Persia/Iran in civ7

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,258
Location
Poland
How would you like Persia/Iran (I am torn between those named) to look in civ7?

Personally I'm tited to death of getting always Persia based on Achaemenid empire, Cyrus or Darius, expansionist style, Immortal unique unit. The last one is an insult to injury, as it was a military unit really overhyped by Herodotus, which meant jack **** in larger scope of things - native Persia has always the civilization of bowmen and excellent cavalry, both heavy and light, not heavy infantry. Cataphract is a real military unit pioneered by Persia which was actually groundbreaking (almost literally) and distinctive.

So, returning from narrower Immortal rant to broader Achaemenid rant. Yes I know it was the largest Persian dynasty, and one of largest empires on history, and a brilliant achievement of administration, infrastructure etc. Now could we please, after 30 years, acknowledge that Persian history only begins with that empire and then lasts 2300 more years? In fact, if I had to point at the most glorious impacts of Persian people on the global history, of course it wouldnt be Achaemenid conquest, but the insane career Persian culture and science did in the medieval Islamic era (easily among top the most globally influential cultures ever). Era which is always ignored in favour of politically mighty but intelectually flat Achaemenids.

Parthians (Arsacid dynasty) - actually terribly attested empire, comparatively speaking, but still an empire that Rome couldn't break and at least a dynasty which could inspire "proper" cavalry focus for Persia.

Sasanian Empire - easily among the most inexplocably obscure yet absurdly important civilizations in history, basically half of Islamic civilization and Byzantine empires were influenced and inspired by its structure, culture, customs and economy.

Medieval Persia - annoyingly spread among many good but not a single one really spectacular Persian and Persiajised dynasties, which is one of reasons I am driven to insanity by pop history calling medieval Islamic scientific achievements "Arabic science", spoiler alert, an enormous part of them was done by 100% Persianised 0% Arabic people and cultures who specifically identitied as Persians and not Arabs. Bonus pointa for Abbasids being essentially half Persian dynasty but still being treated as 'Arab' (civ5 adres purely Persian cities to 'Arab' city list to add insult to injury). Anyway, however you introduce it (Samanids or Buyids would be nice enough), the career of medieval Persia in terms of culture, art and science was insane. Persian works of all kind were circulating from Ireland through Somalia to Korea.

Safavids - militarily, economically, culturally awesome empire, but unfortunately scientifically completely barren. Still, I would weep from my Persophile joy if it was the basis for Persia instead of Achaemenids #8.

Nader Shah - an incredible 18th century conqueror, if there are imho much more interesting characters to choose from. Still, arguably the last truly spectacular moment of Persian history, as, I willa say this directly, Qajar dynasty was miserable on all account except art, and Iranian 20th century history was miserable. At least nowadays Iran is silently turning into a scientific powerhouse again.


So my suggestions would be:
- Persia based on Sasanians, medieval era or Safavids
- Cultural, scientific or economic focus (just not expansionist for once)
- Proper cavalry based unique unit, giving Persians heavy infantry unit every game is as if Roman civ got a ship UU every game


PS
No Cyrus Cylinder was not "human rights" Jesus Christ it was propaganda piece claiming how much more of a chad Cyrus is compared to the virgin King he just conquered (its totally true folks btw - said by me, Cyrus). Also his empire totally had slavery, was not feminist, and brutally crushed rebellions just like everybody else.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,427
How would you like Persia/Iran (I am torn between those named) to look in civ7?

Safavids - militarily, economically, culturally awesome empire, but unfortunately scientifically completely barren. Still, I would weep from my Persophile joy if it was the basis for Persia instead of Achaemenids #8.

Nader Shah - an incredible 18th century conqueror, if there are imho much more interesting characters to choose from. Still, arguably the last truly spectacular moment of Persian history, as, I willa say this directly, Qajar dynasty was miserable on all account except art, and Iranian 20th century history was miserable. At least nowadays Iran is silently turning into a scientific powerhouse again.


So my suggestions would be:
- Persia based on Sasanians, medieval era or Safavids
- Cultural, scientific or economic focus (just not expansionist for once)
- Proper cavalry based unique unit, giving Persians heavy infantry unit every game is as if Roman civ got a ship UU every game
There maybe TWO persians. the emblem could be a saber wielding lion (Is that lion in the emblem a legendary Mantocore? a man eating beast of the Persian origin)


1. Pre-Islamic Persia
2. Islamic Persia.

There is however a link that could represent BOTH iterations
1. The first Cataphracts. a UU named Aswarun.
2. Paradise garden. (Invented by pre-Islam persians, survived pasts Islamizations to the point that many Islamic Persian leaders periodically built ones.

the two Persias had distinct UUs
1. Pre-Islamic Persia may also have Immortals (Being elite footmen), either Darius or Cyrus
2. Islamic Persia (Nader Shah or Safavids) may have Zamburaks (mobile light cannon mounted on camel back)

http://araftofapples.blogspot.com/2017/01/zumbooruk.html

While Humankind have BOTH Persias. having a kind of tribal musketeers as Linear Infantry proxy annoys me much, did Amplitude forget the existence of gun camels?

OFF TOPIC: Did Griffons also originate from Old Persia as well?
 

awesome

Meme Lord
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
2,839
Location
behind you
I can dig it.
There should definitely be some kind of representation of Achaemenid Persia, but I agree that there could be more than that to the civilization. Then again, I’d be fine with the same thing being true for Egypt.
 

jsciv69

Prince
Joined
Jul 16, 2016
Messages
305
Location
Earth
Perhaps the question should really be. Should we have two Civs that occupy the same land? I am certainly one to entertain that. I would like to see Rome and Italy as separate Civs in the game. As well as Celt and Irish Civs.
 

FishFishFish

Chieftain
Joined
Jun 26, 2021
Messages
77
Introducing a Tajik civ with a Samanid leader along side pre-Islamic Persia would sort of work. The Samanids played a big role in revitalizing Persian culture and can fill the scientific role that the Persians played during the Islamic Golden Age. A Ghurid leader could also lead the Tajiks, but they would probably be war focused which I think is less interesting.

It would be kind of sad for Islamic Persia to not be Shia though.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,087
Location
Texas
Yeah I love the Classical Era and have never really minded Persia being solely represented by the Achaemenid Dynasty.
I do realize the want for other areas of representation, though and hope they would continue to at least keep one Achaemenid attribute for the civ.

Next time around they could possibly get a unique commercial hub in the form of a bazaar, or market replacement, since those were Persian in origin.
I do like the Paradise Gardens in Civ 6, but considering I also wish for a Mughal civ with a Garden improvement, they needed something else not so similar.

Either Immortals or Zamburaks are fine. I'd like the Cataphracts to be a default Classical Era heavy cavalry unit.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,258
Location
Poland
I am personally against splitting Persia into two civs because, well, modern Iran has relatively straight continuity with ancient Persians (its the single Persian language all this time, just divided into Old, Middle and modern Persian) and a continuous unbroken identity, it's one civilization. It's the same problem as with China, where modern Chinese wouldn't be happy to find themselves separated from ancient China.

Instead I just think civ7 should go further with "one civ many leaders" and make it so you have one "Persia" civilization but with two leaders, one Sasanian and one Islamic one, each one bringing different set of stuff.
 

awesome

Meme Lord
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Messages
2,839
Location
behind you
I am personally against splitting Persia into two civs because, well, modern Iran has relatively straight continuity with ancient Persians (its the single Persian language all this time, just divided into Old, Middle and modern Persian) and a continuous unbroken identity, it's one civilization. It's the same problem as with China, where modern Chinese wouldn't be happy to find themselves separated from ancient China.

Instead I just think civ7 should go further with "one civ many leaders" and make it so you have one "Persia" civilization but with two leaders, one Sasanian and one Islamic one, each one bringing different set of stuff.
I would honestly rather have them focus on making civilizations more unique than having multiple leaders, Persia could easily be one of the civilizations that get 2 unique units, if they still go with the formula of 2 unique components per civilization.
 
Joined
Oct 17, 2017
Messages
8,087
Location
Texas
I would honestly rather have them focus on making civilizations more unique than having multiple leaders, Persia could easily be one of the civilizations that get 2 unique units, if they still go with the formula of 2 unique components per civilization.
I'm fine with civs getting two unique units as long as they at least get a unique infrastructure as well, like they did in Civ 6.
 

TahamiTsunami

Prince
Joined
Sep 27, 2017
Messages
471
I honestly wouldn't mind Cyrus coming back if only so that they can do a decent job of portraying him before going to different leaders. Even ignoring the Cyrus Cylinder, it seems likely that Cyrus was a fair and just ruler rather than the backstabbing villain that he is in Civ 6. It would be almost as unfortunate as if we never got Gustavus Adolphus as a leader of Sweden again and his only appearance looks more like Eric XIV! That being said, I do agree that a different dynasty would be better for once.

Sasanian Empire - easily among the most inexplocably obscure yet absurdly important civilizations in history, basically half of Islamic civilization and Byzantine empires were influenced and inspired by its structure, culture, customs and economy.

100% this! This is a Persian dynasty that more people should know about! I wouldn't mind a Safavid dynasty under Abbas the Great but the more I learn about the Sassanians and their leaders the more I really want to see them in the game!

I would honestly rather have them focus on making civilizations more unique than having multiple leaders, Persia could easily be one of the civilizations that get 2 unique units, if they still go with the formula of 2 unique components per civilization.

I'm not holding my breath for this, but I would love it if one day civs like Persia, China, etc. could have a UU from each era! The tricky part would be how to work that for civs like Assyria and 4-5 UUs in a single era for some of them may be a bit hard to come up with. Not impossible but certainly more difficult depending on the civ in question.
 

pineappledan

Deity
Joined
Aug 9, 2017
Messages
7,344
Location
Alberta, Canada
It really is a wonder the Sassanids are so obscure to a western audience. They were arguably more powerful and influential than the Achaemenids.
 

Krajzen

Deity
Joined
Oct 23, 2013
Messages
3,258
Location
Poland
It really is a wonder the Sassanids are so obscure to a western audience. They were arguably more powerful and influential than the Achaemenids.

I agree and honestly I have a suspicion it's a remnant of an old eurocentrist history rule of "we mention non European cultures mostly when we conquer them supposedly with small numbers" or "we gloriously defeat their despotic attempts to conquer us in the name of freedom - with small numbers ofc"

It's why Achaemenids have been traditionally vastly more known than Parthians and Sasanians, and the same goes for
- supposed small groups of white space marines conquering Americas (avoiding disease apocalypse and tens of thousands of native allies)
- Mapuche being obscure despite spectacularly kicking white ass under charismatic leader and after him
- Zulu being famous but Ashanti, Yoruba, Benin not being famous, despite being vastly more powerful and impressive (Ashanti won two of four wars against British and used firearm mass tactics)
- Central Asia being thought of as "horse barbarians with no culture and no importance although they did that one very scary barbarian invasion one time"
- Ottomans being supposedly "despotic oriental backwards threat already decaying by the late 16th century"
- China and India out of textbooks until 19th/20th century when we list their miseries although we do mention Gandhi

And so on...

And Civilization is there to teach them!
 

Abaxial

Emperor
Joined
Sep 14, 2017
Messages
1,079
It really is a wonder the Sassanids are so obscure to a western audience. They were arguably more powerful and influential than the Achaemenids.
And how many gamers have heard of either the Achaemenids or the Sassanids? Given the number of people who can't find Finland on a map?
 

Uncle Paul

Bittereinder
Joined
Aug 6, 2022
Messages
396
Location
Die Ou Transvaal
You could do what Leoreth did in Rhye's and Fall: Dawn of Civilization...Darius/Cyrus/Xerxes leads the Persian civ, based on Classical, pre-Islamic Persia, but Abbas leads the Iranian civ, based on Medieval/Renaissance Islamic Persia.
 
Joined
Jan 10, 2019
Messages
1,427
You could do what Leoreth did in Rhye's and Fall: Dawn of Civilization...Darius/Cyrus/Xerxes leads the Persian civ, based on Classical, pre-Islamic Persia, but Abbas leads the Iranian civ, based on Medieval/Renaissance Islamic Persia.
With that, base UU should be Aswarun Cataphracts. Since this unit represents them being Horselords.
 

Absolution

King
Joined
Mar 6, 2010
Messages
755
Location
Israel
How would you like Persia/Iran (I am torn between those named) to look in civ7?

Personally I'm tited to death of getting always Persia based on Achaemenid empire, Cyrus or Darius, expansionist style, Immortal unique unit. The last one is an insult to injury, as it was a military unit really overhyped by Herodotus, which meant jack **** in larger scope of things - native Persia has always the civilization of bowmen and excellent cavalry, both heavy and light, not heavy infantry. Cataphract is a real military unit pioneered by Persia which was actually groundbreaking (almost literally) and distinctive.

So, returning from narrower Immortal rant to broader Achaemenid rant. Yes I know it was the largest Persian dynasty, and one of largest empires on history, and a brilliant achievement of administration, infrastructure etc. Now could we please, after 30 years, acknowledge that Persian history only begins with that empire and then lasts 2300 more years? In fact, if I had to point at the most glorious impacts of Persian people on the global history, of course it wouldnt be Achaemenid conquest, but the insane career Persian culture and science did in the medieval Islamic era (easily among top the most globally influential cultures ever). Era which is always ignored in favour of politically mighty but intelectually flat Achaemenids.

Parthians (Arsacid dynasty) - actually terribly attested empire, comparatively speaking, but still an empire that Rome couldn't break and at least a dynasty which could inspire "proper" cavalry focus for Persia.

Sasanian Empire - easily among the most inexplocably obscure yet absurdly important civilizations in history, basically half of Islamic civilization and Byzantine empires were influenced and inspired by its structure, culture, customs and economy.

Medieval Persia - annoyingly spread among many good but not a single one really spectacular Persian and Persiajised dynasties, which is one of reasons I am driven to insanity by pop history calling medieval Islamic scientific achievements "Arabic science", spoiler alert, an enormous part of them was done by 100% Persianised 0% Arabic people and cultures who specifically identitied as Persians and not Arabs. Bonus pointa for Abbasids being essentially half Persian dynasty but still being treated as 'Arab' (civ5 adres purely Persian cities to 'Arab' city list to add insult to injury). Anyway, however you introduce it (Samanids or Buyids would be nice enough), the career of medieval Persia in terms of culture, art and science was insane. Persian works of all kind were circulating from Ireland through Somalia to Korea.

Safavids - militarily, economically, culturally awesome empire, but unfortunately scientifically completely barren. Still, I would weep from my Persophile joy if it was the basis for Persia instead of Achaemenids #8.

Nader Shah - an incredible 18th century conqueror, if there are imho much more interesting characters to choose from. Still, arguably the last truly spectacular moment of Persian history, as, I willa say this directly, Qajar dynasty was miserable on all account except art, and Iranian 20th century history was miserable. At least nowadays Iran is silently turning into a scientific powerhouse again.


So my suggestions would be:
- Persia based on Sasanians, medieval era or Safavids
- Cultural, scientific or economic focus (just not expansionist for once)
- Proper cavalry based unique unit, giving Persians heavy infantry unit every game is as if Roman civ got a ship UU every game


PS
No Cyrus Cylinder was not "human rights" Jesus Christ it was propaganda piece claiming how much more of a chad Cyrus is compared to the virgin King he just conquered (its totally true folks btw - said by me, Cyrus). Also his empire totally had slavery, was not feminist, and brutally crushed rebellions just like everybody else.
I would love nothing better than an Islamic Persian play.
Can range all the way from early Ghazanvids to Nader Shah.
With the feature of changing capitals based on leader - a multi-leader Persia can be amazingly interesting.
 
Top Bottom