Poll: Merging Nordic/Scandinavian civs (Denmark, Sweden and Norway) into one Nordic civ in CIV 7?

[moysturfurmer]

I agree, but I wasn't thinking of a steppe civ (of which Scythia is not the first as we've also had Huns and Mongolia). I was thinking of a settled Silk Road civ.


I actually think Kalmar Denmark could fit what I suggested above. Make Margaret I the leader, give her a leader bonus emphasizing trade, have the civ bonus emphasize pillaging, and toss in a Longship UU. It's Kalmar Denmark with shades of Viking Denmark.

I know this topic is about consolidating the Nordic civs, but what about Denmark/Norway under Harald B, Sweden under Gustavus A. and Margaret I as an alt leader for both of them

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I actually think Kalmar Denmark could fit what I suggested above. Make Margaret I the leader, give her a leader bonus emphasizing trade, have the civ bonus emphasize pillaging, and toss in a Longship UU. It's Kalmar Denmark with shades of Viking Denmark.

Even though I would miss the presence of a Viking-like leader in game I could live with that.

 

[Zaarin]

I know this topic is about consolidating the Nordic civs, but what about Denmark/Norway under Harald B, Sweden under Gustavus A. and Margaret I as an alt leader for both of them

I hope we never see a leader leading two civs in the game again. It undermines what leaders are supposed to represent as the face of their civilization, and it's extremely gimmicky. I only suggested Denmark for Margaret I and a toned down Viking civ, and I would generally prefer Norway for "the Viking civ." Norway has a longer list of Viking kings to choose from. (And if they want someone to swear by the Norse gods, maybe they should pick a pagan next time. )

Even though I would miss the presence of a Viking-like leader in game I could live with that.

I thought about suggesting Gorm the Old or Harald Bluetooth as an alt leader, but honestly an alt leader brings up to two-and-a-half Scandinavian civs.

 

[Hellenism Salesman]

(And if they want someone to swear by the Norse gods, maybe they should pick a pagan next time. )

While I confess that I enjoy some of my pop culture vikings and can tolerate a little historical dramatization, seeing the writers so strongly defy historical accuracy in a historical 4X game was just depressing. General audiences expect Civ to be a (mostly) historically accurate source, so when they see something like Harald referencing the Norse pantheon, they believe it to be true. But when you're feeding them incorrect information, that's just widespread misinformation

I understand that's partially an issue of general audiences expecting Civ to be historically accurate, but with the increasingly more detailed, well-written Civilopedia entries we get with each installment, it's hard to blame them for assuming the entire game is as well-researched as those. Besides, it's a lot easier to change a couple lines of dialogue than it is to change the perceptions of millions of people.

 

[Zaarin]

While I confess that I enjoy some of my pop culture vikings, seeing the writers go in the face of historical accuracy in a historical 4X game was just depressing. General audiences expect Civ to be a (mostly) historically accurate source, so when they see something like Harald referencing the Norse pantheon, they believe it to be true. But when you're feeding them incorrect information, that's just widespread misinformation

I understand that's partially an issue of general audiences expecting Civ to be historically accurate, but with the increasingly more detailed, well-written Civilopedia entries we get with each installment, it's hard to blame them for assuming the entire game is as well-researched as those. Besides, it's a lot easier to change a couple lines of dialogue than it is to change the perceptions of millions of people.

And then, to top off the weird, Harald favors a religion that wouldn't exist for another 500 years because...reasons. (Makes one wonder if they originally planned to make civs that didn't have a favored religion favor their country's modern religion like Civ5, changed their minds and did the sensible thing and made it random, then forgot about Harald.) But yeah, the increasing attention to historical detail is appreciated, but it also makes the anachronisms like Harald's swearing, Freddie's plate armor, and just absolutely everything about Ambiorix stand out more.

 

[TheSpaceCowboy]

At the start of this generation I was of the opinion that they should be a single, combined Civilization. I've since come to hold that they should each be separate, though they should share an overarching Norse Culture (in my proposal for a Culture mechanic in Civ VII I don't make mention of Norse, Indian, or Latin American Cultures, as I'd introduce them via Expansion Packs). I do believe in blob civilizations in certain cases, such as the Italian City States or Polynesia, but the Norse, Danes, and Swedes have sufficiently uniquely rich histories that translate well into different gameplay mechanics, as seen in Civ VI.

 

[Zaarin]

I do believe in blob civilizations in certain cases, such as the Italian City States or Polynesia, but the Norse, Danes, and Swedes have sufficiently uniquely rich histories that translate well into different gameplay mechanics, as seen in Civ VI.

...Norwegians, Danes, and Swedes are a lot more similar than the dozens of different peoples living across thousands of miles of ocean. I don't think we need multiple Polynesian civs, but we absolutely should have a specific Polynesian civ. Polynesia is only the second most egregious blob in the franchise's history because "Native America" was a thing. ("Celts," especially the Civ5 version, takes the third slot.)

 

[Sirsquier]

I think we need atleast two Nordic civs (Preferably Sweden, Gustavus Adolfus or Carlous Rex and either Norway uner Hadrada or Denemark as Bluetooth)
I also think we need more civs in general split all the blobs.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I thought about suggesting Gorm the Old or Harald Bluetooth as an alt leader, but honestly an alt leader brings up to two-and-a-half Scandinavian civs.

I think Cnut the Great would be a good option. Then we could debate on whether he could lead England too.

 

[Zaarin]

I think Cnut the Great would be a good option. Then we could debate on whether he could lead England too.

I thought about Cnut, but didn't want to open that can of worms.

I also think we need more civs in general split all the blobs.

I hope the art department gets a raise.

 

[Leucarum]

Norse is a blob I could maybe get behind... I don't think Denmark, Iceland, Norway and Sweden are so drastically different that separate civs are needed and Norse would be one vehicle to unite them. The Kalmar Union might be a little divisive for the same...

 

[Krajzen]

By the way, has Sweden done anything very interesting and remarkable between the Viking era and 16th century that would warrant focusing on this age of its history? I'm asking because my very shallow lectures of this period led me to the conclusion that Sweden was, no offense Swedes every nation has mediocre times, miserably backwards and insignificant country in the context of Christian medieval Eurooe.

This question also sort of works regarding last five hundred years of Danish history, but at least the country was extremely 'civilized' in the entire modern era even if not very mighty or soectacular or dramatic. Meanwhile medieval Sweden seems both boring and backwards.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

By the way, has Sweden done anything very interesting and remarkable between the Viking era and 16th century that would warrant focusing on this age of its history?

Nothing that I can think of besides being part of the Kalmar Union with Norway and Denmark.

Which also begs to say that the best possible way for Norway to keep returning is it being the Viking civ considering since the union with Denmark they remained inseparable until I believe the 1800s. Denmark to me seems like the only one that can be designed as either a Viking age or post-Viking age civ.

 

[Xandinho]

I prefer that they continue to focus on Protestant Sweden with some cultural and diplomatic bonuses and that the Viking nation be either Norway or Denmark, they can alternate in every game. I just wouldn't want to lose Protestant Sweden, either for gameplay or niche occupation.

 

[Zaarin]

By the way, has Sweden done anything very interesting and remarkable between the Viking era and 16th century that would warrant focusing on this age of its history? I'm asking because my very shallow lectures of this period led me to the conclusion that Sweden was, no offense Swedes every nation has mediocre times, miserably backwards and insignificant country in the context of Christian medieval Eurooe.

This question also sort of works regarding last five hundred years of Danish history, but at least the country was extremely 'civilized' in the entire modern era even if not very mighty or soectacular or dramatic. Meanwhile medieval Sweden seems both boring and backwards.

Several Swedish ports were part of the Hanseatic League, but not the most interesting or important parts--certainly not compared to the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, the Novgorod Republic, Denmark, or the German Hanseatic states. Post-Viking pre-Thirty Years' War Sweden was a bit of a backwater as far as I'm aware.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

Not that there aren't some blobs out there that couldn't be acceptable, but I don't think that a Scandinavian blob is one of them unless someone comes up with a really persuasive and satisfying design for one somehow.

I'd also prefer for future games to keep a Viking-era Norway and the Swedish Empire of the 17-18th centuries. I think it would be great at some point to have a Kalmar Union Denmark led by Margaret but, as others have said, it's lower priority than some more consistent Native American civs beyond the Aztec, Inca, Maya, more African and Indian civs, etc.