Never Before Seen Civs - Elimination Thread

[Pokarnor]

Argentina - 7 (6+1) It's probably futile to give my vote to this one, but I think Argentina is probably the most worthy Hispanic post-colonial civ besides Mexico (not on this list), taking note of its cultural achievements, it being a notable regional power for much of its existence, it being at one time among the world's wealthiest countries (and still ranking among the world's more highly developed nations) and being one of the prime destinations for Old World emigrants in the 19th and 20th centuries.
Armenia - 21
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10 (13-3) In contrast I think Colombia's case is very weak, and the arguments presented for it in this thread have bolstered my suspicion that the support for it mostly boils down to a desire to see Simon Bolivar in the game. Bolivar is one of history's great people to be sure, but I wouldn't shoehorn a civ in just for him.
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrew - 21
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 20
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 22
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam - 19

 

[Henri Christophe]

Argentina - 6
Armenia - 21
Ashanti - 23 (20+3) This game don't have ANY slavery kingdom, that isn't just a civ who never be in the game, is a time period totally ignored.
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 13 (10+3) America have few civs, Simon Bolivar have sexy appeal to be a great leader in this game XD
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 20
Italy - 14 (17-3) This game already got Rome to be kind of Italy, I know it is not the same, but also is not different either.
Madagascar - 20
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 22
Pueblo - 12
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 14
Vietnam - 19

 

[Xandinho]

@Henri Christophe, you can only take one upvote at a time, and it must be +1 point. Also, some votes were skipped, just correcting.

Argentina - 4
Armenia - 21
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 21
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 20
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 22
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[TeddyMain]

Argentina - 1 (4-3) I'm sorry, I feel like I'm really bullying this civ but they should be gone soon IMO. Regarding how someone compared Patagonia being shared with the Mapuche to Canada being shared between the Cree and Canadian civs, the issue here is the size of the region shared. Canada is around 4 times the size of Chile and Argentina combined, so my main concern is about these two civs being scrunched up, especially on True Start Locations where the Mapuche already have issues expanding, as someone has said before.
Armenia - 21
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 21
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 20
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 23 (22+1) The Southwest needs to be represented in some way, and the Navajo are the most notable representatives, considering their biggest competition, the Pueblo, are almost certainly never being represented unless Firaxis wants another controversy on their hands. The Shoshone were a last minute replacement civ for the Pueblo, so I don't believe they should return, and the other civs (Comanche, Apache, etc) don't seem nearly as unique as the Navajo IMO.
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

Godspeed Hawaiians, I see you were too precious for this world.

 

[679x]

Argentina - 1
Armenia - 21-3 = 18 - I didn't want to be That Guy to downvote Armenia, but I think Georgia knocks this one out of a spot. They'd be crammed into the same small region on the map, and their gameplay would probably be pretty similar. I don't oppose the idea of having Armenia in Civ, but when there's such fierce competition for limited civ slots, I would want to see something different.
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 21
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 20
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 23
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 15+1 = 16 - Please see TahamiTsunami's comment above. He gives it a case better than I ever could. And a case it has! I hope to see it someday in Civ.
Vietnam- 20

 

[Edmund Ironside]

Argentina - 1
Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22 (21+1) No civ on this list has had a more important legacy than this one IMO.
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 17 (20-3) Isolated and minor. If a civ had no influence outside of its immediate small locality, than why is it any better than one of hundreds of other possible civs.
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 23
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 16
Vietnam- 20

 

[Timothy001]

Argentina - 0 (1-3) Thought i'd pop in an eliminate. Don't think enough room
Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 17
Muisca - 6
Navajo - 24 (23+1) Need another Native American civ
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 16
Vietnam- 20

 

[Jkchart]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 17
Madagascar - 17+1=18 I really want to see Madagascar show up. Great and unique choice that deserves inclusion.
Muisca - 6-3 = 3 I honestly would appreciate this choice, but as it stands, I need to place a vote somewhere and there are many options I like more. Gotta start moving towards Elims.
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 16
Vietnam- 20

 

[Krajzen]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 17
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 17+1=18
Madagascar - 18
Muisca - 3
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 16-3=13
Vietnam- 20

Italy: by far the most important, interesting and powerful civ which never appeared im the series.

Tlingit: Adding some extremely minor ethnic groups of like 14,000 total population and utter lack od historical significance is always no from me if the only argument are Americans willing to put all US regions as separate civilizations. Although I roll my eyes at all very tiny tribal civilizations no matter the part of the world. Ah yes the great civilizations of Pacific North West, living in a bunch of mostly hunter gatherer villages with a total population smaller than one proper ancient city, technologically mostly stagnant, raiding each other for centuries and millenias until being effortlessly annexed by US, what an exciting story. But they have rich culture - by certain criterias every culture is rich, even Neanderthal cavemen, so it's not exactly an argument. There is a ton of more accomplished obscure tribal forest pirate civs if you wish, such as Polabian Slavs or whatever.

 

[Xandinho]

Don't cry, Argentina

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 14 (17-3) I'm not interested, I prefer Morocco.
Bulgaria - 17
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 19 (18+1) In an edition that adds alternative leaders with unique abilities, then the inclusion of Italy is mandatory.
Madagascar - 18
Muisca - 3
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 13
Vietnam- 20

 

[Amrunril]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 14
Bulgaria - 14 (17 - 3) I would need to see a very strong argument to consider adding another Balkan civ to the current roster. I haven't yet seen one for Bulgaria.
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 19
Madagascar - 18
Muisca - 3
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 14 (13 + 1) The artistic style would stand out dramatically, and a crest pole would be one of the most iconic UI options I can imagine for any civ. The large populations supported without traditional agriculture are a further plus in my view, providing potential options for unique abilities.
Vietnam- 20

 

[The Kingmaker]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 14
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 15+1=16 Dismissing the Gauls as “samey barbarian hordes” does them a severe disservice.
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 19
Madagascar - 18
Muisca - 3-3=0 My apologies to the Muisca, who were on the tipping point.
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 14
Vietnam- 20

 

[TahamiTsunami]

I am a bit sad about the Muisca, they're the strongest choice for the next native SA civ so its a shame they left as soon as they did but its understandable in these games.

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 11 (14 - 3) They're another cool choice but its possible that we'd see a Berber leader for Morocco.
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 16
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 19
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25
Tlingit - 15 (14 + 1) Don't get me wrong, I personally wouldn't advocate for every Native American tribe to be in the game. However, I do want the handful of powerful and notable groups that I do think are worthy of being officially in Civilization like the Iroquois, Puebloans, and definitely the Tlingit. I think its more than a bit hyperbolic to call the Tlingit an 'extremely minor ethnic group with a lack of historical significance.'
Firstly, even if describing the Tlingit as 'living in a bunch of mostly hunter gatherer villages with a total population smaller than one proper ancient city, technologically mostly stagnant, raiding each other for centuries and millenias until being effortlessly annexed by US, what an exciting story' was accurate, we need to be honest here and acknowledge that every civ (even the greatest ones) would sound equally pathetic if it was described in a similar way. For example, Italy was a bunch of whining states that were either busy painting random stuff or getting conquered by others, how exciting. The Roman Empire was a bunch of stone settlements that effortlessly lost its western half to raiders and then effortlessly lost its eastern half a bit later, how exciting. The Americans were an English colony until they said no and then did their own thing, how original. For the record, I love all those civs, but I think I'm making it clear that you can make any civ sound unappealing if you word it like the above examples.
Additionally, like @Amrunril said, they're one of the very few groups that lived in large settlements without the need for agriculture and they do have a very distinctive art style that most would recognize.
I don't know the specifics but I'm sure there were more than 14,000 of them before smallpox happened. Even if they were still at a small number like 20,000 - 30,000 or so (not that I know for certainly so definitely correct me if I'm wrong), it makes it incredible that they accomplished what they did.
Like what was said before, with their massive ocean-going canoes that could carry multiple tons of weight, they raided as far as Washington state and probably traded as far as Baja California.
The Tlingit were able to hold themselves against the Russians for much of their interactions starting in the mid 1700s. They did ultimately lose the Battle of Sitka but they were still able to bring the Russians to a peace deal due to their blockades from their trade routes and periodic attacks and they didn't lose much territory from it except for a small town. Even by the time the Russians sold Alaska to America in 1867, the Russians had very little control over the natives and most of the Russian population in Alaska was restricted to four very heavily fortified towns. The Tlingit were very protective about the role they played in the local trade networks with Shotridge himself leading an attack against Fort Selkirk more than 200 miles away from Klukwan because it was infringing on their trade with the interior natives. By destroying the fort, it secured the Tlingits role in trade for the next 40 to 50 years afterwards. Even the American navy wasn't always safe with the first US naval fatality in the Pacific being when the Tlingit killed a US navy colonel for revenge. I'm not saying that the Tlingit could've conquered the Americans if they wanted to but given how the Russians and Americans valued their trade and sought their cooperation for hundreds of years, I wouldn't say that they were 'effortlessly annexed.'
Just to be clear, I'm not saying that you have to like the Tlingit or start voting for them. You can simply not like them if you don't want to, it is up to you after all. I just wanted to add my 2 cents to what you said. Chances are we'll just agree to disagree!
Vietnam - 20

 

[SagarRathore]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 11-3=8 kind of agree with others argument may be Morocco is better
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 16
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 19
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 25+1=26 unique culture,roof of the world,they should be in the game.
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[Pokarnor]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8 (I think the last person accidentally forgot to account for the previous person's vote here, so I'm simply correcting it)
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 7 (10-3) I've already made my opinions on this civ clear.
Gaul - 16
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20 (19+1) This is a very culturally and geopolitically significant civ throughout history, so I'll give it a nudge back up to par.
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[Morningcalm]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 7 + 1 = 8 Claims that Bolivar is the only reason people want Colombia is as short-sighted as people claiming Augustus is the only possible reason people could want Rome, or Elizabeth the only reason for England. Having an iconic pan-South American hero as leader is *not* a liability, especially in Civ VI which focuses on big personalities, and in any event, other famous leaders for Colombia also exist, like Santander (Bolivar is just the most prominent). Colombia has plenty to offer culturally and historically, and geographically are from an ideal region for TSL maps. There are plenty of other elements in Colombian culture one can draw on, including coffee production (Colombia is considered to have some of the world’s best coffee), their unique biodiversity, and their unique cultural and ethnic diversity (African, Native American, and mestizo, etc). Featuring Colombia is also a short cut to representing a key part of South America’s modern history (not just the modern Colombian state), and many South Americans’ past struggle against colonial Spain. Further, of all Civ games to feature Colombia, Civ VI is the best candidate since leaders get their own unique ability, developers are seeking “big personalities”, and Bolívar is one of the biggest personalities you can get in South American history. (Also, @Henri Christophe, you should clarify which of your two upvoted civs will get one upvote; per game rules you only get one upvote.)
Gaul - 16
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 9 - 3 = 6 (The Pueblo themselves didn’t want to be featured in Civ due to their view of their language as sacred (see article at https://www.polygon.com/features/2013/6/27/4453070/civ-the-making-of-brave-new-world) so this is an easy downvote. It’s a shame they couldn’t be included in Civ V Brave New World, but I’m glad the developers respected their wishes not to be included.)
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 8 +1=9. Now that Argentina is gone I have to upvote the other colonial Civ I would want. A leader that revolutionized a whole continent is worth including.
Gaul - 16
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 6-3=3 Their fall is inevitable only because they can't be depicted properly. In that case the Navajo will be a better option for a SW tribe.
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[Lord Lakely]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 9
Gaul - 17 (16+1) The most obvious choice for a Celtic civilization and if not in the next Xpac, I hope we get to see them in Civilization 7.
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Pueblo - 0 (3-3) This will never happen. Let's drop it.
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8
Bulgaria - 14
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10 (9 + 1). Okay here's the thing. I actually am dubious of this civ working. We already have a 19th century SA leader in Pedro. I also think the concept is a bit schizoid as far as VI's "personality" design goes, given that Simon Bolivar would encourage a militaristic bent, while mechanically Colombia really wants to be a luxury resource and gold machine. Bolivar and "Colombia" simply don't meld well into a cohesive whole. However, between the Muisca and the Arawak, and Colombia's rich resources, and Bolivar, there still feels like so much potential that I can't dismiss it as impossible.
Gaul - 14 (17 - 3) - I just see a lot of unearned exceptionalism around this idea. It doesn't pull triple duty like Scythia as far as cultural, historical, geographical representation go, and only clutters an already dense Europe. There's no modern cultural heritage to rally around like so many other European civs. UU on both mods is basically a highlander, so nothing new there. And Colombia has a much stronger identity for a mining and metalsmithing civ. Also, Vercingetorix looks really doofy, whereas Theoderic is magnificent.
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 15
Vietnam- 20

 

[Edmund Ironside]

Armenia - 18
Ashanti - 20
Berbers - 8
Bulgaria - 15 (14+1) Were a major regional rival to the Byzantines during the Early Medieval period for 300 years roughly, until eventually defeated by Emperor Basil II "the Bulgar Slayer." Also briefly became so powerful during the latter years of the Ottoman Empire that during the second Balkan War five countries teamed up against them.
Burma - 21
Colombia - 10
Gaul - 14
Goths - 21
Hebrews - 22
Italy - 20
Madagascar - 18
Navajo - 24
Swahili - 20
Tibet - 26
Tlingit - 12 (15-3) I know several people have made strong defenses of them. However for me they remain just another one of many Native American tribes that could be chosen. Personally I don't care that much about using civs to fill out parts of the map unless their is a strong historical case for why they have an important legacy.
Vietnam- 20