BEST Female Leaders for Civ VII?

[Patine]

2 levels of trait/unit/infrastructure: one tied to the civilization/culture and 1 tied to the leader/empire. Should make it easier. Can use some more general concepts for the civilization thing, or broaden it out and pick something that isn't necessarily directly related to that civilization in particular, but isn't a default unit either.

Perhaps the leader and civ should also be separate, so multiple leaders are a viable possibility.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

You mean something like this:

Civilization: Ottomans
UA: Masters of Siege
UB: Sublime Porte

Leader: Suleyman
UA: The Magnificent
UU: Barbary Corsair

Leader: Mehmed II
UA: The Conqueror
UU: Great Bombard

?

 

[pineappledan]

Civilization: Turkic
Civilization Ability: Oghuz
Civilization Unit: Ghulam
Civilization Infrastructure: Balbal

Leader: Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire
Leader Ability: Kapikulu
Leader Unit: Basilic
Leader Infrastructure: Tersane

 

[Henri Christophe]

Leader: Mehmed II of the Ottoman Empire

Here in female thread shouldn't we discuss female leader? Ottoman Empire could have a women leader? It didn't come any name on my mind.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Here in female thread shouldn't we discuss female leader? Ottoman Empire could have a women leader? It didn't come any name on my mind.

You are right. I though this was new leaders/civilizations thread.

As for a female leader for the Ottomans, you could have Kösem Sultan or Turhan Sultan. Though I would prefer actual male sultans who had effective and illustrious reigns, I wouldn't mind Kösem Sultan as an alternate leader.

 

[krmarci]

For Austria and Hungary, probably Maria Theresa or Sisi.

 

[Patine]

For Austria and Hungary, probably Maria Theresa or Sisi.

Sisi is an odd choice.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Sisi is an odd choice.

I liked it for Maria Theresa.

 

[Evie]

I dislike it for Austria not being lumped in Germany where it belongs

 

[Patine]

I dislike it for Austria not being lumped in Germany where it belongs

Maria Theresa never ruled, "Germany." And many of her biggest enemies (like Frederick the Great) were also German rulers. Plus, at it's height period, Austria ruled over an multiethnic and multi-confessional empire where the majority were non-German.

 

[Evie]

One could say the same of most candidates for Greek and Mayan leadership. Yet, they still are widely recognized as Greek and Mayan leaders, because in their time they were among the leaders of those people.

Which certainly can be said of Maria Theresa, a German-speaking ruler of German culture who ruled over a wide number of German realms (plus a few non-German ones), who was (technically by marriage, but it was well understood that she was the de facto ruler) Empress of the Holy Roman Empire.

In every imaginable way Maria Theresa has a *greater* claim than Frederick the Great to being a German leader. The only reason it's viewed otherwise because of people clinging to the ridiculous notion that Germany only really existed from 1871 and that the closest thing to a pre-1871 German is Prussia, since they were the ones who won the race to (re)unify Germany.

Adding an extra civilization for a german-speaking, german-cultured country that was not only wholly part of Germany up until the late nineteenth century, but in fact the *heart* of Germany for most of the previous five hundred years, just because another country won the reunification race is making even Canada and Australia look like reasonable use of tags.

 

[Patine]

One could say the same of most candidates for Greek and Mayan leadership. Yet, they still are widely recognized as Greek and Mayan leaders, because in their time they were among the leaders of those people.

Which certainly can be said of Maria Theresa, a German-speaking ruler of German culture who ruled over a wide number of German realms (plus a few non-German ones), who was (technically by marriage, but it was well understood that she was the de facto ruler) Empress of the Holy Roman Empire.

In every imaginable way Maria Theresa has a *greater* claim than Frederick the Great to being a German leader. The only reason it's viewed otherwise because of people clinging to the ridiculous notion that Germany only really existed from 1871 and that the closest thing to a pre-1871 German is Prussia, since they were the ones who won the race to (re)unify Germany.

Adding an extra civilization for a german-speaking, german-cultured country that was not only wholly part of Germany up until the late nineteenth century, but in fact the *heart* of Germany for most of the previous five hundred years, just because another country won the reunification race is making even Canada and Australia look like reasonable use of tags.

I've noticed that several posters here have, sporadically, been promoting viewing a leader's civi by a more ethno-linguistic division rather than as, "civilizations." Although I am not a proponent of Canada or Australia being in game, or Greek leaders ruling Egypt, or any other such thing, as I have said, I am also not really and fully in line with ethno-linguistic definitions as clear-cut and absolute delineators.

 

[Evie]

Whereas I am not a proponent of a polities-based approach to civilization. A civilization can be one continuous and unified polity certainly, but it can also be a non-state whole made of a collection of interlinked polities or other entities, distinct either geographically or temporally but with a distinct sense of cultural and historical continuity between them.

In any event, someone who was de jure Holy Roman Empress by marriage and de facto actual ruler of the Empire is most certainly a German leader. The idea that there was no Germany prior to 1871 is just bad pop history.

 

[Patine]

Whereas I am not a proponent of a polities-based approach to civilization. A civilization can be one continuous and unified polity certainly, but it can also be a non-state whole made of a collection of interlinked polities or other entities, distinct either geographically or temporally but with a distinct sense of cultural and historical continuity between them.

In any event, someone who was de jure Holy Roman Empress by marriage and de facto actual ruler of the Empire is most certainly a German leader. The idea that there was no Germany prior to 1871 is just bad pop history.

The title of Holy Roman Emperor was a deprecated and symbolic sinecure by Maria Theresa's day, and the office ruled nothing and had no binding power. And, I was the first one to correct Henri on the myth that Germany, "began," in 1871, before you joined in, so please, don't make that assumption of my views. Or the assumption that I MUST view thing in strict polities if I don't favour absolute ethno-linguistic blocs. This post I am quoting is putting words and views in my mouth that I have never said, based on baseless presumptions. I can take criticism of my views and statements - but only if they are actually of my explicitly stated views and statements, not wild assumptions.

 

[krmarci]

Sisi is an odd choice.

While that is true*, she is the most popular queen of Hungary in its 1,000 years of history, and one of the most popular Austrian queens/empresses as well. Her friendly attitude towards Hungarians also contributed to the creation of the Compromise, which led to an era of economic prosperity for Austria-Hungary.

(*I wouldn't discount her for being a royal consort - so are Catherine de Medici and Eleanor of Aquitaine, yet they are in the game.)

 

[Patine]

While that is true*, she is the most popular queen of Hungary in its 1,000 years of history, and one of the most popular Austrian queens/empresses as well. Her friendly attitude towards Hungarians also contributed to the creation of the Compromise, which led to an era of economic prosperity for Austria-Hungary.

(*I wouldn't discount her for being a royal consort - so are Catherine de Medici and Eleanor of Aquitaine, yet they are in the game.)

She also likely suffered from mental illness like her ill-fated and suicidal son, Archduke Rudolf, though.

And, Catherine de Medici was NOT just a Royal Consort, but later a Queen Regent.

 

[Evie]

Of course, suffering from mental illness should not by itself disqualify anyone from anything. As always, actions, not conditions, is what people should be judged by.

 

[Patine]

Of course, suffering from mental illness should not by itself disqualify anyone from anything. As always, actions, not conditions, is what people should be judged by.

Depending on the mental illness. George III was removed from active, de facto reigning in favour of his son, George, Prince of Wales (later George IV) as Prince Regent for the last 10 years of the elder's long reign (the longest-reigning King, and third-longest-reigning Monarch, after Elizabeth II and Victoria, of Britain) due to his mental illness - a period called the Regency Era.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

This post I am quoting is putting words and views in my mouth that I have never said, based on baseless presumptions. I can take criticism of my views and statements - but only if they are actually of my explicitly stated views and statements, not wild assumptions.

Really sucks when that happens, eh?

 

[Patine]

Really sucks when that happens, eh?

If you're referring to what you I think you're referring to, I was a bit overbearing and presumptuous, there, and recognize that. I hope @Evie has the same insight, here.