Funny part is this this type of sword wielding elephants are depicted in temple paintings in sri lanka.Were elephants trained to use swords is questionable.
This is what I was also thinking,separate civis are the way to go but 3 or 2 are the standard civi number per dlc we will need to make compromise.
Considering the last East Asian DLC set a precedent with 5 civilizations, I suppose we can get the same number again.
That’s just 3 chinese and 2 half baked civis.This setup would be similar to having chera pandya pallawa kingdoms and kalingans speaking bengali and sindi speaking hindustani.
Considering there’s no separate Chola civ, it’s honestly still fine. The original Dravidians already cover the Chola legacy quite well (naval focus, South Indian architecture, economy). Cheras can naturally represent the Malayali sphere, while Pallavas fit well as representatives of early Telugu polities.
This way, major Far South Indian cultural-linguistic regions are still meaningfully represented without overcrowding the DLC with too many closely related civs. Furthermore these entities are not short lived like the three Kingdoms
I think you mean “Sindh speaking Hindi”
Hindi along with Urdu are the modern offshoot of Hindustani language which is the colloquial register for both. Hindi is Sanskritised Hindustani while Urdu is Persianised Hindustani.
The rigid separation into two “antagonistic” languages was largely a product of the 19th century under British colonial policy. Under the “divide and rule” strategy, colonial administrators actively promoted them as two distinct languages, linking Hindi to Hindus and Urdu to Muslims, to foster cultural and political divisions.
Linguistically, Hindi and Urdu are considered one single language referred to as Hindi-Urdu or Hindustani.
Oh, I didn’t know Hindustani was a term for a language. I thought it was just the ethnic group.
Going through this thread, along with some light research of my own and based on my personal preferences, I am thinking my personal desire for a second Indian DLC would be the below civs.
Kannadigas
Telugus
Punjabis OR Nepalis (Punjabis a much higher preference than Nepalis tbh)
(Dravidians renamed Tamil)
I like the idea of Punjabis (to represent the earlier Muslim groups, many of the Muslim enemies in campaigns like Prithviraj had their power base in Punjab, and the Lodi dynasty you fight in the Babur campaign was Punjabi. I like Bengalis and Gurjaras as is personally. I like the presence of early and later medieval periods both being represented, with the early-medieval tripartate power struggle being represented by Bengalis, Gurjaras, and now Kannandigas representing Rashtrakuta, and then Tamils and even later Hindustanis representing the later period. Gurjaras can also serve to represent the Rajputs I think Bengalis is sufficent to represent both early and late e. India
I think the most major absenses from this are Sinhalese and Kashmiris, but from what I can tell (I’m admittedly no master of Indian subcontinent history) the Punjabis had a much greater effect on northern India than the Kashmiris, and while southern India is probably the area most lacking area, I wouldn’t want the whole DLC to just be southern India and it seems Kannandigas and Telugus were both more important than Sinhalese. I also don’t like the idea of Hindustanis representing all Islamicised Indians across the full history of the region as it seems the Hindustani civ is based mainly on the Mughals, which come at the tail end of the time period, hence Punjabis being my preferred third since they seem to have had a large effect on the region throughout the whole time period of the game.
I’d love to hear opinions from people who i’m sure are more knowledgeable than me on Indian history though.
How feasible would a Gonds civ be? That region on that map is the one major hole left, and Gonds seem like the best non-dynastic option to fill it, but their history seems kinda sparse. I was considering splitting my above Indians DLC into southern and northern parts as outlined below.
Kannadigas
Telugus
Sinhalese
(Dravidians renamed Tamil)
________
Nepalis OR Kashmiris
Punjabis (to represent the earlier Muslim groups, many of the Muslim enemies in campaigns like Prithviraj had their power base in Punjab, and the Lodi dynasty you fight in the Babur campaign was Punjabi.)
Kalingans (Edited from Gonds)
I suppose you could still use this split and remove Gonds, having both Nepalis and Kashmiris, but that hole in the map feels awkward…I guess Telugu could be used to fill it, but I dunno. Any thoughts?
Kalingans would be my number 1 pick for another Indian civ.
Good call, that works well for that area and is less of a stretch than the Gonds.
Do you think Nepalis is feasible or no? I kinda wanted to get some representation for the southern flank of the Himalayas (especially because its possible we don’t get Tibetans) but I dunno.
I wonder if we could feasibly receive a Christian Indian civ. India has had large numbers of Christians longer than almost anywhere else, including Europe, and basically every other religion in the subcontinent is already represented through a civ.
There were Christians, Jews, and Zoroastrians in India, but to my knowledge neither formed a lasting independent polity, they lived as minorities in Hindu and Muslim kingdoms.
Speaking of Zoroastrians, IIRC they survived a bit longer in the Khorasan region – perhaps a Khorasani civ one day?
If the main purpose is to fill blanks…
I think the Sinhalese (Sri Lankans) and the Khas/Khashiya (Nepalis) should have fairly high priority. These two civilizations would provide content not covered by the existing civs, and more importantly, as the dominant ethnic groups of modern nations, they are much easier to promote.
A civ representing Central India (named as Karachuris or Gonds) could potentially become the third civ in the DLC in my opinion, as distinct from the Bengalis to the east, the Dravidians to the south, and the Gurjaras and the Muslim to the Northwest. The frequently mentioned Kalingans (I am not even sure whether this is an idiomatic term) on the eastern coast and the Kashmiris would likely have lower priority. Meanwhile, the issue of splitting the Dravidians would be put on hold.
That would not make much sense as there were very few of them.A punjabi civi with Sikhism would be a better choice if one is going with religion.
Buddhism can be also split to Mahayana(bengalis) Therawada Sri kanaka or Tailand and Vajrayana Tibet or Nepal.But we dont need any of these added.
Kannadigas, Kalingans, Sinhalese, Deccanis, Assamese, Nepalis and Kashmiris.
I’d add these civs to the Indian region.
Why? There are two longlasting empires left in South India: Kannadigas and Kalingans (or call them Oriyas). They were the most significant. Kashmiris had a shortlasting empire while Sinhalese, Nepalis, Deccanis and Assamese were kingdoms.
Unified country’s is a bit beyond kingdoms.We already have non empire or even kingdoms ingame already.
Because
And a DLC won’t have over 3 civs usually.
So, the Sinhalese, the Khas, and one for Central India, would be my pick.