What if you got to pick the Civ 6 roster?

[IgorS]

Or, better yet, the Kingdom of Judah, which was arguably more significant than the unified Kingdom of Israel and certainly more significant than the Northern Kingdom of Israel. Josiah and Hezekiah would both be good candidates for rulers.

Let's not forget that "Civilization" is not about states, but about nations as a whole, and the various states they had. Making a Judah civ would be like making an Athens civ instead of a Greek civ, too specific. Israel should represent the entire ancient history, from the times of Joshua (and maybe even Abraham) to the times of Bar-Kokhva.

 

[Zaarin]

Let's not forget that "Civilization" is not about states, but about nations as a whole, and the various states they had. Making a Judah civ would be like making an Athens civ instead of a Greek civ, too specific. Israel should represent the entire ancient history, from the times of Joshua (and maybe even Abraham) to the times of Bar-Kokhva.

I know that (though I'd argue that it represents the civilization from the time of Saul to the time of Bar-Kokhva: pre-monarchy Israel was a collection of barely unified tribes and city-states. Not that that's a reason to exclude them--viz., Greece--but I think it's more useful to think of the Hebrew civilization as simply covering the time of the monarchy). However, calling the civilization "Judah" accomplishes a few things:

• It avoids controversy, since this is the only conceivable reason we haven't seen such an important civilization yet. (Yes, it was small and frequently conquered--but it was also a major trade hub, a major producer of luxury goods, and the enormous impact of the Abrahamic tradition on the entire world cannot be overstated.)
• It emphasizes the most important aspect of the civilization (since the existence of the Northern Kingdom was brief, and the United Kingdom was briefer still).
• It emphasizes continuity--"Jew" and "Judaism" both coming from "Judah," despite the modern nation taking the name "Israel."

 

[IgorS]

I know that (though I'd argue that it represents the civilization from the time of Saul to the time of Bar-Kokhva: pre-monarchy Israel was a collection of barely unified tribes and city-states. Not that that's a reason to exclude them--viz., Greece--but I think it's more useful to think of the Hebrew civilization as simply covering the time of the monarchy). However, calling the civilization "Judah" accomplishes a few things:

• It avoids controversy, since this is the only conceivable reason we haven't seen such an important civilization yet. (Yes, it was small and frequently conquered--but it was also a major trade hub, a major producer of luxury goods, and the enormous impact of the Abrahamic tradition on the entire world cannot be overstated.)
• It emphasizes the most important aspect of the civilization (since the existence of the Northern Kingdom was brief, and the United Kingdom was briefer still).
• It emphasizes continuity--"Jew" and "Judaism" both coming from "Judah," despite the modern nation taking the name "Israel."

Well, you can do that, especially that Israel was called "Judea" during Roman times.
But the thing is that the adjective of the civ is Israelite, not Israeli, so this is also something that can remove the controversy, and emphasize the fact we are talking about Ancient Israel, not the modern one.

And one more thing about the names "Judah" and "Israel". You say that the people are called Jews and not Hebrews, but this is actually not true for all languages. In English the word is Jew, but in languages like Italian and Russian the Jewish people are actually called Hebrews, so the continuity thing will not work for every language.
Actually the modern Jews are called that because they are descendants of the people of Judah, and not of the other tribes.

 

[Ikael]

Already did one very similar tread to this one, only that the "rules" were 18 civs +1 preorder bonus, and that there were expansions.

That being said, my roster would be:

The usual suspects ("must have" civs):

Greece
Egypt
Rome
United States
Germany
France
England
China
Japan
India
Arabia
Russia

Their inclussion is kind of self-explanatory

The "I cannot believe that some entries of vainilla civ didn't include these":

Mongols: Largest continuous land empire on Earth. Nuff said
Persia: One of the most influential cultures of the ancient world, represents a very under-used geographical region as well
Spain: Because how the hell are you going to understand South America's and Europe's history without it, seriously

And finally, the "we need better representation of every relevant world culture":

Incan empire: Far more relevant than the Aztecs, and not a North-American location to boot
Ethiopia: One of the most long lasting, rich African cultures
Khmer: Mother of many modern S-E Asian cultures, and the pinnacle of human civilization during its existance (largest city in the world, largest urbanized terrain, religious syncretism, cultural and scientific advances...)

Pre-order bonus: Be the first to civ, and get the first civ who ever civved! (Sumeria)

 

[Zaarin]

Actually the modern Jews are called that because they are descendants of the people of Judah, and not of the other tribes.

Judah + Benjamin. The other tribes got scattered across the Near East by the Assyrians, whereas Judah/Benjamin were exiled wholesale to Babylon (before being allowed to return and even restore the monarchy under Persia).

 

[IgorS]

Judah + Benjamin. The other tribes got scattered across the Near East by the Assyrians, whereas Judah/Benjamin were exiled wholesale to Babylon (before being allowed to return and even restore the monarchy under Persia).

Yeah, Benjamin too, but when you say Judah, you kind of have to mean Judah and Benjamin.

 

[BornInTheLoo]

Probably gave this too much thought, but it was great fun!

Greatest omission are probably the caliphate (Arabs or the Ottomans). They were cut in the last round in a three-way decision, because I wanted to cater to the Australian market and am a chauvinist pig who wants to include the Netherlands.
Still quite Eurocentric and the gender (in)balance could probably be improved.

1. America – Leader: George Washington

Spoiler :

Age: Early Modern
Region: Americas
Market: USA #1
Focus: Late game expansion

2. Blackfoot Confederacy (or Niitsitapi) - Leader: Crowfoot;

Spoiler :

Age: Late Modern: 1800 AD-present
Region: Americas;
Market: Canada #3;
Focus: diplomacy, bonus towards settlers

3. Britain - Leader: Victoria

Spoiler :

Age: Late Modern: 1800 AD-present
Region: Europe
Market: The UK #2
Focus: Domination, Bonus towards occupying cities.

4. China - Leader: Wu Zetian

Spoiler :

Age: Postclassical: 476-1453 AD
Region: Asia
Market: China #8
Focus: Faith, culture, science.

5. Egypt - Leader: Hatshepsut

Spoiler :

Age: before 476 AD
Region: Middle East
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Early Exploring, Wonder building

6. France - Leader: Louis XIV

Spoiler :

Age: Early Modern: 1453-1800 AD
Region: Europe
Market: France #6
Focus: Culture, bonus to the capital.

7. Greece - Leader: Aristides

Spoiler :

Age: before 476 AD
Region: Europe
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Early warfare, diplomacy

8. Inca - Leader: Wiraqucha

Spoiler :

Age: Postclassical: 476-1453 AD
Region: Americas
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Early Warmonger, Mountains/Hills, Roads

9. India – Leader: Ashoka

Spoiler :

Age: before 476 AD
Region: Asia
Market: Every Civ Fanatic (Except Gandhi fan boys)
Focus: Early empire building, faith.

10. Japan - Leader: Meiji the Great

Spoiler :

Age: Late Modern: 1800 AD-present
Region: Asia
Market: Japan #13
Focus: Industrialisation, modern warfare.

11. Mali - Leader: Mansa Musa

Spoiler :

Age: Postclassical: 476-1453 AD
Region: Sub-saharan Africa
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Gold/trade, luxury resources and faith

12. Mongols – Genghis Khan

Spoiler :

Age: Postclassical: 476-1453 AD
Region: Asia
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: WAR

13. The Netherlands - Leader: Frederick Hendrick of Nassau

Spoiler :

Age: Early Modern: 1453-1800 AD
Region: Europe
Market: The Netherlands #14
Focus: Trade/piracy, religious tolerance Besieging cities.

14. Noongar - Leader: Yagan

Spoiler :

Age: Late Modern: 1800 AD-present
Region: Pacific
Market: Australia #7
Focus: Faith and culture, natural wonders, extra yields from desert.

15. Persia - Leader: Khosrow I a.k.a. Anushiruwan

Spoiler :

Age: Postclassical: 476-1453 AD
Region: Middle East
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Faith, trade routes

16. Rome - Leader: Hadrian

Spoiler :

Age: before 476 AD
Region: Europe
Market: Every Civ Fanatic
Focus: Wonder building, wide play, border fortifications

17. Russia - Leader: Catherine II of Russia

Spoiler :

Age: Early Modern: 1453-1800 AD
Region: Europe
Market: Russia #4
Focus: Wide play, culture.

18. Spain - Leader: Isabel and Ferdinand

Spoiler :

Age: Early Modern: 1453-1800 AD
Region: Europe
Market: Spain #18
Focus: Faith wars, midgame exploration

Deluxe DLCs:
A. Prussia – Frederick the Great (+ 7-years War Scenario) – market: #5 Germany
B. Aztecs
C. Map pack
D. Other irrelevant DLC

Break down:
The raging Eurocentrism
Africa: 1
Americas: 3
Asia: 4
Middle-East: 2
Europe: 7
Pacific: 1

Age of the leader
Classic Age: 4
Postclassical: 5
Early Modern: 4
Late Modern: 5

Gender:
Female leaders: 3,5
Male leaders: 14,5

Big Civ markets catered for:

Market: USA #1
Market: The UK #2
Market: Canada #3;
Market: Germany #5 (DLC)
Market: France #6
Market: Australia #7
Market: China #8
Market: Japan #13
Market: The Netherlands #14
Market: Spain #18

 

[RebelScum88]

Europe-
Rome- Constantine (A)
Greece- Pericles(A)(very glad they picked him over Alexander again)
England- Henry II(PC)
France- Napoleon III(LM)(I actually really like that Catherine is the French leader, but I've always thought Louis-Napoleon never got enough love).
Russia- Catherine II the Great(EM)

N. America-
USA: Theodore Roosevelt(LM)
Aztecs- Moctezuma I(EM)

S. America
Inca/Quechua: Pachacuti(EM)

ME/N. Africa
Egypt- Baibars Bahri(PC)
Ottomans- Mehmed II(EM)
Persia- Cyrus the Great(A)(But i like Khusrow being included in so many lists)

S. Africa:
Mali- Musa I (PC)
Ethiopia- Haile Selassie(LM)

Asia:
China- Kangxi Emperor(EM)
India- Chandragupta Maurya(A)
Japan- Tokugawa Ieyasu(EM)
Scythia- Tomyris(A)
Mongolia: Khubilai(PC)(i guess hes kind of more a China ruler, but he certainly considered himself Mongol ruler, and I thought the Mongols should have different rulers than just Chinggis, however deserving he is)

Unfortunately I could have done better with gender balance, I’m sure you could find interesting female leaders for most of these civs, even if they’re not explicitly political ones. I also wanted to emphasise a few “pet” leaders that I felt deserved a little more attention than they normally get, which is one thing I like about what they’ve been doing in V and VI

 

[Staler87]

Americas:
USA - Franklin Roosevelt
Mayan - Pacal I
Inca - Huayna Capac

Pacific:
Japan - Meiji Tennō

Asia:
China - Qin Shihuang
Muhgal Empire - Babur
Mongol Empire - Ghengis Khan
USSR - Stalin

Middle East:
Persia - Cyrus
Ottoman Empire - Suleiman I
Egypt - Ramses II
Arabia - Saladin

Europe:
England - Elizabeth I
France - Louis XIV
Germany - Bismarck
Rome - Augustus Ceaser
Portugal - Henry the Navigator
Greece - Alexander the Great

Sub-Saharan Africa:
Mali - Mansa-Musa

I just made this list trying to find the leader I found the most capable and realized my gender balance was terrible, but oh well that wasn't one of the conditions. At least I got all the regions and don't have too many European civs; I did really wanted to fit the Dutch and Spain in but couldn't find room.

 

[Lohrenswald]

I would still have Norway best country but instead of Hardråde I'd have eternal king Olav the holy

 

[cjm81499]

This my list, I spent a while on it, and I think I would like this. What do you think?

Americas:
United States: Thomas Jefferson
Gran Columbia: Simon Bolivar
Aztecs: Montezuma I
Lakota: Sitting Bull

Europe:
England: Richard the Lionhearted
France: Joan of Arc
Prussia: Fredrick the Great
Russia: Ivan the Terrible
Rome: Hadrian

Asia:
China: King Wu
Mongolia: Ghengis Khan
Japan: Tokugawa Ieyasu
India: Ashoka

Middle East:
Arabia: Saladin
Babylon: Hammurabi

Africa:
Mali Empire: Mansa Musa I
Ethiopia: Menelik II
Ghana: Yaa Asantewaa

 

[RebelScum88]

This my list, I spent a while on it, and I think I would like this. What do you think?

Americas:
United States: Thomas Jefferson
Gran Columbia: Simon Bolivar
Aztecs: Montezuma I
Lakota: Sitting Bull

Europe:
England: Richard the Lionhearted
France: Joan of Arc
Prussia: Fredrick the Great
Russia: Ivan the Terrible
Rome: Hadrian

Asia:
China: King Wu
Mongolia: Ghengis Khan
Japan: Tokugawa Ieyasu
India: Ashoka

Middle East:
Arabia: Saladin
Babylon: Hammurabi

Africa:
Mali Empire: Mansa Musa I
Ethiopia: Menelik II
Ghana: Yaa Asantewaa

I was on the fence about adding Bolivar to my list(nit picking: its spelled Gran Colombia ) but I feel like you could have a special dlc pack for post colonial nations like Brazil, Chile, etc. Also it being a rather temporary political union held together by Bolivar kind of disqualifies it as a civ. But it would still be cool to have. Basically, I feel like having the Ottomans and Persia before Gran Colombia or Brazil is more important. I personally feel like Saladin makes more sense as an Egyptian leader, since that was his original power base, but its not a huge deal.

 

[cjm81499]

Well I was trying to space it out, geographically, and both Persia and Ottoman inclusion would have too be 2 taken away from somewhere else, and if Saladin for Arabs is good enough for Firaxis it is good enough for me, even if it may be innacurate

I guess I would maybe take away Ghana and Lakota for Ottoman/Persian.

Persian leader would probably be Cyrus the Great, and Ottoman would probably be Osman I. Let's consider this an alternate list

But I will keep Simon because I feel like he can kind of represent multiple SA factions at a time.

 

[Zaarin]

This my list, I spent a while on it, and I think I would like this. What do you think?

Americas:
United States: Thomas Jefferson
Gran Columbia: Simon Bolivar
Aztecs: Montezuma I
Lakota: Sitting Bull

Europe:
England: Richard the Lionhearted
France: Joan of Arc
Prussia: Fredrick the Great
Russia: Ivan the Terrible
Rome: Hadrian

Asia:
China: King Wu
Mongolia: Ghengis Khan
Japan: Tokugawa Ieyasu
India: Ashoka

Middle East:
Arabia: Saladin
Babylon: Hammurabi

Africa:
Mali Empire: Mansa Musa I
Ethiopia: Menelik II
Ghana: Yaa Asantewaa

A few thoughts:

1. Why the Sioux? They're so overrepresented in America media compared to other tribes. That's why you see non-Sioux wearing warbonnets and bonepipe armor in movies. Also, as far as significance goes, the Sioux are mainly significant for defying the US for about fifty years; they weren't even the dominant tribe on the Plains, originating in the Great Lakes before the Iroquois drove them out. For the sake of both variety and significance, the Sioux are the only tribe I do not want to see in Civ6. :/
2. Richard the Lionhearted is certainly a big personality (and I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see him as DLC), but he wasn't exactly a good king. He probably could have been, but he spent all but a few months of his reign on Crusade. He'd actually make a much better great general, come to think of it.
3. Hammurabi isn't a bad choice, but he'd be difficult to peg on Civ6's personality-focused leader system. I suspect that when (if?) we get Babylon, we'll either see Nebuchadnezzar II again (because who doesn't love crazy?) or someone like Nabonassar. I suppose while Hammurabi might be lacking in personality, though, his agenda wouldn't be too difficult: he likes people with more policy slots. That he gets a bonus economic slot goes without saying.

I personally feel like Saladin makes more sense as an Egyptian leader, since that was his original power base, but its not a huge deal.

Saladin leading Egypt makes as much sense as Queen Victoria leading the Gauls. :/

 

[Civciv5]

This would be my list:

North America (1)
-United States - Abraham Lincoln
South America (1)
-The Inca - Pachacuti

Europe (6)
England - Henry VIII
France - François Ier
Germany - Frederick II
Rome - Trajanus
Greece - Pericles
Russia - Peter I

Africa (2)
Egypt - Hatshepsut
Kongo - Ana Nzinga

Middle East (3)
Arabia - Al-Khayzuran
Sumeria - Kug-Bau
Persia - Shapur II

Rest of Asia (5)
India - Ashoka
Cambodia - Suryavarman II
China - Yongle and Wu Zetian (instead of Greece having two leaders)
Japan - Meiji
Tibet - Khri ma lod

Pre-order bonus: Still the Aztecs

Female leaders: 6/19 = ± 1/3 (quite good I think)

First DLCS:
-Mongolia - Toregene Khatun
-Spain - Felipe II
-Ottomans/Turkish - Mehmed II
-Indonesia - Tribhuwana
-Soshone - Sacajawea
-Georgia - Tamar

 

[Homusubi]

I read through these, not just looking for inspiration for this list, but just to see which leaders people want for Japan. I'm rather baffled by the popularity of Meiji - even if you want a Restoration-era leader (I wouldn't, but I guess that's arguable), Meiji himself didn't play much of a role. Why not Ito Hirobumi?

Anyway: here's my choices. I don't know any leaders for some of them. I'm biasing the other leader choices towards leaders that haven't been in Civ yet (but some, obviously, have).

Americas:
Maya - Pakal
USA - Ben Franklin
Inca

Middle East:
Egypt - Hatshepsut
Arabia
Sumer

Europe:
Rome - there are so many, I can't decide
Britain - William Gladstone
Austria - Charles V (I'm calling him Austrian rather than Spanish)
Sweden - Gustav Vasa
Russia
Spain

Asia:

Japan - Tokugawa Iemitsu
China - the founder of the Ming dynasty (forgotten his name)
Vijayanagar
Thailand/Ayutthaya
Mongolia

Sub-Sahara:
Kilwa

Yes, I missed quite a few stalwarts.

 

[Morningcalm]

Will pick leaders based on the big personality theme of Civ VI, and cut many European civs. Bolded leaders are those replacing those currently in Civ VI.

Africa:
Egypt-- Hatshepsut (economic and cultural leader)
Kongo: Mvemba a Nzinga or Afonso I (religion-focused leader with economic and military bonuses)
Mali -- Mansa Musa (economic and religion-focused leader with some science bonuses)

Americas:
USA -- Teddy Roosevelt (Rough Rider environmentalist and trustbuster with a strong foreign policy)
Aztecs -- Montezuma I (amenities focused leader with military and religious bonuses)
Inca -- Pachacuti (defensive and population-focused Earth-Shaker)

Asia:
China -- Qin Shi Huangdi (wonder and conquest-focused leader)
Japan -- Hojo Tokimune (religion and defensive leader)
India -- Ashoka (past conqueror, now peaceful religious leader)
Mongols -- Genghis Khan (military and spy-focused leader)

Europe:
Britain/England -- Queen Elizabeth (navy, culture and spy-focused leader)
France -- Cardinal Richelieu (culture and spy-focused leader)
Germany -- Frederick Barbarossa (crusading warrior who dislikes city-states)
Greece -- Pericles (culture, city-state and navy-focused leader)
Rome -- Trajan (conquering leader with extensive public building)
Russia -- Catherine the Great (science and cultural leader with strong military)

Middle East:
Arabia -- Saladin (religion and war-focused civ)
Persia -- Cyrus the Great (civics and war-focused civ with high happiness)

DLC will include Iroquois/Shoshone, the Mongols, Spain, Vikings, etc.

Expansions would include the usual suspects (Mayans, Koreans, Ottomans, Sumeria, Dutch, Portugal) as well as some interesting new civs like Gran Colombia, Judah, the Majapahit/Indonesia.

 

[cjm81499]

A few thoughts:

1. Why the Sioux? They're so overrepresented in America media compared to other tribes. That's why you see non-Sioux wearing warbonnets and bonepipe armor in movies. Also, as far as significance goes, the Sioux are mainly significant for defying the US for about fifty years; they weren't even the dominant tribe on the Plains, originating in the Great Lakes before the Iroquois drove them out. For the sake of both variety and significance, the Sioux are the only tribe I do not want to see in Civ6. :/
2. Richard the Lionhearted is certainly a big personality (and I honestly wouldn't be surprised to see him as DLC), but he wasn't exactly a good king. He probably could have been, but he spent all but a few months of his reign on Crusade. He'd actually make a much better great general, come to think of it.
3. Hammurabi isn't a bad choice, but he'd be difficult to peg on Civ6's personality-focused leader system. I suspect that when (if?) we get Babylon, we'll either see Nebuchadnezzar II again (because who doesn't love crazy?) or someone like Nabonassar. I suppose while Hammurabi might be lacking in personality, though, his agenda wouldn't be too difficult: he likes people with more policy slots. That he gets a bonus economic slot goes without saying.

Saladin leading Egypt makes as much sense as Queen Victoria leading the Gauls. :/

1. I originally had the Cherokee led by Dragging Canoe, but I feared he was too obscure. Think it would be better than Lakota?

2. I reckon they didn't really have to have been the greatest kings, just good representatives of their nations, and I think he would represent them well. If I did pick another I would probably go with Edward I, the good ol' Hammer of the Scots think he might be better?

3. I would like Nebuchadnezzar II again, I could see that. I looked up Nabonassar, and he would probably be good as well.

 

[phryxolydian]

2. Mexico-Zapata

Ha! Not bad, man. Very unlikely they'll ever include Mexico as a civ with the Aztecs and the Mayans being almost mandatory picks, though.

 

[Zaarin]

1. I originally had the Cherokee led by Dragging Canoe, but I feared he was too obscure. Think it would be better than Lakota?

2. I reckon they didn't really have to have been the greatest kings, just good representatives of their nations, and I think he would represent them well. If I did pick another I would probably go with Edward I, the good ol' Hammer of the Scots think he might be better?

3. I would like Nebuchadnezzar II again, I could see that. I looked up Nabonassar, and he would probably be good as well.

1. I think a mix of obscure and familiar is a good thing. Many people may have never heard of Dragging Canoe, but they'd be familiar with the Cherokee. The Cherokee and Creek would both be great options for representing the Southeast.
2. Edward I Longshanks is one of my personal hopes for future leaders of England.