If Siam to be a full civ in Civ7

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

1. I've read somwhere here and there citing that Siam should be either Renaissance/Early Modern (Ayutthaya Empire, which since the comings of Portuguese (or Zheng He some 50 years prior) became BOTH gunpowder empire and elephant empire (contending with Burmese Kingdoms hailed from the west sides of Tenaserin Range), or Industrial/Modern era civ (Thonburi or Rattanakosin between King Rama-I to the III (some would say even in King Chulalongkorn era (Which saw the actual use of Gatling Elephants early in his reign, against Haw Marauders in present day Laos) or even as late as after 1932 Revolution. (Open hostility against French Indochina and even daring campaigns in Shan States and even invaded Kuomindang domain in South Yunnan) though these later invasions were fanned by Japan which not only sought to defeat China entirely but also to take India through Burma. Too bad these campaigns didn't end well in the last years of war.). What's your view when should this civ be? (This reflects UU).
Also Sukhotai isn't the FIRST 'Siamese Empire', the actual first is Ayutthaya (which actually sacked Angkor Wat early(maybe right after Zheng He's visit) ). During tenure of King Ramkhamhaeng, he actually allied with everyone around him so his Stele written about his 'large domains' were actually referred to those in league with him (And himself an advisor to King Meng Rai, founder of Chiang Mai, and even help him overseeing constructions of CM). By then 'Yasothorn Empire' (The Khmers) still a dominant power which no one North of that empire dares to oppose them, and someone like King Ramkhamhaeng even allied with King of Yasothorn and willing to use his personal relations to coerce other kings. I'm not sure how did he even invade Champa and contended with the Viets but not on his own, (I think King of Yasothorn 'ordered' or even 'set a challenge' for him to solve Cham Rebellion problems, but there was an actual campaign where Sukhotai invade Champa)

My view is that EITHER Siam being Early Modern or Industrial Era Civ. Depending on what is chosen as seat of power (and who's leading)
Basic premise: Land Affinity, Riverine, Commerce.

- Ayutthaya: (Renaissance/ Early Modern)
Leader: Either King Naret or King Narai.
UU: A kind of war elephant. either melee or with Jingal or cannon mounted. Psycho ability + Battering ram ability
Unique Infrastructure: Klong (The actual name of Floating Market, commercial hub stands in, can only be built next to river, more wealth generated with each other city located in the same or connected river, can connect two rivers together. Also behaves like Civ6's Khmer's 'Grand Barays')

- Thonburi (Early Modern/ Industrial)
Leader: King Taksin (Zheng Xin).
Same profile as Ayutthaya EXCEPT that he
Emperor Yong Le of Qing did not recognize his status as King of Siam. BUT his war against Kaungbaung Burma required him to sell bronze and brasswares (so Thonburi could melt these to make big guns) because King Taksin's usefulness was his drive to 'Avenge Ayutthaya' meant that he would wage wars aganst Kaungbaung regardless of numerical and economical disadvantages (and damaged).
Special UU: A kind of early modern raider cavalry (King Taksin was very much associated with BOTH Cavalry and Guerrilla warfare, particularly to make up with greater Burnese numbers, through it turned out that his easy recapture of Ayutthaya was due to the fact that Burmese left only a few thousand garrisons while larger army was recalled to fight invading Qing Banner Armies).

- Bangkok (Rattanakosin, or Krung Thep). Early Rattanakosin
Same profile as Ayutthaya. led by First Three Kings particularly King Rama III (who led a great war to the East against Dai Viet under Emepror Min Mang of Nyugen).
Offensive opriented (Changes in tactics after a painful lessons, its founder had witnessed strategical mistakes to let Kaungbaung Burna lay siege to Ayutthaya and eventually shifted towards counteroffensive strategy--Meet enemy invaders outside and defeat them there).
UU: Jingal Elephant.

- Bangkok. Industrial Era (Absolute Monarchy era)
King Chulalongkorn OR King Vajiravudh
UU: Gatling Elephant.

- Bangkok. Modern Era (1932 Revolution)
Pridi Banomyong OR Plaek Phibunsongkram.
UU: Not so easy to choose, either Paribatra biplane OR "Light Tank" (saw extensive actions against Indochine Francaisse). Thonburi Class coastal 'Battleship' (Made by Kawasaki Kouki) are actually suckers, french records wrote that the ship failed to do any damage against French light cruiser. in truth, none of Coastal Defense BB are any good compared to actual seagoing 'Cruisers' or actaul Dreadnoughts. let alone aviations....
In truth. impetus towards Siamese success in 1940 (can't remembe the exact year but the war is very brief) were BOTH Aviations and Armor (actually because the only French Indochina advantages were at sea but not on land.. unreliable 'Tonkiness' natives meant that French couldn't use them against Siamese, but instead relied on Africans (which usually deployed against local rebellions), also France didn't deploy any armored units (but they did deploy countermeasures--25mm Antitank guns), and aeronautic units deployed there were inadequate compared to enthusiastic Siamese (Fanned by Revolutionary Patriotism stirred into populace) which by then operated BOTH American and Japanese streamlined fighters and bombers. Thus the UU could be either Land or Air oriented.
Unique Infrastructure: Thammasart Center. (no fancy Floating Markets for this one too bad). BUT the TU itself was very very late game creations and it could only replace Research Lab and can generates BOTH Culture and Science. (Thammasart University began as Law and Politics Academy actually).

What's your opinions?

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

I can't comment on anything Firaxis is working on. I agree for a large part on your characterization of Siamese history. Putting Ramkhamhaeng as the "first Siamese" (or, even more outlandishly, "Thai") state is an act of historical revisionism. Sukhothai was one of a number of city-states, some of whom were with the Khmer, and some of whom were in a kind of anti-Khmer coalition.

I think Narai or Chulalongkorn are both very interesting eras, for different reason. Narai's Ayutthaya was a vast, cosmopolitan city-state, including a large Japanese community (refugees from Sengoku), and at times European administrators, all under a very Siamese state. Rama V's Siam was at the height of industrialization, and had successfully evaded colonialism (though perhaps more to do with English/French desire not to have a direct border). In Bangkok, you can just feel that era radiating off of the old buildings in the old city.

Pridi would be a great idea for a later era. He's what Siam could have been - a social-democratic advocate for voting, etc. Phibul is what Thailand got - an ethno-nationalist, fascist-allied dictator, who nonetheless pushed forward a campaign of modernization. I know Phibul is popular now amongst some who oppose the current regime, but I think he's got some historical baggage.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Let Siam be the industrial SEA civ, that way Burma could be the early modern one.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I agree with the other statements above in where a proper Siam civilization would exist later, preferably around the Industrial Era because that's the best option for SEA from that time period.
Because of that I think they could even get more of a production focus

I'd love for them to get a Floating Market Unique District.

UU would probably be an elephant but mounted with a gun (Jingal).

 

[Kimiimaro]

I think there should be at least one leader/civilisation focused on fast modernisation. Civ VI had Peter the Great, Menelik II and Meiji (sorta, the leader was of course Hojo Tokimune, but Meiji is directly referenced in the ability of Japan) fulfil this role. Siam under Rama IV or Rama V, the kings who modernised the country so fast that European colonial empires couldn't use their favourite 19th Century casus belli of "we're here in the name of progress to civilise your backward folk, totally not to pillage some stuff or anything" is certainly a prime candidate to fulfil this role. And, by the inclusion of either of the two kings, we'd get a leader we didn't see before in Civ - that's always nice, too .

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

I agree that this is a very interesting time in Siamese history. This modernization led to some of the quirks of Thailand today, and, indeed, led to some of the debates that OP mentioned - the story of Sukhothai and Ramkhamhaeng were inflated/invented/promoted (depending on your take) in order to make a claim for civilizational progress. I'm just teaching now (at Mahidol) and we've been talking about the changes in the dress code to "modernize" Siamese citizens so that they look more like Europeans (a terrible idea in Siam's climate), and Thailand still has rather Victorian dress codes for that reason.

They also used this "become the Europeans of Southeast Asia" image to incorporate former vassal areas (Lanna, Nan, Pattani), basically marching in and saying "you're with us, right?? RIGHT???" Rama V even explicitly quoted European "civilizing missions" as the Siamese attitude towards the Lao. It's a fascinating time.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think there should be at least one leader/civilisation focused on fast modernisation. Civ VI had Peter the Great, Menelik II and Meiji (sorta, the leader was of course Hojo Tokimune, but Meiji is directly referenced in the ability of Japan) fulfil this role.

I'm good with that as long as that means we get a more Classical Era Ethiopia.

 

[Zaarin]

I think there should be at least one leader/civilisation focused on fast modernisation. Civ VI had Peter the Great, Menelik II and Meiji (sorta, the leader was of course Hojo Tokimune, but Meiji is directly referenced in the ability of Japan) fulfil this role. Siam under Rama IV or Rama V, the kings who modernised the country so fast that European colonial empires couldn't use their favourite 19th Century casus belli of "we're here in the name of progress to civilise your backward folk, totally not to pillage some stuff or anything" is certainly a prime candidate to fulfil this role. And, by the inclusion of either of the two kings, we'd get a leader we didn't see before in Civ - that's always nice, too .

Wrong thread, but as long as it doesn't replace an Ancient/Classical Persia (whether Achaemenid of Sassanid), I'd be down for Reza Shah Pahlavi filling that role, too. (Just emphatically not at the expense of a pre-Islamic Persian civ.)

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Let Siam be the industrial SEA civ, that way Burma could be the early modern one.

eh? Burma as 'Modern' (Under Military Leadership--Aung San?) and not Medieval/Early Modern? ('The Three Kings Era... where Bayingnaung and Hsibushyin were second and third as per Burmese 'founding myths despite that these kings were not in the same dynasty and not ruled from the same Seat)

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

eh? Burma as 'Modern' (Under Military Leadership--Aung San?) and not Medieval/Early Modern? ('The Three Kings Era... where Bayingnaung and Hsibushyin were second and third as per Burmese 'founding myths despite that these kings were not in the same dynasty and not ruled from the same Seat)

You can clearly see the words "early modern" in the post that you quoted. I don't think anyone wants modern Burma.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ Oops soz. that's the term i've loaned from Humankind which refers to an era between Medieval and Industrial.

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

Yeah, it's hard to put a time frame that's made from Europe onto the rest of the world. For the Early Modern period, we'd look at the growth of rationalism and secularism, the growth of the merchant class, an explosion of writing in vernacular languages (e.g. Thai), and the growth of international trade routes (or, rather, their absolute domination of the world's attention). In Europe that's around 1500-1800 or so. In Siam I might put it from Narai through the end of Ayutthaya to Rama IV, maybe. Rama V is clearly industrial. So Rama V would be an industrial-era leader and Bayinnaung would be an Early Modern leader (for Burma).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Yeah, it's hard to put a time frame that's made from Europe onto the rest of the world. For the Early Modern period, we'd look at the growth of rationalism and secularism, the growth of the merchant class, an explosion of writing in vernacular languages (e.g. Thai), and the growth of international trade routes (or, rather, their absolute domination of the world's attention). In Europe that's around 1500-1800 or so. In Siam I might put it from Narai through the end of Ayutthaya to Rama IV, maybe. Rama V is clearly industrial. So Rama V would be an industrial-era leader and Bayinnaung would be an Early Modern leader (for Burma).

I still think that the term Early Modern Era is at least a better alternative to the name Renaissance Era, when talking about possible time periods for the game.
Considering the actual Renaissance period did not last all the way to 1800, there is at least about a 100 year gap between the actual end of the Renaissance in Europe and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

 

[Zaarin]

I still think that the term Early Modern Era is at least a better alternative to the name Renaissance Era, when talking about possible time periods for the game.
Considering the actual Renaissance period did not last all the way to 1800, there is at least about a 100 year gap between the actual end of the Renaissance in Europe and the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

And even in European history the term "the Renaissance" is falling out of favor as historians increasingly recognize continuity between both the Classical and Medieval and Medieval and Modern periods and as scholars recognize other instances where arts and learning flourished in the High and Late Middle Ages, making the Italian and Norther Renaissances just two among many that occurred.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Many of these infos came from Suchit Wongthes's book "Sukhothai is Not the First Siamese Empire" https://www.silpa-mag.com/history/article_29827

City names.
Capitol: Ayutthaya OR Bangkok (depending on who's leading and what dominant era is chosen in design stage as aforemented, if King Taksin (Zheng Xin) is chosen, Thonburi will be the name instead of Bangkok)
Second city:
- Ayutthaya (if Bangkok is Seat.)
- Lopburi (Unavailable to the Khmer if BOTH are in the same game. In truth Lopburi/Louvopur itself was actually a 'vassal to/in league with/ tied with' Yasodharapura, their 'Khmeric' art was not really the same, where the Old Temple Complex which intentionally built as Baray and Prasat complex was actually 'A Competition 'to build Cosmos' against Yasothorn', there were times Louvo became 'equals' to/ or could 'defy' Yasothorn' at whim, this associated to the foundings of Harigunchai Kingdom (แคว้นหริกุญไชย) seated in what's now Lam Puun (ลำพูน), where Pricess Chama-devi was sent by Louvo King to be the 'First Queen' of that city, was actually a political play to somehow contains either rivals or to even challenge Yasothorn itself. The city itself is also associated to King Narai as a 'Versailles/Sansoucci" city surrounded by diamond shaped bastions (AKA The Star Fort) with constructions supervised by Konstantin Phaulkon (who later built the foundations of modern Thonburi), so a palace politics against Old Families of Ayutthaya. if Ayutthaya is chosen as Seat, Lopburi will be second.
Third City onwards.
- Bangkok
- Chantaburi (Why Fxis forgot this city when designing Siam for civ5??! despite its historical significance in Ayutthaya Empire and successors, especially the city played important roles of Phaya Tak (Zheng Xin)'s reconquistas where he went there 'On the orders of the King' to muster Chinese and Vietnamese mercenaries/volunteers (i'd say Mercs but remember that in the final years of Ayutthaya Empire, Kaungbaung Burma fought wars on TWO fronts, with Qing China great banner army marching towards Inwa up north, Phaya Tak himself (or any other Ayutthayan ministers) could or already awared of this facts through Kohongs in the latest Tribunary Visit to China, and since he could communicate with Chinese and Vietnamese there, he was sent to that port city to get troops (Phaya Tak did NOT order his Army to sally fourth 'on his own without supervisor's blessings' particularly with his ranks being junior (he's granted a maximum manpower counts of 500, not so much, and also a subordinate to 'Phaya Kamphaeng Pej', The need of additional manpower and conficts between Qing and Inwa were impetus to get troops from Chantaburi), too bad Ayutthaya fell shortly after his departures, and the empire fractured overnight with Chantaburi being a seat of one faction, the city overlord openly 'defied the King's order' and thus came a city siege which ended in a daring assault where Phaya Tak took the City (either with him ramming his elephant on the city gate OR with Chinese populace inside the city became Fifth Column). With Chantaburi firmly under Phaya Tak's hands, the city became a base of operations to his Reconquista where a fleet (either of barges, galleys or Junks, i think the latter) full of Sinic mercs and volunteers originally earmarked for Ayutthaya defense + other locals mustered, now repurposed for the recapture which was done by naval forces. With 'Thonburi' was the first to fell in this campaign (The City joined up with Burmese invader), so his Seat relocated there, and very soon Ayutthaya was easily recaptured.
Too bad the city was 'left off' completely despite historican significants, Phaya Tak's 'trade with China' during a brief tenure there played a significant role to retake Ayutthaya. The City also played imporant roles as 'regional seat' for successor Siamese Empires. and even briefly 'occupied' by France as a bargaining collateral to cede claims over Laos shortly after the Haw Wars ended, the trace of Late Industrial French Occupation still stood there--French 'Red House' commanderie (where french colonial prison was but no longer used as such but later the Red House was used as Noble recreational facility, and later on as a 'Patriot museum' which I was there in 2007 and there were what appeared to be French Paixhans guns), and what's now Royal Thai Marines Base, which still used today. And later the city was targeted by French Indochine for their counteroffensive in 1941 shortly after HTMS Tonburi sunk after The Battle of Koh Chang Islands, only the amphibious assaut troops destroyed by Siamese Air Foce units. Too bad the rise of Chonburi and Pattaya in Cold War (As part of American base in their 'Nam campaign of '60s) and later the foundings of Eastern Seaboard in Early 90s had effectively marginalized Chantaburi. VERY few white tourists visit Chantaburi city (I only saw a couple having fun at Plieu Waterfall sometimes in 2007. but alot of them in Pattaya and Koh Chang, where trace of Siamese Revanchelisme faded). The only significants were fruits, other agriculture products, and a handful of 'patriots' visits (There were indeed periodically a group of 500 horse riding processions from Ayutthaya to Chantaburi via an alleged route Phaya Tak used, though these processions may or may not be sponsorized by or arranged by the Government, and the actual routes were likely faded long ago after decades of either disuses or new Tarmac and concrete roads built by various authorities--both of Centra government and local administration agencies (the numerous SAOs and Municipalities) ) as well as some 'magic tourism' to seek out amulets and rites.

I can't comment on anything Firaxis is working on. I agree for a large part on your characterization of Siamese history. Putting Ramkhamhaeng as the "first Siamese" (or, even more outlandishly, "Thai") state is an act of historical revisionism. Sukhothai was one of a number of city-states, some of whom were with the Khmer, and some of whom were in a kind of anti-Khmer coalition.

Suchit Wongthes is a person who detested the State 'historical' version and even concluded numerous contradictions of Modern Thai School History Books particularly in the details of Old Khmer - Siamese relations (or how Siam replaced Khmer later on), his book (s, maybe others he wrote on his research earlier or later) even cited hard evidences including numerous Steles inscribed elsewhere in many cities which cited that Sukhothai was one of many smaller Kingdoms coexisted with similiarly or slightly more powerful kingdoms of Menam basin and elsewhere in what's now Laos and Isaan region of Thailand. While the official history books for schools cited that Old Sukhothai was 'Coast to Coast Empire', Suchit Wongtes's book suggested differently particularly with one of King Ramkhamhaeng's stele narrative on his 'dominion' was actually a narrative of his leagues, where many city states or kingdoms around him were his 'relatives' which he could call upon if things went sour. The other stele also cited that he is 'related to King of Yasothorn Empire' one way or another (either took orders from him, or use his reputations to solve his diplomatic or kingsly problems or coerce his rivals). In trutn around the same time Yasothorn did have peculiar problems with Cham 'rebellions' to the East. And 'Laotian' problems up north (One or two Laotian kingdoms either turned against, or went into interregnum crisis which caught Yasothorn's attention, or even fight each other and one sought support from Yasothorn or already earned ones.). Through i'm not sure if Anti-Khmer sentiments actually originated from excessive extortions from Yasothorn or another classic 'local affairs went global' where two minor kings conflict had dragged the whole Empire's attention and it turned wrong where a faction Yasothorn opposed became stronger or did manage to erode much of their respective imperial power.

Pridi would be a great idea for a later era. He's what Siam could have been - a social-democratic advocate for voting, etc. Phibul is what Thailand got - an ethno-nationalist, fascist-allied dictator, who nonetheless pushed forward a campaign of modernization. I know Phibul is popular now amongst some who oppose the current regime, but I think he's got some historical baggage.

If Modern Era Siam is to be chose, ideas on UU and Unique Infrastructure please.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

And even in European history the term "the Renaissance" is falling out of favor as historians increasingly recognize continuity between both the Classical and Medieval and Medieval and Modern periods and as scholars recognize other instances where arts and learning flourished in the High and Late Middle Ages, making the Italian and Norther Renaissances just two among many that occurred.

That's why 'Early Modern' is chosen in place of 'Renaissance' in Humankind.

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

I know Sujit's work quite well, yes! He has a good reputation.

I don't know why Chanthanaburi is not on the CivV list; it was a long time ago, and I wasn't here then! I haven't spent much time there, but have been through.

Alas, I cannot comment on game-related stuff. Talking about Sujit and Ramkhamhaeng, etc., is all fine, but giving ideas for UU and UI is getting too close to game-related material.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

^ Also Louvopur/Lopburi status. Suchit did NOT believe that Lopburi began as Khmer colony (He even cited that 'Theory of Conquest' is invalid with Southeast Asian historical narrative, wars fought in Mekhong subcontinent usually ended with sackings where peoples and wealths were taken home by victors since 'There were too many lands, too few men to work on there', more educated POWs became craftsmen or artists or archetects), but he even cited that the city was either vassal or sometimes a rival to Yasothorn. Prasat complex located there was more of imitations of Angkor glory since the "Angkor Wat represented itself as the Center of the Universe" there are FIVE towers with the tallest is the central one, representing the FIVE PEAKS of the MERU), Two walls represents smaller-seemingly unimpregnable mountain walls and ocean. The Angkor Wat itself not only inspired Lopburi temple complex (or even Wat Chaeng in BKK which more or less older than the very city itself). But also Ayutthaya's largest 'Royal Temple' complex ruins (with much more modern smaller temple hall built next to it, the latter site is open to public as a place of worship). The comparative arts howver, as Sujit cited, are different.

Another reasons why Sukhothai shouldn't represent 'in game Siam' anymore--Domains. the actual domain of Sukhothai Kingdom was, to the south, limited to what's now City of Nakhorn Sawan (Ancient name was 'Muang Prabang', not really the same as more renown 'Luang Prabang'). With this, Phitsanuloke was part of Sukhothai Kingdom., Further south were domains of stronger kingdoms--Louvo, Ayutthaya (which later became a full Empire and thus should represent Siam in game, particularly first since Zheng He's visit, and later after contacts with the Portuguese where gunpowder was added to the imperial mix.), and even southwards. the Nakhorn Si Thammarat (itself also a strong 'Srivijayan League' Kingdom before Ayutthaya subjugated it later on). I've yet to re-read Sujit's book to determine the exact limits of Sukhothai Kingdom but i'm very sure it is not 'coast to coast' empire nor even seaside.
To the east i'm very sure that Sukhothai didn't extend further than Petchabun, to Southeast not further than Si Thep (today part of Petchabun province), due east lies Vimayapur Kingdom (and he even cited that there were 'Old Korat' with 'Dams' and complex irrigation systems, similiarly as complex as Old Khmer itself though he did not summarize that Vimayapur (พิมาย) is Khmer. But i'm abit sure that anywhere since Buriram due east to Dej Udom was Yasodornpur's domain particularly with modern historians agreed that Preah Vihear was built by Khmers of Yasothorn and predates much larger Angkor Wat.
Up north as aforemented. lies Lanna, seated by a city of Chiangmai, the city was actually collaborated works between King Meng Rai and his colleage after Chiang Rai completely sujugated Harigunchai--so came the need of a new seat of power, King Ramkhamhaeng, who's a 'school friend' his advisor (and even a mediator, often cited his relations with 'King of Yasothorn' to settle matters otherwise Yasothorn will interfere.)
One more reason is that the life of King Ramkhamhaeng was as fuzzy as parts of his Stele (there were many, one at Si Chum temple, the other located either North or Southwards i'm not sure). His mother's identity is as faded as the inscriptions but later revealed to came from Luong clan (Being 'viets'), i'm not sure if Thai 'official historians' intended to 'misread' King Ramkhamhaeng's Stele No.1 to dissociate him with Vietnamese or due to the other constrains (lack of better tooks to identify the actual etchings by the time, so in later official textbooks it was simply cited as 'faded'), however more interprit 'Thammasart Historians' like Sujit Wongtes and Charnvit Kasetsiri conducted series of extensive research which later identified that King Ramkhamhaeng's mother came from Luong clan (but no other names nor details how did she ended up in Sukhothai, either through a Civ6 Girl tried to seek allies or to bribe Sukhothai not to join Yuan's campaign against Viets (facing Two-pronged war is very bad if you're leading a small empire).--Also in the same book Sujit cited that Sukhothai began as a crossroad 'caravansarai' and florushed during Yuan Dynasty of China.-- or trhough Yasothorn's arrangements. (???) ). Also 'history books cited him being 'Leader of Anti-Khmer coalition' isn't really correct much. Indeed there were 'Anti-Yasothorn' factions somewhere North of Old Khmer empire. but anyone leading that coalition must be strong enough to do so or have to wait until Yasothorn wane (or having better sponsors to do so). Eventually Yasothorn (along with Angkor Wat) was sacked, by the Siamese. but I don't think those of Sukhothai Kingdom did, I think those of Ayutthaya did, along with much of Yasothorn's populace including skilled and high rankings were carried all the way home to Ayutthaya. But all of these happened concurrently in Ming Yongle's reign through Zheng He's Seven Expeditions. (not really sure, but it associated with Chinese Diasprosa in Southeast Asia. Particularly with 'Sam por gong' legends were associated with Zheng He's seven expeditions. https://www.sarakadee.com/2018/04/02/sam-por-gong/ .. (Note, Zheng He's alternate name is Sanbao and Gong is honorific. literally means 'Duke Sanbao'), some Chinese in or around Ayutthaya even associated themselves as a fruit of Zheng He's 'colonial seeds'. The truth was that Ayutthaya became Empire after Zheng He's visit (i'm not sure if he really sailed into Menam but his 'Floating city' flagship is very very big. much bigger than HMS Victory or Valmy or any late Ships of the Line of 19th Century. so I don't think he could sail that ship into Menam but he might use smaller junks accompanying the Great Fleet to meet the local kings there). Particularly with Ming Empire chose sea trade route over land in Yuan era.

 

[awesome]

Siam in civ5 was medieval, so it would make sense to see that again, but the Gatling elephant does sound cool.
Siam representing the 1700s would be a cultural powerhouse, so that would fit for the Asian cultural civ that we usually get

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Siam in civ5 was medieval, so it would make sense to see that again, but the Gatling elephant does sound cool.

If we must get a Medieval SEA civ let it be Khmer, not to mention Indonesia would probably be the Majapahit Empire again.
Siam can easily pull off other eras like Early Modern Ayutthaya or the only Industrial Era one.