Never Before Seen Civs - Elimination Game

[Returning Lurker]

Apache 8
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 14
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 35-3=32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 10
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 26+1=27
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 7
Toltecs/Zapotecs 1

I would be downvoting some other people since I don't dislike Italy the most, but I do dislike Italy and it is absolutely dominating this game which I just don't approve of. Unless Italy drops beneath 30 points I'm stuck down voting it indefinitely.

 

[Zaarin]

Apache 8
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15 (14 + 1) -- Who cares if they overlap with Civ5's Morocco? I don't see Morocco in game and I don't really see it coming back in the near future, either. Plus Tin Hinan would be a pretty fascinating leader choice from a region that doesn't offer a lot of great female leaders.
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 7 (10 - 3) -- With solid historical evidence only of their decline, they make little sense for inclusion; we'd be better served by one of their successor confederacies like the Creek or Chickasaw.
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 27
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 7
Toltecs/Zapotecs 1

 

[Roman Citizen]

Apache 8
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 7-3=4 To little is known except for their collapse.
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 27
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 7+1=8 I think Tamerlane or Ulugh Beg would be fun leaders to have in the game.
Toltecs/Zapotecs 1

 

[Kimiimaro]

Apache 8-3=5 - I'm really not interrested in them.
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 32+1=33 - My greatest wish from this list.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 4
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 27
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
Toltecs/Zapotecs 1

 

[luigilime]

Apache 5
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 33
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 4
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 27+1=28 India should be represented more than it is right now. We can't have just Gandhi for India, that's considering precolonial India insignificant
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
Toltecs/Zapotecs 1-3 ELIMINATED there are better options for other mesoamerican civilisations

 

[Xandinho]

Apache 5
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 33
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 4 - 3 = 1 Most of the natives of North America do not interest me so much.
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28
Philippines 25 + 1 = 26 I must confess that Philippines would be a nice addition for me.
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[The Kingmaker]

Apache 5
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 15-3=12 Would rather have a civ representing the Almoravids or Almohads covering Andalusia, Morocco and the Berbers together.
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 33+1=34 I think I've articulated everything at this point. Give them the Greek treatment with Florence and others, etc.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 1
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28
Philippines 26
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[God of Kings]

Apache 5
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 12
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 34
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 20
Mississippians 1 - 3 = ELIMINATED Not many good leader choices
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28
Philippines 26 + 1 = 27 Plenty of good leader choices
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Apache 5
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9 (12 - 3) I second Alex/Kingmaker's suggestion above with the addition: Having the Almoravids and Kanem Bornu/'Other Saharan' gives better coverage of the entire northwest Africa region - and the Almoravids could get a UA based on what happens when they take the capital of a Civ with a higher Culture/Amenity level than theirs (I'm looking at you, Cordoba...)
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 34
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21 (20 + 1) - For the Finns again: Any Civ that can scare the C**p out of the Vikings with their 'magic' prowess has Got to have a place in the game! Sauna as a Unique Amenity would also be nice...
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28
Philippines 27
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[Guandao]

Apache (5-3)=2 Stereotypical Indian horse raider civ, boring!
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 34
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28
Philippines (27+1)=28 I've given my reasons for supporting them
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[Returning Lurker]

Apache 2
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 34-3=31
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 20
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 28+1=29
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

I still think "stereotypical" is a silly arguement for people who literally did the things unironically as a way of life as... it's not stereotyping. They literally did that stuff. How is it a stereotype to depict things as they happened and why is it bad to have archetypes? But since my vote wouldn't save the Apache I'm just gonna let it go. I would like to downvote some other people but Italy's continued success annoys me.

 

[Zaarin]

@Returning Lurker I know your post was directed at Guandao, but since I also downvoted the Apache I'd just comment that for me personally it's not that the Apache fit a stereotypical image of Native Americans (albeit they do), it's that they were rather insignificant, even regionally. The major players in the Southwest were the various Puebloan peoples (who already refused inclusion, or at least one tribe did--they might tap the Hopi or Zuni or something, I guess), the Comanche (who were already sort of included under the umbrella of their cousins, the Shoshone), and the Navajo (cousins of the Apache who took up herding rather than raiding and represent the largest tribe in the US); the Apache were just raiders who annoyed the other three. On top of not being even regionally important, they're not even the best representatives of Amerindian horse culture; aside from the extremely overrepresented Sioux, the Blackfoot, Cheyenne, Arapaho, and Nez Perce would all make better representatives of Native American horse raiders than the Apache. Like the Sioux and the Seminole, the Apache are chiefly noteworthy for having been a nuisance to the United States; it is literally the equivalent of selecting civs for being rivals of Rome that is so frequently denounced here (even in cases where it's not true, like Gaul or Carthage).

 

[Guandao]

Horse riding among North American Indians is such a recent phenomenon compared to the length of their history. I'm tired of pop culture's insistence on making it seem like all the Indians were whooping, war bonnet wearing, tipi living buffalo hunters. I already have issues with Firaxis's portrayal of the Iroquois and Shoshone. Contrary to traditional American stereotypes, North Amerindians were not simply tree hugging environmentalists nor brutes perpetually at war all the time. They were humans who shaped the landscape of North America like other people around the world. some of them managed to develop substantial settlements, and eventually adopted maize agriculture from Mesoamerica. I recommend the book 1491 for those interested in how the Americas were like before Columbus.

 

[God of Kings]

Horse riding among North American Indians is such a recent phenomenon compared to the length of their history. I'm tired of pop culture's insistence on making it seem like all the Indians were whooping, war bonnet wearing, tipi living buffalo hunters. I already have issues with Firaxis's portrayal of the Iroquois and Shoshone. Contrary to traditional American stereotypes, North Amerindians were not simply tree hugging environmentalists nor brutes perpetually at war all the time. They were humans who shaped the landscape of North America like other people around the world. some of them managed to develop substantial settlements, and eventually adopted maize agriculture from Mesoamerica. I recommend the book 1491 for those interested in how the Americas were like before Columbus.

Even the Iroquois formed a complex nation-state before the Europeans arrived.

 

[Amrunril]

Apache 2
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 20
Goths 29
Hungarians 30
Italians 32 (31 + 1) It seems a waste to give Europe more slots than any other region but then always fill them with the same civs. For reasons that many others have stated, Italy seems like a good way option to shake thing up.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 17 (20 - 3) I don't have any particular issue with this option, but the choices are started to get whittled down, and I haven't seen a convincing argument in its favor either.
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 29
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[Zaarin]

Apache 2
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 17 (20 - 3) -- The least fitting choice from the Southeast; the Creek, Chickasaw, or even the Choctaw would be better choices.
Goths 30 (29 + 1) -- The best way to represent the Germanic peoples of Antiquity; they had a major impact throughout the Roman world; and they have a fine selection of leaders to choose from.
Hungarians 30
Italians 32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 17
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 29
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I recommend the book 1491 for those interested in how the Americas were like before Columbus.

I've already voted today, but I have to second this book recommendation whole-heartedly. Also, while Charles Mann's 1491 will give you a whole new look at the technology and ability to transform the landscape of the American natives, Colin Calloway's One Vast Winter Count will give you an entirely different view of the relationships among the western tribes and between those tribes and the Europeans.

- And neither one will even faintly resemble anything you've seen in any 'popular' entertainment depiction of the Native Americans!

 

[Returning Lurker]

If the game depicts England as a dominant naval power obsessed with collecting relics no one assumes that's true of every single west European power not in the game yet. So why is it any different for Native Americans? Having one "Horse raiding tipi dwelling (or wickiup, if we're splitting hairs) chiefdom made up of clans and bands" isn't saying that that's every native American not in the game yet, just this one. And if that's a popular itch that the general public wants to scratch I don't see it as a problem. If they painted the Powhatan as mounted plain raiders then yeah, obviously that's a problem since that didn't happen, but if a side actually DID do mounted plains raiding and people want a mounted plains raider I don't see the problem in including a mounted plains raider. They aren't there to represent EVERY tribe, just the ones that did the things they did. Unless we're also going to argue that England is stereotyping the Scotts and Welsh and Gaels and everyone else in that area not in the game yet as naval collectors of rare antiquities.

 

[Zaarin]

@Returning Lurker The difference is that thanks to popular media portrayals a great deal of the world--and many Americans as well--are under the impression that all Native Americans wore feathered war bonnets and rode horses, half naked dressed in buckskin (ironically, the horse-riding tribes, especially the Sioux, were quite concerned with modesty and most certainly did not ride half naked). The point is that Civ6 should take the occasion to rise above typical media stereotyping to provide an educational experience rather than perpetuate the "all Native Americans are Sioux" myth. (Well, actually, my point was more that including the Apache over the Navajo or Blackfoot or numerous other possibilities is rather like including Lichtenstein rather than France or Germany.)

 

[Returning Lurker]

@Zaarin but I don't feel like they are saying that "this is all the Native Americans had to offer or aspired to". They're saying that these specific people did this stuff. If they had 5 native tribes and all of them were horse raiders then yeah, I could see your point that they should diversify a little and that they're focusing too heavily on one type of culture, but currently they have 0 native tribes north of El Paso so I don't see it as stereotyping if the first NNA tribe is the horse raider one unless we count whatever first tribe they do decide to add as stereotyping all other NNA as whatever they are. And if they plan on adding more than one I don't see it as armageddon if one of the several added is a horse raider if... that happened. Either way I don't see the issue with adding a pop-culture one first if current representation is 0.