Now that dual leaders are official...

[blackcatatonic]

...it's time to speculate on who might be added in future DLC/expansion packs if we are to have dual leaders for some of the other Civs as well

(N.B.: I'm making a few assumptions here, which may not be the case - for instance, I feel that in the interests of diversity, where possible they will go for leaders representing a different time period in that Civilization's history, and they will also pick leaders of the opposite gender if they can. Obviously only one of those is true in the case of Greece, but then Greece in Civ very much seems to represent the classical Civilization rather than its descendants.)

Off the top of my head, here are a few possibilities...

Egypt: Ramesses II has to be the obvious candidate here. I feel his unique would give him more of a military slant than Cleo. More yield from captured cities could be a good one.

England: I'm hoping they don't go with Churchill as I'd like to see a bit of recognition for England rather than 'Britain' which is what Victoria seems to represent. Henery VIII would be an interesting, if controversial choice. I'd love to see Edward III with the Longbowman as a unique, but there are plenty of other worthy candidates. Just no King Arthur, please

France: The somewhat oddball choice of Catherine de Medici leaves room for any one of a number of French rulers. Louis XIV and Napoleon are the obvious candidates, and I think they'll go with Napoleon as he represents a later time period and also offers France a more military path (whereas I feel that Louis would favour culture, like Catherine).

Spain: One of the easier ones as we have already seen Isabella on the bingo board, and we assume her to be Isabella of Castile rather than Isabella of Portugal. She would presumably have another religious bonus of some sort, possibly with more emphasis on exploration than Philip has.

Right, because I'm a) ignorant about quite a lot of Civs, and b) short on time, does anyone have any other suggestions?

 

[moysturfurmer]

We been doing this for months in the black pit that is Ideas and Suggestions

 

[stealth_nsk]

England needs Longbowmen, so probably Edward III.
America - Washington with Minutemen.

 

[KrikkitTwo]

Theodora for Rome (and Greece)

 

[just_passed_away]

Russia - Catherine. Again. Unfortunately

 

[Nurse Michael]

My wishlist:

Germany - Bismarck
China - Mao Zedong
Japan - Meiji
India - Asoka or Akbar
Arabia - Harun
Kongo - Queen Nzinga
Russia - Stalin
Rome - Julius Caesar
Egypt - Ramesses II
England - Henry VIII
France - Napoleon

 

[ehecatzin]

Also, to add more fuel to the multiple leader speculation, remember that unit reskin and color scheme are also on the table.

As for leaders lets start with Greece, it may get a third leader in Alexander, reskin the Hoplites to look Macedonian, diferent color scheme, and a LUA for straight up wide expansion on the level of Rome or Russia.

For Rome, I think the best choice would be for a leader from Republican Rome, as to give both Rome's a very distinct flavour (maybe the Forum will make it under a second leader)

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

England will probably have Elizabeth I again. France will probably get Louis XIV. Spain is obviously getting Isabella.

I hope America gets Jefferson or Kennedy, although Lincoln seems likely. Jackson might be an evil Wildcard choice. He's definitely a Big Personality.

Germany will probably get Bismarck, although i would prefer Hermann or even Wilhelm II for Big Personality flavors.

Russia might get Catherine or Ivan the Terrible.

 

[Grumpbeard]

I would love to see them go really off the rails for America and pick John Adams.

 

[dexters]

I was under the impression Greece is getting 2 leaders due to it missing 1 extra UA/UU/UB is this still correct?

In any case multi leader support seems like a good thing and long speculated. It was especially apparent when they went with the static painted backdrops that the logic of supporting multiple leaders was even more pronounced.

I do kind of wish we get fully rendered leader scenes in a future civ game. Though the expense was probably a huge limiting factor in Civ5

 

[wildlumberjack]

England needs Longbowmen, so probably Edward III.
America - Washington with Minutemen.

As it is confirmed that both leaders could play at once, it's unlikely that the second leader can have the same capital. In this case, no more leaders with London or Washington as a capital. But it's only a theory

EDIT:
so my theory for a second leader:
1) one man leader and one woman leader
2) different capitals
3) unique name

 

[Furycrab]

Personally I don't really care who they take for alternate leaders, I'm more interested in how they give twists to specific civs. I would like to see an Indian leader that doesn't just want peace. Or a more peaceful Norway that seeks to use the early oceanfaring to get better trade, science or Religion.

Greece was a pretty easy one. The wildcard already lends itself to multiple playstyles, it just needed the other leader to push it in a different direction.

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas & Suggestions.

 

[Grumpbeard]

As it was confirmed that both leaders could play at once, there is a very little chance that the second leader would have the same capital. In this case, no more leaders with London or Washington as a capital. But it's only a theory

But wouldn't Washington's capital be Philly, anyway?

 

[ehecatzin]

I was under the impression Greece is getting 2 leaders due to it missing 1 extra UA/UU/UB is this still correct?

In any case multi leader support seems like a good thing and long speculated. It was especially apparent when they went with the static painted backdrops that the logic of supporting multiple leaders was even more pronounced.

I do kind of wish we get fully rendered leader scenes in a future civ game. Though the expense was probably a huge limiting factor in Civ5

Yeah, the 2D backgrounds were a sign for me as wel, that they reworked the production pipeline to focus on the important part: The leader.

As much as I liked civ5 leaderscreens design wise, I think Firaxis did the smart thing of focusing on a character design and animation (and a more manageable pipeline)

 

[PhroX]

I'd like to see some more less obvious ones rather than simply bringing back "classics" from older Civs.

For England, my favourite would probably be Edward I - more focused on conquering neighbours than overseas - though Edward III as the OP suggests would be pretty good. Or, for something completely leftfield, how about Aethelstan - the first King of England?
France, well, I'd like them to go earlier instead of the more obvious Sun King or Nappy. Maybe Louis IX? Known for both military successes and reorganising the justice system of France. Or even Charles Martel.
Russia, Ivan III could be interesting. But then I like Rurikoviches more than Romanovs.
Germany is a little difficult to find another unused leader who represents something very different from Redbeard unless we start including Austrians (Hapsburgs). Maybe Wilhelm II, but he was hardly a leader worthy of leading a Civilisation. If the do bring someone back, I'd prefer Freddie the Great to Bismarck
Eygpt, I'd kinda like to see Akhenaten (or, if they want to up the number of women, his wife Nefertiti). Definitely something religion focused for them.
A Republican era Roman would indeed be really cool. Cincinnatus maybe?
For Japan, Meiji would definitely be my preferred choice, but as I understand there are issues with depicting the Imperial Family so that might not be doable.
China, Zhu Yuanzhang (Hongwu Emperor - founder of the Ming dynatsy) could be interesting.
India, Chandragupta II perhaps? (I'd prefer not to see Akbar - instead, I'd keep him for a separate Timurid civilisation covering both Tamerlane himself and the Mughals)

 

[blackcatatonic]

We been doing this for months in the black pit that is Ideas and Suggestions

My bad. I never go in there! But now I do

 

[blackcatatonic]

Russia - Catherine. Again. Unfortunately

I was thinking that, but surely with another Catherine already in the game that might be too confusing. Elisabeth?

 

[blackcatatonic]

I'd like to see some more less obvious ones rather than simply bringing back "classics" from older Civs.

For England, my favourite would probably be Edward I - more focused on conquering neighbours than overseas - though Edward III as the OP suggests would be pretty good. Or, for something completely leftfield, how about Aethelstan - the first King of England?
France, well, I'd like them to go earlier instead of the more obvious Sun King or Nappy. Maybe Louis IX? Known for both military successes and reorganising the justice system of France. Or even Charles Martel.
Russia, Ivan III could be interesting. But then I like Rurikoviches more than Romanovs.
Germany is a little difficult to find another unused leader who represents something very different from Redbeard unless we start including Austrians (Hapsburgs). Maybe Wilhelm II, but he was hardly a leader worthy of leading a Civilisation. If the do bring someone back, I'd prefer Freddie the Great to Bismarck
Eygpt, I'd kinda like to see Akhenaten (or, if they want to up the number of women, his wife Nefertiti). Definitely something religion focused for them.
A Republican era Roman would indeed be really cool. Cincinnatus maybe?
For Japan, Meiji would definitely be my preferred choice, but as I understand there are issues with depicting the Imperial Family so that might not be doable.
China, Zhu Yuanzhang (Hongwu Emperor - founder of the Ming dynatsy) could be interesting.
India, Chandragupta II perhaps? (I'd prefer not to see Akbar - instead, I'd keep him for a separate Timurid civilisation covering both Tamerlane himself and the Mughals)

Great post! Love your suggestions, especially for England. He could even have Winchester instead of London

I agree with you on France - I would love to see an earlier ruler than a later one. I just feel that they will go with Napoleon once again, unfortunately. But Charles Martel, Saint Louis, or Charles VII, or even Philippe-Auguste would all be awesome.

 

[VermelhoRed]

We have to consider that for gameplay purposes, alternate leaders will probably HAVE to have a different capital! Because it seems like they can be played on the same map, and having the same capital would ruin it!

I'd say for Rome, Constantine ruling from Constantinople seems like the most obvious choice, and solves the whole "Byzantine Civilisation" polemics.
Similarly, while Germany has plenty of good choices, I'd love to see Maria Theresa with Vienna as her capital. She would be a cool mirror to Barbarossa as well, with some bonus to city-states, maybe a bonus diplo card to mirror his military card.
France and England would get harder choices to pick, given that most ruled from Paris and London, respectively. Alfred ruled from Winchester though. And Louis XIV could be said to rule from Versailles.
For Russia, they can pick any leader that ruled from Moscow, I'm hoping Lenin will return with some ideological abilities. If they're really daring, though, they could pick St. Olga with Kiev as a capital.
America has the obvious Washington ruling from Philadelphia. If they're really really REALLY daring they could have Jefferson Davis ruling from Richmond!
Arabia has numerous choices ruling from cities like Damascus, Baghdad, etc. Sadly the only ruler that could have Mecca as his legit capital was Mohammed himself, and won't be depicted.
Brazil probably won't have a second leader, but if we get one, it won't be Vargas I think. He literally gave his oppositor's wife as a present to Hitler! Kubitschek would be the second-best choice, ruling from Brasília, and with a cool LUA name "50 Years in 5". But when they gave the Republican flag to D. Pedro, instead of the monarchic cross-and-sphere, I guess they already ruled out a second Brazilian ruler.

As for Kongo, I must remind you guys that Ana Nzinga Mbande was ruler of two different kingdoms in her life, neither was Kongo, nor did she rule over Kongo people! She was a Mbundu, ruling over the Mbundu kingdoms of Ndongo (also known as Angola) and Matambe!