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

[PhoenicianGold]

The flags seen in the Diplo victory movie are:


Mexico
Nigeria
Kenya
Thailand
Argentina
South Africa
Iceland
Kazakhstan
Czech Republic
Papua New Guinea
Morocco
Sri Lanka

Some of them are as city-states in the game like Mexico City and Buenos Aires, but could some of them be hints, like for Benin Empire? Or maybe Iceland for a new city-state of Reykjavik?

Also the Hall of Fame has a niiiiice room for 9 leaders:

https://preview.redd.it/o5m1xskdrjg...bp&s=abe15e317646729069f136e047f7d6b86f1c9772

Sorry, I still need to get to replying to Buchi's post, there's just a lot to unpack and I keep getting pulled away.

But this does not bode well for my theory or indeed many theories, given that it implies that since not all of these civs could be added to the roster, that likely none of the civs with flags will be added. Note that we have:

* Civs that are already city states: Argentina, Mexico, Morocco, Sri Lanka, arguably Kenya.

* Civs that are already semi-precluded by civs which occupy the same geographical space and general historical/mechanical niche begged by the region: South Africa (Zulu), Kazakhstan (Scythia), again Mexico (Aztec).

* Civs that, I'm sorry, will always only be potentially city-states in VI: Papua New Guinea, Iceland, Czech Republic.

This does not bode well for Morocco or Siam, since the most likely conclusion here is that the flags onscreen are a means of representing "runners up" and those that aren't already city-states are set to be city-states in the next expack (Reykjavik, Bangkok, Oyo, Prague, and Nur-Sultan?).

Which, although Vietnam/Burma could still be stretched into a "multicultural" civ and Swahili/Oman could replace Morocco, that does put a dent in my multicultural theme theory. The biggest problem being that even if we get Byzantium over Bulgaria, that's only three returning civs, and I still don't consider Assyria or any Mesopotamian civ to be a very good representation of cultural synthesis (that isn't already vicariously represented by Sumeria). Multicultural theory might be shot.

Although I could still have some slim hope that even if these are "runners up," that they might change the flags if any civs are added to the roster.

 

[Haig]

I agree with you that most of the choices wont make much sense as full fledged civs.

Maybe they just didnt want to use predictable flags like China, USA etc. and went with the "what if?" -style of civilization's world.

 

[Patine]

Sorry, I still need to get to replying to Buchi's post, there's just a lot to unpack and I keep getting pulled away.

But this does not bode well for my theory or indeed many theories, given that it implies that since not all of these civs could be added to the roster, that likely none of the civs with flags will be added. Note that we have:

* Civs that are already city states: Argentina, Mexico, Morocco, Sri Lanka, arguably Kenya.

* Civs that are already semi-precluded by civs which occupy the same geographical space and general historical/mechanical niche begged by the region: South Africa (Zulu), Kazakhstan (Scythia), again Mexico (Aztec).

* Civs that, I'm sorry, will always only be potentially city-states in VI: Papua New Guinea, Iceland, Czech Republic.

This does not bode well for Morocco or Siam, since the most likely conclusion here is that the flags onscreen are a means of representing "runners up" and those that aren't already city-states are set to be city-states in the next expack (Reykjavik, Bangkok, Oyo, Prague, and Nur-Sultan?).

Which, although Vietnam/Burma could still be stretched into a "multicultural" civ and Swahili/Oman could replace Morocco, that does put a dent in my multicultural theme theory. The biggest problem being that even if we get Byzantium over Bulgaria, that's only three returning civs, and I still don't consider Assyria or any Mesopotamian civ to be a very good representation of cultural synthesis (that isn't already vicariously represented by Sumeria). Multicultural theory might be shot.

Although I could still have some slim hope that even if these are "runners up," that they might change the flags if any civs are added to the roster.

Even though you use the "word' theories, the tenor of your posts is that your theories are "irrefutably correct" (especially given how you like to make vicious, uninformed, and intolerant lashings out and personal attacks - usually making up "personal material" about your target to enable the façade of them, against all you disagree with you, however rationally and logically the counter-argument is term), and you often speak as if your deciding or have been told directly by a developer these things.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The majority of the Haida are in Canada but the vast majority of the Tlingit lands and people are in Amerca (specifically the Alaskan panhandle). The Navajo are still cool and one of my favorites regardless but I do prefer the Tlingit more.

The Tlingit are located entirely in Alaska. The Haida and Tsimshian are primarily in Canada but also have small groups in Alaska. Further south, the Coast Salish, Nuu-Chah-Nuulth (formerly known as the Nootka), and Makah are possibilities from Washington, though I would prefer the Tlingit or Haida.

I thought they were more located in the various Canadian provinces of British Colombia and the Yukon than Alaska. Either way I would want another tribe focused in the mainland of the U.S. first before we do another northern tribe though the Tlingit would be a good choice.

Some of them are as city-states in the game like Mexico City and Buenos Aires, but could some of them be hints, like for Benin Empire? Or maybe Iceland for a new city-state of Reykjavik?

* Civs that are already semi-precluded by civs which occupy the same geographical space and general historical/mechanical niche begged by the region: South Africa (Zulu), Kazakhstan (Scythia), again Mexico (Aztec).

* Civs that, I'm sorry, will always only be potentially city-states in VI: Papua New Guinea, Iceland, Czech Republic.

This does not bode well for Morocco or Siam, since the most likely conclusion here is that the flags onscreen are a means of representing "runners up" and those that aren't already city-states are set to be city-states in the next expack (Reykjavik, Bangkok, Oyo, Prague, and Nur-Sultan?).

​

Reykjavik is already on the list of the Norweigan cities so I do not expect it to be part of a new city state pack, unless they decide to take it off like they did with Granada from Spain.

Either way I do agree that many of these feel like they aren't needed to be full fledged civilizations in the game and being represented by city-states is fine as a lot are post-colonial nations and modern day countries. That would make Colombia (Gran Colombia) a more viable option than Argentina or Mexico though for a Spanish speaking civ from the New World.

 

[Xandinho]

The flags seen in the Diplo victory movie are:


Mexico
Nigeria
Kenya
Thailand
Argentina
South Africa
Iceland
Kazakhstan
Czech Republic
Papua New Guinea
Morocco
Sri Lanka

Some of them are as city-states in the game like Mexico City and Buenos Aires, but could some of them be hints, like for Benin Empire? Or maybe Iceland for a new city-state of Reykjavik?

Also the Hall of Fame has a niiiiice room for 9 leaders:

https://preview.redd.it/o5m1xskdrjg...bp&s=abe15e317646729069f136e047f7d6b86f1c9772

I don't think it means anything, but I like to play with conspiracy theories. It's a good speculation exercise, let's go...

Maybe these flags represent civilizations that will not be in the game completely? Maybe they represent future additions of city-states, let's look at each one separately:

Mexico: Mexico City is already in the game as city-state.
Nigeria: Lagos is one of the largest and most important African cities currently, I would not be surprised to see this as city-state.
Kenya: Zanzibar is already very close to Kenya, or perhaps it means that we will have Nairobi as a city-state?
Thailand: perhaps it means the inclusion of Bangkok as a city-state? there are few city-states in Southeast Asia anyway.
Argentina: Buenos Aires is already in the game as city-state.
South Africa: Cape Town was in Civ5, it is not impossible to see it again in civ6.
Iceland: Reykjavik is already on the list of Norwegian cities, I find it difficult to become a city-state.
Kazakhstan: Almaty was a city-state in Civ5, would not find it impossible to return.
Czech Republic: Prague is a blatant omission, given its historical importance.
Papua New Guinea: this would mean Port Moresby as city-state. In a third xpac that would add city-states from all continents, one would have to come from Oceania anyway.
Morocco: Fez is already a city-state.
Sri Lanka: Kandy is already a city-state.

Well, I particularly find it difficult that those flags meant anything. Or maybe we will have Lagos, Bangkok, Cape Town, Reykjavik, Almaty, Prague, Port Moresby and Nairobi as city-states in the future?

 

[Zaarin]

I thought they were more located in the various Canadian provinces of British Colombia and the Yukon than Alaska. Either way I would want another tribe focused in the mainland of the U.S. first before we do another northern tribe though the Tlingit would be a good choice.

Technically Alaska is on the mainland of the US. (Yes, yes, I know that "Continental US" colloquially means "Contiguous US." I'm being pedantic. )

The Tlingit or Haida remain my top choice for a new Native American civ, but failing that my next choices would be Iroquois, Choctaw, or Powhatan. I'm not really a huge fan of a Southwestern civ personally. It satisfies TSL, but TSL is of little interest to me. In regards to TSL, though, the Tlingit are still a nice choice: it's my observation that on real Earth maps Alaska rarely gets settled, and it's a decent distance from the Cree or Canadian starting locations. IMO the Navajo on TSL would quickly fall victim to the Aztec. That usually seems to happen to even the Cree, and I've even seen it happen to Japan.

 

[Vandal Thorne]

A couple of quick thoughts on Native Americans:

The Cree are a NATION; the Ojibwe would be a CREE TRIBE.

The Cherokee Nation might be an interesting East-Coast oriented North American cultural group to introduce. They developed their own writing system and after contact with the Europeans, enacted some sweeping education programs.

A thought re: Babylon (Mesopotamia) -- I think a lot of folks are making assumptions that Babylon would be science-focused if included in the next expansion but, given the importance of law to historical figures like Hammurabi and Civics to Civ 6, Babylon could be used as an excellent lever to revamp the civic and government system by focusing on Civics and governance rather than science. The governance system, in particular, could use expanding since, as mods like JFD's Rule with Faith show, a lot more can be done with it as a game system that promotes more interesting player choices than is currently possible in GS.

 

[Zaarin]

The Cree are a NATION; the Ojibwe would be a CREE TRIBE.

The Ojibwa are closely related to the Cree, but they are not Cree. That's like calling the Frisians English. NB I wouldn't want an Ojibwa civ or a Frisian civ.

The Cherokee Nation might be an interesting East-Coast oriented North American cultural group to introduce. They developed their own writing system and after contact with the Europeans, enacted some sweeping education programs.

They also committed cultural suicide, so there's that...

 

[Patine]

The Ojibwa are closely related to the Cree, but they are not Cree. That's like calling the Frisians English. NB I wouldn't want an Ojibwa civ or a Frisian civ.]

And that's further complicated by the fact that modern Cree, in the First Nations organization of Canada, have a whole of reservation sites, which Treaty recognition, their own Chief, Elders, Band Council, a few have their own police force (like Hobbema), their own bylaws, etc. and in legal lingo in Canada, are each a "Nation," and each have their representative on the Assembly of First Nations, and the same is true of the several Ojibwa Bands (I'm not sure how the Ojibwa of Northern Minnesota and Wisconsin fair, administratively, and in recognition). However, in the "old days," the Cree, and Ojibwa occupied such a large, sparsely-populated, geographic area that the bands and moieties probably mostly recognized each other by "kinship" of culture and language, but not an organized "nation," as we know it, with a leader, a government, and legal unity, and even the Iron Confederacy between many Cree (and Ojibwa, Salteaux, and other related) groups, in the early-to-mid-1800's, seemed to be a purely military alliance, and mostly formed in response to the aggressive land expansion of the Sioux "Council of Seven Fires."

 

[Zaarin]

I'm not sure how the Ojibwa of Northern Minnesota and Wisconsin fair, administratively, and in recognition

I believe they are federally recognized tribes, which means that they are dependent nations (i.e., they may determine their own domestic policies but are subject to the foreign policies of the United States). Wikipedia mentions they are located mostly in the US, where they are the fifth-largest Native American population, but doing a little digging it looks like their political tribal status is...complicated, with some communities having federal recognition and others not, and only as part of the umbrella identification of Anishinaabeg, which also includes several other tribes.

However, in the "old days," the Cree, and Ojibwa occupied such a large, sparsely-populated, geographic area that the bands and moieties probably mostly recognized each other by "kinship" of culture and language

As evidenced by the existence of the Oji-Cree--but that's also sufficient evidence that Ojibwa and Cree considered themselves distinct.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

The Cherokee Nation might be an interesting East-Coast oriented North American cultural group to introduce. They developed their own writing system and after contact with the Europeans, enacted some sweeping education programs.

I've noticed that city-states that turn into Civs are replaced by new city-states from the same continent apparently, Since that's been the case I think that a Cherokee town, like Tuskegee the hometown of Sequoyah, to replace Palenque would work out well instead of making it a full Civ.
Unless somebody else could think of a better scientific city-state from NA, that makes the most sense as a replacement if the Maya come.

 

[Zaarin]

I've noticed that city-states that turn into Civs are replaced by new city-states from the same continent apparently, Since that's been the case I think that a Cherokee town, like Tuskegee the hometown of Sequoyah, to replace Palenque would work out well instead of making it a full Civ.
Unless somebody else could think of a better scientific city-state from NA, that makes the most sense as a replacement if the Maya come.

It's a good idea, but I think there's a very long list of Mesoamerican civs and city-states they could select a new city-state from to replace Palenque, especially since it's unfortunately unlikely we'll get a third Mesoamerican civ. Tilantongo (Ñuu Tnoo-Huahi Andehui), Danipaguache, or Tula, for example.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

It's a good idea, but I think there's a very long list of Mesoamerican civs and city-states they could select a new city-state from to replace Palenque, especially since it's unfortunately unlikely we'll get a third Mesoamerican civ. Tilantongo (Ñuu Tnoo-Huahi Andehui), Danipaguache, or Tula, for example.

I would personally have a problem with 'Tula' because it is also the name of a large Russian industrial city south of Moscow that was the focus of the German offensive in that area during October - November 1941, about which I am currently doing research for a book. The mental disconnect for me would be egregious!

IF they don't include the Maya as a full Civ, my vote would be for Tikal - there is some fascinating archeological work being done in the Yucatan that may change a lot of our previous conceptions of the Maya and their predecessors . . .

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It's a good idea, but I think there's a very long list of Mesoamerican civs and city-states they could select a new city-state from to replace Palenque, especially since it's unfortunately unlikely we'll get a third Mesoamerican civ. Tilantongo (Ñuu Tnoo-Huahi Andehui), Danipaguache, or Tula, for example.

A Zapotec city could work well I suppose. The Maya apparently might have borrowed their written language from them or at least be the predecessor to all the other written languages in Mesoamerica.

I would personally have a problem with 'Tula' because it is also the name of a large Russian industrial city south of Moscow that was the focus of the German offensive in that area during October - November 1941, about which I am currently doing research for a book. The mental disconnect for me would be egregious!

Tula is already on the list of Russian cities, both in game and real life so no need to worry.

 

[BuchiTaton]

I would personally have a problem with 'Tula' because it is also the name of a large Russian industrial city south of Moscow that was the focus of the German offensive in that area during October - November 1941, about which I am currently doing research for a book. The mental disconnect for me would be egregious!

IF they don't include the Maya as a full Civ, my vote would be for Tikal - there is some fascinating archeological work being done in the Yucatan that may change a lot of our previous conceptions of the Maya and their predecessors . . .

The proper nahuatl name of Tula is Tollan. So is as easy as name it Tollan. This city is perfect being the realm of the civilizer king Ce Acatl Topiltzin.

 

[Patine]

The proper nahuatl name of Tula is Tollan. So is as easy as name it Tollan. This city is perfect being the realm of the civilizer king Ce Acatl Topiltzin.

And the capital of the Tolteca (Toltecs), an earlier civilization heavily admired and emulated by the later Mexica (Aztecs).

 

[Zaarin]

IF they don't include the Maya as a full Civ, my vote would be for Tikal - there is some fascinating archeological work being done in the Yucatan that may change a lot of our previous conceptions of the Maya and their predecessors . . .

If they don't include the Maya as a full civ, why are we replacing Palenque in the first place?

A Zapotec city could work well I suppose. The Maya apparently might have borrowed their written language from them or at least be the predecessor to all the other written languages in Mesoamerica.

There are a number of theories about the origin of writing in Mesoamerica, though I think the mainstream view at the moment is that writing originates with the Maya. Also the Zapotec postdate the Maya--are you thinking of the Toltec? (But yes, Zapotec would be another option for a city-state; my list was not meant to be exhaustive. )

 

[Patine]

If they don't include the Maya as a full civ, why are we replacing Palenque in the first place?


There are a number of theories about the origin of writing in Mesoamerica, though I think the mainstream view at the moment is that writing originates with the Maya. Also the Zapotec postdate the Maya--are you thinking of the Toltec? (But yes, Zapotec would be another option for a city-state; my list was not meant to be exhaustive. )

I think the Olmec are the earliest Mesoamerican civilization with the recognizable traits and features of that group of cultures and civilizations, chronologically.

 

[Zaarin]

I think the Olmec are the earliest Mesoamerican civilization with the recognizable traits and features of that group of cultures and civilizations, chronologically.

No, the Maya were contemporary with the Olmec.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

There are a number of theories about the origin of writing in Mesoamerica, though I think the mainstream view at the moment is that writing originates with the Maya. Also the Zapotec postdate the Maya--are you thinking of the Toltec? (But yes, Zapotec would be another option for a city-state; my list was not meant to be exhaustive. )

From what I saw the first writings, that we know, of the Zapotec were dated about 600 to 500 BC while the first Maya scripts were found to be written about 300 to 200 BC. Though this is all speculative and could be wrong and Mesoamerica civilizations are not my forte.