Which Civs are you looking forward to the most?

[The Kingmaker]

There's something on the order of 30 civilizations that have been previously featured in the series that have yet to return. I've sorted them according to priority below. There's a small handful we could maybe do without, but it would be an absolute shame if the majority of these civs did not return.

Critical Priority - Major civilizations who should already be in the game. Their absence is keenly felt. Need to be DLC, stat!
Mongols - Created the greatest contiguous land empire in history and fundamentally changed the Old World forever.
Babylonians - The lynch pin civ of the ancient Near East. Has been in every game so far with good reason. All the more needed after Sumer's poor showing this time around.
Incas - South America's anchor civ. That continent is unrepresented other than Brazil, and the Aztecs are the lone Pre-Columbian civ.

High Priority - Important civilizations that fill key spots in the game. Ought to be in XP1.
Mayans - We're in sore need of more Pre-Columbian civs.
Ottoman Turks - Another major Middle Eastern power.
Carthaginians - A North African favorite, especially for elephant lovers.
Iroquois - Either them, or another important Native American tribe. The Native Americans are as yet unrepresented.
Koreans - A well-accomplished civ and an important market in the gaming world.
Malians/Songhai - They fill a key spot in Africa. I say make them a multi-leader civ and depict them both.
Khmer - An old favorite that we've been wanting to see since Civ4's XP2. Bring them back!

Moderate Priority - Solid civs, but mostly expansion fodder, but it'll be good to have them back sooner or later.
Byzantines - Another fan favorite.
Celts - Ancient Europe's only representative outside the Mediterranean. Civ5's version was a disgrace. Needs to be tidied up, perhaps a Gaulish civ?
Ethiopians - An ancient and accomplished African civ.
Assyrians - A nice new addition from Civ5's second XP.
Indonesians - Expecting to see them soon as DLC.
Moroccans - Another nice new addition. Tweak them a bit and make them Almoravid or Almohad themed.
Polynesians - They were fun in Civ5, but do need some tidying up to be a bit less blobby.
Dutch - Had a big colonial empire.
Portuguese - Ditto.
Zulus - They're a Civ-mainstay and bound to come back sooner or later.

Low Priority - These could fill some gaps if needed. XP3, anyone?
Austrians - A lot of overlap with the current HRE-themed Germany. Could still be done well, but they're not urgent right now.
Hittites - Haven't seen them since Civ3. Would be good to have them back, but not before all these others above.
Sioux/Shoshone - It would be nice to have another Native American civ, but it needs to be done properly.
Siamese - They're not bad, but I'd prefer the return of the Khmer first. Poor Ramkhamhaeng doesn't get a lot of love.
Swedish - By this point on the list, they're looking like just another mid-tier European power.

No Priority - We can do without these, in my humble opinion.
Danish/Vikings - Considerable overlap with the current portrayal of Norway.
Huns - A very odd inclusion. Shouldn't return unless they make the barbarians playable somehow.
Venetians - Was already very eclectic in Civ5. Ought to be replaced with a multi-leader Italy civ representing both Venice and Florence.
Holy Roman Empire - Shouldn't have ever been separate from Germany/Austria. Currently overlaps with Barbarossa's German civ.
Native Americans - Way too much of a blob civ. Separate and distinct tribes are preferred.

At some point, I may do a second post with my thoughts on never-before-seen civs that merit inclusion too.

 

[Cossackaiser]

Asia
Tibet
Nepal
Khmer
Kazharia
Korea
Assyria
Sibir
Babylon
Kazakstan
Bactria

Mongols
Modern Mongolia
Timurid Empire
Oman
Ancient Israel
Pakistan
Phonecia
Phillipines
Indonesia
Kyrgystan
Sri Lanka/Taprobana
Hittites
Ottomans
Armenia
Siam
Bangladesh
Vietnam
Europe
Prussia/Teutonic Order
Ukraine/Cossack/Zaporizhia
Sweden
Denmark
Finland
Holland
Austria
Venice
Genoa
Papacy
Tuscany/Florence
Al-Andalus
Portugal
Scotland
Ireland
Brittany
Wales/Cornwall
Bohemia/Czechia
Hungary
Byzantium
Serbia
Courland/Latvia
Lithuania
North America
Irquois
Cree
Sioux
Missisipian
Maya
Olmec
Zapotec
Beothuk
Greenland/Vinland
Hopi/Pueblo
Quebec/New France
Florida
Taino
Inuit
Alueit
Aztecs lead by someone NOT called Montezuma
Cuba
South America
Inca
Musica
Chimu
Argentina
Patagonia
Nazca
Africa
Morocco
Carthage
Cyrene
Mauritiana (ancient)
Mali
Dahomey
Mombasa
Songhai
Yoruba
Zulu
Ethiopia
Nigeria
Kilwa
Zimbabwe
Medieval Egypt
Australasia
Kaurna
Kulin
Kimberly Aboriginal
Eora
Yolgnu
Tasmanian Aboriginies
Pitinjara (bad spelling)
Wirajuri
New Zealand
Tonga
Maori
Hawaii

 

[luigilime]

Asia:
Korea
Indonesia/Malaysia
Vietnam
Tibet
Mongolia
Assyria
Babylon
Phoenicia (that could work like Venice did in civ 5)
Judah
Siam
Khmer
Burma

The Americas:
Inca
Maya
Shoshone/Sioux/ other native American
Iroquois

Oceania:
Hawaii
Māori
Tu'i Tonga

Africa:
Ethiopia
Mali/Songhai
Morocco
Kilwa/Swahili
Mutapa/Żimbabwe
Zulu
Carthage
Benin

Europe:
Celts(multiple leaders to represent various groups like the Gauls and the Picts)
Byzantium
Sweden
Netherlands
Portugal
Austria
Italy ( Venice, Florence and united Italy in Turin, just like I want Germany with Prussia, HRE, and united Germany)
Hungary/Bohemia (the only ones I find appealing in Eastern Europe)

 

[Zaarin]

Celts(multiple leaders to represent various groups like the Gauls and the Picts)

That would be extraordinarily presumptuous, given that we don't even know if the Picts were Celts. We also know very little about their leaders, despite having a king list. Britons would make much more sense, but I hardly think it's necessary: the Britons had few unique accomplishments before assimilating quite thoroughly to Roman culture, and no one wants to see Hippie Boudicca come back...The Celtiberians had more accomplishments but we also know a lot less about their language and leaders. And a civ jointly led by Vercingetorix and, say, Brian Boru would be...bizarre, to say the least. Firaxis needs to figure out who they're actually trying to represent with the civ instead of the past three games' horrendous amalgamations.

 

[luigilime]

That would be extraordinarily presumptuous, given that we don't even know if the Picts were Celts. We also know very little about their leaders, despite having a king list. Britons would make much more sense, but I hardly think it's necessary: the Britons had few unique accomplishments before assimilating quite thoroughly to Roman culture, and no one wants to see Hippie Boudicca come back...The Celtiberians had more accomplishments but we also know a lot less about their language and leaders. And a civ jointly led by Vercingetorix and, say, Brian Boru would be...bizarre, to say the least. Firaxis needs to figure out who they're actually trying to represent with the civ instead of the past three games' horrendous amalgamations.

Sorry i was just making some examples, there are definitely better options than the Picts

 

[Sostratus]

As the game stands now, there are 3 districts which currently do not have a unique counterpart.
I think these would be a nice way to integrate some of the missing civs.

Commercial hub: Mali. If we're gonna make our boy Mansa Musa all about gold, what better way than a unique CH? It's already a gold and trader district- it'd be easy to pile on the cash with some basic bonuses. Also: they really need to bring the "gold ore" lux from Nubia scenario into the main game. Mansa needs them gold bricks to build his house!

Encampment: Zulu. Since the Zulu usually tend get some wildly good bonuses (Especially in civ 5,) why settle for a boring barracks replacement when we can just give them the Ikanda district? You'll be on your way to Impi-rialism in no time.

Campus: Korea. There's a lot to pull from, but it could give some extra culture, or perhaps all city specialists get bonus science, or what have you.

They really have to be careful about this, though, since Campus and CH are currently the best two districts out there. A standard unique district can always be built in half the time; extra bonuses pile on top of that. We don't want to make anyone too OP; though I suspect an expansion will have them looking at rebalancing a few systems.

I think it would be fun to fill out the unique district set, though.

Now, I hope the Inca are as wildly fun as they were in 5. PLZ firaxis, don't let me down!

 

[Phrozen]

Campus: Pyramid Plaza for the Mayans. Gives faith as well as science since many Mayan pyramids temples also doubled as observatories and were built as such.
Commerical Hub: Turkish Bazaar. Turks will probably be war focused with Janissaries plus maybe great bombards. The Bazaar will give the Turks some flexibility. Gives tourism in later eras?
Encampment:

The actual best civ that could have a special campus district is America with its land-grant university system.

 

[Zaarin]

I agree that Korea is a great choice for a unique Campus, but I think the best candidate for a unique Encampment is the Gaulish oppidum. I don't think Mali makes sense for a unique Commercial Hub, despite their gold focus. I can think of three good possibilities: a North African civ with a souk, a Middle Eastern civ with a bazaar (as Phrozen suggested), or one of the Central Asian civs along the Silk Road like Sogdia.

 

[Draehl]

Iroquois or Cherokee. I'd love to see a forest-focused civ for early rapid expansion and late game culture. Improved Forest tiles provide 1 culture and worker charges aren't consumed for improving forest tiles would be a nice base to work off of.

 

[Zaarin]

Iroquois or Cherokee. I'd love to see a forest-focused civ for early rapid expansion and late game culture. Improved Forest tiles provide 1 culture and worker charges aren't consumed for improving forest tiles would be a nice base to work off of.

Yea stereotypes? The Iroquois definitely cleared forests for agriculture (and nearly destroyed the ecosystem by driving the beaver to local extinction), and the Cherokee chiefly lived in the mountains (insofar as you can call the Appalachians "mountains" *pines for the Cascades*) prior to adopting large-scale agriculture (and thus deforestation) among other European practices. The indigenous peoples of the PNW would make more sense for forest bonuses since they didn't practice agriculture and built their villages on the beach, therefore not needing to clear forests (plus their wood-harvesting techniques didn't actually kill the trees unless they were building something large like a canoe or crest pole).

 

[soulsprit]

Babylonians for sure.

I see no reason to not add the babylonians in whatever future dlc or expansion pack. I don't think a collection of different nations for each new and respective civ game is bad. There are only so many civs the developers have time for to program. I don't think it is a shame that some other civs are neglected to prioritize the programming of different civs. If some old but famous CIV civilizations are left out to make room for others then that is good imo.

 

[Draehl]

Yea stereotypes? The Iroquois definitely cleared forests for agriculture (and nearly destroyed the ecosystem by driving the beaver to local extinction), and the Cherokee chiefly lived in the mountains (insofar as you can call the Appalachians "mountains" *pines for the Cascades*) prior to adopting large-scale agriculture (and thus deforestation) among other European practices. The indigenous peoples of the PNW would make more sense for forest bonuses since they didn't practice agriculture and built their villages on the beach, therefore not needing to clear forests (plus their wood-harvesting techniques didn't actually kill the trees unless they were building something large like a canoe or crest pole).

I'm quite aware. Sitting right now in north Georgia in former Cherokee lands.. I'm not saying they are simple savages running through the forest, but surely they have more of a link to the land than Europeans of the same timeframe did. As for Iroquois their bonuses in Civ V were blatantly forest/jungle based. In many cases the civs in this game are largely a collection of bonuses based around generalities and stereotypes. That said, I mostly just want to see a rapid expansion/culture/wide empire type civ. Where it comes from I really don't care, but it would be really cool for it to be a native american one.

 

[Zaarin]

I'm quite aware. Sitting right now in north Georgia in former Cherokee lands.. I'm not saying they are simple savages running through the forest, but surely they have more of a link to the land than Europeans of the same timeframe did. As for Iroquois their bonuses in Civ V were blatantly forest/jungle based. In many cases the civs in this game are largely a collection of bonuses based around generalities and stereotypes. That said, I mostly just want to see a rapid expansion/culture/wide empire type civ. Where it comes from I really don't care, but it would be really cool for it to be a native american one.

I'm really eager for a Native American civilization, but after the horrible blob civ in Civ4, the horrible stereotyped Iroquois in Civ5, and the complete absence of a Native American civilization in the Civ6 base game, I think Firaxis should think long and hard about how they choose to portray Native Americans in Civ6. The Iroquois aren't a bad choice, but their bonuses really ought to reflect Three Sisters agriculture, Mourning Wars/Beaver Wars, and bonuses to city-states. I think the Cherokee in general would be a poor choice; they have name recognition, but mostly for assimilating to European culture and having that poor decision bite them in the posterior. Of the so-called Five Civilized Tribes, I think they'd be the weakest choice aside from the Seminoles. (Any one of the Creek, Chickisaw, or Choctaw would be an excellent choice, but given that they also practiced large-scale agriculture they're not going to be your forest-based civ.)

One possibility for a civ that might accurately have forest-based bonuses as well as taking on the Iroquois' diplomatic abilities is the Powhatan, as I've advocated in other threads. They really did build a civilization in the woods of Virginia/North Carolina.

Given that Civ5 had two Native American civilizations (Iroquois, Shoshone), maybe if we're lucky Civ6 will get three...

 

[More4Fred]

Here are my suggestions:

Americas: Incas
Maya
Sioux

Oceania: Polynesians
Maori
Aboriginal Australians

Asia: Khmer
Ottomans
Assyrians

Africa: Zulu
Ethiopia
Mali

Europe: Byzantines
Papal States
Franks

Others I would like to see would be The Visigoths, The Ostrogoths, The Lombards, The Saxons, The Celts, The Olmecs, The Apache, The Iroquois, The Cherokee, Thailand, and Korea. I enjoyed using the Romans or the Byzantines in games against The Visigoths, Ostrogoths, Lombards, and Huns, or pitting the Inca against the Aztecs in Civ 5. The Maori and Aboriginal Australians would add ancient civs that the game has never seen, and might offer some interesting policy and religious elements.