Leaders

At this point this is the leaders/traits we have:

Please no arguments about mapped countries in this thread. Use the Map development thread. Only issues with the leaders used to represent.

Spoiler :
West: 7
USA - Barack Obama - CHM/EXP
Canada - Stephen Harper - FIN/ORG
Mexico - Felipe Calderon - CHM/SPI
Brazil - Lula da silva - SPI/CRE
Argentina - Cristina Kirchner - SPI/PRO
Peru - Alan Garica - PHI/PRO
Chile - Michelle Bachelet - ORG/EXP
Colombia - Alvaro Uribe - ORG/IND

Bolivarian Alliance: 1 - Hugo Chavez - IMP/SPI
Venezuela
Ecuador
Bolivia
Cuba
Honduras
Dominican Republic

Europe: 10
UK - Gordon Brown - FIN/PRO
Spain - Jose Zapatero - EXP/CRE
France - Nicolas Sarkozy - CHA/PRO
Germany - Angela Merkel - FIN/IND
Poland - Donald Tusk - EXP/PRO
Italy - Silvio Berlusconi - CHA/FIN
Sweden - Fredrik Reinfeldt - FIN/ORG
Turkey - Recep Erdogan - PRO/IND
Ukraine - Yulia Tymoshenko - PRO/IMP
Switzerland - Hans Merz - ind/fin

European Union: 1 - Peter Balkenende - EXP/ORG
Belgium
Netherlands
Ireland
Portugal
Greece
Bulgaria
Romania
Czech Rep.
Austria
Hungary
Finland
Norway
Iceland
Denmark
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania

Mediterranean Union: 1 - Stipe Mesic CHM/ORG
Croatia
Albania
Serbia

N Africa: 4
Libya - Muammar al-Gaddafi - AGG/SPI
Egypt - Hosni Mubarak - PRO/CRE
Morocco - Abbas el Fassi - PRO/PHI
Algeria - Abdelaziz Bouteflika - SPI/PHI

Africa East/Central/West Alliances: 3
West: 1 - Umaru Yar Adua - FIN/PRO
Sierra leone
Liberia
Cameroon
Togo
Nigeria
Central: 1 - Jose dos Santos - IMP/EXP
Mali
Niger
Zambia
Angola
Senegal
East: 1 - Meles Zenawi - EXP/AGG
Tanzania
Mozambique
Ethiopia
namibia

South Africa: 1
South Africa - Jacob Zuma - ORG/CHM


Middle East: 4
Saudi Arabia - King Abdullah - FIN/PHI
Syria - Bashar al Assad - SPI/IMP
Israel - Benjamin Netanjahu - PRO/EXP
Iran - Mahmoud Ahmadinejad - AGG/IMP

Central Asia: 2
Russia - Belarus - Vladimir Putin - IMP/FIN
CACO: - Kassym Tokayev - ORG/PHI - Tajikistan - Kazakhstan - Kyrgyzstan - Turkmenistan -Uzbekistan

West/South Asia: 2
Pakistan - Asif Zardari - AGG/SPI
India - Manmohan Singh - FIN/SPI

SouthEast Asia: 4
China: 1 - Wen Jiabao - FIN/IMP
Thailand: 1 - Bhumibol Adulyadej - IND/CRE
Indonesia: 1 - Susilo Yudhoyono - EXP/ORG
ASEAN: 1 - S.R. Nathan - FIN/ORG
Vietnam
Philippines
Malaysia
Singapore

East Asia: 3
N Korea - Kim Yong Il - AGG/IMP
S Korea - Lee Myung Bak - FIN/IND
Japan - Taro Aso - ORG/IND

Australia/Oceania: 1
Australia - Kevin Rudd - CHM/CRE
 
I truly hope that this list is not final.

Why is Barack Obama listed as Charismatic and Expansive? That seems silly to me. Charismatic and Philosophical fits much, much better. Even Cha/Org or Cha/Imp would be better than Expansive, of all things. If you're trying to reference his health care plan (with the +2 health bonus), that's silly. Reflect that in his favorite civic choice, not his bonuses.

Chavez as Imp/Spi? Bizarre. Imp/Cha, Imp/Phi, or Cha/Phi make much, much more sense. Chavez is not spiritual, but he is deeply committed to his political ideology. He's wildly popular and actively cultivates an image that appeals to the poor. That sounds charismatic. I understand the Imperialistic trait, thanks to a previous discussion, but I don't think it fits nearly as well as Cha/Phi.

Harper seems okay. I'm not 100% on Financial, but I like Organized a lot.

Why is Putin Financial? He doesn't strike me as particularly Financial. Maybe Imp/Cha or Imp/Agg.

Netanyahu is good, but Imp/Exp works very well for him, too. In fact, I'd argue more for Imp/Exp, personally.

Kevin Rudd is clearly Organized. I don't see where you're getting Cha/Cre. I don't see a clear second trait for him, but I suppose Cha/Org or Cre/Org could work. Does anyone else have any input on this?

Some of these trait choices smack of Western bias, but that's okay... as long as we realize and acknowledge it. For example, the only Agg or Imp nations on the list are Eastern European, Middle Eastern, and Far Eastern. That's a very simplistic and narrow viewpoint. However, I'm certainly willing to play along and make Putin, Castro, Musharrif, and Ahmadinejad the eeeeevil warmongers, and Obama, Rudd, and Harper the peaceful builders. Let's just admit to ourselves that we are biased.
 
Why is Barack Obama listed as Charismatic and Expansive?
I'm using these based on, more or less, the nation's ideologies, not the leaders themselves. Leaders are generally elected to represent the nation's ideas. More realistic for me would be making the USA Aggressive/Expansive. And no...Obama has no say in this. He is run by the Military Industrial Complex...who has the real say regardless of what liberal or conservative will say one way or the other. I am a political atheist (unless you consider Anarcho-Capitalism a realistic vision for the future), so I'm pretty much down the line of not caring about our system in this country.

The USA is the most expansive country in the world right now. (If I was basing his Health Care plan as being expansive, I would give it -3 health). We are involved in 2 different wars in the name of spreading our "ideologies," (freedom!...since we are one of the least free countries in the world, after all - with the highest % of citizens in a prison) as well as being involved in nearly every major military coup in the last 50-75 years.

Why is Putin Financial? He doesn't strike me as particularly Financial
Russia is FIN because, going forward, they are a global energy superpower. Not to mention he was put into power through the financial elite in Russia.

Some of these trait choices smack of Western bias
I'm about as objective as I believe I can be. I am NOT an "America First!!!" idiot. The USA has become the exact kind of joke a republic becomes as it grows too big for it's own good. We crumble under a false "democracy" in which 51% of people get to tell 49% of people what to do - where America was founded as being a country that stood up for the 49%. But...such is what happens to Republics that grow too large.

Iran is labeled as such because of their political ideology. Nearly every mosque in Iran has "Death to Israel" publically showcased.

Kevin Rudd is clearly Organized
Rudd was a misprint by me as I was copy-pasting. He is ORG/CHM in the XML.

Pakistan is labeled aggressive because of their "nationhood" type belief system.

Kim Yong-Il has led a country into having a smaller GDP than the USA's state of Delaware with his economic & political ideology of a perpetual military state. Hence, AGG/IMP.

China gets IMP over their feud with claiming Taiwan.
 
Matty,

I've offered to do your leaderheads but have had no firm response from you.

If you want me to do them please let me know with your final civ list and i'm sure i can turn them round in 1-2 days.
 
The flags are all done, and I'm uploading them now. For now, as I've said dozens of times, just use pre-existing XML + art as placeholders. It won't matter if we have an army of Alexander the Greats for testing purposes.

Adhesive, I think the list of civs on the penultimate page of the Final Civ List thread has the leaders included, so create ones for the civs that overlap with the list on the final page, and ignore ones that have been removed. Hope that makes sense. A useful tutorial for creating the images is here (just follow the instructions about the LH picture and ignore the rest).

EDIT: Just remembered that I don't have a graphic for the Minor Nations. Anyone have any ideas?
 
EDIT: Just remembered that I don't have a graphic for the Minor Nations. Anyone have any ideas?

I say either the Minor State Flag have the flag of the Minor states from RFC, A generic Grey Flag, or a Flag made of bits and pieces of all or the more important Minor states (like the combined countries in RTW).
 
Updated: Monday, 12:30PM Central Standard Time USA

For the Leader Traits, I'm thinking of doing it more like this:

Instead of individual leader traits, we should have a "country ideology" as the traits.

For example:
As I said above, a leader is selected by the people of the nation. But in today's world, a leader really doesn't have the "full-fledged impact" that the media makes them out to have. The best example is definitely the United States. Barack Obama, to the world and in the USA, is seen as someone who wants diplomacy over war, and is a very charismatic person. But, the fact is that he just sent another 30,000 troops to the Middle East. What a leader says, and what the "country" dictates are two very different things. In the USA, as in most of the world, the real power is behind the scenes. Obama came to power saying we'd be out of Iraq asap. Now, its going to last beyond his first 4 years - while we built a military base larger than the vatican - so, in essence - the USA is never leaving the Middle East unless financially forced to do so (a la the Soviet Union).

With that said, normally - you'd use something like "Charismatic/another trait" for Obama...but the USA acts in very different ways. The USA, easily, is the most expansive, imperialistic country of today's world - attempting to "spread" its' ideology throughout the world & by war if necessary. So that would be either: AGG/EXP, AGG/IMP, or IMP/EXP.

Now, with that, some of you are from all over the world...and you know your own country and the way it "really" operates better than those who live outside it (in most cases) as well as knowing the area of your part of the world better. Who am I to argue with IanInsane who I believe is from Germany...or to argue with Adhesive from UK about what their countries are really like, and what agendas their countries operate under despite the veil of the USA's mainstream media? Just like Obama appears to be the "savior" to many in the world and in the USA because of the media, but his actions speak louder than words thus far. So, using the full civ list found here: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8412422&postcount=132 . Lets try to come up with "nation traits" instead of "leader traits." That would lead to a more accurate game for us to play.

NOTE: I will continuously edit this post with updated leader traits (feel free to comment on your thoughts/ideas for "national traits."

Spoiler :

****THESE ARE OPEN TO DEBATE, just FYI****

West:
USA: AGG/IMP
Bolivarian Alliance: IMP/FIN (based on Venezuela's oil dealings & alliances)
Mexico: EXP/CHA
Brazil:
Chile:
Argentina:
Canada: ORG/FIN
Peru:

Europe:
European Union: ORG/CRE
UK: FIN/PRO
Spain: FIN/CRE
France: PRO/CRE
Germany: IND/PHI
Poland: PRO/PHI
Italy: CRE/CHA
Balkan States: ??
Ukraine: PRO/IND
Belarus: ??
Sweden: FIN/PHI
EFTA: FIN/PRO
Turkey: ??

Africa:
Libya: ??
Algeria & Tunisia: ??
South Africa: ??
Morocco: ??
Egypt: FIN (free market of the Middle East)/??
3 African Alliances: ??

Middle East:
Saudi Arabia: FIN/SPI
Israel: PRO/EXP
Iran: SPI/AGG
Syria: ORG/PRO
Palestine: PRO/EXP

South & West Asia:
Pakistan: SPI/AGG
India: IND/EXP
Causcasus Union: AGG/PRO

Central Asia:
Russia: PRO/FIN
CACO: PRO/??

East Asia:
China: IMP/FIN
Japan: IND/ORG
North Korea: AGG/IMP
South Korea: FIN/IND
Indonesia: ??
Thailand: ??
ASEAN: FIN/ORG
Vietnam: ??

Australia: EXP/ORG
 
America should be IMP/EXP that aren't that agressive compared to the other nations of the world
 
**So its not missed, please be sure to read this post ( http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8412933&postcount=168 )and comment**

America should be IMP/EXP that aren't that agressive compared to the other nations of the world

I would say that the USA is the most aggressive in the current world, by far. We pre-emptive attack countries with reckless abandon. We are involved in 2 wars (approaching a 3rd) that WE started with no possibility of leaving the wars behind anytime soon. How can others be "more aggressive" than that? We attack the "aggressive" countries in the name of providing security to our citizens...when our attacking and getting involved has directly lead to our country being exponentially more vulnerable to attacks and hatred. By every mean, the USA is the aggressor of the world as of 2009, and contrary to what the world may think - its only getting started. When a country seizes "empire" status, which the USA has had since the mid 1940s - they never let it go easily. And the USA is starting to crumble under its own weight of debt and entitlements. Until we fall financially/crumble under own our weight due to attempting to continue the welfare/warfar state like the USSR, the USA will continue to be the aggressor of the world under the veil of "ensuring freedom."
 
I say either the Minor State Flag have the flag of the Minor states from RFC, A generic Grey Flag, or a Flag made of bits and pieces of all or the more important Minor states (like the combined countries in RTW).
I'm happy to make an amalgamation where it seems necessary. Look at the Caucasus flag:


However, there seem to be rather too many for that to work. Do you have a screenshot of Rhye's?

And RE: the America thing, Mattygerst is completely correct about it being the aggressor. Let's just leave it at that. I'd be inclined to go with IMP/AGG

For the UK, I'd say we were probably FIN/IMP, FIN/ORG or something with FIN at least. Before the banking crisis, we've always been known for our financial institutions, and will again once we're out of recession. For the others, I'll have to think about most of them, but here's a few:

EU: PRO/FIN - common currency and various legislation designed to protect Europe's interests within Europe
Israel + Palestine: SPI over EXP - that's one of the main causes of the fighting after all
Germany: IND/PRO ? - I hear they're pretty efficient workers, but that's probably a stereotype
 
Russia: Financial, yes. Imperial no. Russia's miltary ambition has dwindled (as you ahve allayed to previously) and whilst Putin has no doubt injectied a bit more 'pride' for want of a better word I would think that their motives are more suited to 'protective' than 'imperial'. I see Russia as more concerned about their security than in search of a new empire. So Rus= Pro, Fin

Australia: Must be expansionist as they are basically actively attracting people to expland their population given their low population density. As for their other trait, I have no strong opinion, but only organized, financial or protective would make sense. The others are pretty definite no nos. My vote is Aus = Exp Org

UK: Must be financial as London is now the banking capital of the world. UK also is a prominent forerunner of free market capitalism. I would also say protective for two reasons: 1) We have remained the most Eurosceptic nation in the EU with the possible exception of Denmark and have been more fiercely protective of sovereignty on key issues compared to other large nations such as France, Germany, Italy. 2) The defensive bonus is representative of our excellent armed forces. So UK: Fin, Pro

EU: Org and Cre The EU should not be protective, I disagree with Niknaks as by definition the EU nations have invested in trade and supra-nationalism ie they have given up much of their own sovereignty. Also, non of the nations in our EU civ really have much military presence and rely on the US really for protection. The EU is at most a 'civilian power'. Any military bonuses would be misplaced. I strongly suggest Org due to the scale economies of operating the union and Cre as many of the countries represented are very cultured, post empire, with long histories. So EU: Org, Cre

Germany: I'll invite Ianinsane to comment, but can't be protective. The last 50-60 years Germany has been as close to pacifism in Europe as you can get with the possible exception of Switzerland and Ireland. Ps Please see earlier posts for suggestions of European countries Germany and France. I'll copy and paste when i find it. EDIT: Agree @Ianinsane with Industrious, Philosophical

France: As per my earlier post, recommend: Pro, Cre as the French are ultimately one of the most protectionist western nations in terms of culture, economy and military for years now, so pro is very sensible. Of course, France is one of the most cultured nations on the planet, so Cre is vital.

Italy: Charasmatic, Creative. Italian's are known as nationally very charasmatic, basically so this is simple. I had Berlusconi down as Financial, but creative is perhaps a better national trait. So, Italy: Char, Cre

Spain: A less confident opinion here, but as you're asking for one i've done a bit more research. I believe Financial holds water due to the large amount of successful multinationals e.g. car producers, telecommunications and banks. Crucially, the fact that Spanish car producers do not so much gain their advantage through domestic production and exports as through broader global operation has me favour finance over industrial (also Financial Services). The prevalence of Spanish culture worldwide and the importance it is held in at home, means that like many of her mediterranean neighbours I recomment creative as the second trait. So Spain= Fin, Cre

Sweden: Organised due to nature of economy and socialist state. (Sweden has a fantastic healthcare system for instance). Philosophical seems perhaps the next best trait as military ones must be ruled out due to Sweden's peaceful and neutral foreign policy, as must anything which denote nationalist or imperial ambition. Sweden's status as a small (in terms of population), peaceful ageing country means that philosophical makes alot of sense. So Sweden: Org, Phi

Poland: Must be Protective, as very preoccupied with perceived threat of renewed Russian aggression, and are actively seeking US help to upgrade their armed forces with both training and the whole 'Son of Star Wars' episode. I also think Philosophical would fit well, for simliar reasons as I recommend creative for EU, also compared to their in game size they do produce above their fair share of 'great' people. Another option would be spiritual as Poland is a very Catholic country. So Poland: Pro, Phi

Ukraine: Protective, like Poland in respone to Russia. Although it should be noted that Ukrainian attitudes to Russia are significantly more positive than vice versa. As a second trait i recommend Industrious, due to Ukraine being still having a large precentage of GDP contributed by manufacturing (although this is decreasing steadily) from real highs last century. Also, Ukraine has massive mineral deposits. If Ianinsane or anyone else has a strong informed opinion I'm open to change but this is my relitively informed opinion ;) So Ukraine= Pro, Ind

Pakistan: I agree with Matty. (although it is important that we don't let political thoughts cloud our perception of whether nations are agg, or rather 'pro', if we happen to agree with them!) So Pakistan= Spi, Agg

India: Industrial yes. But whilst their economy is growing, India is not a financial powerhouse like Japan, Germany, UK, insomuch as its GDP per capita is very low. India is underperforming in terms of her size and is a 'third world country' (4x population of USA). I would categorise India therefore as expansionist (the health bonus is useful too) as her population is massive and along with some economic improvements this means elevated status, but this is not because of a finance based economy in the manner of the other countries I mentioned. So India= Ind, Exp

Israel & Palestine EDIT: Whilst standing by my logic, Ianinsane's idea is fine. So recommend BOTH= Pro, Exp

Caucasus: I'm taking this as Georgia. Protective is given due to political situation. However, Saakashvili (Georgian President), did a very large amount of prodding of the Russian bear no matter what your thoughts on the conflict. Much of his politics has been confrontational to say the least and indeed there is little doubt that Georgia has been comparitively aggressive in not being at all shy to step up hostilities in response to Russian supported threats. I can dig out stuff to support this if needed. So Caucasus= Pro, Agg

Syria: Before someone says spiritualism: No. Their constitution guarantees freedom of worship and they are not declared as a Muslim state. This is a tough one as I really don't know enough about it, but again i've done a bit of research. I recommend Organised in so far as the economy is dominated by the state, ie the government has more input into the organisation of the economy than most civs. Given continuing difficulties with Israel and much of the West (possibly thawing with Obama), I recommend Protective. So: Org, Pro

Incidentally, yes I agree re USA too.

I'll edit this post as I come up with more ideas.
 
Concerning Germany I think Industrious is definately a good choice. The second one is more difficult. Since in Germany cultural tradition in terms of philosophy and humanities is highly valued (think of Luther, Hegel, Marx, Kant, Nietzsche, Benjamin, Adorno...) and big part of national self-perception I suggest Philosophical.
Germany = Ind, Phi

Concerning Israel and Palestine. I strongly suggest not to side design-wise with any of them in terms of who's the aggressor. We should stay neutral and give them both the same Agg or Pro traits. And I favor Pro for both of them.
Israel = Exp, Pro

Palestine should not be Spiritual. The PLO/Fatah, which still controls the West Bank and thus the majority of Palestine is an organization fighting for secularism and is nationalist, marxist/left-wing and NOT islamist. Of course the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip could be Spiritual. But since we have only one Palestine we cannot account for that. The religious/cultural/ethnic differences between Israel and Palestine are IMO represented adequately by those two civs having different Cultural Ideologies.
But what should be the second trait then? Nothing really works except Expansive. This is due to the extreme population growth in Palestine which is as far as I know the largest in the world. So:
Palestine = Exp, Pro, too. Isn't that a nice irony?
 
I'm happy to make an amalgamation where it seems necessary. Look at the Caucasus flag:


However, there seem to be rather too many for that to work. Do you have a screenshot of Rhye's?

And RE: the America thing, Mattygerst is completely correct about it being the aggressor. Let's just leave it at that. I'd be inclined to go with IMP/AGG

For the UK, I'd say we were probably FIN/IMP, FIN/ORG or something with FIN at least. Before the banking crisis, we've always been known for our financial institutions, and will again once we're out of recession. For the others, I'll have to think about most of them, but here's a few:

EU: PRO/FIN - common currency and various legislation designed to protect Europe's interests within Europe
Israel + Palestine: SPI over EXP - that's one of the main causes of the fighting after all
Germany: IND/PRO ? - I hear they're pretty efficient workers, but that's probably a stereotype

You'll be happy to hear I just ripped an image out of RFC

Spoiler :


It's really just Scotland's flag, just Grey where it's Blue.

Also, for Vietnam's leader, here are my traits.

As one of the last Communist nations of the world, I think Imperialistic is a must (No, I'm not trying to be biased, but that's what I think). Also, as Vietnam was quickly able to quickly bounce back after 'Nam, maybe industrious or organized?
 
List updated in post #168. Country trait suggestions still needed for:

West:
Brazil:
Chile:
Argentina:
Peru:

Europe:
Balkan States: ??
Belarus: ??
Sweden: ??

Africa:
Libya: ??
Algeria & Tunisia: ??
South Africa: ??
Morocco: ??
Egypt: FIN (free market of the Middle East)/??
3 African Alliances: ??

Middle East:
Syria: ??

Central Asia:
CACO: PRO/??

East Asia:
Indonesia: ??
Thailand: ??
Vietnam: ??

Some thoughts that will be implemented if no other advice/recommendations are given.

I really have no idea about the ones not listed. Inaninsane lives closest in prox. to a few in which I'm sure he has a better idea: Sweden, Balkan states. But I imagine Sweden is ORG along with a 2nd trait, obviously.

As for the rest, it'll have to come down to a short amount of research I suppose. If anyone sees anything they know, though, please let your opinion be seen. Anyone know anything about the African civs better than an uniformed, media-created opinion that would be mine? Same goes with Syria. And then we have the conglomerate of far East Asia countries still do to. Thoughts? Getting these done is pretty important to me being able to finish the leaders in the XML with leaderheads/flags.

I'm going to go ahead and give Mexico EXP/CHA - since they all seem to be coming into our country, illegally and at will here in the USA, haha. And charismatic for lack of a better trait and that Mexican people are very, very proud of their Mexican culture/heritage.
 
I'm updating in post 172. Will show the results here.

Italy: Cha, Cre
Spain: Fin, Cre
Sweden: Org, Phi
Caucasus: Pro, Agg
Ukraine: Pro, Ind
Syria: Org, Pro
 
Sweden: ORG/PHI, very peaceful nation, at least don't give any military traits to it.
EFTA: FIN + something, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland are rich countries. Maybe PRO, as Norway and Switzerland have quite good armies and the terrain helps to defense too.
Vietnam: Maybe PRO because of it's history, don't know about today's situation though.
 
Sweden: ORG/PHI, very peaceful nation, at least don't give any military traits to it.
EFTA: FIN + something, Iceland, Norway and Switzerland are rich countries. Maybe PRO, as Norway and Switzerland have quite good armies and the terrain helps to defense too.
Vietnam: Maybe PRO because of it's history, don't know about today's situation though.

Well, for Vietnam I already said Imperalistic and either Poductive or Industrious. Now that I think of it, though, productive is the better choice. So I say IMP/PRO. I think EFTA should be FIN/IND (Just like the once Swizterland civ) and use Switzerland's leader so we don't have to do more work.
 
Top Bottom