What Civ are you most surprised is missing?

[Von Falkenheyn]

It might be an interesting idea to have a poll on this. I'll list the civilizations which I'll miss on release and I'd like to see in future DLC or expansions.

• Persia: Hugely infuential civilization over hundreads of years. People tend to think of the ancient empire under Cyrus, Darius and Xerxes but Persia had been hugely influential under both the Sassanids and the Safavids. As has been mentioned before Persia lends itself to multiple iterrations and not just the usual leader being Cyrus and the unit being the immortals.
• Ottomans: Again, a huge empire spanning over an enormous area and exerting influence as the defenders of the faith over an even larger part of the globe. Of course Suleiman the Magnificent is the sultan over whose reign the empire reached its zenith but Mehmed the Conqueror and Murad II (Mehmed's father) are also potential candidates. As far as special units are concerned, we could see for example the Ottoman bombards, the classic Janissary units, the Sipahi cavalry or the Barbary corsairs.
• Dutch: As has been said above, a civilization which influenced world affairs by achieving immense leverage of its very limited resources. Superb inventors, painters, traders, navigators and sailors, the Dutch managed to overcome not just their enemies but also mother nature. As for leaders, William I of Orange and Johan de Witt are the obvious choices here. As far as special features are concerned, sea and marsh reclaiming could be a feature, as could be the dairy farm, the East India Company and the East Indiaman as a special unit.
• Khmers: A civilization which dominated South East Asia for quite a few centuries. Their influence was military, cultural and spiritual. As a special unit we could see the War Elephant which could have a ranged attack that can be used twice during combat (the Khmers mounted two crossbows on their elephants).
• Mali: Because really, who didn't enjoy playing with Mansa Musa? The Malinese empire could become a thelogical and economical powerhouse in the game
• Venice: This is a personal favorite which I'd like to see again but I'll live on if it doesn't reappear. Venice represents the epitome in shrewd leadership, they're the inventors of modern diplomacy, the stock exchange and of industrial complexes among others. If the Dutch managed to leverage their own meager resources, just think what Venice did out of a city built upon swampland and seawater.

 

[Ikael]

Persia, Mongolia and Turkey / Ottomans are the "bit missing 3" to me. Seriously, you are talking about some world-altering civs being omitted here here.

Also, Zulus and Native North Americans are far from being "core" civs, not mention that they had almost no historical impact or whatsoever.

 

[Manifold]

Civ6 England is obviously representative of the British Empire in it's design. The only "English" thing about it is the Sea Dog. Virtually everything else is quite British.

What is about the citylist and citynames? No matter...
in the Non Anglo-American world I guess most people would say the Mongolian Empire was larger. Basta!
I feel a bit like in the 7th grade class again

 

[GauntZero]

Persia, Mongolia and Turkey / Ottomans are the "bit missing 3" to me. Seriously, you are talking about some world-altering civs being omitted here here.

Also, Zulus and Native North Americans are far from being "core" civs, not mention that they had almost no historical impact or whatsoever.

I agree very much.

While I dont want to ignore the great cultures that a lot of different native american cultures had, their overall historical impact was comparable small to other civilizations like persia, the mongols or the ottomans.

That doesnt mean their cultures where worse or less interesting, but I for myself would first go with those civs that had a more "global" effect in history.

I might also add Byzantium to the list as they also had a big impact on large areas in europe and around the mediterran.

 

[Nixalo]

Definitely the Haudenosaunee or Mali.

Because Hiawatha's and Mansa Musa's agenda and leader ability would be just cray awesome.

 

[Abraxis]

Persia is definitely the obvious glaring omission.

I'm surprised not to see Carthage though. I would have thought maybe with these new personalities and the natural friends and rivalries they've no doubt very intentionally created, why not include Rome's greatest rival into the base game from the start. My only thought is maybe to capitalise on an early DLC. Another problem is if Carthage were designed well, it would likely be a fairly expansive civ, actually making Rome's current disposition naturally inclined to favour Carthage in most games. I wonder how and if they'll work around that? Have they even thought about it? They must have.

A unique harbour district, I have no doubt, is waiting just for them I'm sure.

 

[ales_]

Carthage is not a surprise: it was present in the Vanilla version of Civ II only.

 

[EvaDK]

A City State, be it Venice or another city. I'd love them to bring in a playable City State again and re-invent the modus operandi for that playstyle and strategy.

Btw is Russia in? Haven't seen a First Look video for Russia. That would be an odd one to leave out.

 

[Abraxis]

Carthage is not a surprise: it was present in the Vanilla version of Civ II only.

It doesn't surprise me because I think they aught to come before many others mentioned. Inca, Mongolia, Persia, Maya, ect... but specifically because I think it's such a missed opportunity to really highlight the new agenda and personality features on release with one of history's greatest rivalries.

Btw is Russia in? Haven't seen a First Look video for Russia. That would be an odd one to leave out.

Yes and we may know their abilities.

 

[thunderbird_14]

Also, Zulus and Native North Americans are far from being "core" civs, not mention that they had almost no historical impact or whatsoever.

Eurocentrism at its finest , anyway, I have to agree that they're planning ahead for the DLC's. What is the general consensus for the no. of civs in each DLC, though?

 

[qadams]

I would say the Inka, "possibly the largest empire in the world in the early 16th century."

 

[IgorS]

Carthage is not a surprise: it was present in the Vanilla version of Civ II only.

Let's also not forget Civ II had 21 civs in the vanilla, and had no EP/DLC civs.

 

[shyPiano]

Persia, The Ottomans, Mongolia, Babylon, one Native American civilization (Iroquois, Sioux, Navajo, ...), The Inca, one South East Asian civilization (Khmer, Siam/Sukhothai, Indonesia/Majapahit, Vietnam, ...) are all civilizations that one now expects in a Civilization game, and are definitively missing for the dismay of many.

Also, as a factor of having both Brazil and Kongo in, and the Age of Exploration theme going on with the UI, the lack of Portugal also stands out as a sore thumb.

Finally, maybe a second Sub-Saharan African civilization would be nice - I'm partial to Mali, but there other great choices as well.

 

[Ikael]

Eurocentrism at its finest , anyway, I have to agree that they're planning ahead for the DLC's. What is the general consensus for the no. of civs in each DLC, though?

More like americanocentrism at its finest. Few people outside the insular sub cultures of american minorities gives any importance about these particular civs, which catters specifically to Americans tastes and identities. Which is a valid criteria like any other, don't get me wrong, but I doubt that too many historians would argue that the Zulu or the native North Americans are on the same level of relevance to world history as say, the Incan Empire or Ethiopia.

 

[ExemplarVoss]

Most surprised: Persia.
Given the way the civilizations are currently set up, I'd gladly trade America and Brazil for Persia and Zulus.
I'd prefer not to have mere colonies taking the slots of long-lived civilizations.

 

[Zaarin]

That's not technically correct, unless you mean a 3 months later free DLC for those who didn't buy the day 1 editions?

The Aztecs are technically DLC, they're simply free DLC that pre-orders get day 1 and everyone else gets free later.

 

[Sonmi]

Most surprised: Persia.
Given the way the civilizations are currently set up, I'd gladly trade America and Brazil for Persia and Zulus.
I'd prefer not to have mere colonies taking the slots of long-lived civilizations.

The United States and Brazil are both entities older than the Zulus though.

 

[ToothedBomb]

Also, Zulus and Native North Americans are far from being "core" civs, not mention that they had almost no historical impact or whatsoever.

I'm starting to notice a pattern here.

 

[LefondesinPL]

I have many picks, but I think most surprising missing is Mayans. They are really important native tribe...

 

[Inhalaattori]

1. Persian Empire
2. Mongol Empire
3. Inca Empire

Im actually really happy that there are no NORTH-AMERICAN Native Civs or other historically meaningless Civs. But they need to include Inca Empire sooner than later.