New Civ Game Guide: Mongolia

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

1. An illustration from the Warring States period (ended 221 BCE) shows a two decked Chinese warship with rowers on rhe lower deck and a fighting deck above them with men armed with halberds and short swords. T his looks very much like a rowed version of the medieval fighting Cog, designed to close with and board the enemy. However, the evidence available indicates most of these ships were river craft, not sea-going. By the Sui Dynasty (584 CE) 5-decked "tower ships" are being built, but again, there is only record of them used as river and lake craft, not oceanic.

Absence of evidence does not equal evidence of absence, as they say. While the Chinese were building ships as big as anything actually used in battle in the Mediterranean by at least the end of the Han Dynasty, we simply do not have direct evidence they were fighting with them in the ocean. I think it is highly likely, simply because by the end of the Han (200 CE) Chinese traders were sailing at least as far as the Mekong in Southeast Asia, where they met with Roman ambassadors, and traders need protection.

2. As @Zaarin posted, it has been suggested that the Hsiong-Nu and Huns were the same people, but since we don't have any DNA evidence (yet) or linguistic evidence to link them, the connection has to be listed as speculation only.

One thing that confuses the question is that numerous steppe people migrated west out of the Altai either voluntarily or involuntarily (pushed), ranging from the Yuezhi to various later Turkic groups and possibly including Hsiong-Nu factions and the Huns, but they are nearly impossible to tell apart from archeological finds alone: everybody used the same horse tack, weapons, wore similar clothing and were composed of groups with multi-ethnic composition, so horse or human skeletons and burial goods aren't usually enough to identify any individual or group for certain.

So Romansphere is actually reaching Mekhong subcontinent and even whagt's now Central Region of Thailand ? Roman Lamps found in 1920s somewhere in Thailand then actually belonged to these Roman Ambassadors?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I wouldn't call it the Roman sphere, but they at least sent people that far. Roman products got even farther. A piece of Roman glass was found in a Korean tomb and a Roman coin was found in Japan.

 

[Phrozen]

People, particularly of high status, like rare foreign exotic things basically.

 

[Zaarin]

People, particularly of high status, like rare foreign exotic things basically.

That is essentially the underpinning of Phoenician success, what Caroline Lopez-Ruiz terms the "orientalizing kit": present Near Eastern luxury items as associated with divine royalty, offer them as gifts to select clients, and now all their neighbors want to have these prestige items associated with Eastern god-kings. This extends to ritual practices like funerary banquets and incense burning, as well. It can even extend to entire syncretizing cults like the cult of Ashtart/Aphrodite and Milqart/Herakles, which spread all across the Mediterranean, often syncretized with local deities (like the Etruscan temple to Ashtart-Uni at Pyrgi, Sardus Pater-Sid on Sardinia, or Zeus-Milqart on Sicily).

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

I wouldn't call it the Roman sphere, but they at least sent people that far. Roman products got even farther. A piece of Roman glass was found in a Korean tomb and a Roman coin was found in Japan.

Roman glass was also found all over the Mekong sites, and Roman silver coins found in abundance in Sri Lanka. BUT there is no eidence that regular Roman 'traffic' got any further than India/Sri Lanka. The Romans in the Mekong were an ambassadorial group sent out by either Marcus Aurelius or Antoninous Pious that were met there by Imperial Chinese authorities. Basically, both Chinese goods like silk and Roman goods like glass got to their respective end points (Rome and China) through middle-men, not directly by Chinese or Roman merchants traveling the entire distance.

 

[Zennock]

Getting closer to release but no sign of Genghis Khan yet. Would be a big shame if he wasn't available on launch, I've been really looking forward to seeing him and I'm sure that there are many others who want him in too. It's cool to see that more people aren't just seeing him as a merciless world conqueror (which he is) but also as someone whose success can be greatly attributed to his focus on reforms and meritocratic approach. Feeling that he might come out later in a DLC later down the line but I'm hoping that's not the case, haha.

 

[Zaarin]

Getting closer to release but no sign of Genghis Khan yet. Would be a big shame if he wasn't available on launch, I've been really looking forward to seeing him. It's been pleasing that more people aren't just seeing him as a merciless world conqueror (which he is) but also as someone whose success can be greatly attributed to his focus on reforms and meritocratic approach. Feeling that he might come out later in a DLC later down the line but I'm hoping that's not the case, haha.

It's definitely weird that the devs felt the need to point out that Sid didn't like that he wasn't in the game at launch in Civ5...only to not include him in the game at launch in Civ6 or Civ7. It's fine that they have different priorities (I'm certainly not pining for more warmongers in the game at the moment, please and thank you), but it is very strange they felt the need to specifically highlight that point right before they started unveiling leaders.

 

[Isengardtom]

It's definitely weird that the devs felt the need to point out that Sid didn't like that he wasn't in the game at launch in Civ5...only to not include him in the game at launch in Civ6 or Civ7. It's fine that they have different priorities (I'm certainly not pining for more warmongers in the game at the moment, please and thank you), but it is very strange they felt the need to specifically highlight that point right before they started unveiling leaders.

Indeed : Amina, one of Ashoka’s persona’s, Charlemagne, Harriet Tubman, Tecumseh, Trung Trac and Xerxes’ base persona are all militaristic

 

[Zaarin]

Indeed : Amina, one of Ashoka’s persona’s, Charlemagne, Harriet Tubman, Tecumseh, Trung Trac and Xerxes’ base persona are all militaristic

For that matter, with his agenda, Ben Franklin promises to be a rampant warmonger. You also forgot Charlemagne and 2x Napoleon.

 

[Isengardtom]

Charlemagne I mentioned, but I forgot that Napoleon was also a leader that we get. He’s not mentioned in the game guide (yet).

Maybe we can find a peaceful Khan as a leader

 

[Zaarin]

Charlemagne I mentioned

Ah, you're right; my eyes glossed over him. But yeah, we've got a lot of warmongers so far.

Maybe we can find a peaceful Khan as a leader

I've been proposing Kublai Khan's mother Sorghaghtani Beki for years...

 

[Lord Lakely]

For that matter, with his agenda, Ben Franklin promises to be a rampant warmonger. You also forgot Charlemagne and 2x Napoleon.

Charlemagne just gets units. His agenda is probably going to make him the Civ7 equivalent of Gilgabro.

 

[Zaarin]

Charlemagne just gets units. His agenda is probably going to make him the Civ7 equivalent of Gilgabro.

True. I was including him because he has militant abilities. Honestly, Amina, Ben, and the Napoleons (for those that connect their accounts) promise to be the worst warmongers in the game.

 

[Krikkit1]

It's definitely weird that the devs felt the need to point out that Sid didn't like that he wasn't in the game at launch in Civ5...only to not include him in the game at launch in Civ6 or Civ7. It's fine that they have different priorities (I'm certainly not pining for more warmongers in the game at the moment, please and thank you), but it is very strange they felt the need to specifically highlight that point right before they started unveiling leaders.

Except in Civ5 Leaders=Civs….and honestly Genghis=Mongols in terms of their feel.

 

[Lord Lakely]

True. I was including him because he has militant abilities. Honestly, Amina, Ben, and the Napoleons (for those that connect their accounts) promise to be the worst warmongers in the game.

AI Franklin leading Mexico is going to be a wild experience, true.

At least not all militarists are pro-warmongering. Tubman, Trung Trac and Charlemagne will love a peaceful Machiavelli (I mean player).

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

I've been proposing Kublai Khan's mother Sorghaghtani Beki for years...

For a Mongolian female leader, Mandukhai would be by first choice

 

[Zaarin]

For a Mongolian female leader, Mandukhai would be by first choice

Sorghaghtani Beki was a Nestorian Christian princess, ruled China as regent for many years and was influential in her son's rise to power and policies during his own reign, and was declared a goddess after her death so I think she'd be interesting.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Mandukhai would be a better choice though, given that she's well-liked with Mongolians. Temujin is the choice, but I think Mandukhai would go down as well with the Mongolians as Kublai would.

 

[Zaarin]

Mandukhai would be a better choice though, given that she's well-liked with Mongolians.

We all have an interesting personage or two we'd like to see included who never will be. Sorghaghtani Beki is one of mine.

 

[j51]

Since they’ve divorced civs and leaders I’m definitely more attached to seeing certain civs in the game. I’m much more open to them getting loose with the leader choices now, but Genghis andAlexander are the only leaders I feel absolutely have to be in a civ game (and early in its cycle before I get bored lol.)