Leyrann
Deity
I'm seeing a lot of people talking about Assyria and Qajar and such all of a sudden, where does this info come from and/or where can I find an overview?
Future DLC announced: Bulgaria, Nepal, Simon Bolivar + more
- Thread starter Cuauhtémoc's Rage
- Start date
It started here:https://forums.civfanatics.com/thre...s-additional-information-on-dlc.694454/page-3
Those civs along with Silla and Dai Viet were leaked to be coming in Right to Rule.
Edit: Sorry Simon Bolivar is coming in CotW. Right to Rule is Genghis Khan and Rani Lakshmibai
Last edited:
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
Simon will be in Crossroads, not Right to Rule.
The RtR leaders will be Genghis Khan and Rani Lakshmibai.
Leyrann
Deity
Thanks! I must've missed it while skimming the thread.
I have mixed feelings about Qajar
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
every account of Qajar history I have ever read I could sum up as "somewhat pathetic" (and I am a massive Persophile so you gotta believe I tried to find redeeming qualities there)
Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
every account of Qajar history I have ever read I could sum up as "somewhat pathetic" (and I am a massive Persophile so you gotta believe I tried to find redeeming qualities there)Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
RedCourtJester
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2024
- Messages
- 1,068
I have mixed feelings about Qajar
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
Not to sound sensationalist, but this does seem in line with representing modern Russia as imperial Russia with an obschina UB and serfdom tree, and modern China as the Qing which was subject to "spheres of influence" and kicked off the "century of humiliation."
I think there are low-key anti-authoritarian tones in the design of the modern civs that extend beyond simply avoiding the modern polities, but also outright undermining them. Representing modern Iran with the Qajars might just be part of that, we will have to see how they are designed.
I would even argue it's not even pro-American or pro-West, because America (civ, not the leaders) is very cynically designed to be a "Manifest Destiny and Robber Barons" civ, and Imperial France leads right from revolution (yay) into Napoleon terror (yikes).
Some of these representations I fully support; some I am still digesting, but I think I will probably come to accept as necessary wakeup calls to the first world.
- Joined
- Oct 23, 2011
- Messages
- 2,115
This kind of take, alongside the "so glad X leader is in because I can't wait to see the anti woke brigade cry about it" type takes really confuse me.
I just wanna play a game where I get to pitch the greatest civilizations of all time against each other. I don't want some weird revisionist take on that which intentionally undermines those civs because of some weird political agenda to give any part of the world a wake up call. I game to get away fron politics and the real world, I find it really strange some people want to inject it here too, or feel it necessary. I'll happily leave that in history seminars where it can be discussed properly rather than imposed.
Assuming modding might be easy, you could probably easily change names around to turn Qajar into Savafids, especially if uniques like Zamburak units and civ icons (Persian lion) are similarI have mixed feelings about Qajar
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
Either that or maybe Qajar civ does contain some stuff overlapping with 17th-18th centuries when Iran was still a respectable civ instead of a miserable pushover backwater in the background of global industrial revolution
I'm frankly puzzled why of all Irans did glory-seeking Firaxis devs, who supposedly said they focus on civs' golden eras, decide on Qajar who were curb stomped in every war they waged, utterly failed to modernize the country, and had barely any achievements besides art and culture. You take Safavids (you can even stretch them to the modern era if 17th century is in) and have just as spectacular art and culture but also like... a serious legit empire capable of winning against Ottomans and Mughals at their peak, not Qajar who made Russian soldiers' quality look like space marines in comparision (during their regular curb stomp fails in Caucasus)
I'm frankly puzzled why of all Irans did glory-seeking Firaxis devs, who supposedly said they focus on civs' golden eras, decide on Qajar who were curb stomped in every war they waged, utterly failed to modernize the country, and had barely any achievements besides art and culture. You take Safavids (you can even stretch them to the modern era if 17th century is in) and have just as spectacular art and culture but also like... a serious legit empire capable of winning against Ottomans and Mughals at their peak, not Qajar who made Russian soldiers' quality look like space marines in comparision (during their regular curb stomp fails in Caucasus)
untitledjuan
Prince
Yet Spain, founded in 1712, is in Exploration and Khmer, which had its height around 1200 is in Antiquity.
The issue here is agreeing what those “greatest” civilisations are - as if there were any objective metric. Personally I would rather learn about different places and different times, so I am glad that Civ has been heading towards a more inclusive approach. It’s genuinely exciting that we are getting civs like Bulgaria and Hawai’i.
I don’t think RedCourtJester is right that there is any attempt to undermine modern states. They certainly seem to be avoiding controversial modern nations, but I think that is caution rather than an attempt at anything subversive. And if it is revisionist (which by the way, is how social sciences are supposed to work) to expand the pool of civilisations and leaders beyond the obvious, that is welcome, and really ought not to hurt anybody’s enjoyment of the game.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
The Spain in Exploration represents Castile more than it does a unified Spain
I wish they had called it that. I mean, they called the English the Normans...
I think if they called it specifically the Spanish Empire, would that have made it better? Because that's what it's also known as. I just don't think they are even planning on having a Modern Age Spain so that's the name they went with.
Black Gate
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 9, 2010
- Messages
- 226
Qajar falls squarely into the post-1750 period, but seeing as "Meiji Japan" is being used as the name for a state that represents all of Japan's imperial period, I would be surprised if there are no references to older dynasties for Qajar.I have mixed feelings about Qajar
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
There's plenty of space left for one of the Turko-Persian dynasties in exploration as well, even if they aren't a priority for now.
Sassanids are an Exploration IP so I live in hope for a Sassanian Exploration civ.
Yeah. If Qajar is supposed to represent all of Persia after the Islamic conquest, I'd be fine with it, even though I wished it would have been Safavid to be contemporary with the Mughals, and most likely the Ottomans whenever they get in.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
I'm not sure why the Qajars were picked over the Safavids either... I assume because they're easier to slot into modern than the Safavids are?I have mixed feelings about Qajar
On one hand, I am very happy that Islamic Iran shall come to civ series, on the other it shall come as probably the most miserable period in the history of Iran
Pretty much every other Iran I'd be more excited by - Safavids (I'm really surprised Firaxis didn't go with them for the exploration or modern era tbh), short but respectable Zand dynasty, very short but stupidly spectacular Afsharid dynasty, post-Qajar Iran which had much bigger developmental success, and yes even the Islamic Republic which for all its misery and terror still improved the material life of Iranians a lot (check Iranian literacy, scientific output, education system, fertility, contraceptives, electricity access, hunger, life expectancy before and after 1979)
And that's even without mentioning my eternal existential pain of Persians having absolutely insane (ancient Greek global uplift tier) scientific and cultural achievements in the middle ages, but doing them under a myriad of short lived multi ethnic states, therefore never getting represented in Civ - I don't expect to see Buyids, Saffarids or Samanids anytime soon, and the average person associates Abbasids with 100% Arabs instead of like 50% of this civilization being Persian...
I initially though it was because the Safavid icon would have been a lion and sun, just like the Mughal one... but then it turns out that was also the Qajar symbol?
Qajar lion would be holding a shamshir (sword). That's surely why, right?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qajar_Iran#/media/File:Tricolour_Flag_of_Iran_(1886).svg
TheGhostEnthusiast
King
I don't think Civilizations with the Expansionist trait should be counted with the Militaristic Civilizations: it's the trait for making Settlements and Food. Buganda's pillaging focus is the exception to the rule.
Similar threads
- Locked
