(poll) What civs would you like to see in a hypothetical third expansion?

[Patine]

As much as I would like Benin I hope for at least Ethiopia to return and give East Africa some love. The Swahili are an option but I'm not as much sold on them as other cultures.

I'd FAR rather see the Baganda for an East African civ than either the Ethiopians or the Swahili, myself.

 

[679x]

Man, just reading the wonderful discussions in this thread is making me super excited for the game, and we don't even have any confirmation whether many, or even ANY of these civs will ever be included! Here's to hoping. And at least I'm learning about these historical nations and people while we're at it.

 

[ehecatzin]

For Mesoamerica, I like the idea of the Maya getting a unique Holy Site or Campus and that the Aztecs probably should've gotten some marsh and lake bonuses since it makes a lot of sense. Out of curiosity, if we were going to get even more Mesoamerican civs, like the Tarascans or Zapotecs, what sort of bonuses or UU and UI/UD could they have to differentiate themselves?

I've been a fan of including the Mixtec under Eight Deer Jaguar Claw. I'm not familiar enough with the Mixtec language to know what to call it, but for the UB I'd give them a goldsmithy replacing the Workshop that provides extra gold and culture. The Aztec have macuahuitlan and the Inca have slingers, so the Mixtec UU could be a bolas-thrower or spear-thrower.

Yeah not adding a Chinampa UI was a missed oportunity, if the Aztecs were not as good I'd argue they should get bonus for lake tiles. I agree in that the Mixtec under Eight Deer would be incredibly cool. As for the Purepecha (Tarascan) they not only were the only bronze workers in mesoamerica they also had a very diferent kind of imperial administration going on, as opposed to the descentralization of the rest of mesoamerica they actually colonized conquered areas and very strongly pushed for the assimilation of conquered peoples. Their temples (Yacata) also have a very dinstinctive architecture. I could imagine them getting bonuses to defensive wars and increased loyalty to conquered cities. They could also use bonuses to lakes and salt.

While she wasn't a ruler the story of Erendira Ikikunari might be too good of a feamel elader figure to pass it.

 

[Patine]

as opposed to the descentralization of the rest of mesoamerica they actually colonized conquered areas and very strongly pushed for the assimilation of conquered peoples.

So, more like the Inca of the Andes than anyone else in Mesoamerica?

 

[TahamiTsunami]

Yeah not adding a Chinampa UI was a missed oportunity, if the Aztecs were not as good I'd argue they should get bonus for lake tiles. I agree in that the Mixtec under Eight Deer would be incredibly cool. As for the Purepecha (Tarascan) they not only were the only bronze workers in mesoamerica they also had a very diferent kind of imperial administration going on, as opposed to the descentralization of the rest of mesoamerica they actually colonized conquered areas and very strongly pushed for the assimilation of conquered peoples. Their temples (Yacata) also have a very dinstinctive architecture. I could imagine them getting bonuses to defensive wars and increased loyalty to conquered cities. They could also use bonuses to lakes and salt.

While she wasn't a ruler the story of Erendira Ikikunari might be too good of a feamel elader figure to pass it.

That sounds very cool to me, we might be on our way to developing a pretty satisfying Purepecha civ!

So, more like the Inca of the Andes than anyone else in Mesoamerica?

It sounds like it to me too. I also recall hearing somewhere that there were some language similarities between them and the Inca.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

I'm having the sneaking suspicion lately that the Timurids will be in VI. Or at least more likely than the Mughals. Reasons:

1. We don't have a civ filling out the "stans" between Persia, Scythia, and India.

2. VI seems to be focusing, even moreso than V, on representing larger cultural paradigms with civs (which the Gurkhani definitely were the largest influencer of the region), and less influential empires with city states (like Kabul repping the Durrani empire).

3. Where cultural paradigms have survived multiple polities (as here with the Timurids and Mughals), the devs have done one of two things. For long enduring cultures, they have included multiple leaders to represent different polities and the change over time. For smaller patches of history, they chose the largest cultural figure to lead the civ, either as representing the height of the civ (Cyrus, Genghis) or it's origination (Kupe, Dido). Here, we clearly have Timur and Akbar/Nur Jahan as frontrunners, but as far as being a cultural hero Timur satisfies both a high point and an origin point for the Gurkhani paradigm. Put simply, he serves the same function as representing the prototypical beginnings for the Mughals in the same way that Dido represents Carthage. He would be a two-fer.

4. Back on the subject of Cyrus, yes I realize that Persia lasted a long time and still will likely only have one leader, but there seems to be a reason why the devs made it DLC and not part of the main game. And I think that reason is, unlike Arabia or China which have many clear alternatives for leaders, Persia has the peculiar situation of having occupied similarly defined territory as several completely different empires, such as Macedon and coincidentally the Timurid empire. In fact I believe this is partly why Alexander was split from Greece, so that he could function as a quasi-alternate leader for the same region as Cyrus. I could see the developers completing the trifecta by including a Turkic leader from the Eastern side of the region.

5. Timur's starting location at Samarkand is a little less cramped than wherever Akbar or Nur Jahan would start. Since the whole point of including the Gurkhani would be to fill out Afghanistan and Pakistan, we would have to stretch to justify either Mughal leader starting in Lahore instead of Agra. But this isn't even an issue with Tamerlane if he starts in Uzbekistan.


Of course, many analagous reasons could be made for Attila serving as a quasi-alternate leader extension of Scythia. And he would likely serve a very similar mechanical niche. So I don't know. It remains to be seen I guess.

 

[Jkchart]

I'm having the sneaking suspicion lately that the Timurids will be in VI. Or at least more likely than the Mughals. Reasons:

1. We don't have a civ filling out the "stans" between Persia, Scythia, and India.

2. VI seems to be focusing, even moreso than V, on representing larger cultural paradigms with civs (which the Gurkhani definitely were the largest influencer of the region), and less influential empires with city states (like Kabul repping the Durrani empire).

3. Where cultural paradigms have survived multiple polities (as here with the Timurids and Mughals), the devs have done one of two things. For long enduring cultures, they have included multiple leaders to represent different polities and the change over time. For smaller patches of history, they chose the largest cultural figure to lead the civ, either as representing the height of the civ (Cyrus, Genghis) or it's origination (Kupe, Dido). Here, we clearly have Timur and Akbar/Nur Jahan as frontrunners, but as far as being a cultural hero Timur satisfies both a high point and an origin point for the Gurkhani paradigm. Put simply, he serves the same function as representing the prototypical beginnings for the Mughals in the same way that Dido represents Carthage. He would be a two-fer.

4. Back on the subject of Cyrus, yes I realize that Persia lasted a long time and still will likely only have one leader, but there seems to be a reason why the devs made it DLC and not part of the main game. And I think that reason is, unlike Arabia or China which have many clear alternatives for leaders, Persia has the peculiar situation of having occupied similarly defined territory as several completely different empires, such as Macedon and coincidentally the Timurid empire. In fact I believe this is partly why Alexander was split from Greece, so that he could function as a quasi-alternate leader for the same region as Cyrus. I could see the developers completing the trifecta by including a Turkic leader from the Eastern side of the region.

5. Timur's starting location at Samarkand is a little less cramped than wherever Akbar or Nur Jahan would start. Since the whole point of including the Gurkhani would be to fill out Afghanistan and Pakistan, we would have to stretch to justify either Mughal leader starting in Lahore instead of Agra. But this isn't even an issue with Tamerlane if he starts in Uzbekistan.


Of course, many analagous reasons could be made for Attila serving as a quasi-alternate leader extension of Scythia. And he would likely serve a very similar mechanical niche. So I don't know. It remains to be seen I guess.

Was trying to dream up a Timurid civ just the other day since Central Asia has a huge gap of representation, and I would love to see Timur join the lineup.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

While I'd like to think we could get both the Timurids and the Mughals if we had the enough open slots for them, I wouldn't be upset to see only the Timurids if a choice had to be made.

@Patine If you don't mind me asking, what would you be excited for or hopeful of seeing in a Baganda civ? I'm definitely in agreement with needing more African civs so I'm quite curious to genuinely learn about what this civ has to get you more excited about it than the Ethiopians or Swahili. Any leaders, UUs, and victory types you'd prefer?

 

[Patine]

While I'd like to think we could get both the Timurids and the Mughals if we had the enough open slots for them, I wouldn't be upset to see only the Timurids if a choice had to be made.

@Patine If you don't mind me asking, what would you be excited for or hopeful of seeing in a Baganda civ? I'm definitely in agreement with needing more African civs so I'm quite curious to genuinely learn about what this civ has to get you more excited about it than the Ethiopians or Swahili. Any leaders, UUs, and victory types you'd prefer?

Esthetically, the Baganda could do the whole inland savanna rotating hunting/farming semi-mobile African people with skilled spear-throwers with lion-mane headdresses and leopard-hide capes and the broad-bottomed conical homes that is such a popular image in the West, but actually be an organized empire with a powerful monarch and centralized rule, mixing outright conquest and vassalage to keep authority.

 

[TahamiTsunami]

@Patine Thank you for that, they sound pretty interesting to me so I'll be sure to do some more research to find out more. Who knows, they may become another favorite of mine! Things are looking better for eastern Africa.

 

[TheyMadeMeDoThis]

IRELAND!!!! Yes please! But not without adding a potato famine natural disaster...

 

[Henri Christophe]

Haiti and Dahomey!
Why the Western hemisphere ignores they ~300 years of slavery era?

 

[TheyMadeMeDoThis]

Haiti and Dahomey!
Why the Western hemisphere ignores they ~300 years of slavery era?

Yes I second this! We need some non western history added to the game.

 

[Lord Lakely]

Why the Western hemisphere ignores they ~300 years of slavery era?

Because I can't imagine a bigger faux pas than a group of white people making an african(-american) civ whose entire premise is "slavery".

 

[TheyMadeMeDoThis]

Because I can't imagine a bigger faux pas than a group of white people making an african(-american) civ whose entire premise is "slavery".

Hahaha yes ok true that

 

[TheyMadeMeDoThis]

Because I can't imagine a bigger faux pas than a group of white people making an african(-american) civ whose entire premise is "slavery".

Maybe not focus on slavery but pan-africanism and black consciousness. I don't understand why Marcus Garvey and Steve Biko are not Great Writers for instance. Haiti and Ghana's Nkrumah would fit perfectly without ever mentioning slavery without ignoring it.

 

[Lord Lakely]

I mean, it's not like Dahomey or Haiti are bad ideas (though I don't care for the latter). Firaxis just have to be careful with their design as to not step on people's toes.

 

[TheyMadeMeDoThis]

I mean, it's not like Dahomey or Haiti are bad ideas (though I don't care for the latter). Firaxis just have to be careful with their design as to not step on people's toes.

I'm sure that between their years of experience with dealing with the public and a fully fledged legal department they'll manage just fine

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

IRELAND!!!! Yes please! But not without adding a potato famine natural disaster...

I'd be happy if they just included Potato as a Resource: it wasn't only Ireland whose population ballooned once the potato was introduced to Europe - Prussia and Scandinavia also saw a massive turn to the potato as a preferred crop. As one historian put it: "Any history of Europe in the 16th - 18th centuries that doesn't mention the potato is not worth reading. . ."

It would make a nice Food Resource available early for Hill tiles, among other things. OR it could be a Unique Resource for the Inca which they could later 'Trade' or spread to other Civ, as happened historically.

Ireland doesn't need a Potato Famine Natural Disaster: the English are already in the game (sorry about that - my Irish wife made me do it!)

 

[Zaarin]

Maybe not focus on slavery but pan-africanism and black consciousness.

Nationalism is already a civic in game. We don't need to represent every single individual nationalist movement; there are too many to reasonably cover.