A lot of the leaders in Civ games weren't the best. Tito isn't some standout there. Elizabeth the First had a penchant for chopping people's heads off. Alexander the Great spent literally his entire life as a leader waging war to expand his empire. Catherine De Medici is best known for massacring religious minorities.

If your requirements for a Civ leader are "wasn't kind of a piece of horsehockye" then the entire series would be in trouble.
I literally said so in another thread. But the people Elizabeth beheaded don't have children who are still alive. Tito, Stalin, Mao, etc. still have living victims and children and grandchildren of victims. (Also, you're flatly wrong about CdM. She tried to moderate the religious partisanship that led to the Bartholomew's Day Massacre.)
 
A lot of the leaders in Civ games weren't the best. Tito isn't some standout there. Elizabeth the First had a penchant for chopping people's heads off. Alexander the Great spent literally his entire life as a leader waging war to expand his empire. Catherine De Medici is best known for massacring religious minorities.

If your requirements for a Civ leader are "wasn't kind of a piece of horsehockye" then the entire series would be in trouble.

I literally said so in another thread. But the people Elizabeth beheaded don't have children who are still alive. Tito, Stalin, Mao, etc. still have living victims and children and grandchildren of victims. (Also, you're flatly wrong about CdM. She tried to moderate the religious partisanship that led to the Bartholomew's Day Massacre.)
Chopping people's heads off, even for vanity or pique, and even in excess, and even to children, was not really that uncommon in that time period, or remotely unique to Elizabeth I. In fact, she likely only got the big and oft-quoted rep for it, over so many others, because of the tagline of Lewis Carroll's character, the Queen of Hearts.
 
I literally said so in another thread. But the people Elizabeth beheaded don't have children who are still alive. Tito, Stalin, Mao, etc. still have living victims and children and grandchildren of victims. (Also, you're flatly wrong about CdM. She tried to moderate the religious partisanship that led to the Bartholomew's Day Massacre.)
I still hate the Medici family due to St. Bartholomew's Day
 
Chopping people's heads off, even for vanity or pique, and even in excess, and even to children, was not really that uncommon in that time period, or remotely unique to Elizabeth I. In fact, she likely only got the big and oft-quoted rep for it, over so many others, because of the tagline of Lewis Carroll's character, the Queen of Hearts.
The Queen of Hearts is generally believed to be a parody of Victoria, or rather a role reversal of Victoria and Prince Albert, not Elizabeth I. While Elizabeth I was certainly more violent than the beneficent image she fostered (she was one of the most brilliant PR experts in history), neither Elizabeth I nor Mary I was particularly exceptional for their bloodiness, certainly not for their period.

I still hate the Medici family due to St. Bartholomew's Day
You seem to carry a great many historical grudges. Also, given that Charles IX was far more responsible than his mother, shouldn't your vendetta be with the House of Valois?
 
The Queen of Hearts is generally believed to be a parody of Victoria, or rather a role reversal of Victoria and Prince Albert, not Elizabeth I. While Elizabeth I was certainly more violent than the beneficent image she fostered (she was one of the most brilliant PR experts in history), neither Elizabeth I nor Mary I was particularly exceptional for their bloodiness, certainly not for their period.


You seem to carry a great many historical grudges. Also, given that Charles IX was far more responsible than his mother, shouldn't your vendetta be with the House of Valois?
I do in fact carry many grudges. Andrew Jackson is also on the list of people who I'd beat up if they returned to life (There's a dispute in my family if I have Cherokee blood, and if I do... let's say a couple of presidents would get the beating.)
 
Andrew Jackson is also on the list of people who I'd beat up if they returned to life
Jackson was a very dedicated and skilled pistol duelist, and beat the one attempt to assassinate him to within an inch of his life with his cane before being pulled off by his handlers. You might him a hard target. I don't say this as admiring him any more than you do - just a pragmatic appraisal.
 
Chopping people's heads off, even for vanity or pique, and even in excess, and even to children, was not really that uncommon in that time period, or remotely unique to Elizabeth I. In fact, she likely only got the big and oft-quoted rep for it, over so many others, because of the tagline of Lewis Carroll's character, the Queen of Hearts.

And? Being a communist dictator wasn't uncommon for the 70's.

By any and all measures Tito was pretty average in terms of oppression for his time and place. Next to other communist dictators he was even kinda liberal.

For a series that just included Genghis Khan, someone that killed so many people his numbers wouldn't be matched for centuries and still holds the record for "personal rape factory" Tito is a heroic force for good. Sure, maybe because people alive today were oppressed by Tito it'd be objected to. But in sheer historical terms he fits right in.
 
And? Being a communist dictator wasn't uncommon for the 70's.

By any and all measures Tito was pretty average in terms of oppression for his time and place. Next to other communist dictators he was even kinda liberal.

For a series that just included Genghis Khan, someone that killed so many people his numbers wouldn't be matched for centuries and still holds the record for "personal rape factory" Tito is a heroic force for good. Sure, maybe because people alive today were oppressed by Tito it'd be objected to. But in sheer historical terms he fits right in.
I think the difference is, whether it's objectively sound or not, is that there are people alive today who lived in Tito's Yugoslavia, but no one alive today who lived in 16th Century England (or Europe as a whole) or in the stomping ground of the Mongol Empire. I believe that's what it comes down to. And that standard is not of my making, to be clear.
 
Dwarves (as in fantasy dwarves)
Unique Bonus: Hammer of Kneecapping - All units get 2x strength for 3 turns after taking a city.
Unique Unit: Nibelung - Replaces spearman. 2x strength.
Unique Infrastructure: Dwarven Mines - Replace whatever mines are in the game. +3 gold.
Thorin II Oakenshield
Leader Bonus: Through Misty Mountains - Whenever a military unit accompanies another military unit, 2x strength to the two of them.
Leader Agenda: Tolkien's Greed - Likes nations with a lot of gold. Dislikes nations with no gold.
 
The Tolkien scholar Paul H. Kocher writes that Tolkien characterises Dwarves as having the "cardinal sin of 'possessiveness'",[9] seen sharply when Bard the Bowman makes what Bilbo feels is a fair offer for a share of Smaug's treasure, and Thorin flatly refuses, his "dwarfish lust for gold fevered by brooding on the dragon's hoard".[9]

I didn't know what to do, so I added that.
 
AUSTRIA (not that needed)
Unique Bonus: Union of Two Kingdoms - Diplomatic marriages to city-states fully annex them.
Unique Unit: Grezner - Replaces rifleman. 3x strength during crusades.
Unique Infrastructure: Coffee House - Replaces bar. +1 culture and +2 happiness.

MARIA THERESA
Leader Bonus: Courts of Vienna - +2 Great People points and +1 diplomatic favor per district in the capital.

FRANZ JOSEPH
Leader Bonus: Fire of Europe - Units gain +5 Combat Strength after starting a World War.

Music:
Rock Me Amadeus by Falco
 
AUSTRIA (not that needed)
Unique Bonus: Union of Two Kingdoms - Diplomatic marriages to city-states fully annex them.
Unique Unit: Grezner - Replaces rifleman. 3x strength during crusades.
Unique Infrastructure: Coffee House - Replaces bar. +1 culture and +2 happiness.

MARIA THERESA
Leader Bonus: Courts of Vienna - +2 Great People points and +1 diplomatic favor per district in the capital.

FRANZ JOSEPH
Leader Bonus: Fire of Europe - Units gain +5 Combat Strength after starting a World War.

Music:
Rock Me Amadeus by Falco
See my response to this identical post in the other thread.
 
America (updated)
Unique Bonus: I Lift My Lamp Beside The Golden Door - Whenever a nation that has knowledge of America and vice versa has -2 happiness, America gets +1 population in any of its cities, and +2 diplomatic favor. Every 3 consecutive terms of this, gain 1 random Great Person.
Unique Unit: Superfortress - Replaces bomber. +5 combat strength against cities.
Unique Infrastructure: Saloon - Replaces entertainment district. +1 happiness and +1 culture.

Thomas Jefferson (Base Game)
Leader Bonus: Manifest Destiny - +5 gold and +1 science after settling a city that is at least 6 tiles away from other cities. Settlers can be used to fight. (I should have done the Louisiana Purchase thing, whatever)

Theodore Roosevelt (DLC Season 2)
Leader Bonus: Big Stick Policy - same as Bull Moose Teddy from VI.

Frederick Douglass (DLC Season 2)
Leader Bonus: Narrative of the Life - +3 diplomatic favor per Great Work.
 
America (updated)
Unique Bonus: I Lift My Lamp Beside The Golden Door - Whenever a nation that has knowledge of America and vice versa has -2 happiness, America gets +1 population in any of its cities, and +2 diplomatic favor. Every 3 consecutive terms of this, gain 1 random Great Person.
Unique Unit: Superfortress - Replaces bomber. +5 combat strength against cities.
Unique Infrastructure: Saloon - Replaces entertainment district. +1 happiness and +1 culture.

Thomas Jefferson (Base Game)
Leader Bonus: Manifest Destiny - +5 gold and +1 science after settling a city that is at least 6 tiles away from other cities. Settlers can be used to fight. (I should have done the Louisiana Purchase thing, whatever)

Theodore Roosevelt (DLC Season 2)
Leader Bonus: Big Stick Policy - same as Bull Moose Teddy from VI.

Frederick Douglass (DLC Season 2)
Leader Bonus: Narrative of the Life - +3 diplomatic favor per Great Work.
1. Just how tricky the US of A design concept can be. maybe it is better to revert to Civ5 UU (Superfortress bomber: USA is the only known builder and operator of this kind of superheavy bombers. what should make this unit more unique is a basic better defense VS Fighter attacks than anyone else.)
Other UU to pic instead: Redlegs (Artillery replacement, attacks twice, @Boris Gudenuf kun did say something about US Army Artillery Corps of the 20th Century and how awesome they are compares to anyone else counterparts)
2. What makes Frederick Douglass so important to add to Leader list?
 
1. Just how tricky the US of A design concept can be. maybe it is better to revert to Civ5 UU (Superfortress bomber: USA is the only known builder and operator of this kind of superheavy bombers. what should make this unit more unique is a basic better defense VS Fighter attacks than anyone else.)
Other UU to pic instead: Redlegs (Artillery replacement, attacks twice, @Boris Gudenuf kun did say something about US Army Artillery Corps of the 20th Century and how awesome they are compares to anyone else counterparts)
Weren't the superfortresses used in the bombing raids like Dresden? I'm all up for changing it though.
Redlegs seem cool
2. What makes Frederick Douglass so important to add to Leader list?
I don't know, it seemed kinda cool to add him. He could be the first non-president to lead America

could you try a USA concept?
 
Last edited:
Weren't the superfortresses used in the bombing raids like Dresden? I'm all up for changing it though.
Redlegs seem cool

I don't know, it seemed kinda cool to add him. He could be the first non-president to lead America

could you try a USA concept?
The B-17 "Flying Fortress" and B-24 "Liberator" were the two US heavy bombers used to pulverize German factories and other targets. However, both were designed around the US Army Air Force doctrine of precision bombing to take out enemy industry and infrastructure - it just turned out to be too expensive in heavy bombers, so they ended up smashing German cities in area bombing instead.

In contrast, the British learned that it was too expensive right at the beginning of the war, so their Lancaster heavy bomber was designed from the start to drop as much tonnage as possible onto German cities to attack the work force rather than the workplaces. It was truly a Terrorist weapon, but ironically was used as the default Bomber graphic in a previous Civ game. Political Correctness has always been a bit of a problem for Historical games . . .

I threw out Redlegs as a nod to the US Army's Fire Direction Center concept developed in the late 1930s, that made the US artillery the most dangerous single weapon other than atomic on any battlefield.
 
I'm in favor of the strategic bomber as a US unique unit. While it may not be the most unique aspect of the US arsenal, it is by far the most iconic one, with the entire Fortress family (Flying, Super and Strato) as well as the Liberator and to a lesser degree Lancer being the most recognizable emblems of American military power for most of the twentieth century into the twenty first.

(Incidentally the bomber in civ V was the B-17 Flying Fortress, not the B-29 Superfortress).
 
Top Bottom