C2C Leaderheads

[Kryanni]

Heya, are you guys taking suggestions for alternatives to existing images? My pet peeve is consistency - I'm okay with the variety in style, but some of them really stand out (in a not good way) from the other Leaderhead images. If I find an image that may make a suitable replacement, may I know where it should be submitted for consideration?

 

[Thunderbrd]

I'm sure it'd be considered (and we can use some hoarding of leader images anyhow) and here would be a sufficient place to post them.

 

[Sgtslick]

You should PM me if you want me involved in certain discussions or feel I should read up on something. I don't have the time or desire really, to read or even take notice of all the threads in our forum.

I guess strategyonly mentioned me because I re-sorted all the leader's traits. Previously for example there were 30+ aggessive, 1 or 2 scientific, 1 or 2 deceiver etc. I have no problem with you changing the leader's traits as long as their is somewhat of a fair distribution among the different traits. I have always said that i'm not too sure how accurate some of the traits are in terms of being a realistic 'summary' of that leader. Some of the leaders were simply given certain traits without much knowledge of their history. Many however I did try and do a little research on so that they weren't aggressive/imperialistic/cruel when they should have be humanitarian/creative/excessive or something lol. You may find that some are indeed inaccurate and in these cases feel free to change them. Just keep in mind that one of the goals is to have a fair distribution amongst the traits. The diplomacy penalty for certain traits as an example, inverses for leaders who have that same trait. More importantly though in my opinion, having somewhat of an equal distribution between the traits creates a more rewarding player experience. (Having lots of different traits distributed across lots of different leaders).

 

[fox456]

I just read through this entire thread and am unclear as to any conclusion. In version 31, I found that there is a window that (randomly?) pops up forcing the player to "add a new" positive personality trait or removing a negative trait. As far as I played, I was only allowed to add a personality trait, not remove one. But, when I checked the traits of my leader, the original personality traits were gone and new ones had taken their spot.

I think this is a work in progress. I just wanted to give my feedback.

...More importantly though in my opinion, having somewhat of an equal distribution between the traits creates a more rewarding player experience. (Having lots of different traits distributed across lots of different leaders).

I agree with this 100%. The other day, I was trying to find a leader with the Science trait and there were very few. On the other hand, there were many traits that were used over and over, such as "Spiritual" and "Charismatic." Of course, most leaders do exhibit charisma. However, if we desire a variety of combinations, then we could eliminate some leaders (most people probably do not want to do that) or at least relax a little on making a leader exactly historically correct and adding more choices for game play's sake.

The altering of traits during the game could be a good remedy for this situation. Perhaps someone can direct me to an explantion of how this game option works so I'll understand it better.

 

[cdman1990]

if you have the "developing leaders" option selected when you create a new game, at certain levels of culture you are asked to select a new trait or get rid of a old one.

the first level is 3000 culture iirc and you only can select a positive trait to get, or a negative to get rid off

at the second level you have 2 selections: select a positive/get rid of negative and select a negative/get rid of positive

and so on...

in any case not all positive trait are all that positive and not all negative are all that negative, depends on the play style and situation. for example if i start a game after renaissance i go for the anti-clerical trait, if i can't have a religion, it doesn't affect me all that, and in most of my games i select the megalomaniac trait

 

[Yudishtira]

Why is the David leaderhead dressed as Cleopatra???!!!

But seriously, even if what he's wearing was considered men's clothes in his era/culture, his regalia - especially the headdress - is clearly Kemetic.

 

[strategyonly]

Why is the David leaderhead dressed as Cleopatra???!!!

But seriously, even if what he's wearing was considered men's clothes in his era/culture, his regalia - especially the headdress - is clearly Kemetic.

changed in SVN

 

[stoferb]

I wouldn't mind changing leaders. Not necessarily between eras, I actually dislike that idea, but for example when you change government civics. And please make it so you get to choose the new leader. Also in democracy it would be cool to every 10th turn or something get to choose leader again (not too often, that would get annoying).

Another idea I would like to see if rev is switched on are pretenders. The mechanic I imagined is that a pretender get's a rather large army with a warlord and a city. Every few turns the pretender is allowed to roam free these rebels get's a new city from you automatically (near his 'capital') but if the warlord is killed the entire rebellion is squashed and all cities returned, if you loose a big battle or a few cities to the pretender then your civ get's a new leader.