Which Civ we should have before Civilization VI?

[Syailendra]

Slightly off topic, but are there any potential tundra/snow wonders? We have desert and coastal specific wonders so I'm just wondering

why would that be difficult, 'international arctic research centre' can be a world congres prize wonder. First winner got it in one of his cities that have tundra or snow tile on its region. Gave 4 beakers on snow/ice tile and 1 food 2 beakers on tundra.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Speaking of the Huns and nomadic civs, what's everybody's preference for a Silk Road/nomadic civ? I know the Timurids are pretty popular and well-known (at least compared to the folks that are left), and they're my pick too, but I've also seen some support for the Khazars on the forum. Personally I have a soft spot for the Uighurs and the Khitan, although I dunno if the former would work in due to having a similar situation with the Tibetans, and the latter might be seen as too similar to the Mongols (although they certainly have their fascinating history). I also personally like the Kushans too, but eh.

 

[SnowKomodo]

Speaking of the Huns and nomadic civs, what's everybody's preference for a Silk Road/nomadic civ? I know the Timurids are pretty popular and well-known (at least compared to the folks that are left), and they're my pick too, but I've also seen some support for the Khazars on the forum. Personally I have a soft spot for the Uighurs and the Khitan, although I dunno if the former would work in due to having a similar situation with the Tibetans, and the latter might be seen as too similar to the Mongols (although they certainly have their fascinating history). I also personally like the Kushans too, but eh.

I've always had a soft spot for a Silk Road civ. Between the ones you mentioned which would you include?

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

The Huns weren't always nomadics. Attila established a centered empire, the Hunnic Empire, which became a civilization until it fell to barbarians

It was always a civilization They didn't miraculously become civilized when they decided to stop conquering and instead inhabit another peoples lands!

Interesting point you raise though, so it would be nice if everyone started out nomadic and it was a viable gameplay route to continue that way as long as you like, but once you've settled you're doomed to city life forever more... It would be nice to see what sort of incentives could keep you nomadic for longer instead of settling. I just think it would be a fantastic mechanic to add that provides a flavour of human history that is sorely underrepresented despite its huge impact of society

 

[cybrxkhan]

I've always had a soft spot for a Silk Road civ. Between the ones you mentioned which would you include?

All of them, frankly. I feel the Silk Road and Central Asia have been rather underestimated in Civ. Well, sort of except the Khazars, contrary to many here I really don't care about them, but I guess they are pretty unique and interesting in their own way.

Well, then again, I'd add in a ton of civs from all over the place.

My top pick would be the Timurids, if only because they are probably the most recognizable. Uighurs would be second, because I really think the Uighurs are cool.


Actually, and this will never ever happen because of lack of information (save for some academic stuff no one reads), but I think a Tocharian civ would be awesome. Something to represent the various city-states and kingdoms in modern-day Xinjiang during antiquity.

 

[SnowKomodo]

Ooo that would be interesting. Nomadic mechanics. Would be incredibly difficult to pull off though but if they can find a way to do it in Civ 6 I'd be excited

 

[Depravo]

I don't think the huns can be done right in this game. What i would really like to see in civ 6 is nomadic gameplay that runs as a viable alternative to settling.

Wouldn't that be awesome. In fact, it would be pretty neat to have a 'pre-Civ' stage for all civilisations so everyone doesn't hit the ground running on a more or less equal footing in 4000BC.

EDIT: That said, the Huns don't make the cut for a civilisation at any point in their history IMO unless we take the broadest possible view of their successor states.

 

[Shimmler]

I've read several people talking about Ukraine (from where I originate), but honestly that would be a bad choice - we have never been important in world arena.

Now, Kievan Rus' would be a much better choice to represent the importance and power of Kiev that it held for couple of centuries during medieval times. To avoid the same city names with Russian civ it could be given all city names that were situated in Ukrainian and Belarus territories that Russian empire civ does not have for some reason - Kiev as capital, then Chernigov, Vyshgorod, Turov, Kremenets, Vladimiri-Volynskiy, Galich etc.

Vladimir the Great would be civ's leader and the unique ability would be "From the Varangians to the Greeks" - every worked tile near the river produces additional 1 gold.

UU would be "Druzhina" that would replace Knight unit. In addition to standart Knight feats, it would produce income of +1 Gold if garissoned in your city (+2 Gold if garissoned in a puppet).

UB would be "Church" that would replace Temple. Contrary to Temple, Church would not have any maintanance cost while providing the same Faith income.

 

[jaldaen]

Ooo that would be interesting. Nomadic mechanics. Would be incredibly difficult to pull off though but if they can find a way to do it in Civ 6 I'd be excited

On a side note: Jon Shafer's At the Gates will have Nomadic mechanics as one of the core play experiences. I know some people didn't care for his Civ 5 vanilla design, but I'm looking forward to seeing if he can pull off a good playing-as-the-barbarians game.

And who knows, if he can do it, then it might inspire the developers for Civ 6 to try a unique "nomadic" civ mechanic, even if only in a scenario.

 

[JustinianIV]

I just don't feel moved by any of these, except for maybe Israel.

Maybe Philippines? Lapu Lapu anyone?

Spoiler :

Now THAT would be a great Civ leader!


I doubt they will make it in because of Indonesia. Perhaps never.

 

[JustinianIV]

I've read several people talking about Ukraine (from where I originate), but honestly that would be a bad choice - we have never been important in world arena.

Now, Kievan Rus' would be a much better choice to represent the importance and power of Kiev that it held for couple of centuries during medieval times. To avoid the same city names with Russian civ it could be given all city names that were situated in Ukrainian and Belarus territories that Russian empire civ does not have for some reason - Kiev as capital, then Chernigov, Vyshgorod, Turov, Kremenets, Vladimiri-Volynskiy, Galich etc.

Vladimir the Great would be civ's leader and the unique ability would be "From the Varangians to the Greeks" - every worked tile near the river produces additional 1 gold.

UU would be "Druzhina" that would replace Knight unit. In addition to standart Knight feats, it would produce income of +1 Gold if garissoned in your city (+2 Gold if garissoned in a puppet).

UB would be "Church" that would replace Temple. Contrary to Temple, Church would not have any maintanance cost while providing the same Faith income.

Interesting because I don't particularly like this incarnation of Russia and your suggestion sounds right up my alley. The problem with the current Russian civ is that it has no religious element to it when Russia is extremely faithful. So, I like your Church idea... just make it an onion-dome

 

[ehecatzin]

Speaking of the Huns and nomadic civs, what's everybody's preference for a Silk Road/nomadic civ? I know the Timurids are pretty popular and well-known (at least compared to the folks that are left), and they're my pick too, but I've also seen some support for the Khazars on the forum. Personally I have a soft spot for the Uighurs and the Khitan, although I dunno if the former would work in due to having a similar situation with the Tibetans, and the latter might be seen as too similar to the Mongols (although they certainly have their fascinating history). I also personally like the Kushans too, but eh.

Khazars would be interesting to have, and we could use a civ that chooses Judaism. However I think the Timurids are much more well known and could fill the central asian gap nicely,

 

[Depravo]

Khazars would be interesting to have, and we could use a civ that chooses Judaism. However I think the Timurids are much more well known and could fill the central asian gap nicely,

Having 'civilizations' be named after dynasties always seemed unnecessarily restrictive to me.

 

[steveg700]

Just need to look at my sig to see my top picks.

 

[SnowKomodo]

I just don't feel moved by any of these, except for maybe Israel.

Maybe Philippines? Lapu Lapu anyone?

Spoiler :

Now THAT would be a great Civ leader!


I doubt they will make it in because of Indonesia. Perhaps never.

I really love Philippines. They would make a fun civ

But realistically speaking they are probably 6th or 7th on the pecking order for potential leaders among maritime Southeast Asia

 

[otaman1]

Having 'civilizations' be named after dynasties always seemed unnecessarily restrictive to me.

True. And if that's the case, we'd probably have well over a hundred civilizations like the Qin, Qing, Ming, Jin, Tang, and hell, maybe Shang, Song (see what I did there?)

 

[poom3619]

I've read several people talking about Ukraine (from where I originate), but honestly that would be a bad choice - we have never been important in world arena.

Now, Kievan Rus' would be a much better choice to represent the importance and power of Kiev that it held for couple of centuries during medieval times. To avoid the same city names with Russian civ it could be given all city names that were situated in Ukrainian and Belarus territories that Russian empire civ does not have for some reason - Kiev as capital, then Chernigov, Vyshgorod, Turov, Kremenets, Vladimiri-Volynskiy, Galich etc.

Vladimir the Great would be civ's leader and the unique ability would be "From the Varangians to the Greeks" - every worked tile near the river produces additional 1 gold.

UU would be "Druzhina" that would replace Knight unit. In addition to standart Knight feats, it would produce income of +1 Gold if garissoned in your city (+2 Gold if garissoned in a puppet).

UB would be "Church" that would replace Temple. Contrary to Temple, Church would not have any maintanance cost while providing the same Faith income.

I like your suggestion. But I find something irony in your post. (Perhaps it's effect from Russia's UA? )

 

[Depravo]

True. And if that's the case, we'd probably have well over a hundred civilizations like the Qin, Qing, Ming, Jin, Tang, and hell, maybe Shang, Song (see what I did there?)

Are we having Shun yet?

 

[Dogmouth]

Harappa/Mohenjo-daro. I'm a sucker for ancient civs, and the ancient Indus Valley doesn't get enough love.

 

[Olympian7]

God no, there's tons of better leader choices out there. Not to mention the overseas Vietnamese community would riot (as they have in the past over these sort of things). And not to mention that the devs have shied from both modern and communist leaders in the present version of Civ.

My preference would be the Trung Sisters, or Quang Trung if the devs don't want someone female, but other good picks would be Le Loi, Le Thanh Tong, Tran Hung Dao, Ly Thuan Kiet, Ngo Quyen, An Duong Vuong, and a few others I probably forgot. But Trung Sisters all the way.

After the release of the BNW expansion, there NEEDS to be leaders that represent ideologies such as communism and socialism since these ideologies are options in the game. It is, after all, just a game.