fredrikslicer
Tailor
- Joined
- May 28, 2016
- Messages
- 147
Had a longer list but wasn´t able to select so many options
Kongo is already in Civ6
Given the options, I voted in Ashanti, Tibet and Goth
Strictly speaking the Canaanites are in Civ6, since the Phoenicians were Canaanites and called themselves such...
Of the ones on the list, I'd like to see Bohemia, Ireland, and the Goths; other new civs I'd like to see: the Gauls, Judah, Elam, the Hurrians, Sogdia (or Kushan), the Choctaw, the Tlingit, the Powhatan (but for the love of all that is holy, no Pocahontas ), the Muisca, the Mixtec...
Berber, Burma, Goths.
The lack of the Navajo/Apache, Timurids/Mughals, and Bulgaria is disappointing.
Also we already got "Kongo."
I mean, firsthand accounts show us the Phoenicians called themselves Canaanites, but also Ponnīm.Some of this was a bit hastly thrown together Never before seen poll and so I went off of this quote:
"The term Phoenicia is an exonym originating from ancient Greek that most likely described Tyrian purple, a major export of Canaanite port towns; it did not correspond precisely to Phoenician culture or society as it would have been understood natively.[11] Scholars thus debate whether the Phoenicians were actually a distinct civilization from the Canaanites and other residents of the Levant."
- Wiki
It could be Numidia, one of the most well known Berber kingdoms, who allied with Carthage.Berber because it's an interesting way to get a non-antiquity civ for north africa that won't be arabian. The main issue though is that they are an ethnicity, and not a state.
It could be a way to get both Assyria and Babylon, sort of, if they wanted to do that sort of like how they combined Carthage into Phoenicia. But the leader would have to be Sargon.Akkad, probably because I've been reading stuff about Mesopotamia lately. Still, it's an important historical state, and probably the first imperialist state in recorded history (with a state built on the necessity of military victory) with a leader (Naram Sim) who claimed to ruler over the world (the four banks). They could probably have happiness modifiers based on military victories/defeats, and era points based on military victories/defeats.
I'm pretty sure Canada is kind of supposed to represent a France successor state as well, considering Laurier also speaks French.Haiti, because the other big colonial empires already had successor states (the British empire has the most with the US, Canada, and Australia ; Portugal with Brazil, and Spain with Gran Columbia), so it's only fair that France has one too with Haiti. And Haiti is also a unique state with a unique culture.
Agade (Akkad) was culturally Sumerian. While I'm generally in favor of having all the Near Eastern civs, IMO having Agade and Sumer in the same game makes no sense. Agade should be on Sumer's city-list instead of being a city-state, and Sargon would make more sense as an alt leader for a (better designed, non-Gilgamesh specific) Sumer. Also "King of the Four Corners (of the World)" was the usual title of Mesopotamian kings, just like "shahanshah" in Persia.Akkad, probably because I've been reading stuff about Mesopotamia lately. Still, it's an important historical state, and probably the first imperialist state in recorded history (with a state built on the necessity of military victory) with a leader (Naram Sim) who claimed to ruler over the world (the four banks).
Britons are a challenge from a linguistic perspective without making them speak Welsh, like Civ5 Boudicca did--and, speaking of which, they also come with the great temptation to bring Boudicca back. At that rate, I'd rather see the Welsh proper led by someone like Gruffydd ap Llywelyn. Plus the Britons didn't really accomplish much of note to distinguish themselves from the Gauls or Hispano-Celts before being conquered by Rome and thoroughly Romanized.I'd love to see the britons and saxons in this game.
Britons are a challenge from a linguistic perspective without making them speak Welsh, like Civ5 Boudicca did--and, speaking of which, they also come with the great temptation to bring Boudicca back. At that rate, I'd rather see the Welsh proper led by someone like Gruffydd ap Llywelyn. Plus the Britons didn't really accomplish much of note to distinguish themselves from the Gauls or Hispano-Celts before being conquered by Rome and thoroughly Romanized.
Um...Burma and Vietnam are South East Asian.Far East Asian: Burma. Two really good leader choices, in Anawrahta and Bayinnaung, Known for it's agriculture and thousands of splendid temples, Burma can be an aggressive civilization with a distinct religious and growth edge. Vietnam would also be acceptable.
South East Asian: Malaysia: Unlikely to ever happen but would be a good alternative to Indonesia in a future Civ game. Philippines is my alternative choice here.
I think Benin or Oyo etc. would be fine civs on it's own. I don't see the need to lump all of them together under one Nigeria civ. Though I guess for marketing purposes it's plausible.Western African: Nigeria: Ideally based around either of the three primary ethnic groups in Nigeria, the Yoruba, Oyo and Hausa. Each culture has had a powerful empire in the past, and there are two easy and fully deserved female leader choices available in Idia and Amina. The Nigerian civ of choice can also double as a rare African science civ, since the technologically advanced Nok Kingdom was one of their predecessor civs. Ashanti is a good alternative choice.