India and China - Playable Through The Entire Game

[Lord Lakely]

Persia, Korea and Ethiopia. Maybe Maya too?

All of those have problems though, in terms of their chronology.

Persia has no independent Exploration Civilization. They were conquered by the Arabs first, then by the Turks. It took until the Safavids for a Persian culture independent state to rise again. You are thinking of the Sassanids, I know that, but there are better options than to put them anachronistically in the Exploration Era (such as adding a Sassanian leader)

Korea runs into problems with the Joseon dynasty.. The three kingdoms fit Antiquity, Joseon can take up the spot in Exploration or Modern, but then what? Who will fill the gap in Exploration or Modern, whichever era you don't fit Joseon in? Goryo? the Republic of Korea? It's very research intensive and also comes with an opportunity cost - every Korea you add takes away a slot for someone else. Personally, I'd let one of our Korean fanatics (gdr or Morningcalm) make their own propositions before I'd give Korea more than two representations.

Because of Aksum's inclusion in the Antiquity Era, Ethiopia no longer has a valid Exploration equivalent. The line for them could have been D'm't => Aksum => Ethiopia, but no more. Unless you want to fictionalize an Abyssinia in Exploration, but Ethiopia had a ROUGH time in the Middle Ages. Anything after the Zemene Mesafint already counts as Modern to me.

So if a currently tiny area(Britain, France, Germany) had a big impact in some age, they should probably be in that age….but their Civ 7 predecessors don’t need to be their limited area predecessors. (Britons, Gauls, etc)

Yes and no. While the Celts inhabited the areas we now know as Great Britain and France, they are not the direct descendants of those nations - that would be the Anglo-Saxons and the Franks.

Even so, Celts => Franks => French and Celts => Normans => English are valid lines due to geography. Additionally, including the Celts in Antiquity is very useful for gameplay purposes. It doesn't bottleneck Greece and Rome as heavily, which are now set to show up in every game because of the disproportionately larger amount of Euro leaders, all of which default to Rome and Greece. Adding in Goths and the Norse would give you five direct Antiquity options for Europe, which is sufficient. (and some Exploration options such as Spain can be made to evolve from Phoenicia, for example)

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

Because of Aksum's inclusion in the Antiquity Era, Ethiopia no longer has a valid Exploration equivalent. The line for them could have been D'm't => Aksum => Ethiopia, but no more. Unless you want to fictionalize an Abyssinia in Exploration, but Ethiopia had a ROUGH time in the Middle Ages. Anything after the Zemene Mesafint already counts as Modern to me.

You could go Exploration Zagwe Dynasty to get the Rock Hewn Churches in, but I think a different civ from the general region would be preferable for variety's sake, like Swahili.

 

[Zaarin]

Persia has no independent Exploration Civilization. They were conquered by the Arabs first, then by the Turks. It took until the Safavids for a Persian culture independent state to rise again. You are thinking of the Sassanids, I know that, but there are better options than to put them anachronistically in the Exploration Era (such as adding a Sassanian leader)

Given the Sassanids straddle the Antiquity/Exploration line, they're considerably less anachronistic in Exploration than Khmer or Mississippians are in Antiquity. Thematically, as the civ that embraced and spread Zoroastrianism, they also fit Exploration. They probably should descend from Assyria or Maurya, though, given how Achaemenid Persia is the Total War civ...

Korea runs into problems with the Joseon dynasty.. The three kingdoms fit Antiquity, Joseon can take up the spot in Exploration or Modern, but then what? Who will fill the gap in Exploration or Modern, whichever era you don't fit Joseon in? Goryo? the Republic of Korea? It's very research intensive and also comes with an opportunity cost - every Korea you add takes away a slot for someone else. Personally, I'd let one of our Korean fanatics (gdr or Morningcalm) make their own propositions before I'd give Korea more than two representations.

Yes, Silla > Goryeo > Joseon makes the most sense, if we're doing a three-era Korea. Silla > Joseon also makes sense if Korea only gets two ages, though that certainly makes Modern awkward (Japan...China...). Also GDR did a write-up on his view of Korea in Ideas & Suggestions, FWIW.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Just want to point out that the devs did say at that PAX West panel that Maurya>Chola>Mughal to them was the “India” pathway so I wouldn't necessarily disagree with other people, if they still think that way.

 

[sTAPler27]

Europe can be played through the entire game as well

People just don't make that connection because they're not labled Roman France or Norman France like China and India are

 

[Stomper66]

You could say Mexico is playable in all ages as well. The Maya to start, the Spanish arrival in exploration and Mexico in modern. I think that will be my first play through.

Because of the colonial history you can have civs like Spain present in two continents like Europe and central/ south America and still have it immersive for that country in exploration. For example Portugal in Brazil, England in Australia or France in Canada.

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

People just don't make that connection because they're not labled Roman France or Norman France like China and India are

So France is Roman and Spain is not? Hmm, It might be too complicated for labels

 

[Krikkit1]

So France is Roman and Spain is not? Hmm, It might be too complicated for labels

Better to say France Rome, Norman Rome and Spain Rome

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

Better to say France Rome, Norman Rome and Spain Rome

But picking Rome in the ancient era means you pick France Rome, or Spain Rome? How a one-label solution can manage this problem without quantum physics?

 

[Krikkit1]

But picking Rome in the ancient era means you pick France Rome, or Spain Rome? How a one-label solution can manage this problem without quantum physics?

No you go
Greek Rome-Norman Rome-France Rome
or
Greek Rome-Spain Rome-Mexico Rome

unlike India and China, the Rome civ has multiple sets of all 3 age civs
(as well as having its own civ which neither India nor China do)

 

[Wielki Hegemon]

No you go
Rome-Norman Rome-France Rome
or
Rome-Spain Rome-Mexico Rome

unlike India and China, the Rome civ has multiple sets of all 3 age civs

Hmm Are you sure about that?

 

[Mudokon Pop]

You can put Mongols off your list, they are a civ and whether they conquered China they never were Chinese. (got absorbed by Chinese culture) However Han, Ming and Qing were all Chinese, at different period of time. I just think that "China" should appear in their name at some point, to avoid any confusion. It would play with the game principles too, and show nothing is impossible.
The European countries you name, while having some heritage from one to the other, are still different civs and has always been in Civ games.

I think we should be using the word ethnicity a lot more here in relation to civilizations. If you look at Confucius as a leader and Han China, Ming China and Qing China, all of them are from Han ethnicity. You could say Qing China was led by a Manchu dynasty but no one's under the delusion that this civilization would represent the Manchus at any period in history, it's about the Han majority they ruled over and the a representation of the Qing dynasty era China. So in that sense, China is unique in that, it has a representation at all levels of the game for its majority ethnicity and culture.

The Qing dynasty were certainly not Han Chinese, ethnically speaking. They are Manchu (Jurchen), a nomadic ethnic group with a lifestyle more in common with Mongols and Turks but are linguistically Tungistic, related to Siberian cultures.

The Manchu rule of China and assimilation into Han Chinese culture is not that different to the Mongol dynasty of China in that regards. Many modern Chinese historians viewed the Qing dynasty as a foreign dynasty.

 

[Evie]

Qing China (the distinction between Qing China and just Qing is important here) was a predominantly Han Chinese polity ruled by a Manchu elite ; there is no Qing China without *both* of those elements. A culture is not determined by its rulers alone (and usually mostly not by its rulers. They just like to hog up the credit.)

And the fact that Qing China counts for China and Mughal India for India makes it pretty self-evident that Exploration Persia will not be a problem - Persianized Turks who ruled over Persia (ie, not Ottomans or Mughals) will do just fine in that role, and there's a bevy of high-profile Persianized Turks to chose from in Exploration (Seljuks and Timurids being the biggest ones).

 

[Krikkit1]

Qing China (the distinction between Qing China and just Qing is important here) was a predominantly Han Chinese polity ruled by a Manchu elite ; there is no Qing China without *both* of those elements. A culture is not determined by its rulers alone (and usually mostly not by its rulers. They just like to hog up the credit.)

And the fact that Qing China counts for China and Mughal India for India makes it pretty self-evident that Exploration Persia will not be a problem - Persianized Turks who ruled over Persia (ie, not Ottomans or Mughals) will do just fine in that role, and there's a bevy of high-profile Persianized Turks to chose from in Exploration (Seljuks and Timurids being the biggest ones).

The thing is should there be a separate Yuan China civ or do the Mongols reasonably count for that (ie Mongol civ with Han traditions and UI)

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

the “India” the op is talking about is: Maurya, Chola, Mughal

And what shall be Persia path? in playthrough Persia becomes Mongolians in Age II, what about Age III? Qing? Mughal? (Mughal took the name from Medieval Mongols, referring to Muslim superpower that took India at some point in history).
I don't think evolutionary path can be this HARD and FAST. Firaxis gives out diversified evolutionay branches in both or any cases.
in Modern Age demonstration video, King Asoke leads Siam. so saying that it could be possible that Chola evolved to Siam (and Majpahit evolved to Meiji Japan).. which is very odd. except that King Asoke fits well with Rattanakosin era Siamese Royal Traditions that's strongly patriarchial. (which precluded Zheng Ce leaderships entirely).

 

[Mudokon Pop]

Qing China (the distinction between Qing China and just Qing is important here) was a predominantly Han Chinese polity ruled by a Manchu elite ; there is no Qing China without *both* of those elements. A culture is not determined by its rulers alone (and usually mostly not by its rulers. They just like to hog up the credit.)

What you said is true of most conquests throughout history - and is particularly true of empires (the big exception being the Americas & Australia). I suspect that same people who comment saying the Qing represent Han China would probably not say the same about Yuan China. I just don't think it's completely fair to view the Han, Ming & Qing dynasties as the same continuous culture as some commentators do. However I do think China got better representation than other civs in the game but that is as much to do with it's unique history than any bias on the dev team's end. I'd have done the same.

And what shall be Persia path? in playthrough Persia becomes Mongolians in Age II, what about Age III? Qing? Mughal? (Mughal took the name from Medieval Mongols, referring to Muslim superpower that took India at some point in history).
I don't think evolutionary path can be this HARD and FAST. Firaxis gives out diversified evolutionay branches in both or any cases.
in Modern Age demonstration video, King Asoke leads Siam. so saying that it could be possible that Chola evolved to Siam (and Majpahit evolved to Meiji Japan).. which is very odd. except that King Asoke fits well with Rattanakosin era Siamese Royal Traditions that's strongly patriarchial. (which precluded Zheng Ce leaderships entirely).

Persia doesn't have to become Mongolia in Age II anymore than China does. The Abbasids are just as valid as a historical/geographical Persian successor as the Mongols for Age II but my personal preference would be the Timurids. The Timurid Empire used the Persian language for it's administration and were patrons of Persian culture. Their culture also incorporated Mongolian elements so it's very reflective of Iran's history and their vast territory was very similar to the ancient Persian empires - particularly the Sassanids.

For Age III - Safavid Iran is often seen as the beginning of Iranian history though they could fall into Age II. They are contemporary with the Mughals and Ottomans so I'd rather they all go into the same Age.

 

[Evolena]

So, what about Hyksos, Nubian, and Greek Egyptian dynasties? Still Egypt or not Egypt? Continuous culture or not?

 

[Mudokon Pop]

So, what about Hyksos, Nubian, and Greek Egyptian dynasties? Still Egypt or not Egypt? Continuous culture or not?

I think change is the only thing that's been truly continuous throughout history.

 

[Krikkit1]

So, what about Hyksos, Nubian, and Greek Egyptian dynasties? Still Egypt or not Egypt? Continuous culture or not?

You might as well ask about the 4th 12th 23rd and 37th Congress in America …every 2 years
some of the people in charge changed…
some cultural practices changed
some of the population changed
some of the laws changed
sometimes lots of violence happened
sometimes fundamental rules of government changed
…..but we don’t have a Jeffersonian civ and a Jacksonian civ and a Lincolnite civ

Because given the scale of the game, that is to detailed to separate (except maybe by having some different policies)

and given they put all of antiquity into one era….best I can see is
maybe a nubian civ at one point
maybe a few different leaders (Alexander leads Egypt…etc)

 

[untitledjuan]

But picking Rome in the ancient era means you pick France Rome, or Spain Rome? How a one-label solution can manage this problem without quantum physics?

What about just Rome?

Or playing Rome as Isabella for Spain and playing Rome as Napoleon for France.