Along with many small towns and counties.
An Exploration Era civilization based on the Holy Roman Empire could also transition into Colombia/Gran Colombia in the Modern Era, considering the fact that Klein-Venedig was a short-lived colony of the Augsburg based Welser family, as well as the German conquistadors that travelled with Nicolás de Federmann in the conquest of central Colombia in the early 1500s. Also, Charles V, the king of Castile during the early colonization of New Granada was from Flanders and was also the Holy Roman Emperor, which is the reason why the coat of arms of Bogotá features the Imperial Eagle of the Holy Roman Empire, even up to the present-day. Moreover, there was a relatively small, but still significant, German migration to Colombia and Venezuela during the 19th and early 20th centuries, that shaped the architecture of cities such as Bogotá, due to parts of it being designed by German architects, as well as some Germanic speaking peoples left in Venezuela today.

Portugal, due to their colonial outposts on territories that currently belong to the Colombia Amazon region, could also transition into Colombia/Gran Colombia in the Modern Era.

Even an Exploration Era England/Normans could also transition into Colombia/Gran Colombia due to the Providence Island Colony established by English Puritans in the 1600s in territories that currently belong to Colombia.
 
Last edited:
I think we really need some more South American representation in general, right now we quite literally only have Inca. Here are some options for a fully-realized South American path.
  • Antiquity: I know the Nazca are a popular request, but I'd personally prefer the Moche.
  • Exploration: We definitely need to get the Muisca as a playable civilization in a Civ Game, and I wouldn't mind the Mapuche coming back.
  • Modern: I honestly don't want Gran Colombia back, they were a unified nation for less than a century. I'd prefer if we'd finally get Argentina, and Brazil should definitely come back.
 
Tiwanaku is also a very plausible option for the Antiquity Andean era, as it was one of the most influential empires in the region, almost on par with the Incas. Still, even though it wouldn’t be a bad choice either, I think they will ultimately go with Nazca, as it is more well-known and popular.

I liked the Mapuche in Civ6, but I'd prefer another civ to take their place in this interaction, such as the Guarani, who come from a nearby region and could serve as a predecessor for both Brazil and Argentina.

I often defend the inclusion of (Gran) Colombia, as it would be a reasonably fitting successor to the Incas, though I cannot really see three modern Hispanic civs in this game, so something between Colombia and Argentina would almost certainly be left out in the end. The Aymara people are another option for succeeding the Incas. However, I'm not sure how viable they would be as a playable civ.

But yes, as it stands now, South America is an absolute embarrassment. I see tremendous effort being put into certain regions, while others, not only South America, are being completely left aside. I'm not sure what their plan is; perhaps they will release DLCs later focusing on certain regions. I certainly hope so.
 
Why not put Caral/Norte Chico in the ancient South America slot? It's literally the first major civilization on the continent, with plenty of unique features, and certainly very ancient. Meanwhile Nazca, Moche, Tiwanaku or Chimu can just as well go to the exploration era slot. As for the modern civilizations, Brazil is obvious, Argentina could finally appear, but I'd be fine with simply Colombia (not even Gran Colombia) or even Peru.
 
Personally I have been reading about Southeast Asia recently, so here are some of my thoughts.

Khmer empire definitely works really well as the ancient progenitor... for the mainland SEA, especially if we assume it's in a package with Chenla and Funan which are way too badly documented to get to the game. Champa could work too but frankly it'd be better fit as an exploration era civ, since it didn't have Khmer "foundational" influence.

An interesting and often overlooked alternative for the second ancient progenitor could be Mon people in general or one of their entities in particular (Dvaravati, Lavo etc). Mon people today number only 2,5 million but they have been VERY important for the foundations of civilization in Thailand and Myanmar. In the former case all Tai speaking kingdoms have been built on the 500-1000 year old substrate of Mon kingdoms, cities, language, art etc, with Angkor being the second parent. Their role in the foundation of Burmese dynasties is only slightly smaller (Pyu culture was foundational there). And anything lacking in terms of the ancient documentation (and Dvaravati or Lavo are far from the worst documented cultures) can be dealt with using inspirations from more modern Mon cultures or kingdoms, such as Bago/Hanthawaddy in Myanmar.

If one was really stubborn to include ancient Vietnam, it was already well developed enough to warrant being included either on its own, as Lac Viet (and you fill the gaps with Nanyue or anti-Chinese revolts periods) or as Nanyue or Yue - non-Sinitic civilization of modern southern China. The great benefit of the latter would be its potential as the first evolutionary step in all directions: Nanyue/Yue works very well when becoming China, mainland SEA or maritime SEA (ancient non-Sinitic southern China has very strong connections with the entire SEA in general). So actually I think I'd be the fan of Nanyue/Yue for its versatility. Then making two era "Vietnamese civs" is trivial - since I assume Dai Viet is going to be exploration era civ and we want to end with the ww2, then the most obvious option for the latter Vietnam is simply Nguyen dynasty period and the country can be simply named Viet Nam. Or Dai Nam.

As for Indonesia, I think it deserves its own separate ancient progenitor, it's a frequent mistake to overstate similarities between mainland and maritime SEA and it usually favors the mainland. And if we allow 800 AD Khmer to be an "ancient" progenitor of the mainland then we should allow 670 AD Srivijaya to precede Majapahit (or Malacca or whatever you want in the exploration era). Assuming again that the third era ends with ww2 there is probably no better option for Indonesia than Aceh since it was the last powerful independent precolonial entity. Or let's just go with Indonesia and pray that Firaxis won't enforce the fourth era switch.

Philippines are an awful case because they barely have anything precolonial you could honestly call "civilization" using such criteria as "urbanization" or "statehood". The best you can do is probably some token ancient culture called "Tagalog" or whatever (or Nanyue...) and then for the exploration era either Maynila or Tondo as the biggest of their tiny quasi polities.

For Cambodia there is nothing to add beyond Longvek and then modernity, with the problem being absolutely miserable history of Cambodia from the 17th century onwards :p

So the examples would look like this:

Khmer or Mon-Dvaravati -> Sukhothai or Ayuthaya -> Siam (-> Thailand?)
Pyu or Mon-Dvaravati -> Bagan or Taungoo -> Konbaung (-> Myanmar?)
Nanyue -> Dai Viet -> Dai Nam (-> Vietnam?)
Srivijaya -> Majapahit -> Aceh (-> Indonesia?)
Srivijaya -> Malacca -> Aceh or Johor (->Malaysia?)
Khmer or Mon-Dvaravati -> Lan Xang -> Siam (-> Laos?)
Tagalog -> Maynila or Tondo -> Philippines (or maybe Tagalog -> Maynila -> Butuan -> Philippines)
Khmer -> Longvek -> Cambodia (or alternately Chenla -> Khmer -> Longvek -> Cambodia)
 
Then making two era "Vietnamese civs" is trivial - since I assume Dai Viet is going to be exploration era civ and we want to end with the ww2, then the most obvious option for the latter Vietnam is simply Nguyen dynasty period and the country can be simply named Viet Nam. Or Dai Nam.
Dai Viet is already out: https://civilization.2k.com/civ-vii/game-guide/civilizations/dai-viet/
And yes it is in Exploration.:)

As far as Southeast Asia goes it has already got a lot of love, and I don't think it needs too many more civs. If I had to choose more I'd only do these:

Antiquity: Srivijaya
Exploration: Burma
Modern: Philippines
If we ever get a hypothetical future 4th age: Singapore :mischief:
 
My general idea for South East Asia is the Antiquity/Exploration/Modern distinction is more of Precolonial/Colonial/Post Colonial (or at least the closest it can be with known records, which is why SEA's Antiquity civs will likely be anachronistic with the rest of the world's Antiquity civs.)

I do like your suggestions about Srivijaya and Aech and I think they fit well for their regions, same with Vietnam.

However while I agree that "Tagalogs" is the best civilization for the Philippines (pretty much gonna be like Mississippi), Maynila/Tondo should just be part of Tagalogs, especially since they were the biggest polities in that region and will pretty much be the capital of the Tagalog civ. Butuan can also work as a possible Antiquity age civ to represent the southern part of the Philippines.

For Exploration age, you can take groups that stood up against colonists (namely Spain) to tie them with the rest of the roster mechanically and thematically. Cordilleras/Ifugao (North Luzon) and Sulu (Southern Mindanao) fit this well as they were both thorns in Spain's side and resisted colonization, unlike Tondo/Manila which folded like wet paper comparatively.

And lastly, Philippines as the Modern age (even though it did get independence right after WW2).

For me though, I think the two important pieces for island SEA is Srivijava and Aceh/Philippines, depending on if you'd rather have something that existed earlier for Modern, or to match up with Rizal
 
Back
Top Bottom