Idea: Castile instead of Spain

[Jcturmer]

I think the Kingdom of Castile could be a better option than Spain in the age of exploration.

-First, it connects into the new theme of civVII about civilizations appearing in one era and disappearing in another.
The kingdom/crown of Castile existed from 1065 to 1715.

-It has a more medieval theme like the rest of the civilizations of this era such as the Normans or the Chola.

-The conquest of America was organized by Castile, while Aragon was in charge of the Mediterranean.

-It´s new, different and cool.

Moderator Action: Moved from GD to I&S. ~ LK

 

[Krajzen]

And, on top of all that, it would allow on a separate "Spain" as a modern era switch, while enabling mods giving us "Aragon" etc alternatives for the second era

oh well

 

[Lord Lakely]

Castile also has the added bonus that you can justify a pre-Isabella leader, like Pelagius (the Kingdom of Asturias was a bridge between the Visigoths and Castile) or Urraca the Wreckless

 

[kaspergm]

I agree 100 % with OP on this. Can't believe they didn't go for this, it's seems so obviously the right choice.

 

[Zaarin]

While I don't have strong opinions on the subject, something like Castile or Asturias definitely feels like it would have fit better alongside..."Normans."

 

[stealth_nsk]

Only reasoning for *not* choosing Castille that I can think of is that they have no intention of having a modern era Spain, and didn't want Civ7 + all expansions and DLC to not have Spain. I'm not saying that's a good reason...

Spain is pretty recognizable name for exploration age, most of the players are not history fanatics, so it's totally understandable. And yes, it means Firaxis don't plan to have modern Spain on release.

On the other hand, if Firaxis later would want to, they could just rename the exploration Spain to Castille Spain. In past, we often seen city states to be renamed once they are rleased as full civ, this could work the same way.

 

[Lord Lakely]

If you're going to have the Abbasids specifically over Arabia, I don't see why you can't have Castile over Spain.

Like, what... are we going to shy away from having casuals learn about history by... playing a game based on history, lol?

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I don't think the name Spain is a problem. If anything, the Normans might be the problem when civs like Portugal and the Dutch might show up in the same age in future DLC.

 

[Leyrann]

*dons tinfoil hat*

What if Firaxis releases them as Spain for name recognition and then renames then to Castille in an update because "it's more accurate", thus getting both the name recognition and the accuracy, while perhaps also prompting a few people to dive into Spain/Castille's history?

 

[Zaarin]

Spain is pretty recognizable name for exploration age, most of the players are not history fanatics, so it's totally understandable.

This is a hard argument to make when they chose the Normans instead of England or France.

As for Modern-Era Spain, I imagine it's not a top priority. I'm still not sure exactly what time period they're going for, but Spain post ~1800 is unlikely to make many people's list of the most dynamic, important, powerful, or influential nations in Europe, let alone the world.

Even if we assume Modern Age starts around 1700, that's well past Spain's prime.

 

[Lord Lakely]

This is a hard argument to make when they chose the Normans instead of England or France.

It's mostly just annoying because you know modders will add in Aragon and Asturias, without renaming Spain to Castile first -_-.

 

[Leyrann]

This is a hard argument to make when they chose the Normans instead of England or France.

Normans have a lot of cultural recognition thanks to their close ties to the Vikings though.

 

[Black Gate]

I don't think the name Spain is a problem. If anything, the Normans might be the problem when civs like Portugal and the Dutch might show up in the same age in future DLC.

Given that we'll have New Kingdom Egypt alongside possibly Khmer or Silla in the same era, I think the anachronism of a few centuries for the exploration age will be fine enough.

 

[stealth_nsk]

This is a hard argument to make when they chose the Normans instead of England or France.

They chose them exactly because they have those civilizations in modern era under recognizable name. Spain is not going to appear in modern at start, so it needs to have recognizable name earlier.

Also, that's why designers use names like "Han China", "Maurya India" or "Meiji Japan" - to have recognizable name attached.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Given that we'll have New Kingdom Egypt alongside possibly Khmer or Silla in the same era, I think the anachronism of a few centuries for the exploration age will be fine enough.

I agree. No matter how you look at it there is going to be a mixture of both Medieval and Early Modern civs in this age, so no matter what there are going to be inconsistencies.

 

[Zaarin]

Normans have a lot of cultural recognition thanks to their close ties to the Vikings though.

As Olleus pointed out, I think what name recognition they have is thanks to their conquest of England, not their origins. That being said, I think we history buffs here significantly overestimate most historical civs' name recognition factor in the general public. Even though middle school history will name drop the Normans, I'd be surprised if a significant portion of the general public in the US could tell you what their significance is (might go slightly higher if you add William the Conqueror); outside the Anglosphere, I'd expect that to drop even lower. (Now, do I personally think civs should be chosen for their name recognition? No. That's why 2k marketing doesn't hire me. )

 

[Leyrann]

I should think it's more to do with a certain William-of-dubious-parentage and 1055 or 1077 or a date like that

That won't hurt either.

 

[Josephias]

If you're going to have the Abbasids specifically over Arabia, I don't see why you can't have Castile over Spain.

Unless you do plan to have a "modern" Arabia (the one Lawrence allied with), and do not plan to have a modern Spain.

Bourbon Spain, Spanish Republics, and Contemporary Spain have all its merits, but quite pale in comparison to contemporary europeans and last is "too young", republics were too short-lived and controversial, and early Bourbons, while managed the feat to mantain the empire for a few centuries, were mostly on declive (while you could have some spark of hope/grandeur with Charles III, Spain was mainly subject to france in that era, faced Napoleonic invasion, and became afterwards a badly-ruled (or even contested between several aspirants) backwards country - which is the opposite of what FXS wants to depict with a "Modern" civ. : one that embraces industrialisation and scientific progress. (I'm skipping the dictatorship as that would be even more controversial to use, and it is again too contemporary).

And it's not that Spain didn't try to re-attach that trend, and you can name a few scientific discoveries, inventions and even military developments coming from Spain in the modern age, but these were the curiosities in the middle to what to foreginers was a rural country where ruins of the past could be found. It has not been until lately that Spain has gained again some relevance and momentum but is still not among the victory challengers (well, unless you assume tourism victory is a thing ) Unfortunately, I'd see Spain making more of a comeback in a 4th "Globalisation" Era than in the Modern Era (and the bad news is probably for Globalisation era the EU would be a more likely civ)

 

[ehecatzin]

+1 Please Firaxis reconsider this one, It shouldn't be too hard to do (I hope), and it could open space for a later Spanish civ down the road.

When I think Castille I think El Cid campeador, the reconquista, the catholic kings and the discovery of the New World. (Exploration age)

when I think Spain, I think Tercios, the Habsburgs, the Spanish Armada , Guerillas against Napoleon and the American wars of independence EDIT: AND the Spanish civil war. (Modern age)

This all coming from a Mexican lens, I'd love to hear a Spanish take on this.

 

[Leucarum]

I'd say part of the problem is that for a large chunk of the 3rd era Spain wasn't exactly having the best time, and the goal from the devs is to showcase civs at the height of their power. For Spain that is very firmly the exploration era...

Though it does leave no obvious civ-switching path for exploration era Spain unless they become a former colony...