India

[Henri Christophe]

I'm tired of Gandhi leading India in every game and I believe India can be weel representade by some kingdoms below as:

1- Maratha Empire lead by Shivaji

it was the last empire before the British Raj.

2-Mughal Empire lead by Akbar or Aurangzeb.

It was the biggest empire in India. The empire who build the Taj Mahal

3-Maurya empire lead by Chandra Gupta.

Chandra Gupta already appear in the game as the leader of India, but his empire is called Maurya

4- Pallava empire lead by Simhavarman I

it's an empire of south bottom of India

5- Gupta empire, lead by Chandragupta I

Chandragupta I isn't the same dude as Chandra Gupta, who leads India in Civ6.

6- Delhi Sultanate lead by Ibrahim Khan Lodi

It is a well know sultanate of India.

7- Vijayanagara empire lead by Harihara I

Another south indian empire.

8- Bactria empire lead by Demetrius I

A greek kingdom in India, they are very intersting.

9- Ahmednagar sultanate lead by Malik Ambar.

About the decan sultanates, it is the most intersting because his leader is a former slave from Ethiopia.

10- Sikh empire lead by Ranjit Singh

They have a unique faith, the Sikhism

11- Chola Empire lead by Vijayalaya Chola

They had a true maritime empire.

If I forgot some important kingdom, please let me know in the comments below.

 

[Patine]

I personally said the Sikh Empire. There's a notably large Sikh-Canadian community in the city live in.

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

I love all of these suggestions; India has such a rich history. Do note the reception of a non-Hindu empire, especially the Mughals or Delhi Sultanate in the present-day Indian political landscape, though.

 

[FishFishFish]

I voted for the Mughals, Chola, Maurya and Marathi. I think this is best because they would represent different time periods, different religions (having two Hindus is probably better) and would fit well together on TSL maps.

Ahmednagar sultanate should not even be included on the list. It is insignificant compared to the other states here. If there was another Muslim civ in India I'd rather see Bengal. The Pala, Gurjara-Pratihara and Rashtrakuta empires should of been included on the poll to represent the tripartite struggle and the 8th century as well.

Also since you included Bactria, Kushan and/or an Afghan civ should've also been included.

 

[Patine]

I voted for the Mughals, Chola, Maurya and Marathi. I think this is best because they would represent different time periods, different religions (having two Hindus is probably better) and would fit well together on TSL maps.

Ahmednagar sultanate should not even be included on the list. It is insignificant compared to the other states here. If there was another Muslim civ in India I'd rather see Bengal. The Pala, Gurjara-Pratihara and Rashtrakuta empires should of been included on the poll to represent the tripartite struggle and the 8th century as well.

Also since you included Bactria, Kushan and/or an Afghan civ should've also been included.

And maybe even the Gorkha Kingdom.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I love all of these suggestions; India has such a rich history. Do note the reception of a non-Hindu empire, especially the Mughals or Delhi Sultanate in the present-day Indian political landscape, though.

I've always thought that there is a possibility of a Mughal civ existing separately from an Indian civ, similar to how Greece and Macedon are separate civs in this iteration.

At least I think this is at least a feasible idea if Gandhi decides to keep recurring in the game.

Speaking as a historian and a fan of the franchise, and not as a Firaxis employee, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the matter.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Ahmednagar sultanate should not even be included on the list. It is insignificant compared to the other states here. If there was another Muslim civ in India I'd rather see Bengal. The Pala, Gurjara-Pratihara and Rashtrakuta empires should of been included on the poll to represent the tripartite struggle and the 8th century as well.

C'mon, the Ahmednagar sultanate is my favorite sultanate of the Decan Plateau. Mostly because the history of one of his leaders, Malik Ambar.
Who come in India as Slave and become a Sultan.

Malik Ambar also fought against Akbar (the might Mughal emperor) and wins, amazing achivment in his history of life.

 

[Patine]

I've always thought that there is a possibility of a Mughal civ existing separately from an Indian civ, similar to how Greece and Macedon are separate civs in this iteration.

At least I think this is at least a feasible idea if Gandhi decides to keep recurring in the game.

Speaking as a historian and a fan of the franchise, and not as a Firaxis employee, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the matter.

Personally, the Mughal Empire is not my favourite choice for an alternate Indian civ. I feel having an Islamic Persian Dynasty can fulfill most of the fix the Mughals would - minus the Taj Mahal, specifically.

 

[FishFishFish]

Who come in India as Slave and become a Sultan.

The Delhi Sultanate was also founded by a slave. Why add the Ahmadnagar sultanate -- who are a predecessor of one of the Delhi Sultanate's predecessors -- when you can just add the Delhi Sultanate?

It makes absolutely zero sense to add such a small and irrelevant state in one of the most neglected regions in the entire game.

 

[Andrew Johnson [FXS]]

I've always thought that there is a possibility of a Mughal civ existing separately from an Indian civ, similar to how Greece and Macedon are separate civs in this iteration.

At least I think this is at least a feasible idea if Gandhi decides to keep recurring in the game.

Speaking as a historian and a fan of the franchise, and not as a Firaxis employee, I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on the matter.

Hm. Societies are created at each instance of time. They are always new configurations of old things, often influences that come from outside as well as within. It is the perennial goal of nationalists to create a sense of continuity and deny that constant change, asserting and building an essence when that essence always alters. That's my academic opinion there.

India has stunning diversity within it - you've got several major religions (Sikh, Jain, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim), two major language families, and a history that stretches back as far as Greece's and, if we include Harappa, beyond. An abstraction like "India in Civ6" is always going to be an abstraction for the purposes of the game, an abstraction that we accept so that we can play. Gandhi worked well because he was an advocate of India as India, not to mention a non-violent leader in a leader pool of warlords. But bear in mind that we've had other Indias - Chandragupta (Civ6) and Ashoka (Civ4) come to the top of my head.

I think that's all I'm going to say. I certainly don't want to offend people of whatever national(ist) or anti-nationalist persuasion, and I can't comment on Firaxis's activities.

 

[Henri Christophe]

The Delhi Sultanate was also founded by a slave. Why add the Ahmadnagar sultanate -- who are a predecessor of one of the Delhi Sultanate's predecessors -- when you can just add the Delhi Sultanate?

It makes absolutely zero sense to add such a small and irrelevant state in one of the most neglected regions in the entire game.

Delhi Sultanate was also founded by a slave? I didn't know that! Can you share his name (or some kind of source) to I search it a bit?

And about Ahmednagar Sultanate, I like Malik Ambar not just because he was a slave, but also a black slave of African origens. It is a very rare a black slave become a sultan and should fit very well this game if Fireaxis want to add diversity in it.

I also make a thread just to speak about Blacks outside Africa, please check it too

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

India has stunning diversity within it - you've got several major religions (Sikh, Jain, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim), two major language families, and a history that stretches back as far as Greece's and, if we include Harappa, beyond. An abstraction like "India in Civ6" is always going to be an abstraction for the purposes of the game, an abstraction that we accept so that we can play. Gandhi worked well because he was an advocate of India as India, not to mention a non-violent leader in a leader pool of warlords. But bear in mind that we've had other Indias - Chandragupta (Civ6) and Ashoka (Civ4) come to the top of my head.

I've never minded the abstraction of Gandhi leading India as much as others. That being said I do commend the idea of adding in Chandragupta making Civ 6's iteration of India at least the best iteration, in my opinion.

Nationalistic tendencies aside, I consider the Mughal legacy to also be linked to nations such as Pakistan, and even more importantly Afghanistan, which is why I think they could possibly exist outside of the sphere of even the abstraction of India.

 

[FishFishFish]

Delhi Sultanate was also founded by a slave? I didn't know that! Can you share his name (or some kind of source) to I search it a bit?

Qutb-ud-din Aybak - New World Encyclopedia

Qutb al-Din Aibak - Wikipedia Or you can just read his wiki article.

And about Ahmednagar Sultanate, I like Malik Ambar not just because he was a slave, but also a black slave of African origens. It is a very rare a black slave become a sultan and should fit very well this game if Fireaxis want to add diversity in it.

I would not consider adding a civ to the game just because their leader was black and they ruled outside of Africa to be good representation personally.

 

[Henri Christophe]

I've always thought that there is a possibility of a Mughal civ existing separately from an Indian civ, similar to how Greece and Macedon are separate civs in this iteration.

I hope Civ 7 don't have Macedon again, since it's name isn't recognized by Greeks, they call Macedon as FYROM "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". Alexander the Great should be the leader of Greece, not Macedon.
And Civ 6 made a lot of Greeks leaders, just Greece have two leaders, and it also has Alexander of Macedon, Cleoptra of Egypt and Basil of Byzantine with Helenic heritage. That is too much. There is the same numbers of Helenics and Black people (despite the fact the Black people is way more diverse than Hellenic greeks). Also the same numbers of Helenics and Native Americans (other very diverse group very few explored by Fireaxis).

About Mughal/India issue. I hope one replaces the another because of the name of cities problem. They share the same range of cities. If I would choice one of they, I would choice the Mughal (because I believe India should be replaced by others states and Gandhi should never more appear in this game).
Mughal, Ahmednagar and Chola empire can fullfill very well all India sub-continent. And I think 3 Civs in Vanila edition should be great, the others Indians civilizations can appear after the DLCs.

 

[Patine]

I hope Civ 7 don't have Macedon again, since it's name isn't recognized by Greeks, they call Macedon as FYROM "the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia". Alexander the Great should be the leader of Greece, not Macedon.

That's not accurate. Greece recognizes three administrative regions in the northern part of their country - Western Macedonia, Central Macedonia, and Thrace and Eastern Macedonia - as being Macedonia, in a proper definition, and view Macedon as a nation tied to Ancient Greek legacy as much as Greece proper. They view the FYROM - or, since, 2019, formally North Macedonia - to be a false claim on Northern Greek territory by Western Bulgarians who, "rebranded," themselves, "Macedonians," during the very late Ottoman rule of the area.

 

[Patine]

Mughal, Ahmednagar and Chola empire can fullfill very well all India sub-continent. And I think 3 Civs in Vanila edition should be great, the others Indians civilizations can appear after the DLCs.

Two out of three civ's for the sub-continent with Islamic rulers? How do you think that'll go over in the very large gaming market of India?

 

[Henri Christophe]

Two out of three civ's for the sub-continent with Islamic rulers? How do you think that'll go over in the very large gaming market of India?

I don't thought about religion when said this 3 civs above, just thought about geographycal spots, one from north India, oder from the Decan Plateau and other from south India.
So, since I agree with you religion diversity is important, I would change the Mughal Empire to Maurya empire with Ashoka, he is a budist. Or Maurya empire can be lead by Chandra Gupta, who follow the religion called Jain.

India have too many religions and to please all players is needed more than just 3 civs. Maybe the buddhist kingdom should be Bactria (the Greeks of India). So in the end it is
Maurya empire lead by Chandra Gupta - Jain
Bactria lead by Demetrius I - Buddhist
Ahmednagar lead by Malik Ambar - Muslim
Chola lead by Vijayalaya - Hindu

 

[Patine]

Ahmednagar lead by Malik Ambar - Muslim

You're still really hung up on pushing a minor bit player, more worthy of a city-state, that most have never heard of, as an, "essential," inclusion, even among only three or four civ's for the region. This seems odd to me. And a couple of others, above, seem to feel the same about your adamant idea.

 

[Henri Christophe]

You're still really hung up on pushing a minor bit player, more worthy of a city-state, that most have never heard of, as an, "essential," inclusion, even among only three or four civ's for the region. This seems odd to me. And a couple of others, above, seem to feel the same about your adamant idea.

Ahmednagar is the best option of Decan Plateau. The other options are Barar, Bidar, Bijapur and Golkonda but they don't have an amazing leader as Malik Ambar.

Choice civs based on his leaders is not that incommun. For example Gran-Colombia who is just in this game because it's leader Simon Bolivar.
Malik Ambar also fought and won battles against the might Mughal emperor Akbar.
Should be amazing to see also a scenario in this game about this war.

 

[Patine]

Ahmednagar is the best option of Decan Plateau. The other options are Barar, Bidar, Bijapur and Golkonda but they don't have an amazing leader as Malik Ambar.

Choice civs based on his leaders is not that incommun. For example Gran-Colombia who is just in this game because it's leader Simon Bolivar.
Malik Ambar also fought and won battles against the Might Mughal emperor Akbar.
Should be amazing to see also a scenario in this game about this war.

That's the Deccan Plateau, specifically, in the 15th Century. Not that representative, all-in-all. And I was never a fan of the inclusion of Bolivar and Gran Colombia. I always felt the Muisca would have been much more intriguing for the slot. And how, exactly, is Malik Ambar so, "amazing?" In a way that would captivate more than just you, basically?