Choosing Harald Bluetooth as a Danish leader=********

[Option]

I'm sure Carthage had actual rulers who weren't either mythical (Dido) or, indeed, not rulers (Hannibal).

Well there was a king named Hannibal, who actually did do some conquest, but he's not THE Hannibal, and honestly wasn't even that important to the history. Dido makes sense for Carthage, even if she is semi-mythical.
Other leaders for the city, though... I would say Mago or one of the 2 Hannos. But of course none of them are "popular" names that stand out as special.

I find Southeast Asian history very interesting, although the Sukothai period specifically is not one I'm very familiar with. Visiting Bangkok's royal museum provides a good crash course too (including the story of Naruresan, he of the eponymous elephant).

I've been always more interested into India and Eastern Asia, to be honest. I never really looked into Southeast Asia, and the cultures there don't stick out to me as specifically interesting (to me, mind you).
For instance, based on actual history, Gandhi is a bad leader - he was very bad with administration, and the reason Pakistan split off. He was nowhere near that serene peace-loving nice guy that everyone is portraying him to be.
India has had many great leaders, but frankly, Gandhi is not one of them. =P

I actually think the ability (and cavalry UU) would be a perfect fit if the civ represented was not the Songhai, but the Oyo of Nigeria.

I think the designers made an interesting choice with their portrayal of African civs - they chose the ones that came to fruition fairly late and were well-developed, with UUs representing knights or riflemen, rather than bowing to stereotypes of Africa as the continent of spear-wielding tribesmen (as the Zulus were Africa's only representatives in two incarnations of the game).

Agreed².

Getting back to Sweden/Denmark, I think it's fair to portray both the important aspects of the history - Vikings and the Renaissance time where they were dominant in the Nordic area.
Something I'm still hoping to see one day is a Venetian civ to represent Renaissance Italy.

 

[Flying Mathias]

I'm sure Carthage had actual rulers who weren't either mythical (Dido) or, indeed, not rulers (Hannibal).

Hanno.

 

[Civciv5]

Okay, poorly-phrased. He existed as a person, but probably not as a particularly significant figure - rather one to whom mythical achievements were pinned centuries after his death. Someone here a while back compared him to King Arthur, which is a good analogy. A genuine Romano-British warlord called Arthur probably existed, but he certainly didn't have any knights (too early), quest for the Holy Grail, or have a magic sword. Most of what's known about Ramkhamhaeng comes from the Ramkhamhaeng stele, thought likely to have been partially or wholly a 19th Century forgery based on elements indicating that its writing postdated European contact.

How dare you to say that!
Ramkhamhaeng the Great is a national hero for the Thai people!
He expanded the Kingdom of Sukhothai to its zenith and after his death the kingdom
declined.He is credited with the creation of the Thai alphabet and the firm establishment of Theravada Buddhism as the state religion of the kingdom.
Recent scholarship has cast doubt on his role, however, noting that much of the information relating to his rule may have been fabricated in the 19th century in order to legitimize the Siamese state in the face of colonial threats.
"No,it is you who is mistaken about a great many things!"
"Oh,I afraid my good answers will be quite operational when your wrong statements arrive."

 

[Louis XXIV]

FWIW, Hannibal was a Suffette, which is the Carthaginian equivalent of a Consul. He wasn't a particularly long-lasting one because the political groups opposed him, but he was an effective one and a fascinating figure as a leader from a historical perspective.

 

[Keejus]

And personally I think it was a very good decision, and while I've no idea (if anyone does) of the extent to which Harald's portrayal is realistic, I find him one of the most characterful leaders in the game, with a personality, graphic, text and accent that all fit together perfectly. The game is not short of fairly bland "able administrator" types (Washington, I'm looking at you), and just on those grounds I'd rather have a Viking Denmark than one led by Canute.

I don't know about Harald specifically, but Christian IV is popularly depicted as a very similar character in Danish culture; a spirited, boastful warlord. Ironically, he was a much better administrator than general, but he loved nothing more than wailing on some goths.

especially not with burning Djenne in the background

Is it Djenne? I've always thought it was Timbuktu!

 

[Option]

Is it Djenne? I've always thought it was Timbuktu!

I dunno!
Could be either.

 

[PhilBowles]

I don't know about Harald specifically, but Christian IV is popularly depicted as a very similar character in Danish culture; a spirited, boastful warlord. Ironically, he was a much better administrator than general, but he loved nothing more than wailing on some goths.



Is it Djenne? I've always thought it was Timbuktu!

It's Djenne - it's the Great Mosque anachronistically burning in the background. The current Mosque wasn't built until the early 20th Century and, although there were prior mosques on the site, the modern one is not a replica. Its rectangular form and the square columns are based on a European aesthetic. It's a French colonial building made in Sahelian style rather than a replica - in much the same way Kuala Lumpur's Abd al Samad building is built to 'oriental' designs (as the British perceived them - its design is plainly Indian-inspired, owing nothing to native Malay architecture), but is also designed to resemble the Palace of Westminster in its overall layout.

 

[mEatBucket_]

Well, yeah. But there has been Mao Zedong and another leader that i don't remember. This is the first leader of Denmark. I do somehow understand Gods&Kings decision of Kustaa Aadolf (is that Gustaf Adolphus?) of Sweden because at his conquers (with Finnish Hakkapeliittas) he made such an impression to Europe. Again, anyone who'd ask, it would be Kustaa Vaasa (Gustaf Vasa) in Sweden at the very top of leaders choice.

Game-makers have problems of history outside USA/France/England?

Hello long time lurker here but made an account just to answer this.

Gustaf Vasa were the unifier of Sweden as an empire and also the one to kick out the occupying Danes from Sweden, he were also the first ruler of the Vasahouse.
During Gustaf Vasa's reign Sweden weren't strong at all.

However Gustaf II Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus?) were the king to make the Swedish empire a powerhouse of Europe, if he weren't killed at the battle of Lützen Sweden could've been a massive european power during the 17th and even 18th century.

So if you ask me (a swede) Gustaf II adolf is the obvious choice.

 

[havuoksa]

Hello long time lurker here but made an account just to answer this.

Gustaf Vasa were the unifier of Sweden as an empire and also the one to kick out the occupying Danes from Sweden, he were also the first ruler of the Vasahouse.
During Gustaf Vasa's reign Sweden weren't strong at all.

However Gustaf II Adolf (Gustavus Adolphus?) were the king to make the Swedish empire a powerhouse of Europe, if he weren't killed at the battle of Lützen Sweden could've been a massive european power during the 17th and even 18th century.

So if you ask me (a swede) Gustaf II adolf is the obvious choice.

Hälsningar från Finland! Måste fråga, har det regnt så mycket än denna sidan om Östersjön? 18c, 19c temperaturen för många veckor

Apart of Kustaa Vaasa's unifying, he made absolutely vital adjustments to the government and policies, as well as turning to Lutheranism and therefore confiscating practically all Churches' belongings...so I would disagree with you that Sweden(-Finland) would not have been strong. He made the vital BEGINNING where Sweden was formed as a powerful State.
Anyways, I don't have that much against Gustaf Andra Adolf, I know what you mean by all these conquests etc. But, are conquests the only measure by which to choose the most prominent leader??? There is, for example Washington of USA in the game and he only had 13 small States instead of nowadays 52. And still chosen in the game!

 

[mEatBucket_]

Hälsningar från Finland! Måste fråga, har det regnt så mycket än denna sidan om Östersjön? 18c, 19c temperaturen för många veckor

Apart of Kustaa Vaasa's unifying, he made absolutely vital adjustments to the government and policies, as well as turning to Lutheranism and therefore confiscating practically all Churches' belongings...so I would disagree with you that Sweden(-Finland) would not have been strong. He made the vital BEGINNING where Sweden was formed as a powerful State.
Anyways, I don't have that much against Gustaf Andra Adolf, I know what you mean by all these conquests etc. But, are conquests the only measure by which to choose the most prominent leader??? There is, for example Washington of USA in the game and he only had 13 small States instead of nowadays 52. And still chosen in the game!

Another thing which makes it an easy choice for me is the question "What would've happened if Gustaf II Adolf weren't killed in battle?", while Gustaf Vasa died a natural death. One can only speculate.

 

[Koiranputki]

Another thing which makes it an easy choice for me is the question "What would've happened if Gustaf II Adolf weren't killed in battle?", while Gustaf Vasa died a natural death. One can only speculate.

Well...I suppose it depends on what you think is important...a "builder" or a "conqueror"... I'm more inclined to agree with havuoksa... Gustavus Vaasa was the "builder"...I tend to think of Gustavus Adolphus as a bit of a megalomanic.... And I think that Axel Oxenstierna carried on his "legacy" well enough so that no one really needs to "speculate" what might have happened even if Gustavus Adolphus had died in his bed instead of on the battlefield.

The devastation the Thirty Years War wrought on the north Germanic states was actually rather mindboggling by modern standards....but a big part of the problem was that the Swedes had a great deal of difficulty controlling their largely mercenary army....

Heck, the devastation was so chilling that a folk lullaby, if it can be called that, survived in north Germany well into the 19th century:

Bet' kindchen, bet'...Morgen kommt der Schwed....I can't remember the rest...but it goes on to mention the exploits of Axel Oxenstierna....

I'm not even sure that the "conversion" of Sweden to Lutheranism was, unilaterally, such a wonderful thing....it gave people like Gustavus Adolphus a pretext to wage their wars.... And it eventually lead to the rather austere and repressive Swedish Church Laws of 1686....the "real reason" why the Nordic countries are 90% plus "Lutheran" to this day...

 

[Carl5872]

All respect to unifying Denmark a bit more, and especially turning to Christianity, forcibly or not (pretty moving story he removed his father's grave from a Viking burial mound to a Christian grave), the single most True leader would have been Knut (Canute) The Great. Meaning, ruling aside Denmark, ENGLAND etc. etc.! I can confess that I am a distant distant distant relative to Knut The Great, believe it or not, but anyone who knows the slightest of Nordic history would agree with me.

Maybe another Civ5-rant? Didn't mean that, it's just the way things have gone down since the most incredible game of Universe has ever experienced: Civ4 Beyond The Sword. City-States are almost the only thing better from the previous. (Looking seriously forward to Gods & Kings on Tuesday's mail.)

I paid the astounding amount of one Euro and 50 cents for this Denmark, so guess I'm playing it happily.

Agrees, disagrees?

Moderator Action: Please watch your language (considering the title).

would you please change "********" to stupid, dumb, etc. Using a derogatory term for a person with a medical condition as a synonym for dumb, unwise, stupid or bad is not the best way to get your point across.

 

[havuoksa]

would you please change "********" to stupid, dumb, etc. Using a derogatory term for a person with a medical condition as a synonym for dumb, unwise, stupid or bad is not the best way to get your point across.

Changed it. Would have changed it earlier, but since it's ages that I started this topic, I thought it would "die", but seems to go on and on.

BY ALL MEANS I DID NOT MEAN it to refer to "a person with a medical condition", that didn't even cross my mind. And NEVER would I do that. Some of my American friends use that "ret*rded"-word fairly often so I didn't know some people would get offended. Now I know better. Sorry for everyone that got offended by that word.

*Havuoksa

 

[Carl5872]

Changed it. Would have changed it earlier, but since it's ages that I started this topic, I thought it would "die", but seems to go on and on.

BY ALL MEANS I DID NOT MEAN it to refer to "a person with a medical condition", that didn't even cross my mind. And NEVER would I do that. Some of my American friends use that "ret*rded"-word fairly often so I didn't know some people would get offended. Now I know better. Sorry for everyone that got offended by that word.

*Havuoksa

Thanks.

Also thanks for posting this. I never had even heard of Knut, but he seems pretty interesting. I doubt they'll ever add additional leaders to current civs, but if they do I hope Knut gets in there. If not there's always civ VI.

 

[BlakeTheDrake]

I recently had a chance to discuss this subject with a minor authority on Danish history... after debating the matter for a while, the conclusion we came to is that the best pick would be Svend Tveskæg (Sveyn Forkbeard for you anglophones). Sveyn was the son of Harald Bluetooth, but unlike his father, he wasn't a Christian - he clashed with his old man over this several times, and apparently considered Christianity to be weak and foolish, putting his faith in the Old Gods of Asgard instead.

Also, while Bluetooth spent most of his time playing the diplomat, finishing Gorm the Old's work and uniting all of present-day Denmark under one throne, Sveyn preferred to spend his time conquering and plundering, like a Viking should. He's the one who started the invasion of Britain, which HIS son, Canute the Great, finished. (You'll recall that Canute was a devout Christian. Basically, the whole thing was 4 generations of viking warlords playing the old 'rebelling against the ideals of your parents' game.)

So there you have it. Sveyn Forkbeard is the guy you need - he was Viking as they come, ruled a united Denmark, and walked the path of the Conqueror. He's also a lot more well-known than Gorm the Old, and he had a WICKED beard.

 

[PhilBowles]

Another thing which makes it an easy choice for me is the question "What would've happened if Gustaf II Adolf weren't killed in battle?", while Gustaf Vasa died a natural death. One can only speculate.

Possibly this?

http://www.amazon.com/1634-The-Balt...F8&qid=1342823686&sr=8-1&keywords=1634+baltic

At least if you throw in time-travelling Americans...

 

[Rabble159]

Hannibal would be more interesting than Dido because it's freakin Hannibal, c'mon. And as pointed out he held the only "leader" position he could technically have held at the time in Carthage's political system in addition/after his military campaigns. The UA and UU also clearly are references to him. Well known longtime awesome general and short time plutocratically elected leader beats maybe-mythological leader.

Theodora PISSED me off though. Wife of the greatest leader in ERE history who can easily be portrayed as having a negative influence on the empire? Alexios Komnenos would have also been acceptable.

Boudica, Elizabeth, Catherine, Isabella and Maria Theresa are all fine choices.

 

[Svip]

Giving women more security? Woo, negative influence indeed.

Anyway, my biggest problem with Harald is the fact that he speaks modern Danish, and a particularly cartoon-y version at that. Now, I am sure a lot will correct me now, but I get the feeling that the other leaders are speaking a more time period version of their language, even if it exists today.

Secondly, whenever the Danish AI is around, it always seems to be doing terrible, and before the game is over, is always destroyed by another AI. I know Paradox has a history of making Denmark look ridiculous, but now Firaxis as well!?

 

[PhilBowles]

Anyway, my biggest problem with Harald is the fact that he speaks modern Danish, and a particularly cartoon-y version at that. Now, I am sure a lot will correct me now, but I get the feeling that the other leaders are speaking a more time period version of their language, even if it exists today.

Allow me to be the first to correct you, then... From what I've read, all the leaders speak modern incarnations of their language (except for Rameses, who speaks modern Arabic rather than any form of Egyptian, which irritates many people) - except Nebuchadnezzar I think (he doesn't sound as though he's speaking the same language as the other leaders from now Arabic-speaking countries, so is presumably speaking some historical Mesopotamian dialect). Darius speaks Farsi. Ramkhamhaeng speaks modern Thai. Elizabeth's lines are too short (for some reason much shorter than those of other leaders - Sejong's goes on for the best part of a month before he gets round to mentioning his name) to identify whether she's intended to be speaking modern or Shakespearean-era English, although she clearly speaks with a (horribly fake) modern English accent. I've heard that former colonial accents may reflect the English of the time the colonies were established better than modern English accents do - which is why, for instance, South African, Australian and New Zealand accents resemble one another more than they resemble English, American or Canadian accents, and why American and Canadian accents are also so similar (although they too have presumably diverged since colonisation), so ironically the voice actor's native Canadian accent might have been a more authentic choice for Elizabeth than fake RP...

Secondly, whenever the Danish AI is around, it always seems to be doing terrible, and before the game is over, is always destroyed by another AI. I know Paradox has a history of making Denmark look ridiculous, but now Firaxis as well!?

To be honest, I find that part of Harald's charm - yes, it does make him a comic relief character of sorts, but he is a Viking - and those of us who are safely removed in both space and time from 8th Century Lindisfarne do have a habit of seeing Vikings in vaguely comical, Hollywoodised form - boastful and belligerent, but at the end of the day just a bunch of lads out to have a good time and drink lots of beer. Harald always gets crushed because he bites off more than he can chew, cheerfully declaring war on everyone simultaneously and regardless of the fact that he's usually weaker than his rivals when he does it (in other words, he's boastful and belligerent...)

 

[animalguy]

Giving women more security? Woo, negative influence indeed.

Anyway, my biggest problem with Harald is the fact that he speaks modern Danish, and a particularly cartoon-y version at that. Now, I am sure a lot will correct me now, but I get the feeling that the other leaders are speaking a more time period version of their language, even if it exists today.

Secondly, whenever the Danish AI is around, it always seems to be doing terrible, and before the game is over, is always destroyed by another AI. I know Paradox has a history of making Denmark look ridiculous, but now Firaxis as well!?

If you want to see a danish runaway you should see maddjinn's england lp!