Changing Leader Mechanic in Civ 7

[The_goggles_do_nothing]

My idea isn't changing leaders based on era, but having a choice to change when changing into a different government. Of course you still have a choice and it's not mandatory. I think your idea is too limiting. For example I'd love to start an England game as Victoria for quick expansion. Then mid-game I choose switch to Elizabeth to focus on a cultural victory after building up my empire. If we do it your way I'd have to start with Elizabeth first.

I would play this as mode. I would allow civ switching as well, preferably limited to some "logical" options like Rome->Byzantium.

 

[Henri Christophe]

And he is the only one on the list whose accomplishments that we know of are probably not even real, let alone if he was even real or not

I don't will leave it alone. Of course Romulus and Remus's history is real. Why would historians lie about that? Roma was founded somehow and have their unique history how it's happens.
It's look like the controversia about Tupac Yupanqui in Inca's thread, just because his voyage was amazing that don't mean it isn't real. By the way, untill now you don't cast your vote in Patine's acusation of lack of aproval of the community.

Either if you believe it ended when Rome fell in the West in 476, or the end of the Eastern Roman (Byzantine) Empire in 1453, those are the only dates in which the Roman Empire could have ended.

I would argue about 1806 when Francis II abolish the Holy Roman Empire, or 1922 when the title of Sultan was abolish in Turkey, or 1945 when Mussoline lost the 2nd world war.

Rather than changing leaders why not add or change a civ trait or ability every era like Civ Rev did

Here is Germany for example


Era Bonuses

The Germans begin the game with automatic upgrades for their elite units. Units promoted at least once will upgrade to the next relevant unit when the appropriate technology is researched (e.g. a Warriorwith Blitz will become a Legion with Blitz upon researching Iron Working).

Ancient: New Warriors become veterans

Medieval: +1 Production from forest

Industrial: 1/2 cost Barracks

Modern: 2% interest on gold reserves

Your idea is great and can be intermixed with my idea. Maybe Germany can starts being lead by some Ostrogoth or Visigoth kings (or from others barbarians tribes). and after have the Frederick Barbarrosa in medieval age, Frederick the Great of Industrial age and ends with Bismarck in modern age. (better avoid Hitler as last leader because it is very controversial).

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

I would play this as mode. I would allow civ switching as well, preferably limited to some "logical" options like Rome->Byzantium.

I never thought about it as a potential game mode before. I wouldn't mind it being optional considering I never expected to get it in the first place. I'm still not a fan of civ switching. It's fine for Humankind but I'd rather it stay there and not come to Civ.

I don't will leave it alone. Of course Romulus and Remus's history is real. Why would historians lie about that? Roma was founded somehow and have their unique history how it's happens.

Romulus could have been real but the stories around him are most likely not real and taken from Roman mythology.

It's look like the controversia about Tupac Yupanqui in Inca's thread, just because his voyage was amazing that don't mean it isn't real. By the way, untill now you don't cast your vote in Patine's acusation of lack of aproval of the community.

I mean I voted for Huyana Capac in that thread.

I would argue about 1806 when Francis II abolish the Holy Roman Empire, or 1922 when the title of Sultan was abolish in Turkey, or 1945 when Mussoline lost the 2nd world war.

You do realize that you are the only one probably in this forum arguing for these dates? If you want to stick to what historians say, like you mentioned earlier, then look at their facts.

 

[Evie]

Aieegrunt - that's entirely possible.

Henri - What civ III did is animate the same leaderhead with different clothes for the ages. They didn't create different leader models for each age. That's a LOT simpler.

And dumbing down the graphics - taking them below previous civs in quality - would get them murdereded in reviews. Just going back to a less realistic, more cartoonish (but still high quality) style from V to VI was controversial enough ; actual dumbing down would be brutal.

Bottom line is, there's around 50-60 leaderheads in Civ VI with all expansions and DLCs. If every civ needs five leaders? Then we get to have 10-12 civilizations in the game. Even if they double the number of leaderhead they create (which would likely cost more than twice as much due to graphics having improved even further), you get maybe 20-24 civilizations. And, because of the high cost of doing all this, they are going to limit themselves to the most popular, most obvious civilizations.

What African/Black representation do you think you'd get with only 20-24 of the most popular civilizations in the game?

 

[Henri Christophe]

You do realize that you are the only one probably in this forum arguing for these dates? If you want to stick to what historians say, like you mentioned earlier, then look at their facts.

Maybe I'm the only one in this forum arguing for these dates, but I'm not alone in the world.
I already shared a lot of sources in hyperlinks and photos of book cover. But for some reason it isn't enought to you.
I also shared some historical memes, but it was deleted and I don't know who did that (because he, or she, didn't send me an Inbox)
But I will share at least this meme because it explain very well what I'm trying to say

to all understand, I will explain this meme.
The Original - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 476
The Beloved Sequal - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1453
The Fan Made One - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1806
The Wierd Spinoff - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1922
The Third one that didn't make much sense - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1917 (maybe that one don't fall yet, since the Russia still calling it's capital as the Third Rome, and Russia still with Imperialist movements as the invasion of Ukraine)
The Short Lived Reboot - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1945

What African/Black representation do you think you'd get with only 20-24 of the most popular civilizations in the game?

That is a good point, since I think Black representation is very important. But I believe if Fireaxis wants it can make multiple leaders and still with a good black representation. Even the short lived Zulu Empire have more than 5 leaders, I listed 6 names here.
Ethiopia can easily have leaders from all eras and Egypt have their his own historical time line, going from Ancient age, middle age and new age all before the born of Cleoptra.
But other kingdoms as Angola don't have that much leaders to use, since it's best name (quenn Nzinga) was Angola's last leader before the conquest of Portugal.

 

[aieeegrunt]

Aieegrunt - that's entirely possible.

Henri - What civ III did is animate the same leaderhead with different clothes for the ages. They didn't create different leader models for each age. That's a LOT simpler.

And dumbing down the graphics - taking them below previous civs in quality - would get them murdereded in reviews. Just going back to a less realistic, more cartoonish (but still high quality) style from V to VI was controversial enough ; actual dumbing down would be brutal.

Bottom line is, there's around 50-60 leaderheads in Civ VI with all expansions and DLCs. If every civ needs five leaders? Then we get to have 10-12 civilizations in the game. Even if they double the number of leaderhead they create (which would likely cost more than twice as much due to graphics having improved even further), you get maybe 20-24 civilizations. And, because of the high cost of doing all this, they are going to limit themselves to the most popular, most obvious civilizations.

What African/Black representation do you think you'd get with only 20-24 of the most popular civilizations in the game?

I believe CivIII had Ancient Era Abraham Lincoln Loincloth, which was almost as epic as Civ2 advisors during anarchy

 

[Kupe Navigator]

At least Romulus was undoubted a Roman, he is the dude who founded the city of Rome.


The end of the Roman Empire is not so easy to apoint a date or a leader of the last emperor of the Roman Empire.
Maybe the West part of the empire ended with Romulus Augustulus, as you said, but it was revived by Charlemagne as the Holly Roman Emperor.

And this revived West Roman Empire, called him self the Holly Roman Empire, just fall down in Napoleonic wars when the Holly Roman Emperor Francis II decided to end it's empire because he lost the war against Napoleon.

The other half of Roman Empire maybe fall with Constantine XI, as you said, but the Turkish proclaimed they self Roman emperor by the right of conquest. Let's remember at the time the Austrian proclaimed it self as the Holly Roman Emperors too.
And it also has the third Roman is Moscow, who proclaimed it self Romans as the right of religion (they follow the faith of Constantinople).

And for last, the Mussoline also proclaimed it self the Roman Emperor. (he was an emperor in Rome). So that can be understood the Roman Empire just fell in 1945 when Mussoline lost the second world war.

And since the Roman Empire still in our imagination, it can rise again someday in the future (I just hope it's not happens agains).



About the animation budget, Fireaxis can make the animations less hard to do, something more cartoonish should be able to do more leader per civ.

Fireaxis already try to do something similar in Civilization 3, where the leaders trade his clothes per era. But I don't like this way to do it, I think is better changing leaders (in order to they change their behavior when be controled by AI).

You know kinda funny how you leave out Russia out of this... you know with whole Third Rome thing and stuff.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

to all understand, I will explain this meme.
The Original - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 476
The Beloved Sequal - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1453
The Fan Made One - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1806
The Wierd Spinoff - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1922
The Third one that didn't make much sense - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1917 (maybe that one don't fall yet, since the Russia still calling it's capital as the Third Rome, and Russia still with Imperialist movements as the invasion of Ukraine)
The Short Lived Reboot - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1945

Ever since Rome fell the title "emperor " always linked with concept of Rome. That is why all these Emperor claimed to be next version of Rome. Not that they actually had legitimate claim. They just said they were. They were cosplaying as Roman Empire.
Need I bring famous quote from Voltaire about HRE?"
The Holy Roman Empire was Neither Holy, Nor Roman, Nor an Empire"

 

[Henri Christophe]

You know kinda funny how you leave out Russia out of this... you know with whole Third Rome thing and stuff.

I didn't forget Russia, read my post again.

Other example: Rome
It can have a leader as Júlio César in classical age and goes for Italians leaders in modern age as Garibaldi.

As I said in my first post, maybe is better Rome leaders be replaced to Italian leaders, if my idea of one leader per era happens.
It can starts with Romulus, goes to Júlio César, than Odoacro, and then become Vítor Emanuel II and finish it with Garibaldi.



Other example who should be a bit controversial is the Mongols.
It can starts with Genghis Khan then goes to Chagatai, then to Timur and then to Babur of the Mughal empire.
Make it's links between the Mongol empire and the Mughal empire.

But if choice leaders are a option, it can leaves to the Yuan dynasty of China

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Other example who should be a bit controversial is the Mongols.
It can starts with Genghis Khan then goes to Chagatai, then to Timur and then to Babur of the Mughal empire.

Not really. History of Mongals usually go like this: mongal tribes, mongalian Empire. Yuan Dynasty, Northern Yuan, conquest by Qing Dynasty, independence from Qing, people's republic of Mongal, Mongal state.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Maybe I'm the only one in this forum arguing for these dates, but I'm not alone in the world.
I already shared a lot of sources in hyperlinks and photos of book cover. But for some reason it isn't enought to you.
I also shared some historical memes, but it was deleted and I don't know who did that (because he, or she, didn't send me an Inbox)
But I will share at least this meme because it explain very well what I'm trying to say

to all understand, I will explain this meme.
The Original - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 476
The Beloved Sequal - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1453
The Fan Made One - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1806
The Wierd Spinoff - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1922
The Third one that didn't make much sense - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1917 (maybe that one don't fall yet, since the Russia still calling it's capital as the Third Rome, and Russia still with Imperialist movements as the invasion of Ukraine)
The Short Lived Reboot - Is the Roman empire who fall in the year 1945

The fact that the meme you chose refers to the Holy Roman Empire as a fan made one actually makes my point.

You do realize that the Roman Empire was one of the greatest early empires in the world, so is it really surprising that so many political powers wanted to emulate them by calling themselves the "next Rome?"

 

[Henri Christophe]

Not really. History of Mongals usually go like this: mongal tribes, mongalian Empire. Yuan Dynasty, Northern Yuan, conquest by Qing Dynasty, independence from Qing, people's republic of Mongal, Mongal state.

Thats just focus in Chinese part of history, the Mongols conquer almost all Asia. They are influencial in countries as Iran, India and even Russia.
And since the Mughal empire was the last remaining of the Mongols, if we are not allowed to choice their civ per era (if this idea of a leader per era happens), I would like to see a dude as Akbar being an alternative leader of the Mongols.

The fact that the meme you chose refers to the Holy Roman Empire as a fan made one actually makes my point.

You do realize that the Roman Empire was one of the greatest early empires in the world, so is it really surprising that so many political powers wanted to emulate them by calling themselves the "next Rome?"

That brings us back to old discussion: "How important is self recognition?". I already understand it is not very important to you, but the way I understand history it is very important, it is the most important thing. If theses empires called they self Romans, so they are Romans.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

And since the Mughal empire was the last remaining of the Mongols, if

No they are not. You keep on thinking claim is all there is to it.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

That brings us back to old discussion: "How important is self recognition?". I already understand it is not very important to you, but the way I understand history it is very important, it is the most important thing. If theses empires called they self Romans, so they are Romans.

So if China says they are Romans dose it make them Romans in Asia?

 

[Henri Christophe]

Kupe, why do you made double post instead of do it in just one post?
Do you know you can edit your post to add more comentaries even after you already post it?

Moderator Action: You are not a moderator. If you have a problem, report the post and move on. leif

So if China says they are Romans dose it make them Romans in Asia?

China never will claim this kind of things. let's be reasonable.
China is the middle kingdom, they have their unique history. They don't need to be Romans to prove nothing.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

Kupe, why do you made double post instead of do it in just one post?
Do you know you can edit your post to add more comentaries even after you already post it?

China never will claim this kind of things. let's be reasonable.
China is the middle kingdom, they have their unique history. They don't need to be Romans to prove nothing.

I said IF... a nation can say whatever hell they want but if other nations don't recognize it then it does not matter. Like how after WWI Greeks wanted Constantinople because they claimed to be successor of Byzantine Empire but other powers didn't saw them as legitimate so they didn't get it.

 

[Henri Christophe]

I said IF... a nation can say whatever hell they want but if other nations don't recognize it then it does not matter. Like how after WWI Greeks wanted Constantinople because they claimed to be successor of Byzantine Empire but other powers didn't saw them as legitimate so they didn't get it.

Greece don't take Istanbul because a lack of military power, Atatürk didn't allow. And he didn't use words, but guns instead.
The European plan to Turkey was that:

I agree the Greeks wants Istanbul because it was the capital of Byzantine Empire, but what power have the Greeks? If the British, French and also the Italians also wants the city.

 

[Kupe Navigator]

I agree the Greeks wants Istanbul because it was the capital of Byzantine Empire, but what power have the Greeks? If the British, French and also the Italians also wants the city.

It just shows that a nation's word on what they are isn't enough. It needs to be supported by other nations. Most historians see Rome as dying when Constantinople fell. There is no third Rome dispite how many nations have claimed it. HRE isn't Roman Empire ( it was more of confederation of German kingdoms) and Ottomans are not Romans- culture and religion was too different from them.

 

[aieeegrunt]

It just shows that a nation's word on what they are isn't enough. It needs to be supported by other nations. Most historians see Rome as dying when Constantinople fell. There is no third Rome dispite how many nations have claimed it. HRE isn't Roman Empire ( it was more of confederation of German kingdoms) and Ottomans are not Romans- culture and religion was too different from them.

If we want to take this to it’s logical end point I can wrap myself in a bedsheet and be Rome

 

[Kupe Navigator]

If we want to take this to it’s logical end point I can wrap myself in a bedsheet and be Rome

Heck I can write that My house is Rome. Dose that make it next Rome? somehow Henri thinks there have been several Romes in history. Really there has only been one Rome. Byzantium is different as not only people inside it called themselves "Romans" but people outside like Turks called them Romans. Not to mention it was never "officially" separated from normal Rome- There is no solid end date of Roman Empire and Start of Byzantium Empire.