My rationale is it seems devs like to put never-been-done-before civs in new Civ game. Like civ6 got Scythia and Australia. Philippines can be non-modern too.
What Civs and Leaders do you all predict will be in VII's base game?
- Thread starter Caesar of Bread
- Start date
- Status
My rationale is it seems devs like to put never-been-done-before civs in new Civ game. Like civ6 got Scythia and Australia. Philippines can be non-modern too.
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2021
- Messages
- 746
I'd like to see more ancient civilizations like Minoans, native group (for lack of a better word) like Mapuche.
The Normans or someone similar who once had an 'empire' which has faded into history.
The Normans or someone similar who once had an 'empire' which has faded into history.
Hellenism Salesman
Emperor
I had wanted to mention this. The islands' history goes way back.
(side-tangent on why we should include the Philippines)
Also to me they are much, much, much more interesting and flavorful than "English-speaking penal colony" and "English-speaking trade colony." The Philippines are instead a Latin-indigenous multi-ethnic-to-the-core archipelagic post-colonial Civ who were also capable of leading their own armed revolution led by cultured aristocrats.
The blend of cultures and religions as a result of and in spite of colonial powers make it worth including simply for how interesting it is. 4 out of the "5 big world religions" have had a presence in the islands throughout its history.
(returning back to how they could be portrayed)
...granted, the only way I know of portraying them is when they unified under their attempted revolution, which would put them as a post-colonial Civ.
If there's a way we can portray them under a single leader in the precolonial period, that'd be great! I just don't know of any and would prefer to avoid pulling a Greece and going "yes, this local leader ruled the entirety of a wide region of polities," especially when that area happens to be the Philippines as opposed to the culturally-homogeneous Greek colonies.
Naktis
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2017
- Messages
- 295
Well I'm late for the prediction train, but here we go:
For a base game:
1. America - Time for Jefferson to come.
2. Arabia - Saladin. Most famous.
3. China - King Wu of Zhou, Qin Shi Huang, Empress Lu Zhi or Confucius(both for religious approach) could be someone from famous Romance of 3 kingdoms. I personally think China has rich and big ancient history, and picking modern leaders for them is a waste and disrespect for that history.
4. Egypt - Nefertiti, Khufu, Ramses...the list go on. Even bigger history then China, plenty of Pharaoh to choose from, all options is valid. ofc Cleopatra is quite famous and agree that as a DLC she is possible especially depending on game mechanics and other leaders.
5. England - Queen Anne. We got Elisabeth and Victoria, time for someone else. Englands is all about collonialism and ships, tho older medieval history is also filled with famous leaders like, Richard the Lionheart as a DLC.
6. France - Napoleon. Skipping him was a mistake, and CIV6 choice for france leaders were..mediocre. Joan D'arc as DLC or someone also like England had medieval great leaders(prob coz of those wars with england) so Philip II good option as DLC too.
7. Germany - good old Bismarck. Or Wilhelm II the kaiser. Can't agree on earlier leaders because it wasn't full germany, it was just a states, and Holy Roman Empire which was not holy or roman or empire is whole another CIv. OFC there is one guy that is known for some very evil things, even german people we be against him, but I doubt he will ever be pick as leader for this(or future) Sid Meier games.
8. Greece - ... Some people here saying Greece should be as blob and one Leader, if that's the case, its only Alexander the Great, all others fall short, prob even whole history only few can compare to his, and skipping him would be insane.
That's why I think Greece should be repressented as states and regions, which they were most know for. Athens get Solon, Sparta - Leonidas, Macedon - Alexander. This is best.
9. India - Gandhi. I mean c'mon. For other games it could be other leader, but here..only Gandhi.
10. Japan - Hideyoshi Toyotomi. Unified Japan warring states. And Samurai that we love.
11. Rome - Hadrian. Needs someone new. But yeah Caeser either Julius or Augustus is more important. Also Sulla with Marius as dual leader possibilty.
12. Russia - I actually think we wont get them due too backlash 2k would receive from current war going. But if we do then...Catherine or Peter. Oh and for Stalin or Lenin if you want..it wasn't russian leaders it was Soviet union.
13. Spain - Isabella.
14. Sumer - Gilgamesh. We all loved GilgaBro. Maybe now he could be portrait a bit differently, but still important civ to keep in base game.
15. Some African kingdom, Civ 5 got songhai, civ 6 got Kongo..now maybe a Ghana.
16. Aztec - forgot about them, can't skip them.
its a 15 Civ list, Aztec I forgot, but I still think we won't get Russia so its 15. I think Russia we get in later expanssions or as post launch DLC so its safe mode if people want them...buy them.
Here are also some post launch DLC ideas:
Mayan - Lady Six Sky was good so let's keep her.
Carthage - Dido or Hanibal. Adding them differently in civ 6 was a fail method.
Mongols - Genghis. Possible as main game Civ.
Babylon - Hamurabi. Could be switched for Sumer.
Mitanni or Elam - one of fertile crescent Civs.
Etruscans - a big rivals for Rome and what if...
For a base game:
1. America - Time for Jefferson to come.
2. Arabia - Saladin. Most famous.
3. China - King Wu of Zhou, Qin Shi Huang, Empress Lu Zhi or Confucius(both for religious approach) could be someone from famous Romance of 3 kingdoms. I personally think China has rich and big ancient history, and picking modern leaders for them is a waste and disrespect for that history.
4. Egypt - Nefertiti, Khufu, Ramses...the list go on. Even bigger history then China, plenty of Pharaoh to choose from, all options is valid. ofc Cleopatra is quite famous and agree that as a DLC she is possible especially depending on game mechanics and other leaders.
5. England - Queen Anne. We got Elisabeth and Victoria, time for someone else. Englands is all about collonialism and ships, tho older medieval history is also filled with famous leaders like, Richard the Lionheart as a DLC.
6. France - Napoleon. Skipping him was a mistake, and CIV6 choice for france leaders were..mediocre. Joan D'arc as DLC or someone also like England had medieval great leaders(prob coz of those wars with england) so Philip II good option as DLC too.
7. Germany - good old Bismarck. Or Wilhelm II the kaiser. Can't agree on earlier leaders because it wasn't full germany, it was just a states, and Holy Roman Empire which was not holy or roman or empire is whole another CIv. OFC there is one guy that is known for some very evil things, even german people we be against him, but I doubt he will ever be pick as leader for this(or future) Sid Meier games.
8. Greece - ... Some people here saying Greece should be as blob and one Leader, if that's the case, its only Alexander the Great, all others fall short, prob even whole history only few can compare to his, and skipping him would be insane.
That's why I think Greece should be repressented as states and regions, which they were most know for. Athens get Solon, Sparta - Leonidas, Macedon - Alexander. This is best.
9. India - Gandhi. I mean c'mon. For other games it could be other leader, but here..only Gandhi.
10. Japan - Hideyoshi Toyotomi. Unified Japan warring states. And Samurai that we love.
11. Rome - Hadrian. Needs someone new. But yeah Caeser either Julius or Augustus is more important. Also Sulla with Marius as dual leader possibilty.
12. Russia - I actually think we wont get them due too backlash 2k would receive from current war going. But if we do then...Catherine or Peter. Oh and for Stalin or Lenin if you want..it wasn't russian leaders it was Soviet union.
13. Spain - Isabella.
14. Sumer - Gilgamesh. We all loved GilgaBro. Maybe now he could be portrait a bit differently, but still important civ to keep in base game.
15. Some African kingdom, Civ 5 got songhai, civ 6 got Kongo..now maybe a Ghana.
16. Aztec - forgot about them, can't skip them.
its a 15 Civ list, Aztec I forgot, but I still think we won't get Russia so its 15. I think Russia we get in later expanssions or as post launch DLC so its safe mode if people want them...buy them.
Here are also some post launch DLC ideas:
Mayan - Lady Six Sky was good so let's keep her.
Carthage - Dido or Hanibal. Adding them differently in civ 6 was a fail method.
Mongols - Genghis. Possible as main game Civ.
Babylon - Hamurabi. Could be switched for Sumer.
Mitanni or Elam - one of fertile crescent Civs.
Etruscans - a big rivals for Rome and what if...
Bonyduck Campersang
Odd lookin duck
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2022
- Messages
- 4,635
You don't think picking a modern leader would be disrespectful to their rich and extensive history?
I'd say even more disrespectful to India is the fact Gandhi in civ series has been entirely reduced to stupid meme joke, overshadowing his entire real life philosophy - and Firaxis can't do anything with that issue, it is self propelling at this point. I would retire Gandhi from civ series for like two iterations and then maybe reintroduce him in like 15 years, hoping by then he will be again seen as a man, not merely as a joke.
Gandhi also in a way became a tool of orientalism - he's the only Indian leader Westerners recognize, so he became part of stereotype package of India being "pacifist monk pushover civ of spirituality, elephants, overpopulation and poverty".
I would love if Lakshmibai were leader of India in civ7, being a physically strong female warrior aristocrat "ruling in businesslike manner" and fighting the British, so the complete opposite of previous stereotype.
Gandhi also in a way became a tool of orientalism - he's the only Indian leader Westerners recognize, so he became part of stereotype package of India being "pacifist monk pushover civ of spirituality, elephants, overpopulation and poverty".
I would love if Lakshmibai were leader of India in civ7, being a physically strong female warrior aristocrat "ruling in businesslike manner" and fighting the British, so the complete opposite of previous stereotype.
Bonyduck Campersang
Odd lookin duck
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2022
- Messages
- 4,635
If India returns as a single civ, I'd want also to see Tipu Sultan and his famous rocket artillery
Vahnstad
Emperor
If they kept the Civ 6 model for cartoonish civ 6 strong emphasized leaders, Urduja could be a good pick.
GeneralZIft
Professional
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2019
- Messages
- 907
I'm very tired of this concept that Gandhi is only a meme.
Just the fact that he has that quirk to him doesn't reduce him to only that.
Civ needs an AI character that is pacifistic and equally iconic to play off characters like Genghis and Alexander.
The game just feels right with him. And it's not offensive to have a modern leader. We have seen a lot of modern leaders for Civs.
Most of all, I'm not sure why we can't have both? Just like Civ6. We can have Gandhi and Chandragupta or anyone else, it really doesn't matter.
What I'd like to see is his playstyle done right. He gives off a peace, faith, population boom, vibe that other leaders aren't on the same line.
I just don't understand why we can't have both?
Just the fact that he has that quirk to him doesn't reduce him to only that.
Civ needs an AI character that is pacifistic and equally iconic to play off characters like Genghis and Alexander.
The game just feels right with him. And it's not offensive to have a modern leader. We have seen a lot of modern leaders for Civs.
Most of all, I'm not sure why we can't have both? Just like Civ6. We can have Gandhi and Chandragupta or anyone else, it really doesn't matter.
What I'd like to see is his playstyle done right. He gives off a peace, faith, population boom, vibe that other leaders aren't on the same line.
I just don't understand why we can't have both?
Go under any and I mean any Youtube or reddit Civ stuff involving him, and you'll quickly see that the comments can not shut up for five minutes about Gandhi being crazy murderous psychopath... They sometimed even to that under serious documentaries! Games didn't reduce him to that, players did, and now we can't escape that unless he retires for a while and idk redditors grow up (challenge level: impossible)
Does it? Because the problem with AI pacifist civs are inherently boring and weak in games like that. I'm not saying that all leader personalities should be warlike, peaceful AIs are fine, but India under Gandhi always goes all over the top for doormat passive personality which never does anything interesting.
There is also a question "can geopolitical leader afford to be extreme pacifist" and I'd say no at some point, it just becomes self-destructive. Gandhi didn't face this ethical dilemma because he has never ruled independent India. In civ series India being turbo pacifist ends exactly how I'd expect: India being very weak in AI hands.
I actually agree
It is more fun to have two new leaders than only one new leader, and India has gigantic wealth of leaders to use.
For me it is simply boring when we always have the same leader/civ combo which behave and play in the exact same way every time. Case in point: I also would like Zulu to be absent this time, if they really can't do some different stuff. We can get peace faith and food combo from tons of potential civs from all over the world, India does not need to always adhere to this stereotype.
- Joined
- Mar 5, 2017
- Messages
- 4,166
This is actually a compelling reason I didn’t really think about. A pacifist archetype is valuable to play against.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
I would love for a pacifist that makes it their mission to specifically eliminate warmongers from the game via alliances and coalitions, and doesn't attack otherwise.
America's leader would be a shoe-in for that role, actually.
America's leader would be a shoe-in for that role, actually.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
The only correct way to continue the meme, is by picking the actual nuclear Gandhi as India's leader:
Spoiler :
But yes, exit Gandhi's India, enter the AoE2-like split into multiple Indias. Mauryans, Mughals, Tamils, Let's GOOOO.
Hellenism Salesman
Emperor
All jokes aside, though, I could actually see it working for a couple specific examples.
Hellenism Salesman
Emperor
Reading this post I can imagine someone at Firaxis going “that’s perfect! We’ll have our cake and eat it too!”
And I don’t know how that makes me feel
I’d imagine recency and her actions during the Emergency realistically preclude her, though.
Aurelesk
King
- Joined
- Oct 26, 2017
- Messages
- 623
Due to the emerging market in Asia, I think we are going to have more representation there. Korea could be a staple, as well as Khmer and/or Siam. If there are Chinese players or someone very familiar with the education system there, what is learnt in Chinese History class?
Most European goes basically ancient middle east and Egypt, creation of Christianity, Greek and Roman, then slowly goes to the history of the region and its Medieval period, Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, Napoleonic War, WWI & WWII, with a detour with the colonial stuff. Roughly and non-exhaustive.
Yes, nothing is less controversial than space-time representation in the franchise!
But... what about time itself? Is there period of time that is less represented in the game? Obviously yes, everything between -4000 and -1500 is not very known. That is why we only have Gilgamesh and Hammurabi for that time-period. But what about other period? So I made a time-line, using a spreadsheet and MSpaint. I used a somesort of logarithmic scale so that we don't have Ancient era taking most of the timeline with nothing on it.
[spoler="I remade it, with color and size change!"]
[/spoiler]
I pick most leaders and put them by their date of death. Sure, this is not ideal but it is okayish. For some, like Kupe, Hiawatha or Dido, I picked the latest date I could find on Wikipedia. I tried to use the spelling on Wikipedia too. First because Boudica or William never have a consistent spelling. Then I stick with it, which put Smoke-Jaguar, Pacal and Lady Six Sky with with Mayan name. I also sorted them by the first game they appeared, the higher the bubble the later they came.
Sadly, I missed a few important leaders such as Ishtar, Hippolyta or Amatersu, or the well loved Scheherezade, the renown Shakala, and of course the very charismatic Nazca. Yes: Nazca is a leader.
I could have made some error by copying the value wrong, so do not hesitate to tell me if I did.
@FishFishFish You are right. I fixed it. I even miss 3 other: Lady Six Sky, Charlemagne and Ragnar Lodbrok. For some reason, I sorted them with the following chart (but they weren't showing since they were before the starting date).
Most European goes basically ancient middle east and Egypt, creation of Christianity, Greek and Roman, then slowly goes to the history of the region and its Medieval period, Enlightenment, Industrial Revolution, Napoleonic War, WWI & WWII, with a detour with the colonial stuff. Roughly and non-exhaustive.
Yes, nothing is less controversial than space-time representation in the franchise!
But... what about time itself? Is there period of time that is less represented in the game? Obviously yes, everything between -4000 and -1500 is not very known. That is why we only have Gilgamesh and Hammurabi for that time-period. But what about other period? So I made a time-line, using a spreadsheet and MSpaint. I used a somesort of logarithmic scale so that we don't have Ancient era taking most of the timeline with nothing on it.
Spoiler Screenshot and Copy/Paste on MSpaint, that's the real way! :
[spoler="I remade it, with color and size change!"]
[/spoiler]
I pick most leaders and put them by their date of death. Sure, this is not ideal but it is okayish. For some, like Kupe, Hiawatha or Dido, I picked the latest date I could find on Wikipedia. I tried to use the spelling on Wikipedia too. First because Boudica or William never have a consistent spelling. Then I stick with it, which put Smoke-Jaguar, Pacal and Lady Six Sky with with Mayan name. I also sorted them by the first game they appeared, the higher the bubble the later they came.
Sadly, I missed a few important leaders such as Ishtar, Hippolyta or Amatersu, or the well loved Scheherezade, the renown Shakala, and of course the very charismatic Nazca. Yes: Nazca is a leader.
I could have made some error by copying the value wrong, so do not hesitate to tell me if I did.
@FishFishFish You are right. I fixed it. I even miss 3 other: Lady Six Sky, Charlemagne and Ragnar Lodbrok. For some reason, I sorted them with the following chart (but they weren't showing since they were before the starting date).
Last edited:
FishFishFish
Warlord
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2021
- Messages
- 295
I believe you missed Harun al-Rashid, which fills the gap in the 800s.
Vahnstad
Emperor
Korea also one of the most popular (if not the most popular) out of all non-base civ 6 games, so actually good chance they might be in base game this time around.
Vahnstad
Emperor
I would love for a pacifist that makes it their mission to specifically eliminate warmongers from the game via alliances and coalitions, and doesn't attack otherwise.
America's leader would be a shoe-in for that role, actually.
Sure, a pacifist civilisation for a nation that has been at peace for only 17 years of its entire existence. Right...
And framing everyone else as warmongers is stupid, native Americans were not warmongers. Some crazy historical revisionism generally going there.
Lord Lakely
Idea Fountain
Sure, a pacifist civilisation for a nation that has been at peace for only 17 years of its entire existence. Right...
And framing everyone else as warmongers is stupid, native Americans were not warmongers. Some crazy historical revisionism generally going there.
Spoiler :
- Status
