New Civilization which I would like to see in game

[luigilime]

Fair enough, although you seem to still be operating under the old civ design philosophy which prioritized dominance over culture. VI is focusing heavily on audiovisual uniqueness, and I'd argue it has become more important to VI that a civ is interesting to look at and listen to than being a regional superpower. Or at least equally as important.

So you can keep applying the old paradigm if it helps you sleep at night, but Firaxis and the world are still moving forward whether we like it or not.

i will because i don't agree with the new design, if that is the new design it doesn't make sense, how can australia and canada be so audiovisually unique and distinguished from england scotland and america?
i don't like it because this is a game about history, human history, and a lot of people fell in love with this part of the game, especially me, i love playing and change the world of historical powers, that's what makes the world congress soo requested, i like seeing how england or rome, civilizations with one heck of a historical baggage, react to my actions, therefore i'll keep with the old paradigm, because i feel it's better than to add random civs just because they look good, and if things have changed i'll campaign to go back.
this is a game about shaping history not just something pretty to put on a shelf, so i'd like that the civs are chosen accordingly.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

the problem with africa is that is soo diverse, soo many little cultures, that is difficult to pick the more important ones, so africa will always look empty unless we have a 100 civ game which is unlikely.

True at least we got Kongo which is new and interesting and fits near the middle of Africa. Now with Mali probably incoming it would be nice for Ethiopia to come to add one to the eastern side. Benin and maybe the Swahili would be nice places to fill in if we were able to go up to 60 civs.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

i will because i don't agree with the new design, if that is the new design it doesn't make sense, how can australia and canada be so audiovisually unique and distinguished from england scotland and america?

Just listen to their soundtracks and accents. And look at how much more interesting the Australian scenario is than any random European war. Cultural diversity opens up design space *mechanically*.

I don't like it because this is a game about history, human history.

So, Siberia and Tibet, two long standing and influential civs, aren't people? And yet we need Austria because Maria Teresa was an exceptional baby-making machine?

 

[luigilime]

Just listen to their soundtracks and accents. And look at how much more interesting the Australian scenario is than any random European war. Cultural diversity opens up design space *mechanically*.



So, Siberia and Tibet, two long standing and influential civs, aren't people? And yet we need Austria because Maria Teresa was an exceptional baby-making machine?

all right i'll give you the "unique soundtrack" argument, and the scenario,
but what? siberia, a random khanate in the middle of the northern asian tundra that was conquered by russia is more influential than the cradle of classical music and one of the major political players of europe until WW1? i'll think a bit more, i'll agree with tibet for its unique cultural background even though like vietnam just got famous because of what happened in the last century.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

all right i'll give you the "unique soundtrack" argument, and the scenario,
but what? siberia, a random khanate in the middle of the northern asian tundra that was conquered by russia is more influential than the cradle of classical music and one of the major political players of europe until WW1? i'll think a bit more, i'll agree with tibet for its unique cultural background even though like vietnam just got famous because of what happened in the last century.

Siberia finished in the top 3 of CBR. Sakha is the largest subnational governing body in the world. And we don't have a far north civ yet, and it's about tied with the Inuit in terms of reach and influence, but is more necessary because we already have the Cree representing the territories of Canada; nothing like that exists for the vast swathes of Russia, despite most of northern Asia not being ethnically Russian.

And yeah Bach is fine musically, but we already have a Habsburg, and a German civ, and really as a culture Austria isn't as distinct from its neighbors as civs like Tibet or Morocco or Siberia. It may have been influential, as was Portugal, but it doesn't add much to diversity of aesthetic or gameplay or representing non-rennaisance eras. It's...boring. There are plenty of civs you can argue under the old paradigm we're important, but they all kind of cluster together in a vague, samey Euro-Mediterranean blob. Firaxis is clearly trying to move away from that.

 

[luigilime]

Siberia finished in the top 3 of CBR. Sakha is the largest subnational governing body in the world. And we don't have a far north civ yet, and it's about tied with the Inuit in terms of reach and influence, but is more necessary because we already have the Cree representing the territories of Canada; nothing like that exists for the vast swathes of Russia, despite most of northern Asia not being ethnically Russian.

And yeah Bach is fine musically, but we already have a Habsburg, and a German civ, and really as a culture Austria isn't as distinct from its neighbors as civs like Tibet or Morocco or Siberia. It may have been influential, as was Portugal, but it doesn't add much to diversity of aesthetic or gameplay or representing non-rennaisance eras. It's...boring. There are plenty of civs you can argue under the old paradigm we're important, but they all kind of cluster together in a vague, samey Euro-Mediterranean blob. Firaxis is clearly trying to move away from that.

agree to disagree, there is a reason that there's no civ from siberia, and it's because there's nothing there, it's a too rough terrain to live in never mind develop urban cores and agriculture.
then if it is what you say then don't call it civilization then, call it culture royale. civilization means language, codified laws, culture, urban development, and scientific archievements, society. that's why i prefer the old desing.
visual variety is not always better, but i don't want to continue discussing, let's agree to disagree end of.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

agree to disagree, there is a reason that there's no civ from siberia, and it's because there's nothing there, it's a too rough terrain to live in never mind develop urban cores and agriculture.
then if it is what you say then don't call it civilization then, call it culture royale. civilization means language, codified laws, culture, urban development, and scientific archievements, society. that's why i prefer the old desing.
visual variety is not always better, but i don't want to continue discussing, let's agree to disagree end of.

Then go back to the old civs. Because as I've stated, Firaxis has changed their priorities and you're not going to get what you want from them. :/

 

[Siptah]

Siberia is in the game already as Scythia by the way. After all, a lot of the Scythian homeland is there, Tuva being the most prominent archeological site.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

@luigilime That's a pretty nice looking roster, nice choices and well done on the map!

My own choices to include with that would be the Tlingit, Navajo, Muisca, Dahomey, Tonga, Hawaii, and Gaul or Ireland.

I personally wouldn't mind seeing Sakha civ if we had the room for it.

 

[Guandao]

Hmm. I disagree with pretty much all of this.

I think think, under the VI design paradigm, it could be complete with the addition of only a few more civs:

* Maya - represent the Yucatan/Guatemalan region, as well as recent archaeological discoveries.
* Navajo - the best choice for a US tribe along several axes.
* Siberia - Yakutia is practically its own country and Russia is a really poor representative of northern Asia.
* Tibet - generally more important than any other Asian suggestions.
* Morocco - represent the Western Islamic Caliphates.

That is it. That is all we *need* from a cultural/mechanical perspective for the game to feel globally complete. I stand by these five as being practically necessary for the game to feel complete in its mission.

I would also nominate the Taino/Arawak to fill out the Caribbean and Colombia (they're probably the strongest "twofer" civ available, like the Mapuche, or Phoenicia), but then I'd feel compelled to give Oman, the Chola, the Inuit, Ethiopia, Siam, Hawaii, Italy, Portugal, and Denmark the same courtesy, and I consider all of them to be of secondary importance if we're trying to achieve maximal cultural/geographical diversity with the fewest number of civs. All of them have a drawback: too culturally similar to a neighbor, lacking a known language, lacking a strong leader choice, lacking strong/unique mechanics, etc. So while any of these would be nice and relevant, I don't consider them the slam-dunk, absolutely necessary civs like the big five I listed. Still, Arawak as a soft sixth civ if they can figure out what language the leader should speak.

Also, Romani. The long-shot civ that would actually work extremely well as an improved Venice concept while satisfying all of the cultural requirements.

Ethiopia is too similar to Nubia? No, Nubia is too similar to Egypt. None of the Civ you consider to be of secondary importance lack a known language. They all have a known language.

The Navajo are not natives to the American Southwest. They are descendants of Athabaskan migrants from the north. Their culture isn't as unique as the Puebloans (Hopi, Zuni, Tanoans, Keresans), from whom they borrowed cultural traits. I think people chose them because they are the largest Amerindian nation in US today....
Siberia will be a blob Civ?
Tibet will never happen, as long as the game is sold in China.

 

[Guandao]

Siberia finished in the top 3 of CBR. Sakha is the largest subnational governing body in the world. And we don't have a far north civ yet, and it's about tied with the Inuit in terms of reach and influence, but is more necessary because we already have the Cree representing the territories of Canada; nothing like that exists for the vast swathes of Russia, despite most of northern Asia not being ethnically Russian.

Most of Northern Asia is ethnic Russian today. The indigenous Siberian peoples are a minority now. I have a lot of respect for them (being my distant relatives), but do any strong leader choices exist?

 

[TahamiTsunami]

The Navajo are not natives to the American Southwest. They are descendants of Athabaskan migrants from the north. Their culture isn't as unique as the Puebloans (Hopi, Zuni, Tanoans, Keresans), from whom they borrowed cultural traits. I think people chose them because they are the largest Amerindian nation in US today....

That could be a factor but I'm thinking its because they'd be the next best choice for the Southwest after the Puebloan groups (unless you'd prefer the Comanche or Apache). There could be some hope, @Zaarin did say that the Hopi might be open to the possibility but who knows if Firaxis will take that risk after being turned down by the Tewa for Civ 5. It could depend on if the Hopi and the other Puebloans are only against showing past religious leaders or against showing any ancestors at all?

Siberia will be a blob Civ?

Most of Northern Asia is ethnic Russian today. The indigenous Siberian peoples are a minority now. I have a lot of respect for them (being my distant relatives), but do any strong leader choices exist?

It would be a blob civ if it was all of Siberia but I think the intention here is for a focused Sakha/Yakut civ. Their most notable leader choice, as far as I can tell from my amateurish searching, would be Tygyn Darkhan who was referred to as a Sakha king during the Russian invasions into Siberia. This link seems to include at least some decent info on him.

Agreed on Tibet. I'd hope that China wouldn't mind including them the same way as America and the Native American groups but it doesn't look likely to happen.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The Navajo are not natives to the American Southwest. They are descendants of Athabaskan migrants from the north. Their culture isn't as unique as the Puebloans (Hopi, Zuni, Tanoans, Keresans), from whom they borrowed cultural traits. I think people chose them because they are the largest Amerindian nation in US today....

One reason why I would choose the Navajo is because they are one of the largest nations today, but that's not the main reason. If that were the case I would be pushing the Cherokee even more.
They would be a great Civ to cover the SW region of the U.S. though I agree the Pueblo would be just as interesting but due to the whole controversy of them not being able to appear in Civ 5 that is unfortunately probably unlikely. And even if their descendants originally weren't from there I would be surprised if they didn't start on the Four Corners region on a TSL map.
If not the Navajo the Apache would be another good choice but I would rather some group of Pueblo before them. The only argument I have for the Apache is Geronimo is a big personality.
And no to the Comanche. They are too nomadic for my liking.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

I would be surprised if they didn't start on the Four Corners region on a TSL map.

Same here. It would be much more confusing if they started up north where their ancestors came from, it just wouldn't make sense to me.

If not the Navajo the Apache would be another good choice but I would rather some group of Pueblo before them. The only argument I have for the Apache is Geronimo is a big personality.

Yeah, theres no doubt that Geronimo is the most well known Southwest leader.

And no to the Comanche. They are too nomadic for my liking.

I'm pretty sure the Apache were nomadic too, it's the Navajo that were more settled. You could even argue that the Comanche had more of an empire than the others. Regardless, I'd imagine that all 3 of them would probably require some modern cities and reservation names for their city lists.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Same here. It would be much more confusing if they started up north where their ancestors came from, it just wouldn't make sense to me.

I mean if that were the case everybody might start at present-day Ethiopia.

I'm pretty sure the Apache were nomadic too, it's the Navajo that were more settled. You could even argue that the Comanche had more of an empire than the others. Regardless, I'd imagine that all 3 of them would probably require some modern cities and reservation names for their city lists.

Well they were semi-nomadic, less nomadic than the Comanche, but less settled than the Navajo which is another reason why I would put them lower, despite the leader Geronimo. They not only had teepees but some lived in wigwams and hogans, like the Navajo.
The Huns had an empire too but its hard to make up cities with no known settlements. The Comanche are like the Sioux of the Southwest and being from Texas we learned a great deal about the Comancheria and their influence in our history classes, but they would be another Plains tribe and too similar in style too the Cree which is mostly depicted as a very northern Plains tribe, Poundmaker included being of the Plains Cree.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

I mean if that were the case everybody might start at present-day Ethiopia.

And here we all are asking for more African civs when they've been under our nose the whole time!

Well they were semi-nomadic, less nomadic than the Comanche, but less settled than the Navajo which is another reason why I would put them lower, despite the leader Geronimo. They not only had teepees but some lived in wigwams and hogans, like the Navajo.
The Huns had an empire too but its hard to make up cities with no known settlements. The Comanche are like the Sioux of the Southwest and being from Texas we learned a great deal about the Comancheria and their influence in our history classes, but they would be another Plains tribe and too similar in style too the Cree which is mostly depicted as a very northern Plains tribe, Poundmaker included being of the Plains Cree.

Thankfully one advantage they'd have over the Huns is that we'd at least be able to have some reasonable city names for them, they'd be modern ones but they'd exist nonetheless. They would also be more of an economic civ like the Cree but there's no doubt that they'd be more aggressive with domination tendencies and almost certainly a cavalry UU. If they ever did actually become a civ, I'd hope that they'd have some unique playstyles and abilities to at least somewhat reflect their nomadic lifestyle as well as having one of their more fun leaders like Iron Jacket. Don't get me wrong, I know I've talked them up a bit but I agree with you in the Navajo being my SW civ of choice if a Puebloan civ can't get in. All 3 are pretty cool but the Navajo would be more unique with desert farming, a more modern UU, etc.

 

[Guandao]

I think I rather have no more North Amerindian Civs added.....I don't want to experience another Cree controversy again. And read more comments judging NAs for their lifestyle or lack of "civilization". I get it, they can't compare to Rome, Greece or Egypt in terms of monuments or technological advancements. They were Stone Age peoples.

In Civ7, North America should only have America and Canada as Civs.....

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I think I rather have no more North Amerindian Civs added.....I don't want to experience another Cree controversy again. And read more comments judging NAs for their lifestyle or lack of "civilization". I get it, they can't compare to Rome, Greece or Egypt in terms of monuments or technological advancements. They were Stone Age peoples.

In Civ7, North America should only have America and Canada as Civs.....

Well I don't want that to happen. The least they could do is maybe continue to make the Iroquois a staple since they have been in more than once.

 

[Guandao]

Well I don't want that to happen. The least they could do is maybe continue to make the Iroquois a staple since they have been in more than once.

If they pick someone else besides Hiawatha as the Iroquois leader, I'll support putting them in Civ6.

 

[Zaarin]

If they pick someone else besides Hiawatha as the Iroquois leader, I'll support putting them in Civ6.

Joseph Brant.