Civilizations and leaders you would like to see, but probably won't

Ivan the 4th, definitely would be nice to see, completely psychotic later years Ivan IV that is. For the Chinese I really have to lean to Cao Cao. He fits in a period when no other leaders were around and Den Xiaoping is far too close to Mao in the timeline.

I applaud your pre-20th century choices! :)

Given the copious number of times I have posted in these kinds of threads, it is probably obvious why.
 
As some greater men have said. Civ has enough 20th century crap as it is. That and aside from certain dictators, the 20th century has been one of failure, incompetance, and mediocrity.
 
Antilogic and I have had this conversation, but whatever floats your boat, really. And '20th century crap' floats a lot of people's boats.
 
Antilogic and I have had this conversation, but whatever floats your boat, really. And '20th century crap' floats a lot of people's boats.

Yeah, it's probably my biggest point of contention with some of the posters in the I&S, with the exception of rysmiel and his Civ2 ways.

I won't deny that too many people think the 20th century is way too important. I blame the History Channel's Nazi marathons. ;)
 
It's the principle of recentism. An awful lot of people in the BBC's Greatest Britons poll were from the last 150 years.
 
Australia is not even a civ, and when was war memorial unique to Australia?

Presumably when Gardens were unique to Babylon.
 
Presumably when Gardens were unique to Babylon.

And when Stock Exchanges were unique to England, Salons to France, Obelisks to Egypt, Madrassas to Arabia, Malls to America, Mausolea to India, Mints to Mali, Apothecaries to Persia, Trading Posts to the Vikings, and Dikes to the Dutch ;)
 
I think Apothecaries are actually unique to Persia, and Madrassas are pretty Arabian, quite sure America is the one who invented malls as well. Agree with you on the rest though.
 
Apothecaries appear in Shakespeare and there's one within 2 miles of where I live!
 
I guess it could be said to be the first appearance of said building, the Persians invented the idea of Apothecaries hence it's their unique building?
 
It's the principle of recentism. An awful lot of people in the BBC's Greatest Britons poll were from the last 150 years.

I'm pretty sure this has to be quoted for truth. :)

I guess it could be said to be the first appearance of said building, the Persians invented the idea of Apothecaries hence it's their unique building?

This isn't true for many of the UBs; for example, the Dutch originated the Joint-Stock Company and the concept of a Stock Exchange, not the English.

I think they picked things that try to reflect grand themes, but very clumsily.
 
Some civs I would like beeing added to Civ V:
Nubia - a civilization as old as Egypt, often in war with them and a good chance for another female leader (the Kandakes)
Benin - they formed a longlasting and important medieval/early modern African Empire, trading with the europeans and famous for its art.
a Malay/Indonesian faction (to represent the seatrading empires of Srivijaya, Majapahit and Malacca)
oh and some ancient factions: Hittiti and Assyria - don´t know why the first was deleted in Civ IV?
 
I wouldn't mind seeing Wellington in CiV. As per civilizations, remove England, replace it with Britain.
 
Not that I would have anything against a name change. But why should they do this?

p.s. Wellington as a Civ-leader - nah, he is to unimportant ...
 
So that the Scots, Welsh and Irish don't constantly get marginalised? More ot the point, Queen Victoria and Churchill were both leading Britons, not just English people.
 
Anybody who calls for JFK to be in the game is crazy. Sure, he's popular and revered, but when it comes down to it, he only ruled for just under 3 years and other presidents were more influential in shaping both the domestic and foreign policies of the United States.

If we're not going to have more than 4 leaders for any 1 civ in the game (which there shouldn't be), these should be the ones for America:

George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Theodore Roosevelt
Franklin Roosevelt
 
Anybody who calls for JFK to be in the game is crazy. Sure, he's popular and revered, but when it comes down to it, he only ruled for just under 3 years and other presidents were more influential in shaping both the domestic and foreign policies of the United States.

If we're not going to have more than 4 leaders for any 1 civ in the game (which there shouldn't be), these should be the ones for America:

George Washington
Abraham Lincoln
Theodore Roosevelt
Franklin Roosevelt

Amen brother.

The only reason why JFK and Reagan are so popular for additional choices on the leaderboard right now is because they are both relatively recent and were charismatic speakers. JFK has the space race going for him, but many of the Great Society accomplishments belong in LBJ's column and not his.
 
i don't know why i want brazil so much. i guess it's just the only civ other than usa that's actually worth having in the americas.
Brazil:
1 Leader: Manuel Deodoro (charismatic, creative, even though that would probably fit dom pedro more, but there's already peter the great in russia and those names are too similar)
UU: Scout Helicopter (basically a gunship that starts with sentry and gets 5 movement instead of 4 or can see submarines or something like that)
UB: Cabana (couldn't think of anything better than replacing monument, so +3 :) and +3 :culture:)

and yeah, jefferson should be added and teddy roosevelt should replace fdr. i mean, come on, they're on rushmore.
cao cao would also be awesome for china. too bad his descendants were mediocre.
 
Top Bottom