More evil civs!

I wouldn't say Babylon or Aztecs look evil. They look brooding, more like emos in a bad mood. Shaka doesnt look evil at all, unless you consider elephant skulls particularly, but really how much more evil is that than reindeer antlers on someone elses wall? Unless you think that because Shaka is a black person holding a weapon therefore evil, then :gasp: you have bigger problems.

The most imposing would be Askia, with those burning building in the back. Not a good sign.

Although the idea of good guy and bad guy civs may be more palatable if each civ had two leaders to choose from like in Civ4, and aggro and a peaceful version. Although I don't know any peaceful leaders for Mongolia...

I find shaka evil mostly because he always tries to conquer the world. Not because he's black.

As far as evil civs go you forgot to mention Siam. If you are near him he will backstab you for any reason he can find. Too many Wonders - tick, warmongering - tick, small & peaceful - tick, expansive - tick....

There's really no way where Siam won't come after you.

He is the worst backstabber of the bunch. Some come after you if they smell blood, but no rhyme or reason for him.

I agree that Siam is a total dick. That does bring an interesting philosophical point: is being a dick the same as evil? Are all evil people dicks?

Loucypher said:

In before thousands of screams for Hitler, Stalin and Mao.

Thing is, who would you classify as an "evil" leader for, say, the Netherlands, America, Poland, Brazil...and I could go on and on.
Heck, I think the Montezuma depiction is kind of insensitive as it is.

Click to expand...

Obama for America would work quite nicely!

Not sure if baseless demonizing of Obama, or satire thereof...

Hearing people call him a communist and a radical liberal when he has a cabinet full of former Goldman-Sachs partners and zero pieces of liberal legislation with his signature on it, it's like watching a dog hump furniture.

LoneRebel said:

Not too different from the Holodomor in the USSR under Stalin then. Stalin wanted to turn the USSR from an agrarian economy into an industrialized power, and he certainly succeeded at that - at the cost of millions of lives. But even Stalin has been a leader in Civ...

Click to expand...

So has Mao. He was one of the Chinese leaders in Civ IV.

Evil is a term to be applied to very few leaders though- take Vlad Tepes. In the western world he is Vlad the Impaler known best as the inspiration for Dracula, but in Romania he is a hero and was supposedly quite popular among the peasantry during his lifetime as he was immensely cruel, but also fair- applying the standards to any class which, in the view of the lowest classes of people, was far more than most leaders who applied very different standards to peasants when compared to merchants or the nobility. At least, that was how it was explained to me when I travelling there.

Fabio1701 said:

I agree that Siam is a total dick. That does bring an interesting philosophical point: is being a dick the same as evil? Are all evil people dicks?

Click to expand...

If so, does that mean there cannot be evil women ?

Fabio1701 said:

I agree that Siam is a total dick. That does bring an interesting philosophical point: is being a dick the same as evil? Are all evil people dicks?

Click to expand...

I'm going to cite Futurama ep The Farnsworth Parabox to argue that it is not.

Farnsworth 1: No, wait! I've got it. I know what's in the box. Oh, I've been as dumb as Fry.

Fry 1: Am not!

Farnsworth 1: It contains a parallel universe. And when you create a parallel universe, it's almost always populated by evil twins.

Leela A: Now, look: I am not evil. My loan officer said so.

Farnsworth 1: Oh, you'd like us to believe that wouldn't you, Leela? Or should I say Evil-a?

Bender 1: Oh, this is awful. Somewhere there's a Bender more evil than me. I do my best, damnit!

Farnsworth 1: Leela? [Both Leelas look at him.] Uh, the good Leela. I want you to snoop around the other universe and find out how evil they are. [He hands her Hermes' laser.] Here.

Leela A: I tell you they're not evil. But don't be confused. They are jerks.

Click to expand...

Excuse me - zero pieces of liberal legislation - health care?

TheMadFiddler said:

So has Mao. He was one of the Chinese leaders in Civ IV.

Evil is a term to be applied to very few leaders though- take Vlad Tepes. In the western world he is Vlad the Impaler known best as the inspiration for Dracula, but in Romania he is a hero and was supposedly quite popular among the peasantry during his lifetime as he was immensely cruel, but also fair- applying the standards to any class which, in the view of the lowest classes of people, was far more than most leaders who applied very different standards to peasants when compared to merchants or the nobility. At least, that was how it was explained to me when I travelling there.

Click to expand...

Not surprised to find a Vlad apologist. Where are all the Hitler, Pol Pot and Stalin apologists at? We already have a Mao, join the fun!

Isn't Ghandi and his wet dreams of nuclear annihilation enough for this game?

Evil is statement which you can't really explain. What is evil? When are you evil? When everybody in the world thinks you're evil? No, because there will always be persons who think a certain person wasn't evil. What are our standards for evil?

There are a few people who we can agree on all normal people would find evil. Hitler for example. Sure, there are Neo-Nazi's, but those are completely crazy.
Stalin is a little different. For a long time, people agreed that Stalin was evil, and he was hated in Russia(or the Soviet-Union, whatever you like). But he became more popular in Russia recently(that sounds really idiotic, I know), so can you call him evil?

Mao and Genghis Khan are different stories. They are called villains in the west, but they are admired in China and Mongolia respectively. Vlad Tepes, as mentioned before by TheMadFiddler, is exactly the same story.

When is a leader evil? When he fought a lot of wars? That would make Gustavus Adolphus evil. Bismarck also fought a lot of wars IIRC

You can call a lot of leaders evil. Attila was a ruthless barbarian, is he evil?. Shaka was a ruthless warrior, is he evil?. Napoleon was a brilliant strategist, but a lot of people died because of him, is he evil?. Alexander conquered a lot of lands, is he evil?.

Truth is. You can't really tell who's evil

Bulldog Bats said:

Excuse me - zero pieces of liberal legislation - health care?

Click to expand...

Affordable Care Act is Newt Gingrich's counter offer to Bill Clinton from 1993.

So someone tell me what "open scars" are left from the 19th century? Lol @ people who supposedly like history but can't even get their century designations correct. WWI and WWII happened in the 20th (it even actually says that in the Germany start up screen iirc). As well Rommel is in the game as a GG, so the references to WWII and Nazi Germany are already there (or images if you like). Stalin was already in Civ 4 for crying out loud. Open scars..... Piss on that, really atrocious things were perpetrated by a lunatic; and frankly leave Hitler out of the game because the buffoon wanted to fight a war on, what, like 3 simultaneous fronts... But open scars? No, accept and move on, save any rage for those "the holocaust didn't happen" twits. It's not like we didn't shove the Japanese into internment camps (I'm working with someone who was born in one); I hope they were treated, and by that I imagine the truth is they weren't treated as horribly....

If you have a long enough history you're going to have some black eyes in there (*cough* slavery *cough* how ya doing America)

Besides with the way UA's work Civ 5 doesn't lend itself to multiple leaders the way Civ 4 did.

Dgodus said:

So someone tell me what "open scars" are left from the 19th century? Lol @ people who supposedly like history but can't even get their century designations correct. WWI and WWII happened in the 20th (it even actually says that in the Germany start up screen iirc). As well Rommel is in the game as a GG, so the references to WWII and Nazi Germany are already there (or images if you like). Stalin was already in Civ 4 for crying out loud. Open scars..... Piss on that, really atrocious things were perpetrated by a lunatic; and frankly leave Hitler out of the game because the buffoon wanted to fight a war on, what, like 3 simultaneous fronts... But open scars? No, accept and move on, save any rage for those "the holocaust didn't happen" twits. It's not like we didn't shove the Japanese into internment camps (I'm working with someone who was born in one); I hope they were treated, and by that I imagine the truth is they weren't treated as horribly....

If you have a long enough history you're going to have some black eyes in there (*cough* slavery *cough* how ya doing America)

Besides with the way UA's work Civ 5 doesn't lend itself to multiple leaders the way Civ 4 did.

Click to expand...

You sir, deserve a medal

I think Civilization has tried to stay away from leaders we deem as evil (IE: Hitler) because they want to dodge the issue of people playing as some of the most heinous men in the history of the world.

But if they wanted to create an expansion or DLC pack for evil dictators I think the clear choices are Adolf Hitler (Germany), Josef Stalin (Russia), Niccolae Ceaucescu (Romania), Pol Pot (Cambodia), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Ho Chi Mihn (Vietnam), Mao Zedong (China), Idi Amin (Uganda), and Charles Taylor (Liberia).

Although there were many leaders of the 20th century, I think people universally agree that these men are bad people.

Gingrich proposed something similar, but certainly without the mandate, which is the biggest problem people have with it (and the primary constitutional challenge), never mind that the Heritage Foundation dropped the idea.

I have heard many things people have said about Obama, some good, some bad, some fair, some unfair, but it is not often I hear someone try to claim he in not liberal.

Regardless, this is definitely a liberal law - why does the Republican controlled House of Representatives continue to vote to overturn it?

Other "liberal" laws signed by Obama would include:

Lilly Ledbetter Act
- Closed most federal land to drilling/exploration
- many spending bills (Stimulous) - but cuts our Military
- opening borders
- calling for immigration reform.
- Dodd-Frank

I consider myself fairly middle-or-the road politically, but if you think Obama is not liberal, you need to share what you have been smoking.

troublmaker said:

I think Civilization has tried to stay away from leaders we deem as evil (IE: Hitler) because they want to dodge the issue of people playing as some of the most heinous men in the history of the world.

But if they wanted to create an expansion or DLC pack for evil dictators I think the clear choices are Adolf Hitler (Germany), Josef Stalin (Russia), Niccolae Ceaucescu (Romania), Pol Pot (Cambodia), Josip Broz Tito (Yugoslavia), Ho Chi Mihn (Vietnam), Mao Zedong (China), Idi Amin (Uganda), and Charles Taylor (Liberia).

Although there were many leaders of the 20th century, I think people universally agree that these men are bad people.

Click to expand...

Oh, I'd certainly have to disagree with you on Ho Chi Minh. And probably on Tito as well, but I don't know as much about him.

Bulldog Bats said:

I consider myself fairly middle-or-the road politically, but if you think Obama is not liberal, you need to share what you have been smoking.

Click to expand...

He certainly is a liberal, but the question here was not whether he is a liberal, but whether he is a pinko commie and closet Marxist as certain members of the right repeatedly accuse him of being. You ought to ask those people what they've been smoking. I don't think there are many communists with cabinets full of Goldman-Sachs partners.

Tl;dr: He's liberal, but not as liberal as some people think.