Filling in the gaps - Charting the optimal Civ Switches

[Phrozen]

I think native North America, outside of Mexico, will be the hardest. You could probably do a Southwest line and extend the Mississippian line to include say the Cherokee or Cree in the modern age. Perhaps a Powhatan and Haudenosaunee in the exploration.
The modern age choices are pretty disparate geographically:

East Coast: Cherokee
Great Plains/Midwest: Lakota, Blackfoot, Crow, Comanche, Cree
Southwest: Navajo, Apache
Pacific Northwest: Haida, Tlingit, Salish


Proposed Southwest line: Zuni, Hopi, Navajo/Apache/Maybe Comanche
Proposed Algonquian line: Mississippians, Shawnee/Powhatan, Cree
Proposed Iroquoian line: Mississippians, Haudenosaunee, Cherokee

Leaders: Chief Powhatan, Chief Si'ahl, Sitting Bull, Quanah Parker

 

[moondog385]

I don’t think every region needs a three-act path. The devs locked themselves into that by forcing you to transition instead of coming up with some other kind of system. To be clear, I do like transitioning, but there should be some kind of difficult way to avoid it with trade offs.

There are a few paths I can think of for North America.

Eastern Woodlands: Mississippians -> Haudenosaunee -> Cherokee

Plains: Mississippians (no other option really) -> Shawnee since they put them in Exploration -> Cree and/or Sioux

Southwest: Pueblo -> Hopi -> Navajo and/or Apache and/or Comanche

Northwest: only really Modern options here I feel

 

[Ryansinbela]

I don’t think every region needs a three-act path. The devs locked themselves into that by forcing you to transition instead of coming up with some other kind of system. To be clear, I do like transitioning, but there should be some kind of difficult way to avoid it with trade offs.

There are a few paths I can think of for North America.

Eastern Woodlands: Mississippians -> Haudenosaunee -> Cherokee

Plains: Mississippians (no other option really) -> Shawnee since they put them in Exploration -> Cree and/or Sioux

Southwest: Pueblo -> Hopi -> Navajo and/or Apache and/or Comanche

Northwest: only really Modern options here I feel

Tlingit/Haida or Inuit would be cool

 

[Xandinho]

It seems that the Pueblo were left out of Civ5 because of issues regarding the representation of their leaders. Now that we have civilizations without leaders, is there any chance the Pueblo could be included? I feel like they’ll try to avoid getting involved in controversies like the one with the Cree in Civ6 as much as possible. Still, it would be fascinating to have the Pueblo in the game.

 

[Lord Lakely]

If you look at the effort it took to fully represent the Shawnee (and that's with their main chief already being a fan of the franchise), it will probably take forever to get another indigenous Civ from North-America.

I think parity is more more important than accuracy for North-America. Just ensure that you have an equal number of native factions across all three ages (and no, America itself doesn't count), and have them all cross-pollinate each other.

 

[socratic]

I don’t think every region needs a three-act path.

While I agree and though it’s unlikely we get a 3-part, it is possible. There are groups that have enough historical continuity to support it or a 2-part.
Mississippians > Creek > Seminole (full continuity)
??? > Cree > Métis
Rome > Norman > Métis
Dorset > Thule > Inuit (similar to the current path for England)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It seems that the Pueblo were left out of Civ5 because of issues regarding the representation of their leaders. Now that we have civilizations without leaders, is there any chance the Pueblo could be included? I feel like they’ll try to avoid getting involved in controversies like the one with the Cree in Civ6 as much as possible. Still, it would be fascinating to have the Pueblo in the game.

I don't see why they couldn't this time around.

I think parity is more more important than accuracy for North-America. Just ensure that you have an equal number of native factions across all three ages (and no, America itself doesn't count), and have them all cross-pollinate each other.

That will be hard for Modern, if we even get any. The Shawnee arguably could have been Modern, if it weren't for gameplay mechanics.

While I agree and though it’s unlikely we get a 3-part, it is possible. There are groups that have enough historical continuity to support it or a 2-part.
Mississippians > Creek > Seminole (full continuity)
??? > Cree > Métis
Rome > Norman > Métis
Dorset > Thule > Inuit (similar to the current path for England)

Let's not forget Shoshone>Comanche

 

[Lord Lakely]

That will be hard for Modern, if we even get any. The Shawnee arguably could have been Modern, if it weren't for gameplay mechanics.

There's a few that would fit in modern: Lakota and Cherokee are two; The Tlingit and the Metis also fit Modern. One could argue that the Navajo, Muscogee and Cree could also be modern.

There's definitely options. It just depends on what you want the unique mechanics of the Civ to be - Shawnee's mechanics better suit an already established realm that wants to continue settling cities, hence why they fit Exploration.

 

[moondog385]

Tlingit/Haida or Inuit would be cool

I agree on all three. Tlingit and Haida both kinda fit in Modern, right? That’s why they don’t really make a “path.” Again, sort of a flaw of the game’s design.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

There's a few that would fit in modern: Lakota and Cherokee are two; The Tlingit and the Metis also fit Modern. One could argue that the Navajo, Muscogee and Cree could also be modern.

I agree that there are some that could fit in Modern. I just have a feeling that Modern is going to be reserved for post-colonial nations throughout the Americas. If I had to choose at least one, I'd pick the Navajo.

I agree on all three. Tlingit and Haida both kinda fit in Modern, right? That’s why they don’t really make a “path.” Again, sort of a flaw of the game’s design.

I could see the devs putting either in Exploration, solely based on the fact that they were coastal and naval societies and could be "religious" with their crest poles.

 

[Phrozen]

I agree that there are some that could fit in Modern. I just have a feeling that Modern is going to be reserved for post-colonial nations throughout the Americas. If I had to choose at least one, I'd pick the Navajo.

I could see the devs putting either in Exploration, solely based on the fact that they were coastal and naval societies and could be "religious" with their crest poles.

I mean the Comanche would be modern. They only broke off from the Shoshone and traveled south once they got horses. You can use the bands as settlements along with their allies: the Kiowa, Arapaho, Kiowa-Apache, and southern parts of the Cheyenne tribe.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I mean the Comanche would be modern. They only broke off from the Shoshone and traveled south once they got horses. You can use the bands as settlements along with their allies: the Kiowa, Arapaho, Kiowa-Apache, and southern parts of the Cheyenne tribe.

I'd agree that they "should" be. Whether they would be in Modern is the question. The Khmer should be in the Exploration Age, but gameplay wise they got put in Antiquity.

I do think Exploration Shoshone>Modern Comanche would be interesting if they decided to do it.

 

[ConspicuousFlower]

Imo, Comanche, Sioux or Navajo 100% fit as Modern Age civs.

 

[untitledjuan]

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.

Including Colombia, instead of Gran Colombia, could actually work and still represent Gran Colombia, as Gran Colombia was not a different nation per se, but a historiographical term for a period within the history of the Colombian nation, which spans from 1810 to the present. (Or even as far back as 1538 if you include its colonial period when it was known as New Granada).

Colombia just didn't stop existing when "Gran Colombia" lost Venezuela and Ecuador, it just kept up to the present. Gran Colombia was not the name of the nation, but of the period in which Colombia had its largest extent, similar to terms such as "Napoleonic France", "Revolutionary America", "Tudor England", etc.

Having Colombia, instead of Gran Colombia, allows to explore the cultural and agricultural side of the nation, not just the militaristic side of the short period when Bolívar was president.

Colombia could be a modern era civilization unlocked by Spain, the Inca, the Muisca and maybe even the Portuguese, as well as, obviously, Simón Bolívar. (Though I'd love that they added other Colombian leaders, such as Policarpa Salavarrieta, Santander, Rafael Núñez, Antonio Nariño or Rafael Uribe Uribe).

Simón Bolívar's line could work like this:
Rome/Greece>Spain>Colombia
Caribs>Muisca>Colombia
Caral>Inca>Colombia

(BTW, I would add the Caribs, or even the Arawaks, as an ancient era civilization that link together South America with the Caribbean, allowing the Caribs and Arawaks in antiquity to branch into the Muisca, the Taíno, the Tupi or the Inca in exploration and then into Brazil, Colombia and Haiti in modern)

 

[untitledjuan]

My ideal South American lines:

Andean line:
Caral>Inca>Colombia
Caral>Muisca>Colombia
Caral>Inca> Mapuche
Rome>Spain>Colombia

Caribbean line:
Caribs>Taíno>Haiti
Caribs>Muisca>Colombia
Arawak>Taíno>Haiti
Arawak>Muisca>Colombia
Rome>Spain>Colombia
Rome>Normandy>Haiti

Brazilian line:
Caribs>Tupi>Brazil
Caribs>Tupi>Guaraní
Rome>Portugal>Brazil

Southern Cone line:
Caral>Inca>Argentina
Caral>Inca>Mapuche
Rome>Spain>Argentina
Rome>Florence>Argentina

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm not an expert on South America but what about Tiwanaku for Antiquity?
I feel like it could easily progress into both the Inca (being an Andean civ) and Aztecs (if they become a lake civ). Also, the Muisca if they get in.

 

[moondog385]

I'm not an expert on South America but what about Tiwanaku for Antiquity?
I feel like it could easily progress into both the Inca (being an Andean civ) and Aztecs (if they become a lake civ). Also, the Muisca if they get in.

I always figured Tiwanaku would be a great fit for Antiquity. The only logical historical transition is probably Inca in Exploration but at least it’s something for South America in that Age.

 

[Xandinho]

Tiwanaku is a very strong option for the Andean Antiquity, as it is easily among the top three most important pre-colonial empires in the region’s history. Nazca, despite being very popular—and with much of its appeal coming from the crazy alien theories promoted in documentaries—was not historically very significant. In my ideal world, I’d have both: the historically appropriate choice (Tiwanaku) and the fun one (Nazca).

Other options for South American Antiquity outside the Andean region include the already mentioned Arawak, which could create a connection with civs like the Tupi, Guarani, and the Taíno in the Caribbean. However, I’m not sure how viable the Arawak would be, given the many elements Civ7 requires. Another, though less well-known, option would be the Xingu, the people of the Xingu valley, who are strongly tied to the mysterious city of Kuhikugu, deep within the Amazon rainforest.

 

[socratic]

I firmly believe that if the devs choose to represent the Caribbean, they add the Taino and have it be in Antiquity. This is really pushing the boundaries of Antiquity, but Exploration is already teeming with island hopping civs. We don’t need another one. A Taino > Spain > Cuba/Mexico/America/Whatever line is still pretty historically.

Also they should choose the Taino because they’re the indigenous group with the most cultural impact in modern Caribbean countries. (And also because I’m biased and want the closet we can get to a Puerto Rican civ in the game)

 

[Xandinho]

I firmly believe that if the devs choose to represent the Caribbean, they add the Taino and have it be in Antiquity. This is really pushing the boundaries of Antiquity, but Exploration is already teeming with island hopping civs. We don’t need another one. A Taino > Spain > Cuba/Mexico/America/Whatever line is still pretty historically.

The Taíno are fundamentally an Exploration civ: navigation, religion, anti-colonialism… and they’re also the perfect predecessor for a Haitian civ.