"Lead boldly, Lully-wee-lin!"You're making me really want Wales now, for no other reason than I want to see Sean Bean try to pronounce Llywelyn.
[NFP] What Civilizations do you want to see next? And do you want Civilization 6 to be expanded more? 3
- Thread starter Duke William of Normandy
- Start date
Ryansinbela
King
Luckily, Hywel Dda leads
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
First, a note on Nomenclature: "Sioux" is short for Nadouessioux, which covers all the peoples. From at least the 14th century on (very approximate, since early records are largely oral, but their Winter Count annual 'calendars' have a lot of clues) they called themselves the Seven Council Fires (Ochethi Sakowin). Either Nadouessioux or Ochethi Sakowin would be good 'native' titles for the 'Sioux' as a whole.
BUT
The 'Sioux' everyone knows are actually primarily just one of the seven 'fires', the Lakota, who were the first to move west onto the prairie and take up the horse-based semi-nomadic lifestyle. Being also quite numerous, they ended up dominating the central North American area from modern Kansas all the way up into Canada. 'Lakota', then, is a lot easier to pronounce and remember, has some name recognition, and is a more accurate indicator of which 'Sioux' we are referring to.
In addition to all the usual warlike qualities of raiding their (European and native) neighbors, terrorizing farmers (both Native and European - ask any Mandan or Arikawa what they think of the 'Sioux' for a lesson in Native American profanity), the Lakota were also great traders. In fact, many of their 'wars' were responses to a group refusing to trade with them, and in this the Lakota behavior exactly matches that of the Central Asian pastoral groups - they needed and wanted stuff they could get from their settled neighbors, were entirely willing to trade for it, but were also willing to steal it if that was the only way to get it.
In addition, the Lakota/Sioux were shrewd diplomats, to use a Civ definition: they played the French off against the English before they moved west, played off the English against the Americans later, and then played their native neighbors against each other and the Americans once they were out on the plains. And their 'diplomacy' always included the threat or bluff of military action as a way to get what they wanted, or more of what they wanted from the other side. A lot like Great Britain, in fact, with mounted warriors in large groups playing the part of a visiting Royal Navy Man-of-War . . .
As for leaders, enough with the losing medicine chief Sitting Bull. The one Lakota leader that won his war was Red Cloud, still with some name recognition, but a master at military tactics and external and internal diplomacy: he kept various tribal groups together long enough to fight the US Army to a standstill, negotiated virtually everything he wanted out of the US government, and then retired peacefully as an unchallenged Winner - practically unique among Native leaders dealing with the United States!
Assuming we need another Horse Culture in the game - and I would argue that they have been enormously important historically and are still not very well modeled in any Civ game - the Lakota could be a legitimate Military - Commercial (land trade) - Diplomatic Civ with a single leader of Red Cloud as a Military/Diplomatic leader and a potential Alternate Leader in Sitting Bull as a Religious/Cultural leader.
Last edited:
Ryansinbela
King
Also Red Cloud was originally gonna be on Mount Rushmore along side Buffalo Bill, Lewis and Clark before being replaced by the presidents
To be fair all those qualities that you are describing could easily also fit a non horse raider civ like the Iroquois as well: trading, militaristic, and diplomacy with European powers.
Not that I particularly want another plains tribes, I consider the Cree a partial plains tribe, but if I would have to choose one I'd rather them do the Comanche. However if we were to get a "horse raider" civ we could do the Navajo, which were considered a settled "horse raider" civ. Though I wouldn't necessarily design them around that playstyle. I think the Mapuche was given that niche and I'm fine for them to keep it.
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
To be fair all those qualities that you are describing could easily also fit a non horse raider civ like the Iroquois as well: trading, militaristic, and diplomacy with European powers.
Not that I particularly want another plains tribes, I consider the Cree a partial plains tribe, but if I would have to choose one I'd rather them do the Comanche. However if we were to get a "horse raider" civ we could do the Navajo, which were considered a settled "horse raider" civ. Though I wouldn't necessarily design them around that playstyle. I think the Mapuche was given that niche and I'm fine for them to keep it.
The Comanche were more purely a horse-raider group than almost any other North American tribe. Except for having, potentially, a light mounted lancer instead of a horse archer as a UU, they really are something of a 'one-shot' Civ compared to the Lakota.
You are right, of course, that the Lakota and Haudenosenee characteristics are potentially very similar. Biggest difference (and I think it is one worth pursuing) would be the extremely efficient and different agricultural system of the "Confederacy" - the Three Sisters polycrop technique, and also their ability to use the forests in ways that the Europeans were quite unfamiliar with. I would simply love to see some 'alternate' agricultural systems introduced to the game instead of the "one plowed field fits all" approach Civ has been using.
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
Archer? I believe the Comanche used Rifles against the white man.
Duke William of Normandy
King of England & Unofficial Welcoming Committee
Both. Some Comanche had guns, some didn't.
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
Like anybody behind in Technology, they used whatever advanced weapons they could buy or steal from their opponents. However, the Comanche were notorious among the Native plains horsemen for using long lances instead of the composite bow as their preferred weapon. Since a buffalo-hide shield could stop any arrow (and pistol bullets) a Comanche charing at you with lance and shield was nothing that anyone wanted to face and gave them a distinct 'edge' in traditional plains warfare.
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
I don't know exactly about comanche, but all videos I watched and books I read about US-Native Americans they have guns. They aren't behind in Technology, horses and guns was well spread among native americans and don't make sense don't use it as unique feature in game. Civ 5 do it right when Shoshone have their raiders with modern guns
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
They traded for those weapons, Henri. They did not make them themselves, and they didn't have the technical knowledge and industrial capacity to make more of them.
Duke William of Normandy
King of England & Unofficial Welcoming Committee
As others have stated, the Comanche didn't make those guns themselves. They didn't have the means to create gunpowder weapons, but they did have the means to trade for them.
The only reason why they did have guns in Civ 5 is because when you unlock them in the Industrial Era that's already the era that when guns and gunpowder units were being widely used.
Theoretically you could unlock a Comanche raider in the Renaissance Era, and they could be using their more traditional weapons, not guns which were only widespread after contact with the Europeans.
I feel like this is very similar to the Malon Raider for the Mapuche already though.
Though if any Native American group should get a gunpowder unit let it be the Iroquois who dominated the other northeastern tribes with them by acquiring them from the Dutch and the English etc.
Henri Christophe
L'empereur
Mohawk warriors with gun powder is the best option to be include in Civ 6
I'd call them Kanienʼkehá꞉ka, which is what the Mohawk called themselves.
Duke William of Normandy
King of England & Unofficial Welcoming Committee
Would that fit in the UI?
BuchiTaton
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 8, 2019
- Messages
- 1,260
When there is access to new militar technology this is almost allways the first to espread to new peoples. We could see this not just on NA natives, there was also the Tlaxcaltecs (by alliance) or the Inca and Mapuche resistence (captured) spanish weapons and horses. The coastal kingdoms of Africa, the Japanese and others asiatic nations with the european arquebus, the Maori and the musket and steel weapons, etc. Even now you can find many tribal groups of Central Africa and Sudan with their modern asault rifles.
When a nation modernize this process start with their weapons, long before change their ways of production, social structure, goverment or ideologies.
When a nation modernize this process start with their weapons, long before change their ways of production, social structure, goverment or ideologies.
Is there a limit?
I just thought it would be more appropriate than going with the name Mohawk Warrior again.
Alternatively there is the name Rotiskenrakehte, which is what Humankind uses, which does mean "warrior" in the Mohawk language.
It seems like that takes up even more space.
Boris Gudenuf
Deity
In Lakota America (an absolutely required reference for anyone trying to do a Native American Civ, not just Sioux/Lakota) it points out that there were two 'Frontiers' in North America: the frontier between those natives who had acquired guns and powder and shot from the Europeans, and those that hadn't, and the frontier between those that had acquired horses (mostly from the Spanish) and those who had not. The major difference between the two 'acquired technologies' was that the native tribes could exploit horses completely - the Comanche and Nez Perce even learned to breed horses for specific traits they desired - whereas NO Native American group ever acquired the technology to manufacture even primitive muzzle-loading smooth-bore guns, let alone the breech-loading rifles that the Comanche and Lakota obtained by hook or crook in the mid-to-late 19th century.
And incidentally, one major reason for the dominance of the Lakota on the plains is that they moved out right onto the area where those two frontiers overlapped for the first time, so that they, and for a time they alone, had both horses and firearms while their native neighbors had only one of each or neither.
It is going to be a consistent problem for Civ unless there is a major redesign in Civ VII, that Civs that were historically behind the rest of the world in Technology have to be 'fudged' or they simply aren't competitive in-game. Zulus whose best unit was a Classical Era spear phalanx, for instance, or Native American Civs that had not reached the Bronze Age technologically and faced Renaissance, then Industrial Era firearms.
Unfortunately, there is a huge industrial infrastructure that has to be identified and built before you can even start to design and build the weapons and equipment for such a 'catch up' process. Starting from the late-Medieval equivalent it is possible to catch up to the Industrial Era in a short time (Meiji Japan), but that start already has a lot of metallurgical and other technology established. Catching up from two or more Eras behind is a monumental task and it's hard to see how to incorporate such a process into the game.
And incidentally, one major reason for the dominance of the Lakota on the plains is that they moved out right onto the area where those two frontiers overlapped for the first time, so that they, and for a time they alone, had both horses and firearms while their native neighbors had only one of each or neither.
It is going to be a consistent problem for Civ unless there is a major redesign in Civ VII, that Civs that were historically behind the rest of the world in Technology have to be 'fudged' or they simply aren't competitive in-game. Zulus whose best unit was a Classical Era spear phalanx, for instance, or Native American Civs that had not reached the Bronze Age technologically and faced Renaissance, then Industrial Era firearms.
Unfortunately, there is a huge industrial infrastructure that has to be identified and built before you can even start to design and build the weapons and equipment for such a 'catch up' process. Starting from the late-Medieval equivalent it is possible to catch up to the Industrial Era in a short time (Meiji Japan), but that start already has a lot of metallurgical and other technology established. Catching up from two or more Eras behind is a monumental task and it's hard to see how to incorporate such a process into the game.
Duke William of Normandy
King of England & Unofficial Welcoming Committee
Brittany is out! It is a Faith-driven Civilization that can benefit from being invaded, as well as not giving its enemies any benefits from doing so.
