Never Before Seen Civs - Elimination Game

Status
Not open for further replies.
@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.
Again, my issue isn't specifically choosing a horse-raiding culture (though I certainly disprefer it in light of their overexposure in pop culture), but specifically the Apache. The Apache were insignificant even in their own region; if we're going to choose a horse-raiding culture, it ought to be one that at least had some influence on its region, like the Blackfoot or the Nez Perce (either of which definitely has some great leader choices, incidentally). Just...not the Sioux. Please not the Sioux. The Sioux have had more than their fair share of the limelight, and more for fighting a few wars with the US than for any actual accomplishments. (I wouldn't mind seeing Yankton Dakota author and activist Zitkala-Ša as a Great Writer, though. I wrote a paper on her in college, and I rather enjoyed her works, especially her [somewhat fictionalized] autobiography American Indian Stories.)
 
Again, my issue isn't specifically choosing a horse-raiding culture (though I certainly disprefer it in light of their overexposure in pop culture), but specifically the Apache. The Apache were insignificant even in their own region; if we're going to choose a horse-raiding culture, it ought to be one that at least had some influence on its region, like the Blackfoot or the Nez Perce (either of which definitely has some great leader choices, incidentally). Just...not the Sioux. Please not the Sioux. The Sioux have had more than their fair share of the limelight, and more for fighting a few wars with the US than for any actual accomplishments.

There is a bigger problem in depicting a Native American Horse-Raiding Culture than any pop cultural misconceptions. In game terms, it's How Do You Make Them Distinct? As in, Distinct from all the Other Horse Raiders out there? The Scythians we already have in Civ VI, the Mongols we will probably get, the Huns we had in Civ V - Aside from feathers instead of furs (and, in fact, all of the cultures mentioned wore Both) how do you make a Native American version act and play differently in the game aside from graphics and language?

There are distinctions, but I will bet you a dollar to a donut, or a kopek to a croissant, that they won't show up in the game.

- And of course, the other argument still stands, that the Lakotah/Sioux are not the best choice for a Native American Horse Culture: Commanche or Nez Perce were more horse oriented were the only two American groups that actually learned how to breed horses, and both have more distinctive, differentiating features than the Sioux...

- And the other little factor, that ALL the 'horse cultures' in America only adopted it for about 100 - 250 years, and before that were very different societies - the Comanche/Kiowa were farmers before they got their hands on horses, and as far as I know were one of the very few groups who ever switched from farming to nomadic hunting instead of the other way around.

Now, put THAT into a Civ and you'd have something distinctive and different!
 
Apache 2-3=-1 (ELIMINATED) - Let me finish them. I just lack the interest in them.
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 32+1=33 - Venice, Florence, Papal States.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 17
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 21
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 29
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
 
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 33
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 18 (17+1) The goths don't need my help right now, so I'm going for my #2 choice. A great long lasting empire with interesting leader options. It could fill a niche in gameplay as well. They weren't the most important civ, but none on this list were (well, Italy and Mughals to some extent were rather important).
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 18 (21-3) I fail to understand the need for them, nor am I particularly interested. To me, Finland is the least interesting option from the nordic European countries. The Hanse could make a nice 'civ', if you want more Baltic representation, but this spot is taken by Germany.
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 29
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
 
Argentines 22-3=19=colonies aren't civilisations
Berbers/Tuareg 9
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 33
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 18
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 18
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 29+1=30 we need more of India
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
 
Argentines 19
Berbers/Tuareg 9-3=6 Would rather have an Almoravid/Almohad civ incorporating a larger swathe of North Africa and southern Spain.
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 33+1=34 Plus one for Florence, Medici and Spaghetti.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 18
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 18
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 30
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8
 
Argentines 19 + 1 = 20 Unless my high school history teachers are wrong, or everything that I read about Argentina is wrong. Argentina has not been a colony for nearly 200 years.
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 34
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 18
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 18
Mitanni/Hurrians 8
Mughals 30
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 8 - 3 = 5 I'm not particularly interested
 
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30
Italians 34
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan (18+1)=19 With Mali possibly being added to the game, people are satisfied with Saharan representation. I would like another Civ to represent that area, and Kanem-Bornu or Hausa are good choices.
Lithuanians/Finns/Other Baltic 18
Mitanni/Hurrians (8-3)=5 It's about time for these guys to go, they were overshadowed by larger powers around them at the time, mainly Egypt and Mesopotamia :D
Mughals 30
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5
 
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 30
Hungarians 30+1=31
Italians 34-3=31
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 5
Mughals 30
Philippines 28
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5

Would REALLY like to be downvoting some other choices right now. But, here I am. As for how they could make Apache distinct from other horse raiders... I dunno. The same way they make multiple trade route nations, or multiple naval powers, or multiple relic makers, etc? New and interesting mechanics, different era specializations, differing gameplay nuances, etc. You can have one horse raider be the "swarm" type that overwhelms enemies with superior numbers (currently a niche filled by Scythia), a horse raider that focuses on a small number of highly specialized units (Comanche, Mongols, or if you want to stretch the definition of "horse raider" a bit, Teutonic Knights), a horse raider that focuses on the actual raiding bit and gets bonus yields or added values like culture and faith from pillaging tiles or one for pillaging trade routes (Apache, Cossacks), one that gets an Aztec style enslavement ability from raiding or mounted combat (Golden Horde, quite a few natives could fit this role), and plenty of other ideas I can't even think of. It's not like there are only one set of stats you can modify for mounted units.
 
Last edited:
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 31 (30 + 1) -- Oooh, a threeway tie among the Goths, Hungarians, and Italians. Would someone be so kind as to downvote the Italians again so that the Hungarians and Goths can co-lead? :mischief:
Hungarians 31
Italians 31
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 5
Mughals 30
Philippines 25 (28 - 3) -- Their postcolonial history has been uniformly uninteresting, and their precolonial history is eclipsed by their neighbors.
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5
 
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 31
Hungarians 31
Italians 31
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 2 (5 - 3) It's hard to see a reason to choose this over its contemporary neighbors.
Mughals 31 (30 +1) Let's make it a 4 way tie instead.
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5
 
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6
Cherokee 17
Goths 31 (30 + 1) -- Oooh, a threeway tie among the Goths, Hungarians, and Italians. Would someone be so kind as to downvote the Italians again so that the Hungarians and Goths can co-lead? :mischief:
Hungarians 31
Italians 31
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 5
Mughals 30
Philippines 25 (28 - 3) -- Their postcolonial history has been uniformly uninteresting, and their precolonial history is eclipsed by their neighbors.
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5

I knew this day would come:cry:....I wouldn't count the nations in Mainland SE Asia (Khmer, Vietnam, Siam, Burma) as close neighbors of the Philippines. Perhaps Indonesia's history does eclipse the Philippines.
I'm always disappointed by Firaxis' reluctance to acknowledge that most Southeast Asian nations have histories as long as many European countries. How come one never appeared in Civ3 or its expansions, for example?
Several Philippine languages were written in Indic scripts borrowed from a period way before the Spanish came. There were several states (Barangay) existing before and at the time Magellan came. A myriad of influences spread to these pre-Spanish states, including Chinese, Malay, and Javanese. Rulers called themselves Datu, Rajah, and Sultan depending on their religion or cultural influence. There's also a potential female leader named Dayang Kalangitan, who ruled the Kingdom of Tondo.

Hungary, Goths, and Italy being in the lead is proof of rampant Euro-centrism among Civilization game fans....:crazyeye: with Mughals being the exception, though many want them folded under India. The Goths don't strike me as too unique except for their extinct language, classified as Eastern Germanic. They emulated the Western Roman Empire they helped to destroy. A better choice for Civ than the Huns, for sure. Hungary (aka the Magyars) is also interesting linguistically, though they borrowed much of their culture from their Indo-European neighbors after settling down in present day Hungary. Some argue Italy is represented by Rome, I personally disagree. Renaissance Italy is different enough from the Roman Empire.
 
Last edited:
I knew this day would come....How much of an expert are you on the Philippines and its history? Being ruled by Spain for centuries makes the history boring? And what do you mean their precolonial history is eclipsed by their neighbors? You mean Indonesia? Malays? I wouldn't count the nations in Mainland SE Asia as close neighbors of the Philippines. I'm always disappointed by Firaxis' failure to acknowledge that most Southeast Asian nations have histories as long as many European countries. Several Philippine languages were written in Indic scripts borrowed from a period way before the Spanish came. There were several states existing before and at the time Magellan came.

Hungary, Goths, and Italy being in the lead is proof of rampant Euro-centrism among Civilization game fans....:crazyeye: with Mughals being the exception, though many want them folded under India. The Goths don't strike me as too unique except for their extinct language, classified as Eastern Germanic. They emulated the Western Roman Empire they helped to destroy. Hungary is also interesting linguistically, though they borrowed from their Indo-European neighbors. Some argue Italy is represented by Rome, I personally disagree. Renaissance Italy is different enough from the Roman Empire.
Don't forget that two of the ten largest Wikipedias are Filipino languages! One of those two is closely approaching English!
 
I knew this day would come....How much of an expert are you on the Philippines and its history?

Are you an expert on every country you've downvoted? Could you tell me the complete and unabridged history of every single faction on this list to show that you were completely and totally informed as to every decision you've ever made here? I may hate Zaarin with the fiery passion of ten thousand suns plus one medium sized Bunsen burner, but that argument is just a Pandora's Box of problems and I think we should avoid opening it at all costs. No one here is an expert on everything, I can guarantee you of that, it's just a fact we have to live with.
 
Last edited:
Argentines 20
Berbers/Tuareg 6-3=3 - I'd rather see Morocco again.
Cherokee 17
Goths 31
Hungarians 31
Italians 31+1=32 - The top choice for me.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 2
Mughals 31
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5
 
Argentines 20 (21+1) A blend of Italian and South American culture mixed with Spanish language and influences makes it a unique country today and for the last decades, 100 years or even more. To me, it's history is very interesting as well.
Berbers/Tuareg 3
Cherokee 17
Goths 31
Hungarians 31
Italians 32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 2
Mughals 28 (31-3) I'm a fan of the Mughals, but I fear that if India is taken apart into more than one civ, the 'fans' will demand the same treatment for other civs as well. And I'm opposed to that - I don't want 4 Chinas, 3 Persias and 2 Germanys.
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5
 
Argentines 21 + 1 = 22 I do not care if civ is post-colonial or not, what I care about is how much this civ can be interesting. For me, Argentina is much more interesting than many 'non-colonial' civs.
Berbers/Tuareg 3
Cherokee 17
Goths 31
Hungarians 31
Italians 32
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 2
Mughals 28
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 5 - 3 = 2 Again, I'm not interested in this.
 
Argentines 22
Berbers/Tuareg 3-3=Eliminated ...Helping them out the door.
Cherokee 17
Goths 31
Hungarians 31
Italians 32+1=33 Top choice for me as well. I'm compelled to keep upvoting it.
Kanem Bornu/Other Saharan 19
Mitanni/Hurrians 2
Mughals 28
Philippines 25
Timurids/Other Central Asia 2

Looks like we may lose two more options today as well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom