Never-Before-Seen Civs Poll

[pgm123]

I personally don't care about it.


You falsely assume I support Scythia's inclusion. Furthermore, the Huns don't deserve inclusion because they contacted Greeks and Romans, if they did I'd think the Scythians were a good idea. I think the Huns are worthy of special attention because of the degree of infamy they possess.

Mind you, I doubt they're as famous in Japan.

My feeling is that there are a lot that aren't famous in Japan. Though I have a suspicion that some might know Attila.

The Huns and the Scythians both play major roles in Indian history. I've only talked to a few Indians about their history education and it appears they learn about Ashoka and then have to memorize the order of the Mughal Emperors and that's about it before the Raj. If that is the case, then I doubt the Huns and Scythians are famous in India, even if they conquered most of the Gangetic plain, issued coins, built monuments, etc.

 

[pgm123]

The problem I have with "Apache style" civs being added now is the fact their gameplay niche is covered by... Mapuche. Mapuche:
- indigenous precolombian
- confederation of tribes
- living on plains or deserts
- succesfully combating whites
- with cavalry and firearms
- defence and culture

That's a bit of a generic description. Desert isn't all that similar to plains. And the Mapuche settled on hills. Apache lived on flat land--grassland, plains, desert. Quite a few civs combine cavalry and firearms. Or defense and culture. Or are actually a confederation.

Wikipedia says Bolivar is Venezuelan man, not Colombian. In fact, his name is in the official name of Venezuela. I expect Venezuelan people to be quite angry if you made Bolivar the leader of Colombia... Yet Gran Colombia is indeed weird idea, so we have a problem

He was President of Venezuela before it became a part of Colombia. What people call Gran Colombia was called Colombia. You could certainly make the case that he could lead Venezuela, but that state went unrecognized internationally.

 

[Arianrhod]

To be frank I wouldn't be a fan of Gran Colombia being a Civ and its popularity on this forum was always something that confused me a bit. Simon Bolivar would be a great and interesting character to have in the game and his influence in South America is hard to ignore but I just cant get over the fact that Gran Colombia existed for 11 years. That is such a huge roadblock in my eyes to them becoming an actual Civ. Most people see New World countries as "young" and justifiably so compared to the nation-states of the Old World but if nations such as Canada, Brazil, Australia and the U.S are young, then Gran Colombia died in its crib. That being said I do see them as somewhat likely, there is of course a fan demand for them as seen by this poll and with the Mapuche now being added its pretty hard to see an Argentinian Civ in game with Southern South America's slot now being taken up and that does leave room for a Spanish Colonial Civ in Gran Colombia. I would prefer to see an Indigenous group again such as the Muisca but I digress. Plus the Devs arent against adding a Civ for the sake of adding a specific character into the game we saw that with Macedon and the return of Alexander.

At the end of the day while I would be unhappy with the inclusion of Gran Colombia it is always good for me to learn more about the nations history, Simon Bolivar himself and the influence that he had. If the Civ is fun and enjoyable then I wont hold any objections.

You could say much the same about Zenobia of Palmyra. She gets a lot of isolated support here and there (but isn't doing all that well here, to my surprise), but when push comes to shove, her Empire made it three (3) years. Considering how many great Civs there are in that area that survived for over a decade, Palmyra just seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool lady leader, much as Gran Colombia seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool South American civilization.

 

[Carver]

I went with:
Ashanti
Benin
Burma/Myanmar
Kilwa
Tibet
Vietnam
Zimbabwe

 

[Zaarin]

But why do they have this degree of infamy in the first place? They were not that different from the other "barbarians".
We don't know enough of their origins to consider putting them in the game in the first place (Yes I think Firaxis made a mistake in adding them to Civ5). They just appeared and disappeared after a few centuries. No one can claim descent from them. Sure, no one claims descent from say Sumeria, but at least they were an actual Civilization as opposed to a nomadic raiding people like the Huns.

Some Hungarian nationalists claim descent from Sumeria. Genetically speaking, the so-called Marsh Arabs of southern Iraq are probably at least somewhat Sumerian, but after 4,000 years and the rise and fall of dozens of empires in the region, who knows and who cares; they certainly don't. Certainly not a comparable situation to the Assyrians, who still identify as Assyrian.

 

[Phrozen]

The problem I have with "Apache style" civs being added now is the fact their gameplay niche is covered by... Mapuche. Mapuche:
- indigenous precolombian
- confederation of tribes
- living on plains or deserts
- succesfully combating whites
- with cavalry and firearms
- defence and culture

This is so vague it could apply to many native american and non-native american groups. This is why I suggest the Comanche because they would be much more war and raid focused than defense.

Also the Mapuche didn't live on plains. They live in forested valleys. The big land rights fight they are having right now is because their homeland is one of the best timberlands in South America.

 

[awesome]

I don't see Inuits being in the game for another 20-30 years, but it's definitely possible, now that they have a city list because Nunavut exists.

 

[Thormodr]

I don't see Inuits being in the game for another 20-30 years, but it's definitely possible, now that they have a city list because Nunavut exists.

I’d love to see the Inuit but most people will have Nunavut.

 

[Greywulf]

I don't see Inuits being in the game for another 20-30 years, but it's definitely possible, now that they have a city list because Nunavut exists.

I think it's possible we will see them much sooner. We have seen a bunch of fan-made mods for them and the like, and they get a lot of attention and discussion, and the devs pay attention to what the fans want and talk about. Besides this, there is no question that they would be very niche, and niche is great for new ways to play the game.

Check out these four mods alone for Civ V...
Inuit civ mod: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=105558749
Another Inuit civ mod: http://civilization-v-customisation.wikia.com/wiki/The_Inuit_(Ekeuhnick)
Yupik civ mod: https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/fe97/783932lcl2wil444g.jpg
Dene civ mod: https://imgur.com/a/pUBs0#1

Clearly a lot of fans want this to happen. Me? I just want more niche civs, and the Inuit are about as niche as a civ can get.

 

[Thormodr]

I think it's possible we will see them much sooner. We have seen a bunch of fan-made mods for them and the like, and they get a lot of attention and discussion, and the devs pay attention to what the fans want and talk about. Besides this, there is no question that they would be very niche, and niche is great for new ways to play the game.

Check out these four mods alone for Civ V...
Inuit civ mod: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=105558749
Another Inuit civ mod: http://civilization-v-customisation.wikia.com/wiki/The_Inuit_(Ekeuhnick)
Yupik civ mod: https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/fe97/783932lcl2wil444g.jpg
Dene civ mod: https://imgur.com/a/pUBs0#1

Clearly a lot of fans want this to happen. Me? I just want more niche civs, and the Inuit are about as niche as a civ can get.

I’d like to see a Civ interact with snow and tundra. (Other than Russia for tundra) Plus, then we could have the return of seals as a tile improvement from the original Civ and Musk Ox from Civ II.

 

[Metecury]

You could say much the same about Zenobia of Palmyra. She gets a lot of isolated support here and there (but isn't doing all that well here, to my surprise), but when push comes to shove, her Empire made it three (3) years. Considering how many great Civs there are in that area that survived for over a decade, Palmyra just seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool lady leader, much as Gran Colombia seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool South American civilization.

Let's be honest here, a very tiny minority wants Palmyra, it was just a rebellious region of the roman empire with a female leader. Generally not worthy of civ status. Gran Colombia is all centered around bolivar, I'd Argue argentina would make for a good second post colonial SA civ while the rest should be covered by Mayans, Incas and the Likes. Bolivar works just fine as a general.

 

[AnonymousSpeed]

You could say much the same about Zenobia of Palmyra. She gets a lot of isolated support here and there (but isn't doing all that well here, to my surprise), but when push comes to shove, her Empire made it three (3) years. Considering how many great Civs there are in that area that survived for over a decade, Palmyra just seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool lady leader, much as Gran Colombia seems like a hamfisted way to get a cool South American civilization.

While I agree with your assessment of Zenobia's popularity, you could argue that the Palmyrene Empire lasted closer to 13 years.

After Zenobia's husband fended off the Parthians in 260, the are began to operates with more de facto independence and began making subtle changes to its coinage to elevate its ruler and demean the actual emperor. The "official" start of the empire (270) was when Zenobia ordered an actual attack against Roman forces, I think. Still, 13 years isn't very long.

 

[Patine]

I think it's possible we will see them much sooner. We have seen a bunch of fan-made mods for them and the like, and they get a lot of attention and discussion, and the devs pay attention to what the fans want and talk about. Besides this, there is no question that they would be very niche, and niche is great for new ways to play the game.

Check out these four mods alone for Civ V...
Inuit civ mod: https://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=105558749
Another Inuit civ mod: http://civilization-v-customisation.wikia.com/wiki/The_Inuit_(Ekeuhnick)
Yupik civ mod: https://www.mediafire.com/convkey/fe97/783932lcl2wil444g.jpg
Dene civ mod: https://imgur.com/a/pUBs0#1

Clearly a lot of fans want this to happen. Me? I just want more niche civs, and the Inuit are about as niche as a civ can get.

Dene are NOT Inuit. In fact the two were blood enemies in pre-Colonial days, and the derogatory slur for Inuit, "Eskimo," was a Dene word (specifically the Gwi'chin People) who told the British and Russian explorers that that's what "the people to North were called." The Copper River Massacre was another good example right under British explorers' noses and with their guns of this old hatred.

Of course, that old hatred is next to non-existent now. But even today, working in a social work office, in Edmonton, we get clients from both definitive Dene and Inuit backgrounds (too many, sadly - they both got a real raw deal in the last couple centuries from colonialism) and you can distinctly tell the difference by just appearance or the their method of speaking, and, of course, their traditional cultural symbols and motifs, which are both VERY commonly seen around here, are VERY different from each other.

 

[Patine]

Also, another problem with a "Dene civ," is that, linguistically, ethnically, and in terms of lineage, the Apache (another separate favourite for a civ) and the Navajo, are Dene peoples who just migrated much further south than other Dene peoples, and became "cut-off" from other speakers of Na-Dene languages and ended up in a region at the time pre-dominated by Uto-Aztecan, Ancestral Pueblan, and Shoshone, peoples, mostly, but their languages and some core elements of their culture are even identifiably of Na-Dene origin to this day.

 

[Zaarin]

Let's be honest here, a very tiny minority wants Palmyra, it was just a rebellious region of the roman empire with a female leader. Generally not worthy of civ status. Gran Colombia is all centered around bolivar, I'd Argue argentina would make for a good second post colonial SA civ while the rest should be covered by Mayans, Incas and the Likes. Bolivar works just fine as a general.

One can also contend, though, that Zenobia is a prime choice for an Aram or Syria civilization, which is otherwise rather short on leaders despite centuries of regional prominence (pun certainly intended ).

Also, another problem with a "Dene civ," is that, linguistically, ethnically, and in terms of lineage, the Apache (another separate favourite for a civ) and the Navajo, are Dene peoples who just migrated much further south than other Dene peoples, and became "cut-off" from other speakers of Na-Dene languages and ended up in a region at the time pre-dominated by Uto-Aztecan, Ancestral Pueblan, and Shoshone, peoples, mostly, but their languages and some core elements of their culture are even identifiably of Na-Dene origin to this day.

Well, the Dene are a specific Athabaskan tribe, but not an exceptionally important one. The Tlingit and the Navajo are the only really likely civs out of the Na-Dene speakers.

 

[Patine]

Well, the Dene are a specific Athabaskan tribe, but not an exceptionally important one. The Tlingit and the Navajo are the only really likely civs out of the Na-Dene speakers.

Actually, that's incorrect. The "Dene" is (at least in a fair number of usages), a grouping of a fair number of tribes, including Gwi'chin, Han (not to be confused with the OTHER Han, the most populous ethnic group on Earth today), Cree, Slave, Pigeon, Nanehi, Chipewan, and others, whose homeland covers a VERY large area. The problem is, in the Na-Dene languages, a lot of words, even proper names, are used redundantly - thus the Dene TRIBES, calls themselves such, but they ALSO belong to the broader Dene cultural group, all of whose languages are in the Na-Dene family. Also Deneh is a proposed name by indigenous inhabitants for the NWT in Canada, to take away the "technocratic administrative sound of it," but Mount Denneh in Alaska, the highest peak in North America, is an almost identical word with virtually identical meaning, but is about 500-800 km of Yellowknife, the NWT's capital, and named by a different Dene tribe.

 

[Zaarin]

Actually, that's incorrect. The "Dene" is (at least in a fair number of usages), a grouping of a fair number of tribes, including Gwi'chin, Han (not to be confused with the OTHER Han, the most populous ethnic group on Earth today), Cree, Slave, Pigeon, Nanehi, Chipewan, and others, whose homeland covers a VERY large area. The problem is, in the Na-Dene languages, a lot of words, even proper names, are used redundantly - thus the Dene TRIBES, calls themselves such, but they ALSO belong to the broader Dene cultural group, all of whose languages are in the Na-Dene family. Also Deneh is a proposed name by indigenous inhabitants for the NWT in Canada, to take away the "technocratic administrative sound of it," but Mount Denneh in Alaska, the highest peak in North America, is an almost identical word with virtually identical meaning, but is about 500-800 km of Yellowknife, the NWT's capital, and named by a different Dene tribe.

I stand corrected. Most of my knowledge of Athabaskan comes from the perspective of the Tlingit, who called the Athabaskans Gunana, which one might roughly translate as "those backwards hicks from the interior." That didn't stop Athabaskan embroidered and fringed tunics from becoming fashionable at Tlingit potlatches...

 

[Krajzen]

One can also contend, though, that Zenobia is a prime choice for an Aram or Syria civilization, which is otherwise rather short on leaders despite centuries of regional prominence (pun certainly intended ).

The problem with Aram/Syria is, as far as I checked Aramaic history, its basically "a bunch of city states, never united, conquered by whatever major empire was nearby" It doesnt strike me as cool or interesting to warrant major civ... Frankly, they seemed to be one of the most "city-state-like" civs to me. Lingua franca? Cool. Rich architecture? Cool. Still - just city states, secondary actors to the Middle East, captured and recaptured by Assyria/Babylon/Persia/Macedon/Rome/whoever.

On the other hand, Palmyrene Empire under Zenobia sounds nice. But it lasted three years (13 if countong her father) and its existence was essentially "surprise rebellion, then being systematically wiped out in every major battle by Roman expeditionary force". Well...

For me Zenobia is an unfortunate case of a "leader without a civ". She is IMO very similar to Bolivar in this regard and also one other thing... The reason why Zenobia and Bolivar are popular is because of their exact historical context, as charismatic rebels against powerful empires. Now take this context away. You start as a Boliar with settler and warrior, on the ancient map without Spain. Suddenly most of things the guy is known for - L I B E R A T I O N - disappears. Similar problem with Zenobia - put her in the game without subjugation and Rome, and her entire "story arc" disappears.

And what we are left are leaders without story and civs without story.

 

[Patine]

The problem with Aram/Syria is, as far as I checked Aramaic history, its basically "a bunch of city states, never united, conquered by whatever major empire was nearby" It doesnt strike me as cool or interesting to warrant major civ... Frankly, they seemed to be one of the most "city-state-like" civs to me. Lingua franca? Cool. Rich architecture? Cool. Still - just city states, secondary actors to the Middle East, captured and recaptured by Assyria/Babylon/Persia/Macedon/Rome/whoever.

On the other hand, Palmyrene Empire under Zenobia sounds nice. But it lasted three years (13 if countong her father) and its existence was essentially "surprise rebellion, then being systematically wiped out in every major battle by Roman expeditionary force". Well...

For me Zenobia is an unfortunate case of a "leader without a civ". She is IMO very similar to Bolivar in this regard and also one other thing... The reason why Zenobia and Bolivar are popular is because of their exact historical context, as charismatic rebels against powerful empires. Now take this context away. You start as a Boliar with settler and warrior, on the ancient map without Spain. Suddenly most of things the guy is known for - L I B E R A T I O N - disappears. Similar problem with Zenobia - put her in the game without subjugation and Rome, and her entire "story arc" disappears.

And what we are left are leaders without story and civs without story.

But Bolivar's direct and obvious political legacy still exists in a direct, traceable, unbroken chain to this day, EVEN if it's now split among six separate Modern sovereign nations, and not just one. Zenobia's legacy only came to the zeitgeist of most in the world recently outside avid history buffs, like most here, because her capital, in ruins for over a millennium-and-a-half, had what was left of it blown up by ISIS terrorists.

 

[Zaarin]

The problem with Aram/Syria is, as far as I checked Aramaic history, its basically "a bunch of city states, never united, conquered by whatever major empire was nearby" It doesnt strike me as cool or interesting to warrant major civ... Frankly, they seemed to be one of the most "city-state-like" civs to me. Lingua franca? Cool. Rich architecture? Cool. Still - just city states, secondary actors to the Middle East, captured and recaptured by Assyria/Babylon/Persia/Macedon/Rome/whoever.

On the other hand, Palmyrene Empire under Zenobia sounds nice. But it lasted three years (13 if countong her father) and its existence was essentially "surprise rebellion, then being systematically wiped out in every major battle by Roman expeditionary force". Well...

For me Zenobia is an unfortunate case of a "leader without a civ". She is IMO very similar to Bolivar in this regard and also one other thing... The reason why Zenobia and Bolivar are popular is because of their exact historical context, as charismatic rebels against powerful empires. Now take this context away. You start as a Boliar with settler and warrior, on the ancient map without Spain. Suddenly most of things the guy is known for - L I B E R A T I O N - disappears. Similar problem with Zenobia - put her in the game without subjugation and Rome, and her entire "story arc" disappears.

And what we are left are leaders without story and civs without story.

I don't disagree with this assessment, and it's one of many reasons I dislike Boudicca. However, Civ has a long history of turning collections of culturally unified city-states into civs (Greeks, Maya, etc.) or even unaffiliated bands into civs (Scythia) or even utterly disparate cultures into civs (Civ5 Celts). Damascus, Aleppo, Palmyra, and other Aramaic-speaking city-states in the highlands between Mesopotamia and Canaan were often politically independent (or independent-but-tributary) and often held considerable political sway over Canaan and sometimes even extending into Anatolia. I would be miffed if we got Zenobia over Babylon or Assyria, of course, but as an "also" I think it's a compelling solution: the Aramaean petty kingdoms lack compelling leaders, and Zenobia lacks a civ--making Zenobia lead a civ called "Aram" or even "Syria" solves both problems IMO.

But Bolivar's direct and obvious political legacy still exists in a direct, traceable, unbroken chain to this day, EVEN if it's now split among six separate Modern sovereign nations, and not just one. Zenobia's legacy only came to the zeitgeist of most in the world recently outside avid history buffs, like most here, because her capital, in ruins for over a millennium-and-a-half, had what was left of it blown up by ISIS terrorists.

I'm not sure that's true. She's been a popular subject for artists and historical novelists for ages.