Ideas for Korea

[Trav'ling Canuck]

“coming out of” a different ‘nation’ seems better than “going into” one

This is one of my concerns with the way they've handled Spain, and civ-transitions in general. If I was Spanish, I'd be annoyed if after playing Spain in the exploration age, I'd have to switch to Mexico or France in the modern era. Why can't I keep playing as Spain? It still exists. No amount of explanation about how the game is designed is going to change that emotional disappointment.

 

[Sirimiri]

On some level, as much as Spain of course does still exist today, it's recognised in Spain that the 'Golden Age' was in the past and that 'hispanidad/Hispanicity' is something which encompasses the diaspora. I can't speak on behalf of Spaniards, but as much as it might seem like the player is being forced to abandon 'Spain', the line from Rome to Spain to Mexico isn't something outside of the cultural imagination.

On the other hand, even if we might suggest that China is some kind of Rome equivalent in East Asia there isn't a real equivalence of Japan or Korea emerging from the other in the same way even if Chinese culture and language were influential.

Going back to Korea specifically, I think with DLC and expansions there are enough well known periods in Korean history that we will probably get Korean representation in each era. We got two Korean leaders for Civ VI and the market is big enough that I wouldn't be worried about Korea being overlooked. As others have said, there are other pathways which present more issues in how to represent e.g. the modern equivalent of Indigenous people represented in earlier eras. The odds are in Korea's favour over many other groups.

 

[gdr_willter]

We got two Korean leaders for Civ VI ...

The interesting point is that the Civ franchise already dealt with the Korean Civ candidates (Silla-Goryeo-Joseon) as the Leaders: Queen Seondeok (Civ 6) for Silla, Wang Geon (Civ 3, 4) for Goryeo, and Sejong the Great (Civ 5, 6) for Joseon.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I believe Japan is the third most likely option due to its large market. And since they referred to ancient Persia as "Persia" instead of "Achaemenids," it doesn’t give me much hope for more Persian civs, unfortunately.

Sure, I don't disagree that Japan is more likely currently. But if it were up to me, it would be Persia, maybe Ethiopia (I'm counting Aksum as Antiquity Ethiopia), Italy etc. before I'd want 3 separate Japanese civs, personally.

 

[Xandinho]

Sure, I don't disagree that Japan is more likely currently. But if it were up to me, it would be Persia, maybe Ethiopia (I'm counting Aksum as Antiquity Ethiopia), Italy etc. before I'd want 3 separate Japanese civs, personally.

I think the Persian path will intersect with others. They might include the Seljuks to serve as the Persian and Turkish representation of Exploration, eventually transitioning to the Ottomans and Safavids in the Modern Era. I believe it will be something along those lines.

I strongly believe we’ll see a modern Ethiopia, possibly connected to a Somali civilization during the Exploration Age, as I doubt we’ll have the Zagwe dynasty. Perhaps Sardinia would work better as the modern representation of Italy rather than a unified Italy itself, and would make Florence in Exploration featuring unique Great People.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I strongly believe we’ll see a modern Ethiopia, possibly connected to a Somali civilization during the Exploration Age, as I doubt we’ll have the Zagwe dynasty. Perhaps Sardinia would work better as the modern representation of Italy rather than a unified Italy itself, and would make Florence in Exploration featuring unique Great People.

I'm not sure if a modern Italy is needed either, but I wouldn't say no. Then again, they could have two Exploration Age civs, Florence and Venice. Venice feels distinct enough that it could coexist alongside another.

Anyways, regarding Korea I'll be happy to eventually see one at least.

 

[Krajzen]

To change topic somewhat, what gameplay mechanics would you give to the Korean civ/s in Civ7? Bonus points for not using previously present leaders, districts, and video games' somewhat historically questionable obsession with premodern Korea being scientific superpower

 

[Zaarin]

To change topic somewhat, what gameplay mechanics would you give to the Korean civ/s in Civ7? Bonus points for not using previously present leaders, districts, and video games' somewhat historically questionable obsession with premodern Korea being scientific superpower

I'd love to see Silla specifically be culture/religionpantheon focused representing the flowering of the arts under Silla and Silla's embracing of Buddhism.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

I strongly believe we’ll see a modern Ethiopia, possibly connected to a Somali civilization during the Exploration Age, as I doubt we’ll have the Zagwe dynasty.

Zagwe would be able to use the famous Rock Hewn Churches, which might feel odd for a modern Ethiopia, but I see the point. I'd guess any theoretical Exploration Swahili civ would lead to it as well (closer geographically than Aksum and Songhai, that's for certain.)

 

[JaeChunDaeSung]

To change topic somewhat, what gameplay mechanics would you give to the Korean civ/s in Civ7? Bonus points for not using previously present leaders, districts, and video games' somewhat historically questionable obsession with premodern Korea being scientific superpower

For Silla, I would say Diplomatic because of how they brokered an alliance with Tang dynasty China to defeat their peninsular rivals of Baekjae and Goguryeo, THEN manage to drive out their former allies when they were settling too close for comfort after the conflicts. Imagine if Silla gains bonus Influence from alliances, and gains even more if others doublecross or renege.

For Goryeo, Religious for sure, or at least have the Tripitaka Koreana as a Codex, and Economic for its trade, particularly in their unique celadon pottery as a high value commodity to neighbors.

With Joseon, Scientific to represent the scholarly pursuits and reformation brought about by their own take on Neo-Confucianism, and perhaps Diplomatic for having managed alliances and contact with the outside especially during crises like the Imjin, Sino-Japanese, and Russo-Japanese Wars.

 

[JaeChunDaeSung]

I would like to see Balhae in Antiquity

Have you ever heard the Seo Taiji and Boys song, "Dream of Balhae" ?

 

[JaeChunDaeSung]

I'm not stepping in much deeper until I give context for why I thought to bring all this up. To do that, I have to bring up Humankind. While I'm happy Joseon got represented, and YES, you can retain your culture through later ages in that game, there was always that uncomfortable notion of transitioning out of Joseon Korea eventually into Humankind's take on Modern Japan.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I'm not stepping in much deeper until I give context for why I thought to bring all this up. To do that, I have to bring up Humankind. While I'm happy Joseon got represented, and YES, you can retain your culture through later ages in that game, there was always that uncomfortable notion of transitioning out of Joseon Korea eventually into Humankind's take on Modern Japan.

This is a reason why I think, no matter what, Joseon Korea will at least be a Modern Age civ, even if earlier versions of Korea don't show up.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Have you ever heard the Seo Taiji and Boys song, "Dream of Balhae" ?

Never. I only got to know about Balhae from a Civ5 mod

 

[The Fanatical]

This is a reason why I think, no matter what, Joseon Korea will at least be a Modern Age civ, even if earlier versions of Korea don't show up.

That approach can have a negative for some of us, though. The Imjin War will never be recreated in-game, with Edo Japan in the Exploration Age, and Joseon Korea in the Modern Age. Perhaps, Korea is one of those civilizations that should be represented in two ages and not three. One dynasty in the Antiquity Age (Silla or Goryeo) and one in the Exploration Age (Joseon). Perhaps Firaxis has already decided to include three versions of Korea in the game. I think the later will be a certainty if Silla is added in Antiquity in the future.

 

[Evie]

Yeah, the Japan transition problem (nopenopenope) is the biggest obstacle I see to no modern Korea. On the flip side, that Exp-Spain is called Spain and not Castille is a pretty strong sign that not having all civs that exist today have a modern version is, in fact, by design, and I think we fans had better prepare ourselves for more of it. There *will* be modern day countries that exist as exploration or ancient civ and have no modern version. Meaning you, Portugal and Greece.

Given the transitional difficulties (see again: Japan nope nope nope, and especially Meiji Japan), I think it's pretty plausible Korea avoid that fate. But the desire of every modern country to be able to play their civ to the end of the game will, I think, certainly go unmet.

I wouldn't sleep on the possibility of Exp-Joseon and the modern civ being simoly called Korea, though (representing, in that case, both late Joseon when the name Korea started gaining traction, resistance to Japan, and modern Korean civilization).. People want to read a rule that a civ that uses some dynasties or period names will always do so, but I'm not convinced. I think when that civ name is particularly associated with an era in (western) consciousness, it's plausible, even pretty likely that the civ name will be used for that era and dynasty names for the other eras. Persia-Sassanid-Safavid is a progression that I could very well beliueve happening. Same for Axum-Solomonid-Ethiopia. I don't think there's hard and fast rules for naming patterns - just trying to figure out what work best to fit the era system while makign the names reasonably distincts and reasonably recognizable. Likewise with the idea that because the end civ are Mughal and Qing, no modern names can be used (nevermind that most currently existing European civs use modern names or shorthand thereof). There's a great deal of complication in which names go where.

 

[notNamed]

with Edo Japan in the Exploration Age, and Joseon Korea in the Modern Age.

Edo did not participate in the Imjin War so you'd be screwed anyway.

Even with the 3-phased civ progression you couldn't really align them as Joseon is created by a rogue general turning on Goryeo after the latter sends him to support their allied Yuan in fighting the buildup of Ming (fall of Mongolian dominance, 1300s). Imjin happens roughly at a midpoint of its existence, makes sense for the 2nd phase of unit upgrades/progression.

Whereas Edo obviously has things recognisable with the Imjin War only at its very start (1st phase) post-Sekigahara (1600) and goes elsewhere afterwards.
Same issue exists from the other side as well, Muromachi/Ashikaga only gains guns, those famous tenshu, etc at the very end (assuming we merge it with Azuchi-Momoyama since that would never stand on its own) at the very end of its existence, the 3rd phase of unit graphics.

So at least as far as Civ 7 is concerned, gunning for Imjin War doesn't make sense. Not without sacrificing what little flow of history they may actually present in favor of memery.

 

[Evie]

Exploration Whatever-we-call-Japan will have gunpowder (Because gunpowder unit should be there in the later tiers of the exploration era), and will have Samurai (because any Shogunate Japan will have Samurai). Even if the name is not the right one, it should work plenty well enough.

They're not going to give Exploration Japan only Edo era unit graphic just because the civ is called Edo. The UU will represent the Edo era (probably the early Edo era), or whatever other era they pick, but the units graphics will cover Japan in the exploration era as a whole ; it's still gonna be a tier 2 or tier 3 unit because pretty much all of Japanese shogunate is tier 2 and 3 Exploration era, except maybe the establishment of the Minamoto Shogunate.

 

[gdr_willter]

To change topic somewhat, what gameplay mechanics would you give to the Korean civ/s in Civ7? Bonus points for not using previously present leaders, districts, and video games' somewhat historically questionable obsession with premodern Korea being scientific superpower

I wrote this idea post 1.5 month ago. I didn't know about Exploration Age so much then so some feature ideas are outdated, but it still seems good for the base concept.

Korean Civs and Leaders in Civ VII

Hi, I'm a Korean Civ Fan who looking forward to see more informations about upcoming Civ 7. I heared a rumor that there is the Emile Bell wonder in the game, and I also heared some concern that the Antiquity Silla may have its historical route toward Japan, China, or Mongolia. I'm hoping Silla...

forums.civfanatics.com

(Oh yes I will remind this thread again and again haha )

 

[Geminus Leonem]

I wrote this idea post 1.5 month ago. I didn't know about Exploration Age so much then so some feature ideas are outdated, but it still seems good for the base concept.

Korean Civs and Leaders in Civ VII

Hi, I'm a Korean Civ Fan who looking forward to see more informations about upcoming Civ 7. I heared a rumor that there is the Emile Bell wonder in the game, and I also heared some concern that the Antiquity Silla may have its historical route toward Japan, China, or Mongolia. I'm hoping Silla...

forums.civfanatics.com

(Oh yes I will remind this thread again and again haha )

Some of those ideas are really good, but aren't some of those terms mistranslated? I don't know Korean, but I did read about Seodangs (서당들) being rural schools not military troops. I think I read about it due to some civ mod making a similar mistake.

But yeah, your list kinda showcases how Joseon really fits into Exploration. Hwacha in modern age would be more than weird after all, and the Seowons were abolished by the XIX century.

Btw, regarding Seowons, they would actually fit much better as the Joseon unique Quarter with the Confucian Temple and the Confucian School that make up the Seowons as the unique buildings.