POLL: Non-Leader Leaders

[AmazonQueen]

I mean I accept it knowing full well that they are doing their best to appeal to what players perceive as iconic while throwing in a few creative implementations in the pipeline. I'm sure gamer audiences have something to do with it as well.

Yes, and I think there is always going to be a disproportionate amount of European/ Med civs, even Carthage/Phoenecia are part of that and should arguably be a returning rather than a perennial civ, although only if somebody else like Venice or Morocco is in that edition of civ

 

[Ziad]

Yes, and I think there is always going to be a disproportionate amount of European/ Med civs, even Carthage/Phoenecia are part of that and should arguably be a returning rather than a perennial civ, although only if somebody else like Venice or Morocco is in that edition of civ

Well Phoenicia is almost guaranteed representation as a couple of city states at the minimum so there's that. I was actually confused why none of them were in Civ6 til now til it all clicked when I found out they were coming as a civ.

Carthage in particular is more iconic (unfortunate for Phoenicia as a whole but that's fine) because of its iconic enmity with Rome, and it cannot be overstated just how iconic in itself Rome is by the entire Western world.

So yeah... it'll always either be Carthage with Phoenician city states or the entirety of Phoenicia... and again, because it's iconic to Western audiences.

I fully expect Civ7 to revert to Carthage only led by Hannibal with Tyre/Sidon/Byblos as city states

 

[Zaarin]

disproportionate amount of European/ Med civs

Honestly Civ6 has been rather deficient in Near Eastern civs for my tastes.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Well Phoenicia is almost guaranteed representation as a couple of city states at the minimum so there's that. I was actually confused why none of them were in Civ6 til now til it all clicked when I found out they were coming as a civ.

Carthage in particular is more iconic (unfortunate for Phoenicia as a whole but that's fine) because of its iconic enmity with Rome, and it cannot be understated just how iconic in itself Rome is by the entire Western world.

So yeah... it'll always either be Carthage with Phoenician city states or the entirety of Phoenicia... and again, because it's iconic to Western audiences.

I fully expect Civ7 to revert to Carthage only, probably with Hannibal.

Hopefully not with the mountain crossing ability which is really much better as a GG ability. I can see why Carthage is represented seperately from Phoenicia, it fits a warlike state much better, and a group of city states (although from what I understand Carthage,Utica. Gades etc were city states anyway, Carthage wasn't an empire in our sense of the word anyway) is much harder to fit into the Civ model anyway. Civ doesn't handle city states or dynasties or nomads well.

 

[Ziad]

Honestly Civ6 has been rather deficient in Near Eastern civs for my tastes.

Well there's:

Egypt
Nubia
Persia
Sumeria
Arabia
Georgia
Ottomans (soon)
Phoenicia (soon)
Macedon? (Do you count the Successor Kingdoms? )

It's not that bad. That's 8/40 (ignoring Macedon).

Do you mean the Levant in particular? Or the ancient civilizations which would reduce the list to Persia/Egypt/Sumeria. I agree in that case. Perhaps Babylon will come, or maybe Akkad's return as a city state might herald it coming in a possible third expansion. Byzantium might make a return too.

Although I suppose 8/40 is still a little low considering that part of the world's significance in human history.

 

[AmazonQueen]

Honestly Civ6 has been rather deficient in Near Eastern civs for my tastes.

Accepted, correction long overdue

 

[Ziad]

Hopefully not with the mountain crossing ability which is really much better as a GG ability. I can see why Carthage is represented seperately from Phoenicia, it fits a warlike state much better, and a group of city states (although from what I understand Carthage,Utica. Gades etc were city states anyway, Carthage wasn't an empire in our sense of the word anyway) is much harder to fit into the Civ model anyway. Civ doesn't handle city states or dynasties or nomads well.

What makes Carthage stand out in Phoenicia are:

1) They had a land-owning aristocracy. Phoenicians in the Levant had kings and republics but didn't have that much land to squabble over.
2) Their population was mostly Libyan, with the leadership exclusively Phoenician. Over time there was some intermingling and a significant population of Liby-Phoenicians arose.
3) They were able to develop in peace due to their prime location away from the squabbles of the Levant.
4) They were more militant city state that aggressive expanded their territorial holdings. Phoenician settlements were typically far more peaceful in nature.
5) Because of their location and subject populations, they were more capable of fielding larger armies (including mercenaries) enabling conquests in North Africa and Iberia.
6) They faced Rome and almost brought it to its knees, and they are forever memorialized in the eyes of the West.
7) They have more writings about them. Phoenicians in general were notoriously secretive.
8) Hannibal. Nuff said.

Ultimately I too understand why Carthage may be represented separately, but I vastly prefer it when it isn't, because it is ultimately ALL Phoenician history, just like Greece is represented as a whole and not just Athens or Macedon. It's not called the Athenian civilization. It's the Greek one.

Speaking of, Phoenicia was very, very similar to Greece yet the latter had Macedon as a Hellenistic overlord still representing them at times, yet Carthage can't also represent Phoenicia as a whole? It's an interesting dissonance, most likely caused by Western historical biases.

I view their move in Civ6 in a positive light, with both Greece and Macedon being separated and Phoenicia united.. I hope they continue the trend in Civ7.

 

[AmazonQueen]

What makes Carthage stand out in Phoenicia are:

1) They had a land-owning aristocracy. Phoenicians in the Levant had kings and republics but didn't have that much land to squabble over.
2) Their population was mostly Libyan, with the leadership exclusively Phoenician. Over time there was some intermingling and a significant population of Liby-Phoenicians arose.
3) They were able to develop in peace due to their prime location away from the squabbles of the Levant.
4) They were more militant city state that aggressive expanded their territorial holdings. Phoenician settlements were typically far more peaceful in nature.
5) Because of their location and subject populations, they were more capable of fielding larger armies (including mercenaries) enabling conquests in North Africa and Iberia.
6) They faced Rome and almost brought it to its knees, and they are forever memorialized in the eyes of the West.
7) They have more writings about them. Phoenicians in general were notoriously secretive.

Ultimately I too understand why Carthage may be represented separately, but I vastly prefer it when it isn't, because it is ultimately ALL Phoenician history, just like Greece is represented as a whole and not just Athens or Macedon.

That's the funny part. Phoenicia was very, very similar to Greece with Macedon as a Hellenistic overlord still representing them at times, yet Carthage can't also represent Phoenicia as a whole?

I view their move in Civ6 in a positive light. I hope they continue the trend with Phoenicia.

I suppose it depends on how much you're trying to represent the civ as a whole or depict particular aspects of it (especially when like with Greece those aspects were frequently contradictory)

 

[Ziad]

I suppose it depends on how much you're trying to represent the civ as a whole or depict particular aspects of it (especially when like with Greece those aspects were frequently contradictory)

Agreed although I think they did a relatively good job in Civ5, both in separating Hellas (Greece) from Macedon and having two different personalities for Hellas, with Athens having a civil focus and Sparta a martial one.

 

[Zaarin]

Do you mean the Levant in particular? Or the ancient civilizations which would reduce the list to Persia/Egypt/Sumeria.

Yeah, it's particularly Ancient Mesopotamia that's lacking. I think Babylon and Assyria should both be staples, and I'd love to see a wildcard like Elam or Urartu. With only one expansion left, though, I guess I can only expect one. From a later period, I wouldn't mind seeing Palmyra as a stand-in for the Aramaean city-states.

Akkad's return as a city state might herald it coming in a possible third expansion.

I don't understand why Agade isn't on Sumer's city-list. (I mean, yes, Agade/Akkad spoke Akkadian...but so does Civ6's Gilgamesh. Akkad laid the groundwork for Babylon, but culturally and politically it was essentially Sumerian. The compiler of the Sumerian king list certainly considered it as such.)

Phoenicians in general were notoriously secretive.

Everyone talks about Tyrian purple, but the Tyrians were also famed in the ancient world for their glassmaking--and the penalty for sharing their glassmaking techniques was quite harsh.

Ultimately I too understand why Carthage may be represented separately, but I vastly prefer it when it isn't, because it is ultimately ALL Phoenician history

I think the biggest appeal of Carthage is that it has numerous individuals who'd make great leader choices (not just Hannibal, though I'm a fan). However, I've always found Civ's Carthage disappointing, because elephants and all war, all day is not terribly representative of Carthage's history as a whole and even less so of the broader Phoenician history. So I'm hopeful that calling it "Phoenicia" will better represent the civ...even if we get stuck with Dido. (Why can't we do this for other civs? In Civ7, Arthur should lead England, El Cid leads Spain, and Sigurðr Fafnirsbane leads Norway. )

 

[Ziad]

Ooh Palmyra led by Zenobia would be legit.

 

[Zaarin]

Ooh Palmyra led by Zenobia would be legit.

I'd ordinarily object to a civ that existed for roughly three years, but I'd happily consider it a stand-in for centuries of important petty kingdoms and city-states in Aram. Plus Zenobia would just be a fantastic big personality leader.