All leader portraits

[VermelhoRed]

I just thought of something that might possibly be relevant (but probably isn't) while making a post in another thread:

It seems as though Firaxis are using the same colour schemes for Civs as they did in Civ V, except for Egypt which for some reason they have reversed (it's now Purple/Gold, like Rome's Civ V colours). Quite why they did this, I don't know. Why might it be relevant? Because Rome would now need a new colour scheme, and I can't see them using Egypt's Yellow/Purple. If I had to guess they would probably use Red/Gold, as those were the colours used on Roman Vexillums (military standards/banners). Who used Red/Gold in Civ V? Persia.

This makes me wonder whether perhaps that colour scheme was no longer being used in VI, allowing Rome to claim it. If those colours weren't being used then perhaps Persia is not in the base game, meaning C5 cannot be a Persian leader.

Now - I'm not suggesting that this is a sound theory (because it really, really isn't) but seeing as we have so little to go on at the moment I just thought I'd suggest it. Also, I'm aware that it relies on several major assumptions. Firstly that Rome will have a Red/Gold colour scheme this time round (we can't be sure of that until they get properly revealed). Also it assumes that Firaxis follows any kind of particular, consistant logic behind their civilization colour choices at all, which they might not (though I would guess they'd try to avoid giving civs similar colour schemes where possible). I can't really explain why Egypt is Purple/Gold now either, unless there were too many civs using yellow as their main colour in the start lineup (Russia + one of the new civs perhaps?).

Anyway, just a crazy idea that may be of interest. Or not. (I blame this all on a combination of extreme boredom and tiredness.)

I thought about that too, and I hope red and gold are indeed the new Roman colours. Persia, if Achaemenid, should be represented in the game by cyan and red, like this symbol.

Spoiler :

 

[Atlas627]

I just thought of something that might possibly be relevant (but probably isn't) while making a post in another thread:

It seems as though Firaxis are using the same colour schemes for Civs as they did in Civ V, except for Egypt which for some reason they have reversed (it's now Purple/Gold, like Rome's Civ V colours). Quite why they did this, I don't know. Why might it be relevant? Because Rome would now need a new colour scheme, and I can't see them using Egypt's Yellow/Purple. If I had to guess they would probably use Red/Gold, as those were the colours used on Roman Vexillums (military standards/banners). Who used Red/Gold in Civ V? Persia.

This makes me wonder whether perhaps that colour scheme was no longer being used in VI, allowing Rome to claim it. If those colours weren't being used then perhaps Persia is not in the base game, meaning C5 cannot be a Persian leader.

Now - I'm not suggesting that this is a sound theory (because it really, really isn't) but seeing as we have so little to go on at the moment I just thought I'd suggest it. Also, I'm aware that it relies on several major assumptions. Firstly that Rome will have a Red/Gold colour scheme this time round (we can't be sure of that until they get properly revealed). Also it assumes that Firaxis follows any kind of particular, consistant logic behind their civilization colour choices at all, which they might not (though I would guess they'd try to avoid giving civs similar colour schemes where possible). I can't really explain why Egypt is Purple/Gold now either, unless there were too many civs using yellow as their main colour in the start lineup (Russia + one of the new civs perhaps?).

Anyway, just a crazy idea that may be of interest. Or not. (I blame this all on a combination of extreme boredom and tiredness.)

I like this theory. It seems plausible to me, even if this isn't cause and effect.

 

[m15a]

Great post. Dating the video would be important.

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm as thrilled about the spoiler as the next Civ Fanatic, but taking the video out to dinner is going a bit too far.

 

[Tsuchinoko]

I thought about that too, and I hope red and gold are indeed the new Roman colours. Persia, if Achaemenid, should be represented in the game by cyan and red, like this symbol.

Spoiler :

I also thought about that same image when I was trying to think of what colour scheme could be used for Persia this time round assuming that Rome has taken their Red/Gold colours. I totally agree that Cyan/Red would be a great choice for them. We would have to look for a new combination for Indonesia then though...

That also reminds me of another flaw in my theory I forgot to add in the previous post - Firaxis might have just decided to change Persia's colour scheme for some unknown reason (maybe they thought Cyan/Red would be better too). That may in turn have allowed the theorised Roman colour change and the observed Egyptian one, but it would also mean that Persia could still be in the game (and thus also a candidate for C5).

All that said, if you're going to go the effort of changing some of them why not all of them? It's not like there aren't other civs that could do with better, more suitable colour schemes, or even just different ones just so the game feels a bit more different to Civ V.

I'm probably overthinking this though - Firaxis does sometimes just make really inscrutable design decisions (at least, in my opinion).

 

[magha77]

wow, a lot of speculation! Here are my thoughts:
A1-5 are pretty clear. B1 being Egypt? Looks more like Joan of Arc. B2 likely Victoria, but B3 being Catherine de Medici? Far stretch for me and that picture seems awfully familiar to me as well, maybe some 16th century Danish or Portuguese ruler (King Sebastian of Portugal?). B5 is a mystery as well but looks like the silhouette of a woman with a veil covering the back of her head sitting on a crown. C1-3 thoughts seem correct as well. But C4 could be anyone- an African ruler. An old drawing of Shah Abbas of Persia. C5 looks like a medieval Persian miniature drawing of Genghis Khan on a horse to me. Regarding D1, I disagree. This is another one that could be Joan of Arc. Complicating my apparent Joan of Arc goggles, D2 could be a bust of Napolean or any number of Roman emperors. D3 looks like Peter the Great. D4...Sycthians!?! How dissappointing. They never really had a true civilization...really just known for killing Cyrus the Great. D5 could be any female European ruler. Who knows! E1- ok, reasonable. E2- I don't see how that photo looks like that sculpture. If anything, it could a picture of Cyrus the Great. All I can make out is a beard. Could be Babylon or Assyria.

 

[taizu]

I became obsessed with finding the missing portraits a few days ago and I can NOT STOP.

Although I do believe B5 "Tamar" is a second leader for either Greece or Germany, and a woman possibly, so I was looking for Byzantine empresses(if they were going that route) and German/Holy Roman queens, with no luck.

I just.....need......to find....the picture..........

 

[magha77]

Yeah, I've been googling "portraits/pictures/drawings of ____ kings/queen" for the last hour!

 

[taizu]

wow, a lot of speculation! Here are my thoughts:
A1-5 are pretty clear. B1 being Egypt? Looks more like Joan of Arc. B2 likely Victoria, but B3 being Catherine de Medici? Far stretch for me and that picture seems awfully familiar to me as well, maybe some 16th century Danish or Portuguese ruler (King Sebastian of Portugal?). B5 is a mystery as well but looks like the silhouette of a woman with a veil covering the back of her head sitting on a crown. C1-3 thoughts seem correct as well. But C4 could be anyone- an African ruler. An old drawing of Shah Abbas of Persia. C5 looks like a medieval Persian miniature drawing of Genghis Khan on a horse to me. Regarding D1, I disagree. This is another one that could be Joan of Arc. Complicating my apparent Joan of Arc goggles, D2 could be a bust of Napolean or any number of Roman emperors. D3 looks like Peter the Great. D4...Sycthians!?! How dissappointing. They never really had a true civilization...really just known for killing Cyrus the Great. D5 could be any female European ruler. Who knows! E1- ok, reasonable. E2- I don't see how that photo looks like that sculpture. If anything, it could a picture of Cyrus the Great. All I can make out is a beard. Could be Babylon or Assyria.

I don't think there's much of a doubt about any of the portraits that have been found so far, take a look at the assumed portraits bleached out and blurred below, compared to the original screencap on the right:

Spoiler :

 

[gfeier]

No more Musketeers, please Firaxis. I'm so bored of them.

You prefer them to the Foreign Legion? Of the two, I'll take the Musketeers. A unit from Napoleon's era would be nice, but, if Catherine is the leader, something closer in time might be more appropriate.

 

[Birdjaguar]

Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm as thrilled about the spoiler as the next Civ Fanatic, but taking the video out to dinner is going a bit too far.

who said anything about dinner? She prefers youtube or Hulu.

 

[m15a]

who said anything about dinner? She prefers youtube or Hulu.

YouTube and chill?...

 

[j51]

You prefer them to the Foreign Legion? Of the two, I'll take the Musketeers. A unit from Napoleon's era would be nice, but, if Catherine is the leader, something closer in time might be more appropriate.

They seem to only be doing the closer in time thing if its a second UU that's part of a leader's bonus and there's only one more of those left unannounced. I'm hoping it's something Napoleonic.

 

[V. Soma]

This morning I took a look at the portraits and now I think (on a new morning, yeah)

that E1 is Sweden, Gustavus Adolphus - now I look for pictures...

 

[SMcM]

Tigranes II the Great could be pretty interesting, but probably not as interesting as Tamar.

I know of him because he was the leader for Armenia in JFD's Armenia Civ for Civ 5. Isn't his adoption of Christianity before any other nation something to do with the reason he is believed to be a good leader choice?

 

[IdiotStyle]

Look who it was all along!

 

[Krajzen]

I know of him because he was the leader for Armenia in JFD's Armenia Civ for Civ 5. Isn't his adoption of Christianity before any other nation something to do with the reason he is believed to be a good leader choice?

Tiritades III was decent king, allying with Rome in Roman-Persian wars and protecting Armenian kingdom, but the reason he is known is definitely the adoption of Christianity.

Not to confuse him with Tiritades the Great which founded brief Armenian Empire three centuries earlier, the highest extent of Armenia ever. Those two would be main candidates for Armenian civ.

 

[lorrydriverjr]

So the leader of the Aztecs is revealed to be Montezuma I, not the pictured Montezuma II...

 

[GauntZero]

Maybe Monte II. is part of vanilla, and Monte I is pre-order.

They might make two leaders for the Aztecs.

 

[h0nk0815]

So the leader of the Aztecs is revealed to be Montezuma I, not the pictured Montezuma II...

Personally I don't know how they both looked like... So I can't distinguish them. Or does this follow from the description ("temples and aquaeducts")?

 

[ImperialChaos]

I swear if this was all a ruse and we've spent 100 pages on this I will cry eagle tears.