3 most wanted leaders!

Haresus · Nov 15, 2009

Hello good Civplayers!
I have been interested in which leaders people would want to see in the next civ exp/game and the best way to know that is to make a topic (i think).

You can choose up to 3 leaders that you want to play as/with/against.
You are not restricted to the vanilla game or to the civs that we got now.
If you want you could give some more info like which traits you would want to give or just why you want them.

My 3 choices:
1. Sweden: Gustavus II Adolphus (Imperialistic and Charismatic/Aggressive)
2. Sweden: Gustaf I Wasa (Organised Protective/Charismatic)
3. Spain: Charles III (Expansive and Organised)

Gustavus II Adolphus is for me a must.
Gustaf I Wasa would be nice to have in.
Charles III would be good for Spain as they only have Issy.

davelisowski · Nov 15, 2009

Don't forget Caligula.

Roman, of course.

TheLazyHase · Nov 15, 2009

Well, dig a little the forum, and yo uwill find at least 4 topics that talk about leader people would want to have, it can gie you ideas.

capnvonbaron · Nov 15, 2009

Adolphus I agree to. I would vote for another native american leader at minimum, too... perhaps Hiawatha or Geronimo. I think another chinese leader would be good too -- just doesn't seem right for a civilization as old as China to have fewer leader choices than far younger civs (cough cough America).

Lastly, if one could make a case for the Celts being in the game, I think one may also be able to make a case for the Visigoths or Assyrians just as well.

Aquila SPQR · Nov 15, 2009

Native Americans? Certainly not! They should add more leaders from really civilised nations, not stone age barbarians...

mechaerik · Nov 15, 2009

capnvonbaron said:
Adolphus I agree to. I would vote for another native american leader at minimum, too... perhaps Hiawatha or Geronimo. I think another chinese leader would be good too -- just doesn't seem right for a civilization as old as China to have fewer leader choices than far younger civs (cough cough America).

Lastly, if one could make a case for the Celts being in the game, I think one may also be able to make a case for the Visigoths or Assyrians just as well.

Well, Assyria has some serious overlap with Babylonia and Sumer, no?

Aquila SPQR said:
Native Americans? Certainly not! They should add more leaders from really civilised nations, not stone age barbarians...

I sure hope you're being sarcastic....

As for new leaders:

Meiji.
Menelik II
Some other Spanish leader.

capnvonbaron · Nov 15, 2009

Aquila SPQR said:
Native Americans? Certainly not! They should add more leaders from really civilised nations, not stone age barbarians...

News flash: Every ancient civ started out as "stone age barbarians". Due to certain geographical factors and the unfortunate meeting of "white man", the Native Americans never quite passed into modern times as a major nation-state -- but then, neither did the Aztecs, Maya, Sumerians, Babylonians, Persians, Holy Romans, Ottomans, Celts, Carthaginians, Zulu, Khmer, or Inca.

History is full of empirical have-beens. This game gives us the chance to explore the "what if they started under different circumstances..." in a highly fictionalized setup. Therefor, I believe they have every right to be in the game.

KeloGBites · Nov 15, 2009

-A warmongering Egyptian leader, not sure who exactly (Could be RamsII, with Kufu replacing him as a Spiritual/Industrious leader).
-Meiji, Industrious/Charismatic I'm thinking?
-A Jin Dynasty chinese ruler, warmonger traits as well.

mariogreymist · Nov 16, 2009

L Ron Hubbard, leader of the Xenu (Insane, Pretentious are the traits)

HappyFunPal · Nov 16, 2009

capnvonbaron said:
Adolphus I agree to. I would vote for another native american leader at minimum, too... perhaps Hiawatha or Geronimo. I think another chinese leader would be good too -- just doesn't seem right for a civilization as old as China to have fewer leader choices than far younger civs (cough cough America).

Lastly, if one could make a case for the Celts being in the game, I think one may also be able to make a case for the Visigoths or Assyrians just as well.

The Chinese problem is stagnation. After the Yellow Emperor united China, he burned all their old books and gave them new ones describing just what an Emperor of China should be. And that is how they continued for ages, until the last Emperor who was a gay gardener. So if you can find in history a truly unique and dynamic Chinese Emperor and not just a warlord or general, please do. Same with India, same with Egypt.

At least the Romans, European kings, and American presidents had to prove they had the right to rule, not just "that's the way it is." Countries that suffered wars of succession made for dynamic leaders. :goodjob:

Shafi · Nov 16, 2009

Atilla the Hun - Aggresive + ???

HappyFunPal · Nov 16, 2009

Why not Edward Longshanks of England? Or William I of Normandy/France/Vikings? I'm glad they got rid of Henry VIII.

Cleopatra was a vassal of Julius Caesar, I'm glad they got rid of her too.

I would vote for another Native /Meso American leader with the deadly Ind/Phi trait if random leaders could not be chosen.

Perhaps another SE Asian leader, and definitely another Japanese leader, but the Japanese suffer from the divine leader problem.

We need more Japanese input.

KeloGBites · Nov 16, 2009

What you speak of in the China/Japan problem is basically Divine Right, something the Europeans came up with later as well. England has much better rulers then Edward Longshanks, the 3 that most come to mind are already in game and I doubt we need 4 haha.

To that point, a lot of these Generals/Warlords were more then capable rulers (most were definitely better then Boudica at least

), Cao Cao during the Three Kingdom period as an Aggressive/Organized or Charismatic/Organized would fit, and he had to prove his right to rule.

Japan could have Oda Nobunaga (He did do some things right, even if he is considered a complete Villian), Meiji, the Succesor to Ieyasu Tokugawa whose name eludes me. Or as controversial as it may be, General Yamomoto he was very capable and depending who you ask he can be said to have basically been in charge of Japan.

Navarre · Nov 16, 2009

Tokugawa and Isabella definitely need someone less drastic on their side so we have a chance to see their civilization playing differently once in a while. The same could probably be said for Monty, but I must confess I don't know if there was more to the Aztecs than war, spirituality and bloodbaths.

Seriously, seeing Japan on the map is just making me sigh. "Oh, hey, Toku ! Still don't want to trade, talk, or anything besides standing there looking ******** ? No ? Ok, see you next game then."

I'd go for a new Native American leader too. They had several leaders whose names are still remembered, so why not ? Someone more open than Sitting Bull would be interesting.

TheLazyHase · Nov 16, 2009

Navarre said:
Tokugawa and Isabella definitely need someone less drastic on their side so we have a chance to see their civilization playing differently once in a while.

I'd better have a way to make the Toku playstyle actually work in fact. Others japanese leader would be cool, but isolationnism is definitely a trademark of japan, until at least the WW2. But it does not work at all in civIV, that's what cripple Toku.

Edit : maybe simply making that Toku can exchange tech could work. They refused about everything from the European but the guns, somewhat.

KeloGBites · Nov 16, 2009

Rhye's and Fall actually made him somewhat survive, thru introducing the Plague. Could be coded into CivIV by having a random event that has it's chance of happening effected by how many Civ's you have Open Borders with, has to be devastating enough to make a difference to how well Toku does, while not being so ridiculous you'll never open your own borders. This could also make Mercantillism slightly more appealing.

Camikaze · Nov 16, 2009

mechaerik said:
Meiji.

KeloGBites said:
-Meiji, Industrious/Charismatic I'm thinking?

I explained this in another thread a couple of days ago, so here are the links to save me from writing it again.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8624871&postcount=57 and http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8627580&postcount=59

Basically, Meiji shouldn't be in the game. Ito Hirobumi should. He was much more important in the time. Meiji was just a figurehead. The Genro (of which Hirobumi was the most prominent) held real power.

KeloGBites said:
Japan could have Oda Nobunaga (He did do some things right, even if he is considered a complete Villian), Meiji, the Succesor to Ieyasu Tokugawa whose name eludes me. Or as controversial as it may be, General Yamomoto he was very capable and depending who you ask he can be said to have basically been in charge of Japan.

Admiral Yamamoto wouldn't make sense as a leader. He had power because he was head of the Navy, but the Navy didn't have control of Japan. So, yeah, Yamamoto was powerful, but was certainly not the leader of Japan. Why not just have Tojo?

TheLazyHase said:
I'd better have a way to make the Toku playstyle actually work in fact. Others japanese leader would be cool, but isolationnism is definitely a trademark of japan, until at least the WW2. But it does not work at all in civIV, that's what cripple Toku.

Edit : maybe simply making that Toku can exchange tech could work. They refused about everything from the European but the guns, somewhat.

You're completely forgetting the Meiji Restoration, in which Japan completely revolutionised itself and embraced all things European. Which is why there are so many suggestions for Meiji as a leader.

So I have to put my vote in for Ito Hirobumi, as well as Simon Bolivar and Hitler. I mean, sure, Adolf aint got a hope in the world, but I think its appropriate he's mentioned in a thread about the 3 most wanted leaders.

TheLazyHase · Nov 16, 2009

Camikaze said:
You're completely forgetting the Meiji Restoration, in which Japan completely revolutionised itself and embraced all things European. Which is why there are so many suggestions for Meiji as a leader.

Still, Meiji was an isonlationnist at heart. What he wanted were not needing European, and that mean, for example, not depending on them for your industrial need.

In a nutshell, he has seen that Japan alone were to be engulfed if he did nothing, so he restored the country in order for it to still be alone.

ori · Nov 16, 2009

Moderator Action: moved to Civ Ideas

@Haresus: Welcome to CFC :band:

Haresus · Nov 16, 2009

Thanks for correcting me Ori.
And thanks for the welcoming

3 most wanted leaders!

Chieftain

Spartan

King

Democratia gladii

King

Tuturuu!

Democratia gladii

Warlord

Deity

Warlord

King

Warlord

Warlord

Legio XIII

King

Warlord

Moderator

King

Repair Guy

Chieftain

Similar threads