What Native American Civs would you like to see the most in Civ VII?

[Eagle Pursuit]

Texas is big enough that it reaches multiple regions, the Southeast, the Gulf Coast, the Great Plains, the Southwest, and the Rio Grande regions.

 

[Zaarin]

I might be biased but I, and a lot of people from Texas, don't include Texas as part of the Southwest at all, and that's coming from someone who has also lived in Arizona. Texas is it's own thing.

Texas, unsurprisingly, overlaps with several biomes and culture regions.

 

[BuchiTaton]

For me Chimor is a badly disregarded civ, a true urban, stratified, centralized, imperialistic and monument builder nation that represent the long history of cultures from the arid Central Andine coast, literally the historical representative of the oldest civilization of whole Americas.

Purepecha (Tarascans) are another great option from Mesoamerica, the true rivals of the Aztecs, with significative use of metal tools/weapons and their religion and language is unrelated to others cultures from the region.

From USA Choctaw looks like a great option to cover both the ignored Mississippian cultures and at the same time one of the native nations who was adapting the best to a fast changing world. Something that for me fit better for the general CIV model than use some nomadic introvert culture and force it as an urban-empire for no reason.

 

[Zaarin]

From USA Choctaw looks like a great option to cover both the ignored Mississippian cultures and at the same time one of the native nations who was adapting the best to a fast changing world. Something that for me fit better for the general CIV model than use some nomadic introvert culture and force it as an urban-empire for no reason.

Worth noting that the Choctaw were also very interested in creating what you might call a hybrid Native-European culture in which they preserved many of their traditions but also adopted Anglo-American education and technology, and they were actively seeking a closer relationship with the United States. Had Anglo-American been less--Well, let's be blunt about it: had Anglo-Americans been less racist, it's very conceivable that both the Choctaw and the Iroquois could have carved out their own states in the Union--in a way that it's unlikely the Chickasaw, Cherokee, or Creek would have, for instance.

 

[BuchiTaton]

Worth noting that the Choctaw were also very interested in creating what you might call a hybrid Native-European culture in which they preserved many of their traditions but also adopted Anglo-American education and technology, and they were actively seeking a closer relationship with the United States. Had Anglo-American been less--Well, let's be blunt about it: had Anglo-Americans been less racist, it's very conceivable that both the Choctaw and the Iroquois could have carved out their own states in the Union--in a way that it's unlikely the Chickasaw, Cherokee, or Creek would have, for instance.

Agree. This is why I think they fit the best for CIV model, they were more on the think of "we need to play the same game to thrive" instead of just be "let me alone go away". I understand and respect the real historical peoples that did not wanted to change their traditional culture, but that not make them a logical option for the game when they will be played mostly as what they did not want to be.

 

[Phrozen]

The problem with the Moche and Chimu is that we have no existing record other than the archaeological. No leader names, place names, language, written language, first hand accounts or anything but artifacts.

 

[BuchiTaton]

The problem with the Moche and Chimu is that we have no existing record other than the archaeological. No leader names, place names, language, written language, first hand accounts or anything but artifacts.

We know about Chimu kings like Minchancaman, Ñancempinco, Guacricur and Tacaynamo, also the native name of the cities from 14th to 16th century.
The Muchik language is not just attested but also being revitalized with a significative program.

I mean they even have material for their in-game musical theme "Tonada del Chimo"

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Voted Haida, Comanche, Powhatan, but not easily: would also love to see Haudenosene, Choctaw, Nez Perce, Lakotah, Tlingit . . .

Haida because they also used gyaa aangh, or kinship/crest poles - and let's not limit those to the heraldry poles used in or in front of the clan houses, they were also boundary markers, funerary commemoratives, and, my favorite, "shame poles' to harass an enemy - think what fun we could have with that kind of UI! They were also not only sea raiders (and their dug-out Head Canoes were works of art, also incorporating Heraldry) but great sea traders ranging all the way down to California and up to Alaska. Could therefore combine the arresting visual arts of the PNW with trade, military, or exploration Uniques.

Comanche because they were The great horse nation of North America, far more adept at breeding and keeping horses than any other tribe except the Nez Perce, their only equals at it. They, and their Kiowa neighbors, were also unique in that they were maize farmers along the river bottoms of north and west Texas until they got horses, and then essentially abandoned agriculture and took up a nomadic Bison-hunting existance - Civ might have trouble incorporating that 'reverse progression' but if Civ VII could manage it, it would be a really unique attribute for a Civ.

Powhatan not only for @Zaarin's arguments, but also for a brand-new book: A Brave and Cunning Prince, by James Horn, a biography of Opechancanough and a detailed account of the Powhatan Confederation and its relations with the English. Horn is President of the Jamestown Rediscovery organization, had access to a mass of references from England, Spain, Austria, and Virginia including interviews with modern Pamunky Native Americans - his set of notes and references alone would be enough to construct as detailed a version of the Powhatan as we could hope for in Civ VII.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Texas, unsurprisingly, overlaps with several biomes and culture regions.

Including Hell, according to Phil Sheridan . . .
After he was stationed at Fort Bliss, down by El Paso (where even the lizards carry parasols to avoid sunstroke), in the 1850s Sheridan supposedly said that:

"If he owned both Texas and Hell, he'd rent out Texas and live in Hell."

My father, who was born and raised in East Texas, was in complete agreement with Phil when it came to West Texas . . .

 

[Zaarin]

Including Hell, according to Phil Sheridan . . .
After he was stationed at Fort Bliss, down by El Paso (where even the lizards carry parasols to avoid sunstroke), in the 1850s Sheridan supposedly said that:

"If he owned both Texas and Hell, he'd rent out Texas and live in Hell."

My father, who was born and raised in East Texas, was in complete agreement with Phil when it came to West Texas . . .

Applies with equal validity to Florida.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

My father, who was born and raised in East Texas, was in complete agreement with Phil when it came to West Texas . . .

I've never lived in West Texas, but I'm sure it's similar to Arizona, where I've also lived.

Applies with equal validity to Florida.

Living in Southeast Texas most of my life it's funny whenever I've visit Orlando/Central Florida, it's surprisingly sometimes even less hot and humid than it is back at my home. Honestly it was the same whenever I went to Honduras about two years ago in the winter. Being in central Honduras up in the mountains it was way more humid back at home when I checked the weather.

This is probably also why I never consider Texas as a truly southwestern state, considering I live about 30 miles from the Louisiana border and my area has more in common with the South/Cajun culture of Louisiana than almost any other part of Texas.

I hate the cold weather so I've always been fine with Arizona, Texas, or Florida weather. Even Arkansas and Oklahoma are too far north for me to ever consider living permanently. I've visited family in Missouri during November and yeah I was miserable.

 

[Phrozen]

Comanche because they were The great horse nation of North America, far more adept at breeding and keeping horses than any other tribe except the Nez Perce, their only equals at it. They, and their Kiowa neighbors, were also unique in that they were maize farmers along the river bottoms of north and west Texas until they got horses, and then essentially abandoned agriculture and took up a nomadic Bison-hunting existance - Civ might have trouble incorporating that 'reverse progression' but if Civ VII could manage it, it would be a really unique attribute for a Civ.

and conquering or driving off the other tribes in the area like the Apache, almost driving them to extinction. The Comanche were extremely war like.

 

[Zaarin]

Living in Southeast Texas most of my life it's funny whenever I've visit Orlando/Central Florida, it's surprisingly sometimes even less hot and humid than it is back at my home. Honestly it was the same whenever I went to Honduras about two years ago in the winter. Being in central Honduras up in the mountains it was way more humid back at home when I checked the weather.

This is probably also why I never consider Texas as a truly southwestern state, considering I live about 30 miles from the Louisiana border and my area has more in common with the South/Cajun culture of Louisiana than almost any other part of Texas.

I hate the cold weather so I've always been fine with Arizona, Texas, or Florida weather. Even Arkansas and Oklahoma are too far north for me to ever consider living permanently. I've visited family in Missouri during November and yeah I was miserable.

I have a friend like that--she says South Florida isn't warm enough for her. I like the cold (within moderation), though, and hate the heat so I'll be moving out of Florida at the first opportunity I get. I've always thought the climate of the Faroes, with an average temperature range of 40-60℉, sounds perfect--not that I want to live in a Scandinavian country.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I've always thought the climate of the Faroes, with an average temperature range of 40-60℉, sounds perfect--not that I want to live in a Scandinavian country.

I hate the temperature going below 60, so yeah I'd definitely pass on that.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

I only went to west Texas once. It happened to be on fire at the time. It seemed appropriate.

 

[Evie]

Wait, since when did the Comanche originate in the Southwest?

Most every source I've ever seen place their origin in the northern US rockies (Wyoming-Idaho-Montana area) and their foothills, near the (related) Shoshone, with migrations southward onto the plains in the 1700s after acquiring horses.

Texas might be southwest or not, but Wyoming, Idaho and Montana are very much not so.

 

[Zaarin]

Wait, since when did the Comanche originate in the Southwest?

Most every source I've ever seen place their origin in the northern US rockies (Wyoming-Idaho-Montana area) and their foothills, near the (related) Shoshone, with migrations southward onto the plains in the 1700s after acquiring horses.

Texas might be southwest or not, but Wyoming, Idaho and Montana are very much not so.

Yes. For my part at least, the discussion is whether to consider Comancheria the Southwest or the Southern Plains; their point of origin was certainly further north.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Wait, since when did the Comanche originate in the Southwest?

Most every source I've ever seen place their origin in the northern US rockies (Wyoming-Idaho-Montana area) and their foothills, near the (related) Shoshone, with migrations southward onto the plains in the 1700s after acquiring horses.

Texas might be southwest or not, but Wyoming, Idaho and Montana are very much not so.

I don't think they were properly called the Comanche until they expanded into Texas and New Mexico etc. But yes they were considered a part of the Eastern Shoshone before that living farther north.

I'm sure if they were to get in the game they would start somewhere more south on a TSL map, where their historical homeland, Comancheria, was.

 

[Zaarin]

I don't think they were properly called the Comanche until they expanded into Texas and New Mexico etc. But yes they were considered a part of the Eastern Shoshone before that living farther north.

I'm sure if they were to get in the game they would start somewhere more south on a TSL map, where their historical homeland, Comancheria, was.

TBH this is one of the reasons I'd prefer the Nez Perce, Arapaho, or even Lakota over the Comanche because, while Civ5's civ was certainly called the Shoshone and had a Shoshone leader...it seemed like a stealth representation of the Comanche, down to having a Comanche UU. (Or at the very least a hybrid Shoshone/Comanche civ. The Pathfinder was no doubt intended to be a nod to Sacagawea, who was Shoshone, and the extra territory could have been a nod to the sprawling Shoshone or to Comancheria. I always thought that was a neat ability, and I'm glad Russia picked it up in Civ6.)

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Wait, since when did the Comanche originate in the Southwest?

Most every source I've ever seen place their origin in the northern US rockies (Wyoming-Idaho-Montana area) and their foothills, near the (related) Shoshone, with migrations southward onto the plains in the 1700s after acquiring horses.

Texas might be southwest or not, but Wyoming, Idaho and Montana are very much not so.

Like a great many Native American groups, the Comanche started in a place other than where they were when the Europeans met them.
People speaking the Shoshonean language family started migrating south out of the Wyoming/northern Rockies sometime prior to the late 17th century. The earliest certain indication that the Comanche were in the southwest is from Spanish records of 1706, when they were ientified raiding settlements in west Texas and New Mexico. However, until at least 1725 they are still described as being on foot and using dogs to haul their travois, so they apparently did not completely adopt the horse-based nomadic lifestyle until well after they arrived in the southwest. Another Spanish record indicates that by 1724 they had driven the Apaches west and out of the plains, but this information is from 1784 so the date may not be accurate.
What is certain is that once they acquired horses, presumably in the first half of the 18th century, they became accomplished horse-raisers - by 1795 they were trading horses to English and American traders by way of native 'middlemen' ranging from the Shawnee to the Osage, which means they had 'trade routes' or connections ranging all the way to Missouri on the eastern edge of the great plains and up into the western 'Ohio country' (actually modern Indiana and Illinois).