The result of the polls shows that most of people think that Firaxis should add a new leader to these 3 nations!

C'mon Japan, Arabia and Spain really need a new leader!

The solution now is to add them in a special patch!

What do you think?

There's a similar topic already.

There's a similar topic already.

About a patch?

Let's make Firaxis hear us! ;)

not exactly but the posts in the thread all have to do with "Fireaxis should include them in a patch/mini-expansion"

The result of the polls shows that most of people think that Firaxis should add a new leader to these 3 nations!

C'mon Japan, Arabia and Spain really need a new leader!

The solution now is to add them in a special patch!

What do you think?

I wouldn't mind, but it never going to happen...They would most likely add them in a new expansion pack, but never patch them in for free...

What would be cool is to have an expansion pack released with lots of new leaders for only existing civs, and that's all the expansion pack would be...Then just lower the cost to, like, $10 or something...I'd buy that in a heartbeat...

I'd be very surprised if Firaxis included any new leaders in a patch, but there are three trait combinations still available and three civilizations that deserve a second leader. It wouldn't be too hard for Firaxis to add a second leader with the available trait combinations.

Creative/Charismatic - Arab
Protective/Organized - Japan
Philosophical/Industrious - Uhh... Spain? Hrmm maybe I didn't think this over so well...

What would be cool is to have an expansion pack released with lots of new leaders for only existing civs, and that's all the expansion pack would be...Then just lower the cost to, like, $10 or something...I'd buy that in a heartbeat...

Yeah, It is hard to choose the right leaders in right expansion. Maybe specific expansions should be the solution.

Creative/Charismatic - Arab
Protective/Organized - Japan
Philosophical/Industrious - Uhh... Spain? Hrmm maybe I didn't think this over so well...

Meiji for Japan and Franco for Spain (they are a Beyond the Sword era leaders)!
For the Arabs, there are lot of them! Modern and Ancient/Medieval!

I would put Creative/Charismatic in Franco and Philosophical/Industrious in an Arab one.

Don't forget China.

I'd like mini-xpacks for 10 bugs, including two new leaders and a scenario each, maybe a new unit once in a while ... :D

yes! throw in China and India and Rome too for three leaders!

Let's see here.

Rome should have Trajan.
Babylon should have Nebuchadnezzar II.
China should have Empress Wu.
Ethiopia should have Menelik II.
India should have Akbar the Great, or perhaps Babur.
Arabia should have Abu Bakr, or if that's a religious taboo, Hārūn al-Rashīd.
Spain should have Charles I, or perhaps Philip II.

I can't think of anybody for Japan because of the cultural taboo of having Emperor Meiji. Perhaps Oda Nobunaga, but that's two leaders from the same time period. Also, António Salazar for Portugal, but I don't know how unpopular that would make Civ4 in Portugal. Russia already has three leaders, but I'd love to see Ivan the Great. And Theodore Roosevelt for America.

For other civilizations: King David of Israel, Simon Bolivar of Venezuela, and Casimir III of Poland. Most of this is just dreaming, of course.

yes! throw in China and India and Rome too for three leaders!

And Germany too please;)

THROW IN ONE FOR EVERYBODY!!!!!
I love myself...:lol:...best solution I've ever heard on the whole CFC forums...

For Japan one of the "three great nobles" who shaped the Meiji restoration could be argued for.

They are not nearly as famous as Meiji himself, of course, but they are far from unknown in historical (and anime-viewing, thanks mainly to Rurouni Kenshin) circles.

Of the three, I would steer clear of using Saigo Takamori, since he died in a revolt against the Meiji reformation, but Okubo Toshimichi or Kido Takayoshi would do the trick.

I would like three more leaders to finish out every trait combination, and I think Japan, Arabia, and Spain are all fine choices.

They've already put in Fin/Org and Agg/Char. They might as well stick in Phi/Ind and Cre/Char as well. I'm surprised they didn't put in Pro/Org instead of Fin/Org or Agg/Char, since it isn't a brutally powerful combination.

I would like three more leaders to finish out every trait combination, and I think Japan, Arabia, and Spain are all fine choices.

They've already put in Fin/Org and Agg/Char. They might as well stick in Phi/Ind and Cre/Char as well. I'm surprised they didn't put in Pro/Org instead of Fin/Org or Agg/Char, since it isn't a brutally powerful combination.

Phil/Ind perfect for Taizong or any Tang ruler of China. Cre/Char perfect for Harun Al-Rashid.

However, there's an obvious problem with Phil / Ind. That combo of traits is quite overpowered since that would make said civilization a Great Person factory. In order to balance that, it should be assigned to a civilization with a quite crappy UB / UU. I think that Babylon would be a good fit. Also, Perhaps Meiji's Japan. A way to balance such a combo would be to make Meiji unable to use Japan's unique unit (Samurai), a compensation measure for these great traits that would also make completely historical sense ;-)

Of course I voted for. Any free stuff as significant as new leaders or civs would be great ... though I presume it'll never happen. You might as well ask them to give out free dollar notes.

The solution is a mod!

Firaxis isn't going to give three leaders away for free. And no online poll is going to change that.

However, there's an obvious problem with Phil / Ind. That combo of traits is quite overpowered since that would make said civilization a Great Person factory. In order to balance that, it should be assigned to a civilization with a quite crappy UB / UU. I think that Babylon would be a good fit.

Fits, too. Babylon had both the Hanging Gardens and the Tower of Babil. And Hammurabi had the Code, which is quite philosophical.

I still vote for General Franco instead of Philip or Charles, he is a modern leader and leadered Spain in WWII/Cold War, so Civ IV will have one more WWII/Cold War period leader together with Roosevelt, Stalin, Churchill, De Gaulle and Mao (did I forget one?)...

Except Franco was a dictator that's hated by everybody in Spain. The only good thing he brought was an increased economy.

If you're going to add the World War II leaders, go for Haile Selassie, Tojo and Mussolini. Hitler is banned in Germany, and Firaxis would hate to lose sales there, but you got everyone else.

I don't know why anyone would answer this poll in the negative. We all want free stuff. However, the chance of getting free leaders for Civ outside of player made mods is pretty slim.

The solution is a mod!

Completely agree.

I second Germany getting a 3rd leader.

Germany has three leaders. Only it's split into two civilizations.

C'mon Firaxis, Japan, Arabia and Spain only have one leader? The solution is a patch!

Yes! Someone actually mentioned Arabia. The Arabs deserve a second leader then anyone else, imho but most people only mention Spain and Japan. :crazyeye:

I voted yes, by the way.

I'm surprised they didn't put in Pro/Org instead of Fin/Org or Agg/Char, since it isn't a brutally powerful combination.

I'm pretty sure they didn't put that combo in because it was contradictory. Protective pushes towards a defensive turtling strategy, and Organized towards a warmongering/expansionist strategy.

I'm pretty sure they didn't put that combo in because it was contradictory. Protective pushes towards a defensive turtling strategy, and Organized towards a warmongering/expansionist strategy.

Fair enough, but Fin/Org is incredibly powerful, and Agg/Char was the "dream combination" everyone talked about when Warlords was released. I think adding them both was something of a mistake, but I'm glad that Agg/Char was given to a Civ with a middling UU and UB. Fin/Org, on the other hand, was given to Persia, and they have a top tier UU. :/ It'll be like playing with vanilla Washington all over again, except even more broken.

from what I've seen, most civ patches only tweak some values or fix bugs I can't remember a single one adding new content. additionally it would be practically impossible for fraxis to release new leaders in a patch. choosing the traits and stats of the leader would be easy, but creating a 3d animated leader head is the kind of thing that would have to be a planned feature and not a quick fix.
however it is a good idea for a mod

Yes. Please? I'll be very grateful, not to mention the other 57 people who voted yes.

Leaders for Japan, Arabia, maybe Spain. A third leader for China and India would be awesome.

Fair enough, but Fin/Org is incredibly powerful, and Agg/Char was the "dream combination" everyone talked about when Warlords was released. I think adding them both was something of a mistake, but I'm glad that Agg/Char was given to a Civ with a middling UU and UB. Fin/Org, on the other hand, was given to Persia, and they have a top tier UU. :/ It'll be like playing with vanilla Washington all over again, except even more broken.

I always felt Fin/Org was a bit overrated, since Organized is only useful on higher difficulty levels and/or warmongering, and Fin is usually only useful in builder mode, they're kinda contradictory. Fin/Phi or Agg/Org or Cha/Org would all be stronger than Fin/Org because they're synergetic IMO.

There needs to be one for the aztecs!

Not sure why you all want another leader to play for these 3 civs.

Firaxis have made a final patch and they wont add any more to this game now. Besides mods can be used for this anyway.

I think most matches of civ traits that Firaxis wanted to use they have. Same goes for UU and UB. More would just dilute what the current mix of civs already offer.

I think its coming to the point where you just want to add more leaders for the sake of it.

Totally agree.
A patch for that should be made!

arabia has a protective leader
and japan haas protective leader
i will never play with those civs until they get a second non-protective leader.
spain.... i hate that woman, definitely need a new leader there.

China should get Chaing Kai Shek.
Japan should get Meiji.
Russia should not get any new leaders until everyone else has four, or Gorbechev, if The USA gets Kennedy.

I can't think of anybody for Japan because of the cultural taboo of having Emperor Meiji.


What is the cultural taboo for Meiji? I wasn't aware of any. On the original topic, I have long wanted a better leader for Japan in terms of traits since I hate Toku's. I was disappointed that they didn't add another leader for Japan in BTS since I've always wanted to play them with better traits to make up for the UB I'm not a big fan of.

I don't really like either protective or aggressive that much and I always figured that something along the lines of imperialistic, financial, or organized (like in vanilla for toku) made more sense for Meiji.

This is all probably wishful thinking that they will add more leaders to this game but I can always dream I guess. Is it even possible to patch in new leaders anyways (I'm not a computer person so I wouldn't know)?

I'd love to see a mini-expansion that just adds leaders to existing civs.

Please, Firaxis... give Egypt a philosophical leader? For me?

...And maybe a financial leader for America? >.> I don't wanna have to master the specialist economy. ;_;

Maybe a Roman and a Chinese leader don't suck? As I've said elsewhere I'd love a Chinese leader from pre-unification.

I know different leaders from those countries anyway.

First, I've been living in Japan for over 20 years, and I can't think of why there is a cultural taboo against having Emperor Meiji in a game. The deification of the emperor ended in 1945.
I suggest Prince Shotoku (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Sh%C5%8Dtoku) (AKA Prince Umayado), a well-respected and well-known figure from the Asuka period (6th-7th c.). He is "mythical" but so is Gilgamesh.
It might also be interesting to take a historical figure from the Heian period (8th-12th c.), such as Fujiwara no Michinaga (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujiwara_no_Michinaga), maybe.
Civs with only one leader are too limited.

maybe an expansion pack would be even better!! i would advise the great poet king Nezahualcoyotl, lord of Texcoco, for the Aztecs. Never understood why they chose Montezuma... he was probably one of the worst Aztec kings during their "brief" history :S

maybe an expansion pack would be even better!! i would advise the great poet king Nezahualcoyotl, lord of Texcoco, for the Aztecs. Never understood why they chose Montezuma... he was probably one of the worst Aztec kings during their "brief" history :S

He's the most well known, though.
Hence why they also chose Capac of the Incans, Mao of China, Stalin of Russia etc., etc.

It's more about how well known a leader is than the good they did for their own nation.
Except with Egypt, and that was just kinda shocking. Hatty instead of Cleopatra.

I'm puzzeled how Emperor Meiji was left out at all. Especially since the special building for Japan is an industrial/modern era building. If you are going to have a medieval leader as the only option, then the building should be appropriate to that time period.

I'm puzzeled how Emperor Meiji was left out at all. Especially since the special building for Japan is an industrial/modern era building. If you are going to have a medieval leader as the only option, then the building should be appropriate to that time period.

Agreed.

Though to be honest, Japan's UB sucks anyway. It really, really needs to be changed even if they don't add Meiji.

I really think they should have Meiji as a japanese leader with the traits Creative/Charismatic.

Having the creative trait automatically puts Meiji as one of the top competitors along with Sury, zara, willem, louis, etc etc etc. It would be nice to have Japan be up in the top of the scoreboard.

I really think they should have Meiji as a japanese leader with the traits Creative/Charismatic.

Having the creative trait automatically puts Meiji as one of the top competitors along with Sury, zara, willem, louis, etc etc etc. It would be nice to have Japan be up in the top of the scoreboard.

Why not fin?
I mean I don't think it'd entirely fit, but Japan could use either a Philosophical or Financial leader.

Why not fin?
I mean I don't think it'd entirely fit, but Japan could use either a Philosophical or Financial leader.

All the financial/phi combos are used up except phhi/ind. :(

All the financial/phi combos are used up except phhi/ind. :(

So?
I don't see any reason why they should stick to just having one person for each combo.

First, I've been living in Japan for over 20 years, and I can't think of why there is a cultural taboo against having Emperor Meiji in a game. The deification of the emperor ended in 1945.
I suggest Prince Shotoku (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prince_Sh%C5%8Dtoku) (AKA Prince Umayado), a well-respected and well-known figure from the Asuka period (6th-7th c.). He is "mythical" but so is Gilgamesh.
It might also be interesting to take a historical figure from the Heian period (8th-12th c.), such as Fujiwara no Michinaga (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fujiwara_no_Michinaga), maybe.
Civs with only one leader are too limited.

Yeah I couldn't figure it out either. I thought it was a lot more controversial that someone mentioned Hirohito or Tojo as a suggestion. As a half Japanese raised in both countries, I would find it unacceptable to have either one of those men in the game. I understand that sometimes they put people in the game just because they are well known but usually an argument can be made for some good things that were accomplished as well (in case of stalin: industrialization/defense of country in WW2) but those two men really did nothing except bringing Japan closer to ruin than a Mongol invasion did. Not only that, but they did it with a reckless disregard for human life (Japanese lives included). Meiji, Shotoku, Pimiko, I don't care if they even make Abe no Seimei from Onmyouji the leader... just no Tojo or Hirohito.

On other topic: I would love it if we could have at least two leaders per civilization. That'd be cool.

Yeah, It is hard to choose the right leaders in right expansion. Maybe specific expansions should be the solution.



Meiji for Japan and Franco for Spain (they are a Beyond the Sword era leaders)!
For the Arabs, there are lot of them! Modern and Ancient/Medieval!

I would put Creative/Charismatic in Franco and Philosophical/Industrious in an Arab one.


What about Incas and Aztecs! (Spelled Wrong) Caugtehmoc anyone?

Also, Empress Wu and Akbar for China and India....plus (Again, mispelled) Ne-bu-ke-nez-ur for Babylon and Yoritomo for Japan!

i dont think that any civ at this point should add more leaders so that it has three...im ok with the ones that allready do have three such as france and russia and england but if firaxis will add any more leaders in an expansion or a patch which i doubt will ever happen, they should do it to the ones that only have 1 leader...kinda seem neglected dont u think? spain and arabia as well as japan being around since the first game and only have one leader while america and england among others have 3...:mad:

What about Incas and Aztecs! (Spelled Wrong) Caugtehmoc anyone?

Also, Empress Wu and Akbar for China and India....plus (Again, mispelled) Ne-bu-ke-nez-ur for Babylon and Yoritomo for Japan!

Nebuchadnezzar

*If* a need is felt for a second Spanish leader, please don't choose Philip II; his traits would be identical with Isabella's. A better choice would be Alphonso the Wise of Castile. Traits: Philosophical and Organized.

I think the only chance we're ever getting new leaders from Firaxis is if they release another expansion (which i think is unlikely) or when they put out a Civ4:Complete.

They already put out a civ IV complete months ago....

ANOTHER patch ... they just surprised all the modders with the new bts patch ... at some point it would be nice if the community knew they were done with patches so mods wouldn't have to be updated constantly.

Not sure why you all want another leader to play for these 3 civs.
/...snip.../
I think its coming to the point where you just want to add more leaders for the sake of it.

I'd say this kind of topic has always been about a one of three factors, or a combination thereof:
a) someone has subjective reasons for favouring a certain historic civilization or historic leader and by confusing the game with reality they think the game is deficient until the relevant addition has been made,
b) it is an opportunity for people to show off their historic knowledge.
c) as Gumbolt rightly suggests, to have more just for the sake of it.

I can sympathise only with c). :)

Mr DF, whilst I don't have a problem with what you suggested, repetition of trait combos, I do think that would lead to possible game balancing issues...

Eg: If (plus the leader A of) Civ A has a better UB/UU than (plus leader Z of) Civ B, unless Civ B has a leader X available with better traits (in magnitude of benefits) than Leader A, Civ A, by definition, is 'better.'

Personally I just want Chm/Cre.... surely there was a leader of a big nation at some time that was into Art and Music but wasnt an ass face introvert...? (Nandor Tanczos! oops I said big nation)

Harun-al-Rashid for Arabia. He was certainly one of the most cultured leaders of the Islamic Golden Age, and was famous throughout the western world, so he should be creative/charismatic.
I wouldn't want Abu Bakr (ra) in a video game, I think its sacreligious to turn him into a plaything. Plus you would have to declare war on Arabia at some point, and I would never want to say 'I would like your head on a pole' to Farooq-e-Azam.

Why not an Arabian leader from before Islam took over the land?
You could truly have a Phi/Ind leader then, as the area was basically the home of scientific thought for the longest time.

Why not an Arabian leader from before Islam took over the land?
You could truly have a Phi/Ind leader then, as the area was basically the home of scientific thought for the longest time.
There is not as much documented history from that period, but there were some powerful civilisations in southern Arabia and Yemen, including the Aad people, who built an enormous dam. The civilisation was destroyed when the dam burst. There were also Helenistic civilisations in the north who built the underground settlements of Jordan such as Petra.
Perhaps the most famous pre-Islamic Arabian leader is the Queen of Sheba, who either ruled Yemen or Ethiopia.

In general though, before Islam Arabia was a rather weak peripheral area on the border between Rome and Persia.

There is not as much documented history from that period, but there were some powerful civilisations in southern Arabia and Yemen, including the Aad people, who built an enormous dam. The civilisation was destroyed when the dam burst.

I would love to play a civ that sows the seeds of their own destruction in such an obvious and tragic manner :goodjob:

Yep, it would be perfect for me. :lol:

...

*Cries*

I would love to play a civ that sows the seeds of their own destruction in such an obvious and tragic manner :goodjob:
Correction: It was the Himyarites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himyar#From_300_A.D._until_Islam_dawned_on_Yemen) that were destroyed by the dam burst, not the Aad, who were destroyed by a number of natural catastrophes including a storm and the collapse of a cavern under the city of Ubar.

Correction: It was the Himyarites (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Himyar#From_300_A.D._until_Islam_dawned_on_Yemen) that were destroyed by the dam burst, not the Aad, who were destroyed by a number of natural catastrophes including a storm and the collapse of a cavern under the city of Ubar.

That describes so many of my cities since BtS. :(
So many.
So... so many. :cry: