[BtS] The Leaders Project - Recruiting Now!

[NikNaks]

Well, thanks for the input. I'll be sending you a PM shortly so check your inbox.

 

[C.Roland]

Here a quick progress of what I did this afternoon (I make it quickly so I still need to improve it, not really happy with the shape and the "crête" red thing(sorry don't know the exact name in english) can't be made of particule like on this render, so I would have to model it as a block and create a texture with a normal map.

Helmet of Leonidas :

 

[NikNaks]

Looks fantastic! Which leader will be the underneath, as a matter of interest?

 

[C.Roland]

Looks fantastic! Which leader will be the underneath, as a matter of interest?

Don't know, I'll test more than one, bur probably augustus (if not auguste, it would probably be alexander, shaka or hannibal). If you have a suggestion, tell me.

 

[strategyonly]

Don't know, I'll test more than one, bur probably augustus (if not auguste, it would probably be alexander, shaka or hannibal). If you have a suggestion, tell me.

How about Kirk Douglas, Caligula, Nero as Leaders or even Spartacus as a Gladiator

 

[C.Roland]

I'd certainly like to be involved in this project as a researcher/ideas man, though I'm worthless in things such as XML and graphics.

The comments I have about the list as is currently posted:

Benjamin Franklin nor Dr. King are good ones for the United States, as neither was really a leader. I would propose as a replacement for Franklin as Kennedy, who is, while debated whether a great leader, is certainly a recognized leader. Teddy Roosevelt as replacement for King is fine in my book.

Saddam Hussein is NOT good for Arabia, as he never really had much influence over ALL Arabs. However, one that I would put in this one who is not in fact Arab, would be T.E. Lawrence, as a military leader and recognized as an "Arab" leader the world over as well as more modern. If not Lawrence, then I would put as a leader Faisal I of Iraq, who is far more Pan-Arab than Hussein.

I would not put Sun Tzu as a Chinese leader, but rather in his place, Dr. Sun Yatsen, the father of modern China from both the Communist and Nationalist perspective (i.e. both PRC and ROC)

Nelson would in my opinion be very BAD as a British leader, as he was a politically non-astute Admiral, and only remembered for one battle. However, in his place, the Duke of Wellington would be appropriate.

In place of Clovis and Joan of Arc, who in my opinion are not appropriate for France, I would place Richelieu, who really was the architect of the system which produced Louis XIV, and Hugh Capet, the founder of the Capetian dynasty and modern France as it were.

In Germany, I would keep Hitler, but definitely create a replacement, such as Hindenburg, in an idea to avoid the Nazism. I would also specify Wilhelm II as Kaiser Wilhelm, rather than his grandfather.

With Greece, I would retract Pythia, and put a more modern ruler, George I of Greece, or possibly one of the later Greek rulers, but definitely NOT Pythia. I would also definitely pick Leonidas over Epaminodas.

Meiji DEFINITELY with Japan. He was EXTREMELY important in modern Japan.

I would replace Nevskiy in Russia with Lenin, who was an extremely important and influential ruler.

Spain, I would almost completely change. El Cid, Ferdinand, Cortes, and Pizzaro are, in my opinion, not good selections. I would myself put Charles I if he were not more important as Holy Roman Emperor. As my other Spanish leaders, I would definitely include Francisco Franco, and possibly Juan Carlos I. I don't know about other ones, though your idea of Ferdinand is a possibility.

As the last Korean, I would include Syngman Rhee just in my general Idea that we should have at least one relatively modern ruler for any country that still exists. I would possibly include Kim Il Sung, definitely considered an important Korean ruler, in place of one of the others.

With the Vikings, that's EriK the Red, not Erich, and Leif Eriksson. Otherwise I have no other ideas.

With the Netherlands/Portugal, I think we got Queen Wilhelmina switched...otherwise no comment on the Dutch. With Portuguese, I would NOT include Magellan (as he sailed for Spain despite being Portuguese...or vice versa, I can't recall).

Otherwise, off the top of my head, I have no other commentary.

I agree with you on everything except maybe France. Well, historicly, Capet (and Clovis too) is a good choice (more than our good Jeanne D'Arc). We definitly need a medieval french leader. I think the 3 best choice would be Capet, Charles Martel and Clovis but graphicly wise (and this project will need a lot of new graphic) Joan of Arc is the best choice because of this leaderhead :

This LH use ElderScrolls Oblivion's mesh, so it is not really realistic, even for Joan of Arc, but it is so beautifull that It would be a shame to not use it. If we can manage to use this LH for an other medieval female leader (I do not have any idea now), than we may use an other leader for medieval France. The best choice graphicly wise would probably be clovis because I made a LH a long time ago that can be used as clovis. This isn't shaded but maybe I can ask Ploeper to rexport it with shaders so it would be much nicer than it is.

I am also up for Lenin as a Russian leader but ILoveplayciv has also made a nice Nevskiy (less fantasy, more realistic this time) to use. However, this LH can be used for other LH too.

 

[GigaNerd]

I'd certainly like to be involved in this project as a researcher/ideas man, though I'm worthless in things such as XML and graphics.

The comments I have about the list as is currently posted:

Benjamin Franklin nor Dr. King are good ones for the United States, as neither was really a leader. I would propose as a replacement for Franklin as Kennedy, who is, while debated whether a great leader, is certainly a recognized leader. Teddy Roosevelt as replacement for King is fine in my book.

Saddam Hussein is NOT good for Arabia, as he never really had much influence over ALL Arabs. However, one that I would put in this one who is not in fact Arab, would be T.E. Lawrence, as a military leader and recognized as an "Arab" leader the world over as well as more modern. If not Lawrence, then I would put as a leader Faisal I of Iraq, who is far more Pan-Arab than Hussein.

I would not put Sun Tzu as a Chinese leader, but rather in his place, Dr. Sun Yatsen, the father of modern China from both the Communist and Nationalist perspective (i.e. both PRC and ROC)

Nelson would in my opinion be very BAD as a British leader, as he was a politically non-astute Admiral, and only remembered for one battle. However, in his place, the Duke of Wellington would be appropriate.

In place of Clovis and Joan of Arc, who in my opinion are not appropriate for France, I would place Richelieu, who really was the architect of the system which produced Louis XIV, and Hugh Capet, the founder of the Capetian dynasty and modern France as it were.

In Germany, I would keep Hitler, but definitely create a replacement, such as Hindenburg, in an idea to avoid the Nazism. I would also specify Wilhelm II as Kaiser Wilhelm, rather than his grandfather.

With Greece, I would retract Pythia, and put a more modern ruler, George I of Greece, or possibly one of the later Greek rulers, but definitely NOT Pythia. I would also definitely pick Leonidas over Epaminodas.

Meiji DEFINITELY with Japan. He was EXTREMELY important in modern Japan.

I would replace Nevskiy in Russia with Lenin, who was an extremely important and influential ruler.

Spain, I would almost completely change. El Cid, Ferdinand, Cortes, and Pizzaro are, in my opinion, not good selections. I would myself put Charles I if he were not more important as Holy Roman Emperor. As my other Spanish leaders, I would definitely include Francisco Franco, and possibly Juan Carlos I. I don't know about other ones, though your idea of Ferdinand is a possibility.

As the last Korean, I would include Syngman Rhee just in my general Idea that we should have at least one relatively modern ruler for any country that still exists. I would possibly include Kim Il Sung, definitely considered an important Korean ruler, in place of one of the others.

With the Vikings, that's EriK the Red, not Erich, and Leif Eriksson. Otherwise I have no other ideas.

With the Netherlands/Portugal, I think we got Queen Wilhelmina switched...otherwise no comment on the Dutch. With Portuguese, I would NOT include Magellan (as he sailed for Spain despite being Portuguese...or vice versa, I can't recall).

Otherwise, off the top of my head, I have no other commentary.

*sighs* Why do people like modern leaders so much? I'm okay if we have an occasional one, but how are we supposed to get one for civs like Carthage and Sumeria?

America: I'm okay with replacing Benjamin, but no way Dr. King! If I remove him, all the black people on the forums will start flaming me! I don't want to offend anyone by getting rid of him.

Arabia: Hmm..... I like having Saddam Hussein in their, whether you like it or not. But, I might consider you're ideas of other Arab leaders.

China: Oh please, Mao Zedong is enough! I don't want too much communism involved here!

England: Nelson was the only guy I could think of. I'll put in Wellington.

France: I'M KEEPING JOAN OF ARC!! Sorry for all caps, but still, I don't want to replace her. I'll get rid of Clovis though.

Germany: You're okay with having Communists, why should you be worried about Nazis?

Greece: Once I find a dictionary, I'll reply to what you said.

Japan: Hirohito isn't enough? Oh well, I might add him anyways. It's not like anyone cares about my preferences anymore!

Russia: What's with all the Communists?

Spain: Are the only good leaders involved in politics? I don't think that's true. What about Hannibal? I don't remember him being politically active! Well, anyways, I'm keeping El Cid and Ferdinand. I don't like Franco, so maybe Juan Carlos, but I'm staying with either Pizarro or Cortes, if not both of them.

Korea: Dude, I'm half-Korean myself, so if you don't like my ideas, I'll give you this smiley: I don't want to put in Kim Il Sung, because then I'd have to put in one in for South Korea too, or else I'll be flamed by them. Seeing as my dad has told me about most of the Korean leaders on my list, I'm pretty sure that I'm okay with the currently existing ones.

Portugal: Well, Columbus was Italian but he was working for Spain also. I just can't pull off Columbus as Spanish. I don't think I can do the same thing with Magellan.

 

[GigaNerd]

Sorry for double-posting but here's my new list:

Spoiler :

America:
1. Washington
2. Roosevelt
3. Lincoln
4. Dr. King
5. Theodore OR Kennedy

Arabia:
1. Saladin
2. Abu Bakr
3. Saddam Hussein
4. Ali
5. Amr Al-As

Aztecs:
1. Montezuma
2. Ahuitzotl
3. Itzcoatl
4. Tizoc
5. Nezahualpilli

China:
1. Mao Zedong
2. Qin Shi Huang
3. Hongwu
4. Qianlong
5. Qiu Jin

Egypt:
1. Ramesses
2. Cleopatra
3. Imhotep
4. Hatshepsut
5. Menes

England:
1. Victoria
2. Elizabeth
3. Churchill
4. Richard the Lionheart
5. Wellington

France:
1. Napoleon
2. De Gaulle
3. Joan of Arc
4. Louis XIV
5. Richelieu

Germany:
1. Bismarck
2. Frederick
3. Hitler
4. Wilhelm
5. Adenauer

Greece:
1. Alexander
2. Pericles
3. Philip
4. Pythia
5. Leonidas

Incas:
1. Huayna Capac
2. Pachacuti
3. Manco Capac
4. Topa Inca
5. Yupanqui

India:
1. Gandhi
2. Asoka
3. Shivaji
4. Akbar
5. Chandragupta

Japan:
1. Tokugawa
2. Takeda
3. Hirohito
4. Hideyoshi
5. Meiji

Mali:
1. Mansa Musa
2. Sundiata
3. Abubakari
4.
5.

Mongolia:
1. Genghis Khan
2. Ogedei Khan
3. Kublai Khan
4.
5.

Persia:
1. Cyrus
2. Darius
3. Xerxes
4. Achaemenes
5.

Rome:
1. Julius Caesar
2. Augustus Caesar
3. Trajan
4. Scipio
5. Vespasian

Russia:
1. Catherine
2. Stalin
3. Peter
4. Ivan the Terrible
5. Nevsky

Spain:
1. Isabella
2. El Cid
3. Ferdinand
4. Pizarro
5. Cortes

Carthage:
1. Hannibal
2. Dido
3. Hamilcar
4.
5.

Celtia:
1. Brennus
2. Boudica
3. Vercingetorix
4.
5.

Korea:
1. Wang Kon
2. Admiral Yi
3. Seong-Gye
4. Sejong
5.

Ottomans:
1. Mehmed
2. Suleiman
3. Osman
4. Ataturk
5. Selim

Vikings:
1. Ragnar
2. Canute
3. Leif Eriksson
4. Erik the Red
5.

Zululand:
1. Shaka
2. Mpande
3. Cetshwayo
4. Dingane
5. Ndlela

Babylonia:
1. Hammurabi
2. Nebuchadnezzar
3. Naboplasser
4.
5.

Byzantium:
1. Theodora
2. Constantine
3. Justinian
4. Basil
5. Manuel

Ethiopia:
1. Zara Yaqob
2. Menelik
3. Salassie
4.
5.

Holy Rome:
1. Charlemagne
2. Charles
3. Leopold
4. Otto
5. Barbarossa

Khmer:
1. Suryavarman
2. Jayavarman
3. Indravarman
4.
5.

Mayas:
1. Pacal
2. Cauac Sky
3. Tecun Uman
4. Smoke Jaguar
5.

Native America:
1. Sitting Bull
2. Hiawatha
3. Red Cloud
4. Geronimo
5. Crazy Horse

Netherlands:
1. William of Orange
2. De Witt
3. Tasman
4. Maurice of Orange
5. Wilhelmina

Portugal:
1. Joao II
2. Afonso Henriques
3. Henry the Navigator
4.
5.

Sumeria:
1. Gilgamesh
2. Ur-Nammu
3. Lugal-Zage-Si
4. Sargon
5. Eannatum

Also, I want to avoid adding leaders who are still alive. We don't want to be sued by George W. Bush, now do we?

 

[dutchking]

I am also up for Lenin as a Russian leader but ILoveplayciv has also made a nice Nevskiy (less fantasy, more realistic this time) to use. However, this LH can be used for other LH too.

I'm improving my Lenin!
Did I mention I'm working on this project too?

 

[Head Serf]

I have a lot of experience doing XML modding for leaders, and I might be able to help do that with this project once the lists become more final.

Just some comments:

America: Do not include MLK. He was never a leader of the United States, and was in no way involved politically nor militarily. While a great person, including him is absolutely ridiculous. A much better leader would be either Ronald Reagan, JFK, Woodrow Wilson, or Thomas Jefferson.

Russia: Add Lenin, remove Nevsky.

France: I would say switch Joan of Arc for Clovis, but since you already have the Joan of Arc graphics, it's not a huge issue.

 

[C.Roland]

I have a lot of respect for Martin Luther King too, but I do not think he should be a civ ruler. I think it is fine to add general as leader, explorator it may pass, but I agree with Head Serf for King. He is a much nicer person than a lot of general, but civ's leaders aren't the best guys they are the ones who had more influence on their civ. So I think that Joan of Arc can pass (even if it's not my first choice) but King, Magellan, Nelson and Cortez should'nt.

On the same note, Franco and Lenin are good choice because they had a big influence on their country (I mean big, not good) and we already have 2 animated LH for them. Also, Meiji is a must for japan because he is the one who open the japan to the modern world (Also for japan, I think a Heian period leader would be nice).

 

[King Elessar]

*sighs* Why do people like modern leaders so much? I'm okay if we have an occasional one, but how are we supposed to get one for civs like Carthage and Sumeria?

America: I'm okay with replacing Benjamin, but no way Dr. King! If I remove him, all the black people on the forums will start flaming me! I don't want to offend anyone by getting rid of him.

Arabia: Hmm..... I like having Saddam Hussein in their, whether you like it or not. But, I might consider you're ideas of other Arab leaders.

China: Oh please, Mao Zedong is enough! I don't want too much communism involved here!

England: Nelson was the only guy I could think of. I'll put in Wellington.

France: I'M KEEPING JOAN OF ARC!! Sorry for all caps, but still, I don't want to replace her. I'll get rid of Clovis though.

Germany: You're okay with having Communists, why should you be worried about Nazis?

Greece: Once I find a dictionary, I'll reply to what you said.

Japan: Hirohito isn't enough? Oh well, I might add him anyways. It's not like anyone cares about my preferences anymore!

Russia: What's with all the Communists?

Spain: Are the only good leaders involved in politics? I don't think that's true. What about Hannibal? I don't remember him being politically active! Well, anyways, I'm keeping El Cid and Ferdinand. I don't like Franco, so maybe Juan Carlos, but I'm staying with either Pizarro or Cortes, if not both of them.

Korea: Dude, I'm half-Korean myself, so if you don't like my ideas, I'll give you this smiley: I don't want to put in Kim Il Sung, because then I'd have to put in one in for South Korea too, or else I'll be flamed by them. Seeing as my dad has told me about most of the Korean leaders on my list, I'm pretty sure that I'm okay with the currently existing ones.

Portugal: Well, Columbus was Italian but he was working for Spain also. I just can't pull off Columbus as Spanish. I don't think I can do the same thing with Magellan.

In order:

America: Dr. King, while a great man, was not a leader of the United States. And I, being descended from all these African slaves, give you permission to not use him

Arabia: Hussein just doesn't fit at all; he was hated by most Arabs. Also, since he died so recently, he's practically still alive.

China: Sun Yatsen was pointedly NOT Communist. He was the NATIONALIST leader of China. He was BEFORE the Civil War, BEFORE the Communist Party, and BEFORE Mao Zedong.

England: No comment

France: Fine, keep Joan of Arc.

Germany: Well, it's that Nazi imagery is banned in many nations, notably, Germany, Denmark, and Austria, as well as other nations in Europe and the world at large.

Greece: Pythia was a high priestess in a single oracle, at Delphi, which is just the best known oracle now. Therefore, nowhere near leadership material, even less so than Hussein or King.

Japan: Meiji modernized Japan. Japan would not be the nation it is today without him. Actually, I would prefer to drop Hirohito and replace him with Tojo, as Hirohito is a far more disputed and debated figure, and the fact that he only died 20-some years ago, making him a bit TOO recent.

Russia: No one can deny the importance of Lenin in what is now modern Russia. Stalin could never have come to power without him, and it was Lenin's party organization and early leadership which made the Soviet Union possible, despite his death early on in into his leadership. Like Communism or not, like the Soviets or not, he is a major and important leader in 20th century and world history.

Spain: El Cid was a minor mercenary in the midst of a 700 year war, fighting for whichever side paid him better! He's only as well known as he is because of folk legends and manuscripts and dramatizations. Ferdinand is a maybe, but El Cid is unequivocally NOT a leader or anything of the sort. Pizarro and Cortes were in the same tradition as El Cid, it's just that the war ended, so they went off and fought in Latin America. Still, not leadership material or anything like it. They led bands of mercenaries and treasurehunters, not nations or armies. Franco, like him or not, is a MAJOR influence on Spanish culture and history, ruling over the country for decades and establishing the dominant Castillian culture which we now just call "Spanish". Juan Carlos, still being alive, might actually be removed just because of this fact, but Juan Carlos is definitively the father of Spanish democracy! El Cid, Cortes, and Pizarro are, all three, unimportant to Spain and Spanish history as a whole. Every other leader mentioned, including Joan of Arc, Dr. King, Franklin, and even PYTHIA is more leadership material than these three.

Oh, and on Hannibal? He WAS politically active...he's just REMEMBERED for his military exploits.

Korea: Well, I'm not as knowledgeable on Korean history, so I bow to your greater knowledge on the subject.

Portugal: But, really, Magellan accomplished very little...almost nothing, if you think about it. He died halfway through when "he" circumnavigated the globe. In replacement, I suggest Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, the 20th century dictator of Portugal, who, despite his dictatorship, was an influential, longterm, and important leader of Portugal.

 

[King Coltrane]

America: Giga... im all for Dr king for the US. stand firm behind him! he would be fantastic. I mean if ghandi can be a leader for india, why cant he be a leader for the US. give him organized and creative! also, as much as i like kennedy and TR, i would suggest Eisenhower. i mean, any would be fine, and maybe hes too close to FDR chronologically, but he was a general from WW2 and so would probably have the aggressive trait... which i want to see for america also, i would give him either imperialist or financial.

Arabia: instead of saddam, who is not really arab... i would say Faisal also... though lawrence would be really cool! (if a little insensitive to arabs...) maybe give him protective and financial?

China: I would suggest Han Wu-di... the greatest emperor of the Han dynasty, which was one of China's golden ages. make him imperialistic and organized maybe



Egypt: dont use imhotep... he was a great engineer of sorts (in addition to a host of other really cool things) but wasnt really a leader. i mean, by the above MLK jr and Ghandi token i guess it would work, but i would say Ptolomey Soter could be cool. could have philosophical and aggressive maybe... or if thats too greek, how about Narmer, the first unifier of egypt? i would like him better honestly. he could be organized and spiritual maybe

England: Henry V!!!! he would be great! a true hero of england, both historical and important. definately would have charismatic and and protective i would say (to represent the power of his longbows at agincourt...)

France: all good there! i like them. and i say use joan... why not? haha

Germany: i would say Arminius... he could be interesting i think. agg and organized maybe, but that might be a stretch. ill keep thinking haha

Greece:
1. Alexander
2. Pericles
3. Philip
4. Croeses
5. Leonidas

I think the others are good, though philip would be the first of these 5 i would replace. Croeses would be cool because coins were invented in Lydia under his reign and was known for his wealth... financial and protective maybe?

India: Shivaji --- wasnt he more of a hero than leader? i mean i dont know about him so sorry about my ignorance. if not him, maybe use Ajatashatru instead? hes from teh time of buddha, though that may be too close to Asoka for some people's likings, but he does seem to be important from what i have read... maybe religious and imperialistic... could be a cool combination


Japan:

Mongolia:
1. Genghis Khan
2. Ogedei Khan
3. Kublai Khan
4. Subotei (a DAMN fine general of mongolia... but maybe not quite a leader) agg and creative maybe
5. Tamerlane! imperialistic and aggressive

Persia:
1. Cyrus
2. Darius
3. Xerxes
4. Achaemenes
5. Shapur II (its not the achaemenid, but he was probably the greatest of the sassanians, who saw themselves as the successors to the achaemenids) organized and spiritual maybe...

Rome:

Russia: i like nevsky! use him!

Spain:
1. Isabella
2. Juan Carlos
3. Ferdinand
4. Phillip II expansionist + imperialistic maybe... not sure
5. Franco
Carthage:
1. Hannibal
2. Dido
3. Hamilcar
4. Hasdrubal?
5. Hanno the Navigator?

Celtia:
1. Brennus
2. Boudica
3. Vercingetorix
4. ?
5. ?

Korea:
1. Wang Kon
2. Admiral Yi
3. Seong-Gye
4. Sejong
5. ?

Ottomans:

Vikings:
1. Ragnar
2. Canute
3. Leif Eriksson
4. Erik the Red
5. alfred the great?





Byzantium:
1. Theodora
2. Constantine
3. Justinian
4. Basil II
5. Heraclius



Khmer:
1. Suryavarman
2. Jayavarman
3. Indravarman
4. Pol Pot

 

[GeneralMatt]

On England, Nelson? Wellington? The first was not at all a politician, the second a very bad on in a bad time. Both should stay in the great general list.

I would say William Pitt (Either of them)or as mentioned before, Henry V.

Or Henry VIII as the guy below mentions.

 

[Miles Teg]

Hi. I'm a Civ IIIer, so obviously no help with the art or coding, but here's a quick list of amendments I would propose:

Rome: Vespasian was an excellent emperor, but he's overshadowed by two predecessors from the republican era:

Gaius Marius was a roman general, seven time consul (unheard of until then, I'm pretty sure that was never equaled). He beat Jugurtha in Numidia. Then he beat back a major Germanic invasion and so was titled Third Founder of Rome. He instituted major reforms in the roman army, opening it up to the poor, as well as giving land to troops after serving in a campaign. He was one faction in a civil war versus Sulla. He won at first but it all fell apart after he died of his third stroke at the age of 71. He instituted the Eagle as the symbol of Rome and was part of his "Marian Reforms" was to use the legionary for domestic work like road building. My personal choice. Note that he instituted a reign of terror in his later years, in which he was highly senile.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla, the other candidate for fifth leader was Marius's rival. He twice marched on Rome (Never before done) and defeated Mithridates of Pontus after being (Illegally) stripped of his command by Marius. He paved the way for Pompeys conquest of the east, and codified Rome's unwritten constitution, albeit more conservative then the traditional one. He is thought of as the spiritual predecessor to Caesar.


England: I don't really like your list

Here's an alternative:

Victoria
Elizabeth I
Churchill
Edward III (Medieval flavor, ten times better than Richard I who was in Steven Runciman's words :"A bad son, a bad husband and a bad king, but a gallant and splendid soldier."
Henry VIII. Union of England and Wales, Formation of the church of England, one of the three founders of the English navy
Alfred the Great. Need I explain?


America. Sorry, Martin Luther King was never nationally important, unlike Gandhi. I would recomend Eisenhower, Jefferson, or Andrew Jackson instead. Your choice. Also Teddy was a better president and less controversial then Kennedy.


Hitler was a bad leader, Holocaust aside. May I recomend Arminius? He tried (and failed) to unite Germany, but he dealt Rome a harsh blow at Teutoburg Forest.


Khmer: Jayavarman II was the founder of the Khmer empire, but Jayavarman VII was also one of the greats.

 

[GigaNerd]

I have a lot of experience doing XML modding for leaders, and I might be able to help do that with this project once the lists become more final.

Just some comments:

America: Do not include MLK. He was never a leader of the United States, and was in no way involved politically nor militarily. While a great person, including him is absolutely ridiculous. A much better leader would be either Ronald Reagan, JFK, Woodrow Wilson, or Thomas Jefferson.

Russia: Add Lenin, remove Nevsky.

France: I would say switch Joan of Arc for Clovis, but since you already have the Joan of Arc graphics, it's not a huge issue.

I have a lot of respect for Martin Luther King too, but I do not think he should be a civ ruler. I think it is fine to add general as leader, explorator it may pass, but I agree with Head Serf for King. He is a much nicer person than a lot of general, but civ's leaders aren't the best guys they are the ones who had more influence on their civ. So I think that Joan of Arc can pass (even if it's not my first choice) but King, Magellan, Nelson and Cortez should'nt.

On the same note, Franco and Lenin are good choice because they had a big influence on their country (I mean big, not good) and we already have 2 animated LH for them. Also, Meiji is a must for japan because he is the one who open the japan to the modern world (Also for japan, I think a Heian period leader would be nice).

In order:

America: Dr. King, while a great man, was not a leader of the United States. And I, being descended from all these African slaves, give you permission to not use him

Arabia: Hussein just doesn't fit at all; he was hated by most Arabs. Also, since he died so recently, he's practically still alive.

China: Sun Yatsen was pointedly NOT Communist. He was the NATIONALIST leader of China. He was BEFORE the Civil War, BEFORE the Communist Party, and BEFORE Mao Zedong.

England: No comment

France: Fine, keep Joan of Arc.

Germany: Well, it's that Nazi imagery is banned in many nations, notably, Germany, Denmark, and Austria, as well as other nations in Europe and the world at large.

Greece: Pythia was a high priestess in a single oracle, at Delphi, which is just the best known oracle now. Therefore, nowhere near leadership material, even less so than Hussein or King.

Japan: Meiji modernized Japan. Japan would not be the nation it is today without him. Actually, I would prefer to drop Hirohito and replace him with Tojo, as Hirohito is a far more disputed and debated figure, and the fact that he only died 20-some years ago, making him a bit TOO recent.

Russia: No one can deny the importance of Lenin in what is now modern Russia. Stalin could never have come to power without him, and it was Lenin's party organization and early leadership which made the Soviet Union possible, despite his death early on in into his leadership. Like Communism or not, like the Soviets or not, he is a major and important leader in 20th century and world history.

Spain: El Cid was a minor mercenary in the midst of a 700 year war, fighting for whichever side paid him better! He's only as well known as he is because of folk legends and manuscripts and dramatizations. Ferdinand is a maybe, but El Cid is unequivocally NOT a leader or anything of the sort. Pizarro and Cortes were in the same tradition as El Cid, it's just that the war ended, so they went off and fought in Latin America. Still, not leadership material or anything like it. They led bands of mercenaries and treasurehunters, not nations or armies. Franco, like him or not, is a MAJOR influence on Spanish culture and history, ruling over the country for decades and establishing the dominant Castillian culture which we now just call "Spanish". Juan Carlos, still being alive, might actually be removed just because of this fact, but Juan Carlos is definitively the father of Spanish democracy! El Cid, Cortes, and Pizarro are, all three, unimportant to Spain and Spanish history as a whole. Every other leader mentioned, including Joan of Arc, Dr. King, Franklin, and even PYTHIA is more leadership material than these three.

Oh, and on Hannibal? He WAS politically active...he's just REMEMBERED for his military exploits.

Korea: Well, I'm not as knowledgeable on Korean history, so I bow to your greater knowledge on the subject.

Portugal: But, really, Magellan accomplished very little...almost nothing, if you think about it. He died halfway through when "he" circumnavigated the globe. In replacement, I suggest Antonio de Oliveira Salazar, the 20th century dictator of Portugal, who, despite his dictatorship, was an influential, longterm, and important leader of Portugal.

America: Giga... im all for Dr king for the US. stand firm behind him! he would be fantastic. I mean if ghandi can be a leader for india, why cant he be a leader for the US. give him organized and creative! also, as much as i like kennedy and TR, i would suggest Eisenhower. i mean, any would be fine, and maybe hes too close to FDR chronologically, but he was a general from WW2 and so would probably have the aggressive trait... which i want to see for america also, i would give him either imperialist or financial.

Arabia: instead of saddam, who is not really arab... i would say Faisal also... though lawrence would be really cool! (if a little insensitive to arabs...) maybe give him protective and financial?

China: I would suggest Han Wu-di... the greatest emperor of the Han dynasty, which was one of China's golden ages. make him imperialistic and organized maybe



Egypt: dont use imhotep... he was a great engineer of sorts (in addition to a host of other really cool things) but wasnt really a leader. i mean, by the above MLK jr and Ghandi token i guess it would work, but i would say Ptolomey Soter could be cool. could have philosophical and aggressive maybe... or if thats too greek, how about Narmer, the first unifier of egypt? i would like him better honestly. he could be organized and spiritual maybe

England: Henry V!!!! he would be great! a true hero of england, both historical and important. definately would have charismatic and and protective i would say (to represent the power of his longbows at agincourt...)

France: all good there! i like them. and i say use joan... why not? haha

Germany: i would say Arminius... he could be interesting i think. agg and organized maybe, but that might be a stretch. ill keep thinking haha

Greece:
1. Alexander
2. Pericles
3. Philip
4. Croeses
5. Leonidas

I think the others are good, though philip would be the first of these 5 i would replace. Croeses would be cool because coins were invented in Lydia under his reign and was known for his wealth... financial and protective maybe?

India: Shivaji --- wasnt he more of a hero than leader? i mean i dont know about him so sorry about my ignorance. if not him, maybe use Ajatashatru instead? hes from teh time of buddha, though that may be too close to Asoka for some people's likings, but he does seem to be important from what i have read... maybe religious and imperialistic... could be a cool combination


Japan:

Mongolia:
1. Genghis Khan
2. Ogedei Khan
3. Kublai Khan
4. Subotei (a DAMN fine general of mongolia... but maybe not quite a leader) agg and creative maybe
5. Tamerlane! imperialistic and aggressive

Persia:
1. Cyrus
2. Darius
3. Xerxes
4. Achaemenes
5. Shapur II (its not the achaemenid, but he was probably the greatest of the sassanians, who saw themselves as the successors to the achaemenids) organized and spiritual maybe...

Rome:

Russia: i like nevsky! use him!

Spain:
1. Isabella
2. Juan Carlos
3. Ferdinand
4. Phillip II expansionist + imperialistic maybe... not sure
5. Franco
Carthage:
1. Hannibal
2. Dido
3. Hamilcar
4. Hasdrubal?
5. Hanno the Navigator?

Celtia:
1. Brennus
2. Boudica
3. Vercingetorix
4. ?
5. ?

Korea:
1. Wang Kon
2. Admiral Yi
3. Seong-Gye
4. Sejong
5. ?

Ottomans:

Vikings:
1. Ragnar
2. Canute
3. Leif Eriksson
4. Erik the Red
5. alfred the great?





Byzantium:
1. Theodora
2. Constantine
3. Justinian
4. Basil II
5. Heraclius



Khmer:
1. Suryavarman
2. Jayavarman
3. Indravarman
4. Pol Pot

On England, Nelson? Wellington? The first was not at all a politician, the second a very bad on in a bad time. Both should stay in the great general list.

I would say William Pitt (Either of them)or as mentioned before, Henry V.

Or Henry VIII as the guy below mentions.

Hi. I'm a Civ IIIer, so obviously no help with the art or coding, but here's a quick list of amendments I would propose:

Rome: Vespasian was an excellent emperor, but he's overshadowed by two predecessors from the republican era:

Gaius Marius was a roman general, seven time consul (unheard of until then, I'm pretty sure that was never equaled). He beat Jugurtha in Numidia. Then he beat back a major Germanic invasion and so was titled Third Founder of Rome. He instituted major reforms in the roman army, opening it up to the poor, as well as giving land to troops after serving in a campaign. He was one faction in a civil war versus Sulla. He won at first but it all fell apart after he died of his third stroke at the age of 71. He instituted the Eagle as the symbol of Rome and was part of his "Marian Reforms" was to use the legionary for domestic work like road building. My personal choice. Note that he instituted a reign of terror in his later years, in which he was highly senile.

Lucius Cornelius Sulla, the other candidate for fifth leader was Marius's rival. He twice marched on Rome (Never before done) and defeated Mithridates of Pontus after being (Illegally) stripped of his command by Marius. He paved the way for Pompeys conquest of the east, and codified Rome's unwritten constitution, albeit more conservative then the traditional one. He is thought of as the spiritual predecessor to Caesar.


England: I don't really like your list

Here's an alternative:

Victoria
Elizabeth I
Churchill
Edward III (Medieval flavor, ten times better than Richard I who was in Steven Runciman's words :"A bad son, a bad husband and a bad king, but a gallant and splendid soldier."
Henry VIII. Union of England and Wales, Formation of the church of England, one of the three founders of the English navy
Alfred the Great. Need I explain?


America. Sorry, Martin Luther King was never nationally important, unlike Gandhi. I would recomend Eisenhower, Jefferson, or Andrew Jackson instead. Your choice. Also Teddy was a better president and less controversial then Kennedy.


Hitler was a bad leader, Holocaust aside. May I recomend Arminius? He tried (and failed) to unite Germany, but he dealt Rome a harsh blow at Teutoburg Forest.


Khmer: Jayavarman II was the founder of the Khmer empire, but Jayavarman VII was also one of the greats.

What you guys need to understand is that I can't make everybody happy!!

Sorry for the size 7 text, but really, we might as well do seventeen leaders per civ at this rate!

And saying MLK is unimportant compared to Gandhi is like saying Britney Spears should be a leader!

If you guys are so picky about these leaders, why don't you go make your own list? It only took me two months to finish mine!

@ King Coltrane: Thanks for siding with me! It makes me feel better!

 

[Miles Teg]

There are three futile acts.
Holding back the waves with your arms.
Sweeping a beach clean of all sand.
Asking civfanatics to not debate history.

 

[King Coltrane]

but thats whats so fun! im happy to debate this! but anyways, i will agree that Sulla would be better than Vespasian. definitely go with him!

(ps! no problem man! stick to those MLK guns!)

 

[C.Roland]

What you guys need to understand is that I can't make everybody happy!!

Sorry for the size 7 text, but really, we might as well do seventeen leaders per civ at this rate!

And saying MLK is unimportant compared to Gandhi is like saying Britney Spears should be a leader!

If you guys are so picky about these leaders, why don't you go make your own list? It only took me two months to finish mine!

@ King Coltrane: Thanks for siding with me! It makes me feel better!

Well, I think we may arrange something that will make everybody happy.

Here is a compromise suggestions that I hope will make everybody happy and Nik will upload his list with the suggestions that he will find the best

America : I don't mind, as long as he was a president. American politic system is clear enough, ruler are president.

Russia : Lenin or Nevsky, this is probably the hardest choice (and art can't be an argument because we have the art for both) Personally I would go with Lenin because he is really important (Personally, I would prefer Lenin than Stalin but Stalin is already in), but if you take Nevsky is fine too.

France : Clovis, Capet, Martel would all be better choice than Joan but we have art for Joan and she seem very popular so I think we may choose Joan even if she haven't really ruled France. (I think this historical compromise is less dificult to make than King or Cortez)

Arabia : I agree that Hussein doesn't fit

China : personally, I do not have enough knowledge on the subect, this will also be a hard choice

England : No Nelson, Henry V or VIII, Richard and/or Edward III

Germany : Even if Hitler was a ****, he was still a ruler of germany. The legal thing doesn't apply to a mod so I think we should keep it for his historical importance, even if it was a dark period of history, it is still here.

Greece : No pythia. We have a lot of choice Agamemnon would be a popular one (but he is more mythological than historical). We can use a Tyrant of Athen like Peisistratos (or other...), an other King of Sparta, a Corinth tyrant, general or statesman (Cypselus, Sosicles, Timoleon)

Japan : Meiji for sure. Maybe we should also consider a Heian period ruler like Emperor Kammu because we already have 3 bakufu leader.

Spain : No Cortez, No El Cid. I think Franco should be in because of his importance.

Portugal : No Magelan, he was only an explorator, he didn't had any political power

Egypt : No Imothep

Is this a good compromise between historical influence, leader popularity and graphic ?

 

[Miles Teg]

i will agree that Sulla would be better than Vespasian. definitely go with him!

I'd say Marius had more lasting effect. The Marian reforms alone would make him make him a major candidate. Add in: Third Founder of Rome, Beat the Numidicans and the Germans, seven time consul, chose the symbol used by the romans till the end, and you have the candidate.

@C. Roland. Seems well thought out. I have my complaints but it works as a compromise.