Never Before Seen Civs - Elimination Game

[Zaarin]

Armenians 18 (17 + 1) -- Georgia appears to be a sinking ship, so I reluctantly throw my support to Tigranes the Great, who frankly is nowhere near as interesting as Tamar.
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 20
Burmese 2
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 12
Hebrews 18
Maori/Other Polynesians 17 (20 - 3) -- As interesting as they are, they still shouldn't be in the lead.
Swahili/Kilwa 16.
Tibetans 9
Vietnamese 12

 

[Returning Lurker]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 20+1=21
Burmese 2
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 12
Hebrews 18
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Tibetans 9-3=6
Vietnamese 12

I mean if people want the side I want to win to win then what am I gonna say, no? Sure they're my number 3 pick bit they're still the last of my top 3 left.

As for Tibet I'm not SAYING I'm sill bitter at them for outlasting my number 2 pick despite being completely impossible (and no, Firaxis would never do a region locked DLC because that would mean less money!). I'm also not saying I've woken up in a cold sweat every night for the past 2 weeks screaming "PRITHVI NARAYAN SHAH!!!" while tears stream down my cheeks. That being said I still think Nepal was the better choice.

 

[Amrunril]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 21
Burmese 2
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 13 (12 + 1) Whatever you think of the leader options, this is an absolutely perfect choice in terms of adding geographical and cultural diversity and in terms of supporting unique gameplay mechanics. And while I don't want this to be primarily about Sheiyksh (since he's only one leader option out of many [or 9 options, depending on how you count] and leader choice is only one design element out of many) I will point out that, as foreign as the idea of a ruler leading a nation across multiple lifetimes is to the civ franchise , a leader perceiving himself as a continuation of past rulers is exactly the sort of thing that would make for a memorable character depiction.
Hebrews 15 (18 - 3) Again, I feel the biggest "problem" with this civ is not any lack of historical importance or gameplay potential but rather the fact that its political role fits so perfectly into the city state mechanics.
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Tibetans 6
Vietnamese 12

 

[God of Kings]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 21
Burmese 2 - 3 = ELIMINATED I would rather have Siam/Thailand, Khmer/Cambodia, or Champa/Dai Viet/Vietnam to represent mainland SEA
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 13
Hebrews 15
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Tibetans 6
Vietnamese 12 + 1 = 13 Vietnam has a rich history, even before Uncle Ho was born; the Vietnam War was also known as the Second Indochina War

 

[Kimiimaro]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 21+1=22 - Probably the best choice for me now.
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 13
Hebrews 15
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Tibetans 6-3=3 - We all know it's probably not going to happen, so let's end Tibet's suffering.
Vietnamese 13

 

[Guandao]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 22
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA (13+1)=14 It adds a different kind of Amerindian culture to the game, as opposed to tipi-living, buffalo-hunting feather bonnet wearers.
Hebrews 15
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Tibetans 3-3=0 Might as well end Tibet's suffering.
Vietnamese 13

 

[The Kingmaker]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 7-3=4 Amazing to see how the 1st place contender from Round 1 has plummeted so far. How the mighty have fallen!
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 22
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 14
Hebrews 15+1=16 Their foundational stories and teachings are known worldwide and have influenced billions of people. The quantity of dramatized live-action and animated Bible films in existence is mind-boggling and always growing. Can the same be said for say, Bohemia?
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Vietnamese 13

 

[Manifold]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 4
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 19 (22-3) I have read the wikipedia article about them: horrible, cruel, barbarous and unimportant slavers, what should they bring to this game? There were much better choices for Africa like the ancient Ghana...
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 14
Hebrews 17 (16+1) I down voted them before, but now I changed my mind
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16
Vietnamese 13

 

[Kimiimaro]

Hebrews 15+1=16 Their foundational stories and teachings are known worldwide and have influenced billions of people. The quantity of dramatized live-action and animated Bible films in existence is mind-boggling and always growing. Can the same be said for say, Bohemia?

Hebrew influence on world's religions is indeniable and probably no nation ever will approach their influence. Neither Bohemia will. But it surely had some influence on religion. It was one of the first places calling for the reformation of the church, from which the Protestantism was born. England had John Wycliffe, Bohemia had Jan Hus (although he was quite influenced by Wycliffe, and both later influenced Martin Luther). Also, the Hussite Wars occured in the kingdom of Bohemia, and they later led to the creation of Basel Compacts.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Hebrew influence on world's religions is indeniable and probably no nation ever will approach their influence. Neither Bohemia will. But it surely had some influence on religion. It was one of the first places calling for the reformation of the church, from which the Protestantism was born. England had John Wycliffe, Bohemia had Jan Hus (although he was quite influenced by Wycliffe, and both later influenced Martin Luther). Also, the Hussite Wars occurred in the kingdom of Bohemia, and they later led to the creation of Basel Compacts.

I certainly did not mean to suggest that Bohemia made no contributions to religion. It's just noteworthy that those Bohemian Hussites were practicing their own form of a Hebrew-derived religion and reading a translated holy book originally written by Hebrews. Jan Hus even bore the Czech form of the Hebrew name Yohanan.

The Hebrews' religious influence is inescapable.

 

[luigilime]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 4-3=1 let's end the poor Ashanti
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 19
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 14
Hebrews 17
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 16+1=17 the best choice for Africa in this list, for the leader problem I propose one of the Kilwa sultans, the one that built the great mosque in Kilwa, Al Hasan ibn sulaiman
Vietnamese 13

 

[Morningcalm]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 1 likely to be next to go despite their actually having an empire and well-attested leaders, unlike the Haida/Tlingit (!!!)
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 19
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 14 - 3 = 11 (Why this group? Why not any other minor group with poor leader representatives, like the pygmies, Eskimos, etc? These groups are simply too unimportant historically speaking to warrant inclusion as major civs, however unique their culture may be. At least the more well known Native American groups like the Iroquois and Sioux have well attested leaders that would suit the agenda and leader ability based style of Civ VI)
Hebrews 17 + 1 = 18 (This game has a religious victory. Who won the religious victory in real life? These guys.)
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 17
Vietnamese 13

 

[Guandao]

Armenians 18
Ashanti 1 likely to be next to go despite their actually having an empire and well-attested leaders, unlike the Haida/Tlingit (!!!)
Benin (Dahomey)/Benin (Nigeria) 19
Creek/Muskogee/Other SE NA 15
Georgians 9
Haida/Tlingit/Other PNW NA 14 - 3 = 11 (Why this group? Why not any other minor group with poor leader representatives, like the pygmies, Eskimos, etc? These groups are simply too unimportant historically speaking to warrant inclusion as major civs, however unique their culture may be. At least the more well known Native American groups like the Iroquois and Sioux have well attested leaders that would suit the agenda and leader ability based style of Civ VI)
Hebrews 17 + 1 = 18 (This game has a religious victory. Who won the religious victory in real life? These guys.)
Maori/Other Polynesians 17
Swahili/Kilwa 17
Vietnamese 13

So the Sioux are "more important" for winning one battle? Their agenda would be to resist Americans. They didn't have the decently large settlements of the PNW peoples or even the Iroquois. They were nomadic buffalo hunters after adopting the horse. I don't want that stereotype used again in Civ.
I bet the Haida/Tlingit leaders are less well attested, because they are not located in the USA. We can't rely on Wikipedia to contain all the information. There's definitely more about them in books.
No use changing your mind...

Plus the Jews didn't win the religious victory, Judaism isn't the largest religion today. I don't count Christianity and Islam as being the same faith as Judaism, especially with one being opposed to it (or at least some of them being hostile towards Jews). As one familiar with Malays, I can attest to that.

 

[Morningcalm]

The Sioux had a long history of troubled relations with the US. Their stout resistance, amazing skill with adopted weapons (horse and gun) are interesting, and their leaders iconic. The best way to resist stereotype is to represents the Sioux somewhat differently. This isn't impossible. Civ developers have put new twists on France, Rome, etc in VI while retaining somebody of the things that make them iconic (French chateaus, Roman legions). The sandbox is wide enough to conceive of an interesting Sioux Civ, or Iroquoian Civ (someone other than Hiawatha can easily lead the Iroquois).

The Haida are less well attested because they mostly kept to themselves in relatively untroubled obscurity. That doesn't strike me as an interesting Civilization story. Almost all civilizations included in Civilization were influential or influenced by major player such like the British (Maori, Zulu), the Spanish (Incas, Aztecs, etc). Haida/Tlingit etc simply lack that. They are too small scale in their footprint to be a major Civ. The fact they aren't located in the US has little to do with this. Several US Native American groups would also not fit as major civs.

You speak of information beyond Wikipedia. Show me this information please. Show me that the Haida or other PNW groups did much more than sit in obscurity. Where is their influence? What did their leaders do? Again and again I have mentioned their lack of well attested leaders and the best people have come up with in defense is that there are a scant few names of leaders (with no elaboration on their potential agendas or leader abilities, let alone historical accomplishments).

The Hebrews did win a religious victory--they gave birth to Christianity. They also held a capital sacred to three major world religions.

 

[Guandao]

The Sioux had a long history of troubled relations with the US. Their stout resistance, amazing skill with adopted weapons (horse and gun) are interesting, and their leaders iconic. The best way to resist stereotype is to represents the Sioux somewhat differently. This isn't impossible. Civ developers have put new twists on France, Rome, etc in VI while retaining somebody of the things that make them iconic (French chateaus, Roman legions). The sandbox is wide enough to conceive of an interesting Sioux Civ, or Iroquoian Civ (someone other than Hiawatha can easily lead the Iroquois).

The Haida are less well attested because they mostly kept to themselves in relatively untroubled obscurity. That doesn't strike me as an interesting Civilization story. Almost all civilizations included in Civilization were influential or influenced by major player such like the British (Maori, Zulu), the Spanish (Incas, Aztecs, etc). Haida/Tlingit etc simply lack that. They are too small scale in their footprint to be a major Civ. The fact they aren't located in the US has little to do with this. Several US Native American groups would also not fit as major civs.

You speak of information beyond Wikipedia. Show me this information please. Show me that the Haida or other PNW groups did much more than sit in obscurity. Where is their influence? What did their leaders do? Again and again I have mentioned their lack of well attested leaders and the best people have come up with in defense is that there are a scant few names of leaders (with no elaboration on their potential agendas or leader abilities, let alone historical accomplishments).

The Hebrews did win a religious victory--they gave birth to Christianity. They also held a capital sacred to three major world religions.

They didn't interact with the Canadians? Sitting in obscurity? Have you heard of the totem pole or their artworks? Or Potlatches (which can be a potential leader Agenda)?
How is winning battles against White people influence? The Sioux are only iconic because some prejudiced White Americans decided to make them famous. They are one in a number of Amerindian peoples who resisted White people. Adding non-European Civs into the game just because they interacted with Europeans is poor, Eurocentric reasoning.

Why does a Civilization need an "interesting" story to be put into the game? It's a game of make-believe, not actual history.

 

[Morningcalm]

The Sioux are also known for their artwork, conservation and many other things (bison!) even if iconic as warriors. They also had iconic leaders, which I note you have not filled out for the Haida/Tlingit (and I see no compelling history-based presentations of potential Civ leaders for either thus far in either agenda or ability).

Winning battles against Caucasians and negotiating with them shows interaction. The Sioux also interacted with French fur traders and other Native American groups like the Pawnee. Interacting with the Canadians was hardly climactic for the PNW groups on the same scale as Sioux or Iroquois resistance to Caucasian invasion (Popey of the Pueblo, had he been added in V, would have had a similar historical agenda represented as a leaders ability or other). In all ways, the Haida/Tlingit interaction with Europeans lacks the sort of climatic or iconic struggle of the Sioux against the United States (there were fights between Haida/Tlingit and Europeans, but nothing that could be colored as iconic; mostly violence with fur traders, and subsequent occupation).

It is hardly Eurocentric to include civs that interacted with other groups in a less secluded fashion--being a major Civ entails such interaction, whether with Europeans or other groups (they need not strictly be European, but climactic military and cultural struggles mean adding the underdog in the fight to Civilization creates a compelling story). It's not that the Haida/Tlingit didn't need interact much with Europeans as such that isn't problematic, it's their lack of a compelling historical tale. They mostly say in the wilderness and developed a unique culture. Good for them, but that doesn't show the most worthy of a major Civilization slot.

Interesting historical background makes for an interesting game. Otherwise we would have a game with peaceful Eskimos, pygmies and Olmecs gathering food in the wilderness and trying to find shelter--maybe there is an interesting game there, but its name isn't Civilization.

 

[Guandao]

Winning battles against Caucasians and negotiating with them shows interaction. They also interacted with French fur traders and other Native American groups like the Pawnee. Interacting with the Canadians was hardly climactic for the PNW groups on the same scale as Sioux or Iroquois resistance to Caucasian invasion (Popey of the Pueblo, had he been added in V, would have had a similar historical agenda represented as a leaders ability or other).

The Sioux are also known for their artwork, conservation and many other things (bison!) even if iconic as warriors. They also had iconic leaders, which I note you have not filled out for the Haida/Tlingit.

Interesting historical background makes for an interesting game. Otherwise we would have a game with peaceful Eskimos, pygmies and Olmecs gathering food in the wilderness and trying to find shelter--maybe there is an interesting game there, but its name isn't Civilization.

Clarify "climactic". The PNW peoples traded with traders (Russian/British/Canadian/Americans) as well and other Native American groups (like Dene peoples). They just don't have the "iconic" battle in which they killed a white general, but they definitely fought the Whites. I would say their artwork is even more famous and popular than the Sioux.
"Iconic" leaders....how was Ramkhamhaeng, Askia, or Amanitore iconic to the majority of people until they were added to the game? The Sioux leaders (pretty much only Sitting Bull, Crazy Horse and possibly Red Cloud and Gall) are mostly iconic to Americans.
I believe the Sioux are overrated and not my first choice for a Native American civ. They don't even have the settlements which people associate with a Civilization (I know Zaarin definitely has this view). I rather have the Iroquois return.
Here's a link to a wiki page about Maquinna, he's not Haida or Tlingit, but of another PNW people, the Nuuchahnulth. Here's a link to a website with more info on Koyah. Firaxis could definitely work out an Agenda for these two. I would make their Agenda based on Potlatches. Maybe they dislike it when the player doesn't accept their deals or gifts.
Putting the PNW peoples in the same group as the "Eskimos", "Pygmies", and Olmecs makes little sense to me. Plus all of those groups fought in wars/feuds/disputes and weren't peaceful.

 

[Morningcalm]

Amanitore, Ram, etc are far more iconic than the leaders you have listed--first, their actions were on a larger scale, and their accomplishments many. Koyah captured some ships and had minor skirmishes, hardly the stuff of civilization so much as a village.

Maquinna had an army of 300-400 people and was again a village leader rather than a larger scale tribal leader aka Red Cloud (the Sioux and their allies commanded thousands of warriors across broad swathes of territory).

The PNW groups were mostly village-based, ala pygmies etc. They are also more known for peace than war, and for their small scale cultural activities and art. They are not known for their interactions with others as such (contrast that to the Zulus, Aztecs, Iroquois, who were known for their interactions with others, their leaders, AND cultural accomplishments).

Maybe the Sioux are overrated, but they have attestable histories and leaders with more than a scant record. It's not called "Red Cloud's War" for nothing. In contrast, Koyah's raids and skirmishes lack such overarching scale (12 canoes, some 40 losses in one fight, etc). As such, he doesn't fit as a leader of a major Civ, and would be better as a smaller scale leader in a scenario ala the way some Native Americans are represented in Civ: Colonization.

Also, the potlaches would be hard to work as an agenda. Who would seriously decline a gift from an AI? You would have to make it trade based, and that doesn't seem like it could Ben well defined enough for an interesting leader agenda.

(Also, it should be noted our discussion is derailing this elimination game thread. I suggest we move our discussion to messages or into the Design-your-own-Civ thread, or a new historical thread).

 

[Returning Lurker]

Interesting historical background makes for an interesting game. Otherwise we would have a game with peaceful Eskimos, pygmies and Olmecs gathering food in the wilderness and trying to find shelter--maybe there is an interesting game there, but its name isn't Civilization.

Not true, because the Olmec definitely did go out and influence people, otherwise we literally wouldn't even have a name for them (Olmec is the Nahuatl word for "Rubber People", since the Aztecs knew they lived south around where rubber trees grew) like how we don't have a name for Indus Valley Civilization besides... Indus Valley Civilization. If the Olmec didn't AT LEAST have a strong impact on the Aztecs and Zapotecs we wouldn't HAVE the Olmec, we'd have South Mexican Civilization. I take offense specifically to that remark, the resk... eh.

 

[Morningcalm]

How did they influence others actively (I.e. Beyond leaving artifacts behind)? I'm not aware of any major wars or interactions etc that they engaged in. My understanding is the Haida mostly declined for mysterious reasons. Of course it's easy to give a dead Civilization a name of your own making--it hardly speaks to Olmec influence that there is a Nahuatl name for them. Many groups followed the Olmec and likely named them after finding what they left behind.