2 leaders for every civ

[Xia]

I think everytime you advance into a new era your leaders face should change.
Example:
China

Industrial Period - Chaing Kai Chek
Modern Period - Mao Tse Tung (Zedong)

 

[apatheist]

Stalin, Lenin, Kruschev, and Gorbachev shouldn't be leaders of Russia because they were leaders of the USSR. When I think of Russia in the game, I think of the Russia of Alexander Nevsky and Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great, not the Russia that formed the core of the USSR (as the black lion formed the core of Voltron). Russia dominated the USSR, to be sure, but it wasn't the same thing as the USSR.

 

[Xia]

Definately, maybe the Russians and Soviets should be different Civs too!

 

[Himalia]

Its a nice idea but with a very limited amount of civs if you do that who you going to tak out for them ? and and what point do you stop for example should we also have England, The Britons and United Kingdom etc ? Keep it with just one i say. Worth changing for scenarios tho.

 

[Atrebates]

On the Russia/USSR thing, I'd say they are the same thing esp. in game terms- the USSR was Russia's empire, freedom for individual countries was an illusion. No-one ever feared that pissing-off the polish would land a nuke on their heads.
It's like Britain/British Empire, not the same but both really British.

 

[Xen]

You know... after considering the question, the only option for the ENglish is such, really...

Spoiler :

ARTHUR, KING OF THE BRITONS
(as played by Graham Chapman )

 

[OLX]

Industrial Period - Chaing Kai Chek

I Think Sun Yat Sen would be a more logical Choice, After all, he is considered The Father of Modern China by both the Communists and the Taiwanese. Chaing on the other hand, was a poor successor to him.

 

[DAv2003]

On the Russia/USSR thing, I'd say they are the same thing esp. in game terms- the USSR was Russia's empire, freedom for individual countries was an illusion. No-one ever feared that pissing-off the polish would land a nuke on their heads.
It's like Britain/British Empire, not the same but both really British.

Well the territory of the U.S.S.R. was actually owned by the previous Russian Empire anyway so they count as the same thing overall.

 

[Xia]

I Think Sun Yat Sen would be a more logical Choice, After all, he is considered The Father of Modern China by both the Communists and the Taiwanese. Chaing on the other hand, was a poor successor to him.

....you're missing the point.

 

[warpstorm]

You know... after considering the question, the only option for the ENglish is such, really...

WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.

There really is no other choice is there?

 

[Legionary37]

I guess so.

 

[Superkrest]

WOMAN: King of the who?
ARTHUR: The Britons.
WOMAN: Who are the Britons?
ARTHUR: Well, we all are. we're all Britons and I am your king.

There really is no other choice is there?

see the violence inherit in the system..im being repressesd lol

i dont know if thats a good choice...a "watery tart" giving birth doesnt make you a leader lol

 

[JBearIt]

see the violence inherit in the system..im being repressesd lol

i dont know if thats a good choice...a "watery tart" giving birth doesnt make you a leader lol

I thought it was a "watery tart throwing a sword at you"?

 

[GeneralMatt]

I say cahnge the English to the Commonwealth, have the Capital cities first, and then so on.

What happens if they English and the Americans are in the same game? And the English go around in the names. There couldn't be two New Yorks right?

 

[Urederra]

I say cahnge the English to the Commonwealth, have the Capital cities first, and then so on.

What happens if they English and the Americans are in the same game? And the English go around in the names. There couldn't be two New Yorks right?

Well, in civ III there are two Londons.

The original Londinium founded by the romans, and the modern London form the English.

BTW, I think that New York was originally founded by the Dutch, And it was called New Amsterdam. But this is second hand to me, it needs to be confirmed.

In C3C there are two Salamancas as well, and also some other pairs of old city name/new city name. E.g. Constantinople/Bytantium Hispalis/Seville Caesar Augusta/Zaragoza.

I have repited this information in other thread, if not in this one.


Regards.

 

[Xia]

I say cahnge the English to the Commonwealth, have the Capital cities first, and then so on.

What happens if they English and the Americans are in the same game? And the English go around in the names. There couldn't be two New Yorks right?

There can, It's happened to me on Civ 3

 

[JBearIt]

Well, in civ III there are two Londons.

The original Londinium founded by the romans, and the modern London form the English.

BTW, I think that New York was originally founded by the Dutch, And it was called New Amsterdam. But this is second hand to me, it needs to be confirmed.

In C3C there are two Salamancas as well, and also some other pairs of old city name/new city name. E.g. Constantinople/Bytantium Hispalis/Seville Caesar Augusta/Zaragoza.

I have repited this information in other thread, if not in this one.


Regards.

Not to mention Salonika/Thessalonica, Lugdunum/Lyons, Eboracum/York (& Jorvik in Civ II ), Gadir/Cadiz, Lutetia/Paris, Nicomedia/Izmit and probably some more.

 

[Superkrest]

I thought it was a "watery tart throwing a sword at you"?

i couldnt remember the last part..thank you. lol. but i am actually somewhat suprised there hasnt been an "aurther" leader or even a camalot scenerio..maybe there has been ..but i think that would be rather cool.
"t'is a silly place"