[R&F] New Leaks (new civ Cree, new alt leader Chandragupta Maurya of India)

[Siptah]

I was thinking it might be a Buffalo Pound. It's basically a big trap for catching and killing bison. The Cree word for it is Pihtokahan, according to a Cree-English dictionary I googled. A bison carcass provided both food and trade goods, so it kind of makes sense to benefit from nearby resources.

And it would be flavorful and cater to the image of cliché Native Americans held by many. It screams Native American civ.

 

[Guandao]

I was thinking it might be a Buffalo Pound. It's basically a big trap for catching and killing bison. The Cree word for it is Pihtokahan, according to a Cree-English dictionary I googled. A bison carcass provided both food and trade goods, so it kind of makes sense to benefit from nearby resources.

I wonder where the housing comes from if it is a Buffalo pound. Could a tipi be part of the improvement? I think only the Plains Cree lived in tipis though, but I might be wrong.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I wonder where the housing comes from if it is a Buffalo pound. Could a tipi be part of the improvement? I think only the Plains Cree lived in tipis though, but I might be wrong.

Bison hides cover tipis.

 

[Siptah]

I wonder where the housing comes from if it is a Buffalo pound. Could a tipi be part of the improvement? I think only the Plains Cree lived in tipis though, but I might be wrong.

Housing is not just where you live in. At least this is my understanding. The step well is a good example. Or fresh water. Or the aqueduct. Or the sewer.
Bison fur and hides certainly help in the winter.

 

[Remmert]

Bison hides cover tipis.

Bison the remaining luxury resource?
but then again, we already have furs

 

[Kimiimaro]

Housing is not just where you live in. At least this is my understanding. The step well is a good example. Or fresh water. Or the aqueduct. Or the sewer.

About the sewers and place where you live... Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

 

[Remmert]

About the sewers and place where you live... Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles

In fact India does lack of sewers and sanitation today,... well if open sewers count...

 

[Sagax]

Bison the remaining luxury resource?
but then again, we already have furs

Didn’t stop them from adding Bison in Civ 5.

 

[Cerilis]

Bison the remaining luxury resource?
but then again, we already have furs

Might also be a bonus resource.

 

[Phrozen]

Housing is not just where you live in. At least this is my understanding. The step well is a good example. Or fresh water. Or the aqueduct. Or the sewer.
Bison fur and hides certainly help in the winter.

Yes, I take housing as 'things which allows humans to live there' so running water for drinking and sanitation and in later eras things like the availability of medicine, easily constructed, organized, and reliable shelter, etc.

 

[Phrozen]

And it would be flavorful and cater to the image of cliché Native Americans held by many. It screams Native American civ.

Might replace the camp? I can't see it being only to be built over buffalo. Could turn deer and buffalo into luxury resources perhaps?

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Might replace the camp? I can't see it being only to be built over buffalo. Could turn deer and buffalo into luxury resources perhaps?

The translated picture said it gets bonuses for being adjacent to resources. Also, unique improvements don't replace regular improvements like unique buildings or districts.

And the third resource is the turtle boat thing.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I wonder where the housing comes from if it is a Buffalo pound. Could a tipi be part of the improvement? I think only the Plains Cree lived in tipis though, but I might be wrong.

I don't see why not. I thought I saw a blurry looking one in the picture anyway.

 

[nzcamel]

Well, I don't think anybody gets triggered by England having a queen. Or, say, Catherine or Isabella showing up on the leader screen. It's when it feels like a blatant case of tokenism, choosing a leader for their gender rather than any other notable quality or accomplishments.

To many people, Civ is a title bout between the greatest of the greats. Picking obscure leaders goes against that grain.

This ^^^ 100%

The key words being "to many people." Which is to say-- not all, and I would argue, not even close to a majority.

But likewise there is no majority who are keen on tokenism either. There will be a large middle ground who aren't bothered much no matter what. I'm willing to bet the advocates of tokenism are louder, but lesser in number than those who think like steveg700 and I do.

 

[evanaurora]

But likewise there is no majority who are keen on tokenism either. There will be a large middle ground who aren't bothered much no matter what. I'm willing to bet the advocates of tokenism are louder, but lesser in number than those who think like steveg700 and I do.

I'm no advocate of "tokenism." This implies that a) including large numbers of female leaders (which, let's note, the game in its current form absolutely does not even a little do) or even b) including ANY female leader is a practice dedicated to filling quotas instead of simply making an effort to expand (not detract from) the general historical narrative being presented. No one who wants female leaders in the game is an advocate of "tokenism." No one says "tokenism" but reactionaries on the internet in the first place.

Even if you disagree with a choice of leader, the implication that she's somehow stealing a More Worthy Man's place is blatantly ridiculous. So is the fact this a political issue.

Do you know how draining this is to have to keep fighting about???? Women have been around a long time, and they weren't just twiddling their thumbs waiting for men to benevolently grant them the franchise in the meantime.

 

[Perseus Gold]

Where did you get this definitions and concepts? Surely not from an anthropology class.

It is an ackward translation of Ibn Khaldun's on the subject of the pre-Islamic history of the Middle East. In which he identifies a cycle in human behavior in which over successive generations a group would build cities and advance technology then become domesticated by their cities, a disruption to their logistics weaken them either suddenly or over time and the now dependant on the system city dwellers are displaced by a more rugged, undomesticated people. Then those new comers built on what the first group, advance technology, themselves became domesticated and the cycle continues.

This delineation between the concepts of civilized / uncivilized seems to be the same phenomenon Ibn Khaldun referred to as domesticated / undomesticated humans.

 

[pgm123]

It is an ackward translation of Ibn Khaldun's on the subject of the pre-Islamic history of the Middle East. In which he identifies a cycle in human behavior in which over successive generations a group would build cities and advance technology then become domesticated by their cities, a disruption to their logistics weaken them either suddenly or over time and the now dependant on the system city dwellers are displaced by a more rugged, undomesticated people. Then those new comers built on what the first group, advance technology, themselves became domesticated and the cycle continues.

This delineation between the concepts of civilized / uncivilized seems to be the same phenomenon Ibn Khaldun referred to as domesticated / undomesticated humans.

That is an old historical trope, though there are quite a lot of exceptions to it. Was Ibn Khaldun influenced by the Greek histories by any chance? On the other end of the spectrum, you have the Jared Diamond view that agriculture allowed for military conquest. And then you have the actual Anthropologists who realize there are cases for everything.

Still, the idea of "living in harmony with nature" seems to draw heavily on the "Noble Savage" trope. Native Americans often didn't "live in harmony with nature." They transformed nature based on human needs. They cultivated orchards and cleared land for agriculture. The Pacific Northwest is a bit different because they didn't have domesticated crops. They remind me a bit of Jomon Japanese (Ainu?). The Jomon Japanese could live in semi-permanent towns and develop pottery, etc. but never had agriculture. There was just so much food because of the rainy climate that they didn't need to be migratory. The Plains Indians did need to be migratory because that area isn't really suitable for agriculture without Petrofertilizers. There's a reason they used to call it "The Great American Desert" before the Civil War when marketing (plus an unusually rainy period) called the area "The Great Plains."

 

[steveg700]

I'm no advocate of "tokenism." This implies that a) including large numbers of female leaders (which, let's note, the game in its current form absolutely does not even a little do) or even b) including ANY female leader is a practice dedicated to filling quotas instead of simply making an effort to expand (not detract from) the general historical narrative being presented. No one who wants female leaders in the game is an advocate of "tokenism." No one says "tokenism" but reactionaries on the internet in the first place.

Even if you disagree with a choice of leader, the implication that she's somehow stealing a More Worthy Man's place is blatantly ridiculous. So is the fact this a political issue.

Do you know how draining this is to have to keep fighting about???? Women have been around a long time, and they weren't just twiddling their thumbs waiting for men to benevolently grant them the franchise in the meantime.

Well, certainly no advocate of tokenism would use the term, since it has the negative connotation of selecting someone for reasons that contravene meritocracy. However, let's apply the cold light of rationality: if a leader is being selected primarily because of their gender--that is to say, they wouldn't have been selected if they didn't meet that criterion--then why is it ridiculous to say that person is being selected as a token representative?

And if you select, for instance, Seonduk instead of Sejong for Korea's leader, how is that not displacement? Do you find their list of accomplishments and their overall importance to their civilization to be of equivalent value? Is it really a toss-up, or would you say the decisive factor was that Seonduk stands out as an exceptional instance of a Korean female leader?

I loosely refer to this as the Joan Jett/Heart Dichotomy. Joan Jett was basically a successful cover act. She's not given accolades for any particularly original or brilliant songs insomuch as she is recognized for succeeding in a male-dominated field. Heart, on the other hand, is an amazing band with many exquisite and innovative songs in their catalog. That the band's brilliant vocals and guitars are provided by women is noteworthy, but that's not the reason they show up in my playlists.

 

[evanaurora]

Well, certainly no advocate of tokenism would use the term, since it has the negative connotation of selecting someone for reasons that contravene meritocracy. However, let's apply the cold light of rationality: if a leader is being selected primarily because of their gender--that is to say, they wouldn't have been selected if they didn't meet that criterion--then why is wrong to say that person is being selected as a token representative of that gender?

And if you select, for instance, Seonduk instead of Sejong for Korea's leader, how is that not displacement? Do you find their list of accomplishments and their overall importance to their civilization to be of equivalent value? Is it really a toss-up, or would you say Seonduk being an exceptional instance of a respected Korean female leader was the deciding factor?

I guess I'll say this one more time, but then I'm done.

I object to your framing of the issue.

If Trajan is the Roman leader, isn't that displacing a Caesar? How about Genghis? Don't you think he's displacing Kublai? Frederick Barbarossa-- haven't seen anyone complain about him, but he's certainly displacing the traditional Bismarck. Any leader that's picked is "displacing" tens-to-hundreds of others.

Or maybe we don't pick civ leaders just because they're the Most Famousest and Somehow Objectively Determined Importantest Dude In History. Maybe we pick them for an interesting, historically and gameplay-wise, experience in the game. Maybe that means picking an underdog female leader sometimes! Maybe that means picking an underdog male leader sometimes.

Maybe that means having female leaders in the game in general, no matter whether from traditionally patriarchal societies or no! Maybe you object to that mere notion. But I'd wager the vast, vast majority of the civ fanbase would disagree. I'd certainly hope so.

I am sorry but I've been playing civ since civ 2. If I had to see the same ten or twenty leaders every iteration of the franchise I'd have quit a long time ago. That would be-- gasp-- boring.

And guess what? As a female gamer and a history buff-- it's AMAZING to me that women traditionally erased from the mainstream historical narrative are getting a second look. That's not "rewriting history." That's a positive evolution in Civ historiography.

Finally, your assertion that Seondeok is in the game because she is a token representative is-- to be That Insufferable Internet Geek-- laughable by your own logic. The process you describe isn't even a little quota-filling! Making it a goal to include interesting female leaders in a game isn't saying they have to be picked from any particular civ or even in any particular number! It just means that when selecting a leader they might have to look past the same 2-3 obvious picks. Which is good to do anyway. Seondeok was a fascinating and yes, Important leader of her period. Ask the many people on this forum who actually know more than the little I do about Korean history to hear more-- there's been plenty of info around if you're uninformed! Whether we can make a little side by side list of "accomplishments" (Seondeok built 7 big roads! Sejong 8! +1 infrastructure for Sejong!) is an absolutely ludicrous analysis that only comes up when women leaders are picked, and you have to know this to be the case.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I guess I'll say this one more time, but then I'm done.

I object to your framing of the issue.

If Trajan is the Roman leader, isn't that displacing a Caesar? How about Genghis? Don't you think he's displacing Kublai? Frederick Barbarossa-- haven't seen anyone complain about him, but he's certainly displacing the traditional Bismarck. Any leader that's picked is "displacing" tens-to-hundreds of others.

Or maybe we don't pick civ leaders just because they're the Most Famousest and Somehow Objectively Determined Importantest Dude In History. Maybe we pick them for an interesting, historically and gameplay-wise, experience in the game. Maybe that means picking an underdog female leader sometimes! Maybe that means picking an underdog male leader sometimes.

Maybe that means having female leaders in the game in general, no matter whether from traditionally patriarchal societies or no! Maybe you object to that mere notion. But I'd wager the vast, vast majority of the civ fanbase would disagree. I'd certainly hope so.

I am sorry but I've been playing civ since civ 2. If I had to see the same ten or twenty leaders every iteration of the franchise I'd have quit a long time ago. That would be-- gasp-- boring.

And guess what? As a female gamer and a history buff-- it's AMAZING to me that women traditionally erased from the mainstream historical narrative are getting a second look. That's not "rewriting history." That's a positive evolution in Civ historiography.

Finally, your assertion that Seondeok is in the game because she is a token representative is-- to be That Insufferable Internet Geek-- laughable by your own logic. The process you describe isn't even a little quota-filling! Making it a goal to include interesting female leaders in a game isn't saying they have to be picked from any particular civ or even in any particular number! It just means that when selecting a leader they might have to look past the same 2-3 obvious picks. Which is good to do anyway. Seondeok was a fascinating and yes, Important leader of her period. Ask the many people on this forum who actually know more than the little I do about Korean history to hear more-- there's been plenty of info around if you're uninformed! Whether we can make a little side by side list of "accomplishments" (Seondeok built 7 big roads! Sejong 8! +1 infrastructure for Sejong!) is an absolutely ludicrous analysis that only comes up when women leaders are picked, and you have to know this to be the case.

This is the best comment I've read in a long time on these forums. And should serve to put this ridiculous discussion to rest, imo.