All leader portraits

[mitsho]

Or you know, the much simpler version: Spain gets two leaders.

Speaking of which, what are notable Greek female leaders? Olympias (mother of alexander)?

 

[Atlas627]

A more reasonable choice is that Isabella and Philip II are both leaders of Spain.

I highly doubt Sicily will be in the game, and if it is, I doubt it will be lead by the famous Isabella of Spain.

 

[Cerilis]

Or you know, the much simpler version: Spain gets two leaders.

Speaking of which, what are notable Greek female leaders? Olympias (mother of alexander)?

That's just a random idea with neither evidence nor precedent. (Same as sicily as a civ btw )
If those would really be both spanish leaders, it would be much more likely to have one added as a deluxe-dlc.

 

[mitsho]

Exactly, doesn't the initial announcement speak of DLC that add civs, leaders, maps and - what was the fouth thing - scenarios? There's your evidence (besides of course the picture this thread is about), as for precedence: Civ 4 had two leaders per civs (Churchill and Victoria; Ashoka and Ghandi; Kublai and Genghis Khan; Bismarck and Frederic II). But I guess we don't need to discuss that in here and there's really nothing to argue about.

But I first thought your comment was on Olympias which yes would be a random idea without evidence nor precedent. But I was more asking for female famous Greek leaders - and couldn't think of any. Anyone can?

 

[Sonmi]

Exactly, doesn't the initial announcement speak of DLC that add civs, leaders, maps and - what was the fouth thing - scenarios? There's your evidence (besides of course the picture this thread is about), as for precedence: Civ 4 had two leaders per civs (Churchill and Victoria; Ashoka and Ghandi; Kublai and Genghis Khan; Bismarck and Frederic II). But I guess we don't need to discuss that in here and there's really nothing to argue about.

But I first thought your comment was on Olympias which yes would be a random idea without evidence nor precedent. But I was more asking for female famous Greek leaders - and couldn't think of any. Anyone can?

Why would Spain out of all Civs be the only ones to get several leaders? (With, maybe but unlikely, Greece)

In past Civ games featuring several leaders for one Civ, pretty much every big Civ got 2-3 leaders. I doubt they'd add the same feature in Civ VI only to apply it on a single Civ.

The most likely explanation is that E1 is not Philip II, and is probably some Swedish leader.

 

[mitsho]

Because they had fun doing both Isabella and Felipe? What other reasons do they need? And why only Spain and maybe Germany/Greece? Because they have to start somewhere as leader art takes time. It however would make sense to offer Napoleon, Elizabeth, Lincoln or Ashoka later on as a DLC, no?

 

[Atlas627]

Why would Spain out of all Civs be the only ones to get several leaders? (With, maybe but unlikely, Greece)

In past Civ games featuring several leaders for one Civ, pretty much every big Civ got 2-3 leaders. I doubt they'd add the same feature in Civ VI only to apply it on a single Civ.

The most likely explanation is that E1 is not Philip II, and is probably some Swedish leader.

Because they are releasing Leaders as DLC. I think its more likely that E1 is Philip II and Spain & Germany/Greece gets 2 leaders with Deluxe DLC than the alphabetic order is wrong, D5 being Sicily and B5 being...Goths(?), or that there are red herrings.

 

[King Jason]

Exactly, doesn't the initial announcement speak of DLC that add civs, leaders, maps and - what was the fouth thing - scenarios? There's your evidence (besides of course the picture this thread is about), ?

No.

Sid Meier’s Civilization® VI is not yet rated by the ESRB, is available for pre-order now on Windows PC, and will be released worldwide on October 21, 2016 for $59.99/£49.99/€59.99. Expand your empire further with the Civilization VI Digital Deluxe Edition, which includes the full base game, the 25th Anniversary Digital Soundtrack, and access to four post-launch DLC packs that will add new maps, scenarios, civilizations and leaders for a bundled discount.

There is no Oxford comma, which implies that it is one item.

While the comma isn't necessary, it's omission can have very real implications.

For a more obvious example on how a simple comma can mess with meaning, if I write a letter and say, "To Sid Meir, my brother and my boss..." - it sounds like Sid Meir is my brother and my boss. If I instead write, "To Sid Meir, my brother, and my boss.." it sounds like I'm writing to three people.

While theoretically the above release could be interpreted both ways, it's not nearly sufficient enough in itself to suggest that leaders are separate from civilizations. Personally, I'd maintain that the exclusion of the comma is indicative of 'Civilizations and Leaders' being a single item in the list.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Because they had fun doing both Isabella and Felipe? What other reasons do they need? And why only Spain and maybe Germany/Greece? Because they have to start somewhere as leader art takes time. It however would make sense to offer Napoleon, Elizabeth, Lincoln or Ashoka later on as a DLC, no?

Civ 4 came with also 18 civs, I believe that 8 of those civs have leaders.

Why the hell, woudl they ship Civ 6, with multiple leaders features, and only use it ONCE.

Makes zero sense from a game design point of view.

In addition, I have repeated it OVER several times, that if we truly have multiple leaders why not advertise it as something that will come. There were many disappointments when Civ 5 came with single leaders like in Civ 1 and 3.

We also never finalized E1, We made the assumption that it was Fillip despite the fact that many people said that his pose is similiar to thousands of portraits done that have the same pose and apperance.

 

[Atlas627]

Civ 4 came with also 18 civs, I believe that 8 of those civs have leaders.

Took less time and effort to make them, and they were in the base game. Nobody is suggesting these extra leaders are in the base game.

Why the hell, woudl they ship Civ 6, with multiple leaders features, and only use it ONCE.

Makes zero sense from a game design point of view.

You make it sound as though a feature is a special thing they can never make use of again, or have to re-implement every time they want to add on to it. Programming a game isn't like that. If they separate leaders from civs, which they seem to have done (and did in both 4 & 5), it is very easy to add more leaders to current civs.

In addition, I have repeated it OVER several times, that if we truly have multiple leaders why not advertise it as something that will come. There were many disappointments when Civ 5 came with single leaders like in Civ 1 and 3.

Why not just advertise every single feature now? They want to build up hype very slowly, so people stay interested in the game over a long period. Announcing it early allows them to gauge how much they should continue to invest in the project, from a publisher's perspective.

They have not denied that there could be multiple leaders *after* the base game (which is what we are suggesting, with DLC leaders). They have only confirmed that the base game will have 18 leaders for 18 civs.

We also never finalized E1, We made the assumption that it was Fillip despite the fact that many people said that his pose is similiar to thousands of portraits done that have the same pose and apperance.

So what? None of the other make any sort of sense alphabetically, and his is the best match of them all (if only slightly). Just because we didn't confirm it doesn't mean that people can't think it is MORE probable than the other theories. The fact that people care to have the discussion indicates they are aware that other theories are possible. If they thought there were NO way to be wrong, they wouldn't even have to be here to discuss.

 

[DWilson]

I keep saying E1 is Sicily. Isabella of Castile. They used a picture of her mother, common mistake.

And we keep telling you that there is absolutely zero justification for including Sicily, of all choices, as an independent civilization. It doesn't make any sense, so I'm not sure why you're so stuck on it. It is minimally possible that I am wrong here, but, it's just so unlikely as to not be worth discussing. For another reason, no one associates Isabella with Sicily rather than Spain, it doesn't happen.

Let's be honest, what's more likely, that it's a generic portrait of a likely Swedish Civ or that for whatever reason Firaxis decided to include Sicily?

 

[JFD]

No.



There is no Oxford comma, which implies that it is one item.

While the comma isn't necessary, it's omission can have very real implications.

For a more obvious example on how a simple comma can mess with meaning, if I write a letter and say, "To Sid Meir, my brother and my boss..." - it sounds like Sid Meir is my brother and my boss. If I instead write, "To Sid Meir, my brother, and my boss.." it sounds like I'm writing to three people.

While theoretically the above release could be interpreted both ways, it's not nearly sufficient enough in itself to suggest that leaders are separate from civilizations. Personally, I'd maintain that the exclusion of the comma is indicative of 'Civilizations and Leaders' being a single item in the list.

This isn't necessarily proof - Firaxis has omitted an oxford comma in the past, where it would've otherwise been appropriate, e.g. "New Civilizations, Units and Buildings" on the BNW page.

That said, in this same context, they refer similarly to "leaders and civilizations," which is why I also think the phrasing doesn't hold much weight.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/235580/

 

[tmacdec]

Why would Spain out of all Civs be the only ones to get several leaders? (With, maybe but unlikely, Greece)

In past Civ games featuring several leaders for one Civ, pretty much every big Civ got 2-3 leaders. I doubt they'd add the same feature in Civ VI only to apply it on a single Civ.

The most likely explanation is that E1 is not Philip II, and is probably some Swedish leader.

Sweden would be after Sumeria. So if it's alphabetical it can't be Sweden

 

[rastak]

We have confirmations of 19 out of the 22 civs (E1 being one that is questioned).

I wouldn't use the word confirmed. We think the portraits match they fit alphabetically.

 

[King Jason]

This isn't necessarily proof - Firaxis has omitted an oxford comma in the past, where it would've otherwise been appropriate, e.g. "New Civilizations, Units and Buildings" on the BNW page.

What? What you just posted is a confirmation of the theory, not a dissenting opinion. Moreso even, as "Civilizations, units and buildings" are all one item that come together. Therefore the comma isn't needed.

Furthermore, in Features suggestion there is this;

New Civilizations, Units and Buildings: Nine new leaders and civilizations are introduced, including Poland, Brazil, Portugal, Zulu and more each with their own unique traits, units and buildings.

Civ5 didn't have multiple leaders. There's no reason to specify Leaders and Civilizations. You only need to say civilizations. That's just how Firaxis refers to their content. In civ5 much of the emphasis was on leaders way more than civilizations, even the intro of each game annoyingly addressed you as if you were the leader itself. Yet that game was never suspected of having multiple leaders.

 

[Cerilis]

Exactly, doesn't the initial announcement speak of DLC that add civs, leaders, maps and - what was the fouth thing - scenarios? There's your evidence (besides of course the picture this thread is about), as for precedence: Civ 4 had two leaders per civs (Churchill and Victoria; Ashoka and Ghandi; Kublai and Genghis Khan; Bismarck and Frederic II). But I guess we don't need to discuss that in here and there's really nothing to argue about.

But I first thought your comment was on Olympias which yes would be a random idea without evidence nor precedent. But I was more asking for female famous Greek leaders - and couldn't think of any. Anyone can?

Nevermind, I thought you meant one civ having 2 leaders simultaneously (as in, the same game, on the leaderscreen).

 

[Bast]

Ok Spain is not getting two leaders at least not in the base game or the initial DLC. End of story. It's clearly 18 plus 4 civilizations.

 

[Sonmi]

Sweden would be after Sumeria. So if it's alphabetical it can't be Sweden

Sweden is before Ur, which could be used for Gilgamesh.

 

[tmacdec]

If E2 is Ur , instead of Sumeria, then E1 could very well be Sweden. There are portraits of Charles X Gustav that could very well match the blurry picture

 

[True_Candyman]

Nevermind, I thought you meant one civ having 2 leaders simultaneously (as in, the same game, on the leaderscreen).

For what it's worth, I do genuinely think this is a strong bet :

I posted a theory up on it a few pages back: Double leader screens for Germany, Poland and Spain