Ashanti - 9 (8+1) for me it should be in top3 Navajo - 18 (21-3) 4th position is good for them,may be I am biased towards old world Tibet - 23
Vietnam - 19
Ashanti - 6 (9-3) Others are now much more interesting, 4th place is enough for them Navajo - 18 Tibet - 23 Vietnam - 20(19+1) I would like to see Vietnam and the Trung sisters sitting on elephants when you aproach them, also maybe even a late game biased civ with Ho Chi Min as a leader could be nice.
Wow surprised the Ashanti went down this fast especially since many want more African civs, though maybe not this one in particular.
Ashanti - 6 Navajo - 18+1=19. Native North America is lacking. We only have one tribe and they are from present-day Canada. We need one from the U.S. Tibet - 23-3=20 I just don't find them as interesting as the others on this list.
Vietnam - 20
Ashanti - 7 (6+1) They probably won't be in the list much longer, but they are pretty interesting and have fun mechanical space. Plus we could for sure more representation from Africa in the game so let's try and keep them going a bit longer.
Navajo - 19
Tibet - 20 Vietnam - 17 (20-3) In contrast south east asia doesn't feel too badly represented at the moment IMO.
Ashanti - 4 . The game could really do with more African civs but the Ashanti don't excite me enough to vote for them. Navajo - 19+1=20. My clear favourite from those left. They have the history and they fill in an empty part of the map.
Tibet - 21-3=18. Another defensive, religious civ? No thanks.
Vietnam - 17
Ashanti - 4 (7 - 3) - Again, no interest. Morocco, Ethiopia, Swahili/Oman are all far stronger concepts within VI's design.
Navajo - 20
Tibet - 18 (17 + 1) - Idunno, I don't hate Vietnam, but I also think its fans tend to focus on pretty superficial or irrelevant things. Like the fact that it resisted Chinese invasion doesn't actually improve its chances since the "stubbornly independent civs" expack was R&F. That ship has sailed as far as VI is concerned, and even then all of the R&F civs had a pseudo-expansionist/imperialist bent that Vietnam never really had, which to me suggests city-state. I'm not saying it can't join the party, but it needs a lot more work put into framing it that many just aren't bothering to do (which, granted, is true for quite a lot of highly requested civs).
Vietnam - 17
Ashanti - 4
Navajo - 20 Tibet - 15 (18-3) From Asia I want Vietnam.. Vietnam - 18 (17+1) Good female leader choice. Also room for civ from asia getting smaller...maybe only one civ can get in from this region..
Ashanti - 4 Navajo - 21 (20 +1) I've already stated my reasons why I've wanted this civ (historical legacy, fill gaps in the map, modern success). Barboncito could be a great religious and diplomatic leader, a combination unknown to the game as of late.
Tibet - 15 Vietnam - 15 (18-3) Not that I hate Vietnam (even though I would have preferred Burma over them...), but its just that the remaining civs all have the ability fill out clear gaps in the map that Vietnam clearly lacks.
Ashanti - 1 Navajo - 18 (21-3) It would be an interesting inclusion, but I think this shouldn't be in the lead.
Tibet - 15 Vietnam - 17 (16+1) I can't save Ashanti, so I go on this. Vietnam is my favorite among the top3.
Ashanti - 0 (1-3) ELIMINATED They certainly could make an interesting civ in a continent which needs more Civs. However for me Benin remain the better option.
Navajo - 15 Tibet - 17 (16+1) Its tough competition here, but for me they remain the best choice to finish first. They check several boxes including being historically a regional power, having a significant cultural/religious legacy, and being in an area of the world currently unrepresented in Civ.
Vietnam 17
Ow, that's the second time in a row where I wasn't on the forum for a bit and promptly missed the start of the most hectic part of the voting on an elimination thread.
Navajo - 15 Tibet - 14 (17-3) Indeed it is tough competition. This is the one I'm least interested in. That's really all I have to say - I wouldn't oppose its inclusion in Civ even though we all know it's probably not gonna happen due to politics. I also think it'd be kind of lame to have the winner of an elimination thread be a civ that won't ever be in the game, but that's not why I'm downvoting this one haha Vietnam 18 (17+1) I understand the whole SEA-doesn't-really-need-more-civs-right-now thing, especially as I've been using region-filling as an argument for my past votes on this thread, but Vietnam still just intrigues me. The devs want to include female leaders? Well, they can do TWO in one fell swoop, by adding the Trung Sisters! Then have water puppetry in some form, maybe some agriculture-related bonuses, and defensive capabilities, and they'd be set. A cultural civ that emphasizes tall, defensive play is always fun.
Navajo - 16 (15 + 1) Lets get some desert farms and hogans. Wow, that was a pretty short upvote from me! Tibet - 11 (14 - 3) Its just the one I find the least interesting among these 3. I could definitely change my mind if I hear some good gameplay designs from them.
Vietnam 18 I'll just mention that even IF they don't go for 2 leaders in 1 with both Trung Sisters, Trac Trung would be the leader and Nhi Trung could be a unique governor a la Ibrahim of the Ottomans.
Navajo - 13 (16 - 3) The least interesting Tibet - 12 (11 + 1) Again a long and fascinating history which has changed the political climate of the country greatly
Vietnam 18
Navajo - 10(13-3) least interesting from me out of three Tibet - 14(13+1) this mountainous civ will fill the massive gap between Delhi and Beijing.Indosphere requires more representation in the game,unfortunately whole Indosphere is viewed from very narrow mindset.
Vietnam - 15
Navajo - 10+1=11 We need a U.S tribe. I'd prefer more if we had the room. Tibet - 14-3=11 I just want the others more and also I don't feel like it would be included for political reasons..
Vietnam - 15
Navajo - 12 = 11+1 Agreed that NA representation is really poor. Would be god to fix that.
Tibet - 11 These are never going to appear but even though culturally they are very different, I expect Firaxis could swap their game mechanics for another himalayan civ like Nepal or Bhutan so I'm kind of interpreting them in that light. Vietnam - 12 (15-3) Riae and Fall would have been the place for them. There are enough 'valiant resistance' civs in the game already
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
