Which Civ we should have before Civilization VI?

[Hobertonio]

A lot of the proposed Canada civs I've seen have a food bonus to tundra, or similar. Is that, well, accurate? Isn't most of Canada's population concentrated in the non-frozen bits?

Yes 90% of the population lives close to the US border, I think a diplomatic benefit would make more sense

 

[pansitkanton]

I think Majapahit should be a better reincarnation of the Indonesian civilization they added in V Brave New World. I don't see how Gaja Madah would be its leader when the concept of an Indonesian state at his time was non-existent yet. However, I think if the concept of a pan-Maritime Southeast Asian civilization is channelled through Majapahit, there would be more opportunities to expand the bonuses and features of this civ.

Aside from the core areas which are in Peninsular Malaya, Sumatra, Java, Singapore, Borneo, Sunda Islands, Sulawesi, the Moluccas and small areas of New Guinea, several significant petty kingdoms and rajahnates across the pre-modern Philippines were also part of its political, cultural and economic networks. Aside from that, a vast majority of the peoples under this civilization, alongside those in present-day Philippines, were of Austronesian origins.

Ability: Thalassocracy
- City border expansion rate doubled; +1 happiness per harbor and seaport

Unique unit: Laksamana
- replaces Knight

Unique building: Candi

 

[geoaraujo]

I'd prefer Inuit to Canada, personally (and I say that as a Canadian). They haven't been represented yet, and they make way more sense as a tundra specialist. I mean, how much of this country can actually claim being anywhere near tundra in the first place? Most of us live on the border. If Canada gets in, it probably makes a great deal more sense as a diplo civ than any sort of terrain specialist.

For Inuit, I'd probably go with something like +1 Food from Deer, Whales and Fish to give them something useful off-tundra as well, with maybe a second half to that UA (free Sailing?). Give them a tundra UI and maybe a scout/warrior-style UU that moves faster and gets +1 sight when embarked, and you end up with a pretty cool Civ.

That makes sense.

 

[SnowKomodo]

I think Majapahit should be a better reincarnation of the Indonesian civilization they added in V Brave New World. I don't see how Gaja Madah would be its leader when the concept of an Indonesian state at his time was non-existent yet. However, I think if the concept of a pan-Maritime Southeast Asian civilization is channelled through Majapahit, there would be more opportunities to expand the bonuses and features of this civ.

Aside from the core areas which are in Peninsular Malaya, Sumatra, Java, Singapore, Borneo, Sunda Islands, Sulawesi, the Moluccas and small areas of New Guinea, several significant petty kingdoms and rajahnates across the pre-modern Philippines were also part of its political, cultural and economic networks. Aside from that, a vast majority of the peoples under this civilization, alongside those in present-day Philippines, were of Austronesian origins.

Ability: Thalassocracy
- City border expansion rate doubled; +1 happiness per harbor and seaport

Unique unit: Laksamana
- replaces Knight

Unique building: Candi

Majapahit is basically the civ though (represented through the UA, UU and UB.) It's just called Indonesia for, what I imagine, is marketing purposes and accessibility.

If you can accept that, than we basically have a Majapahit civ (even says so in the leader intro screen). If not, then think of Indonesia as a historical, cultural, and geographical extension of Majapahit - because it mostly is.

 

[SnowKomodo]

Question to anybody:

What's a MASSIVE civilization worthy of inclusion based off of sheer sphere of influence that nobody talks about?

I feel like we mention the same ones in all of these polls, but I also feel like there is no way there isn't some under-the-rug civ that is just being forgotten

 

[An Lu-Shan]

Why are people naming single states of America such as Texas or Mississippi? If that's supposed to be joke ok but I don't see why they'd seriously do that.

Well they didn't say Mississippi, they said Mississippian which is a pre-colombian native american civilization, the modern state and the river all share the name, so that might have lead to your confusion.

And while I might not think that Texas is the best choice for a new Civ to be added, I'm guessing it has to do with the fact that Texas was for a period an independent Republic (not to mention being part of the Confederacy). Why even today Texas prides itself on its difference! It might not be strictly analogous, but suggesting Texas is along the same lines as say suggesting Bavaria or maybe Quebec.

I'm just trying to inform not start any fights.

 

[PhilBowles]

Question to anybody:

What's a MASSIVE civilization worthy of inclusion based off of sheer sphere of influence that nobody talks about?

I feel like we mention the same ones in all of these polls, but I also feel like there is no way there isn't some under-the-rug civ that is just being forgotten

Most suggestions are medieval, modern or tribal cultures, save the Fertile Crescent ones. So the 'missing' civs are likely the ones lurking in the ancient era or in prehistory.

In terms of territorial extent, the Gokturks covered much of Central Asia, and controlled much of the Silk Road. They have known named leaders, and are certainly stronger candidates than such oft-mentioned Silk Road civs as the Timurids (who have a charismatic leader going for them but not a lot else).

Norte Chico/Caral is presumably covered in the generic calls for 'South American civs' but probably deserves specific recognition as the original origin of civilization in South America, contemporary with Ancient Egypt; they and the later Olmec are the only ones of the six conventionally defined 'cradles of civilisation' not to have a representative in the game (taking India and China to represent their respective ancient civs); these are also the only two to have developed independently of the Eurasian societies.

Kush may be one of the most important ancient civs missing from the game (given that Ethiopia covers Axum), as this was a society that once ruled Egypt. It might be captured in calls for a Nubian civ (both originated in Sudan), however those calls haven't got much of an airing here.

Saba was a somewhat important regional ancient power, conquering part of Ethiopia from its Yemeni heartland, and probably synonymous with Sheba - a name with important subsequent cultural ramifications, for all that the society itself was not one of the great civilizations of antiquity.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Most suggestions are medieval, modern or tribal cultures, save the Fertile Crescent ones. So the 'missing' civs are likely the ones lurking in the ancient era or in prehistory.

In terms of territorial extent, the Gokturks covered much of Central Asia, and controlled much of the Silk Road. They have known named leaders, and are certainly stronger candidates than such oft-mentioned Silk Road civs as the Timurids (who have a charismatic leader going for them but not a lot else).

Norte Chico/Caral is presumably covered in the generic calls for 'South American civs' but probably deserves specific recognition as the original origin of civilization in South America, contemporary with Ancient Egypt; they and the later Olmec are the only ones of the six conventionally defined 'cradles of civilisation' not to have a representative in the game (taking India and China to represent their respective ancient civs); these are also the only two to have developed independently of the Eurasian societies.

Kush may be one of the most important ancient civs missing from the game (given that Ethiopia covers Axum), as this was a society that once ruled Egypt. It might be captured in calls for a Nubian civ (both originated in Sudan), however those calls haven't got much of an airing here.

Saba was a somewhat important regional ancient power, conquering part of Ethiopia from its Yemeni heartland, and probably synonymous with Sheba - a name with important subsequent cultural ramifications, for all that the society itself was not one of the great civilizations of antiquity.

All good suggestions, actually.

I do nkow Nubia gets thrown around here and there on the forums, but it's not as popular an African civ as Kongo or some of the ones in West Africa like Benin. Frankly, thouh, I like Nubia more. It had a long, long history, stretching from its days as a counterpoint to Egypt (at one point conquering Egypt as said), to its success at staying independent from Rome and as a sort of "spiritual successor" of sorts to Ancient Egypt (though still unique in its way), to its survival as a bastion of Christianity along with Ethiopia against Islamic power during the medieval era.

Nubia's got a lot going for it, and I actually feel like it has *some* name recognition among those who know a bit of ancient history, so it would be a wonderful choice in my opinion.


As for Saba, I feel it could be done in a "Yemen" civ that encompasses Yemen's also long and interesting history, which is a bit different than that of the Bedouins up north. Unfortunately though I feel any sort of civ from Yemen would be seen as too similar to the existing Arabia civ (a situation somewhat similar, in my opinion, to the Tamils/southern Indians/Chola/whatever and the India civ)

 

[PhilBowles]

All good suggestions, actually.

I do nkow Nubia gets thrown around here and there on the forums, but it's not as popular an African civ as Kongo or some of the ones in West Africa like Benin. Frankly, thouh, I like Nubia more. It had a long, long history, stretching from its days as a counterpoint to Egypt (at one point conquering Egypt as said), to its success at staying independent from Rome and as a sort of "spiritual successor" of sorts to Ancient Egypt (though still unique in its way), to its survival as a bastion of Christianity along with Ethiopia against Islamic power during the medieval era.

Nubia's got a lot going for it, and I actually feel like it has *some* name recognition among those who know a bit of ancient history, so it would be a wonderful choice in my opinion.


As for Saba, I feel it could be done in a "Yemen" civ that encompasses Yemen's also long and interesting history, which is a bit different than that of the Bedouins up north. Unfortunately though I feel any sort of civ from Yemen would be seen as too similar to the existing Arabia civ (a situation somewhat similar, in my opinion, to the Tamils/southern Indians/Chola/whatever and the India civ)

Thanks for the comments. I agree that a Nubian civ would be an interesting choice, although looking them up I feel bound to conclude that the civ which best meets seancolorado's criteria is the Gokturks - they're very feasible to represent, and while there are numerous calls for "Silk Road civs" the Gokturks, the oldest (and among the largest) of those societies, are not mentioned at all. The Central Asian region they cover is also a bit of a gap in the Civ map, unlike the West Asian area of the Timurids or the Khazars.

 

[cybrxkhan]

Thanks for the comments. I agree that a Nubian civ would be an interesting choice, although looking them up I feel bound to conclude that the civ which best meets seancolorado's criteria is the Gokturks - they're very feasible to represent, and while there are numerous calls for "Silk Road civs" the Gokturks, the oldest (and among the largest) of those societies, are not mentioned at all. The Central Asian region they cover is also a bit of a gap in the Civ map, unlike the West Asian area of the Timurids or the Khazars.

Gokturks would be a great choice. Personally the Uighurs (and to a lesser extent the Kushans and Khitan) are my favorites, but frankly looking at it objectively Gokturks would be one of the more "deserving" choices for a Silk Road civ. In a sense they're the 'ancestor' of many of the major Turkish dynasties and empires (from the Ottomans to the Seljuks to the folks in Delhi to the Khazars and more), ruled a wide swath, and certainly qualify as a Silk Road civ. I feel if a Silk Road civ ever got in it would probably be the Timurids or maybe the Khazars due to name recognition, but I wouldn't complain about the Gokturks. Or, heck, anyone from the region in the first place.

 

[jaldaen]

Or we could go back to the Civ 2 approach of meeting a 'herald in the antechambers' with a nice portrait of the boss on the wall.

True that

Man... now I'm reminded of the joys of building my throne room

 

[Henry_VI]

Welcome to the forums!!

Thanks! I was a member way back before Civ III was released; I took part in the speculations, etc. I sort of returned to rabid fandom with the release of BNW ('vanilla' Civ V was a huge disappointment for me) so I thought I might join again.

From what i can understand, the Trojans were the inhabitants of one city, Troy, which was itself some part of the Hittite empire, so i think if Troy is to be included it may be more appropriate as part of a Hittite empire

I'm not sure whether this is correct (not that I know much about the subject ). It's hotly debated whether a certain 'Wilusha' that appears in Hittite texts is actually the 'Ilium' of Homer, but I believe the connection is limited to that.

On the other hand, in the Iliad (it's been a while since I read it; so apologies in advance for any stupid remarks) the war takes place between the Achaean 'alliance', and the Asia Minor 'alliance'. That is, fighting alongside Hector et al., are Phrygians, Amazons, and so forth. So maybe the 'Trojans' could include those peoples as well.

It's a city-state in the Wonders of the Ancient World scenario, and an obvious candidate for a main-game CS. I was hoping it would be added in BNW, but it wasn't.

I guess, being Turkish and a fan of Vergil, I do have a soft spot for the Trojans I tried 'converting' my Romans into Trojans, and founding Troy, then Alba, before founding Rome; but it felt too artificial. Well, silly, actually.

 

[BD123]

Donde Esta Vietnam??? But I would be excited to see Sumer or Kongo. There are enough European civilizations in my opinion.

 

[Urdnot_Scott]

Donde Esta Vietnam?

Southeast Asia man

 

[quantum42]

How about the Maori, Sami (Lapplanders) or other indigenous group?

 

[rattlejaw]

Phoenicia could be interesting (give poor Sidon and Tyre a home), though of course Carthage is already in, so there's a cultural--if not geographical--overlap there.

I'm big on Sumer, but with both Assyria and Babylon (well, and Persia), the region's beginning to get a little crowded. Likewise, Europe's pretty much packed to the gills. Hungary could work, though. Al-Andalus would be interesting too, as a sort of science/culture hybrid civ (that may be stepping on Korea's toes gameplay-wise, mind).

 

[Urdnot_Scott]

How about the Maori, Sami (Lapplanders) or other indigenous group?

Maori are already in, Polynesia represents the Maori, whether you think that's an outrageous grouping of unrelated groups doesn't really matter at this point, it won't happen :L

Sami really, really, really aren't important enough to be added, they'd be very, very far down any list, hell, I'd rather have the Inuit if you're looking for a snow/tundra based civ, and I think that's a terrible idea anyway.

 

[otaman1]

Hell, forget about the Inuits or Canadians for Tundra/Snow biomes. Why not just add Antarctica with Penguins and Seals?

 

[Gyra Solune]

Yeah, the thing with the Inuit and whatnot is that...they don't feel like some great and marvelous and unique civilization. They're some guys who hunted and gathered in cold places. I want to play civilizations that had power behind them, that really would fit with the concept of "if you dropped these nations from across time into 4000 BC to all start from scratch, who would come out on top". It's why I feel the Shoshone are a bit of an egh choice, they...didn't make much, they mostly just subsisted and were cool with that. The Inca and Aztecs and Mayans and even the Iroquois to some extent left great legacies throughout history, whether physical or intangible, while the Shoshone were just...there. If they hadn't existed at all in history, not much would likely be different. I kinda feel like that's a good metric on a civ's official "worthiness" to be put in the game: if they had never existed, how much would history be affected? For most, they pass because they did play pretty decent parts, even one as dubious as the Huns did some crazy conquest in a short span of time.

And yeah, if Canada was in they wouldn't get snow/tundra bonuses because...yeah, they only have sparse territory there. They'd be far more diplomatic oriented, I suggested the silly "get other civs' UAs upon making a DOF and sending a trade route" or so. If anything, Denmark would have the cold terrain bonuses, they did settle Iceland, Greenland, and Newfoundland, after all.

 

[kingofsealand]

I think an inherent tundra/snow tile bonus would be awesome regardless of whether they reworked denmark with it or added some new civ. The sami deserve just as much representation as any native american civ which is represented in the game as they have similarly preserved much of their culture.

The inuit idk much about specifically but seriously a bonus on tundra/snow (or BOTH if you want an OP bonus) would make those lousy cities you always dread founding near the north and south edges of the map worthwhile. Possible a UI which could only be built on tundra/snow? This bonus would make that section of the map more relevant in the same way the unique improvements which can be built on deserts/flood plains (kasbah/polder) have.