Dream Civs/Leaders for Civ 7

[jsciv69]

America: Despite (or perhaps because of) being American, the American civ designs/leaders have rarely appealed to me. Civ6 changed that somewhat (I like Lincoln's design, mechanically, though flavor-wise it feels a little too cute and on-the-nose), but what I'd really love to see (and don't expect to see) is an American Civ with a Science focus led by JFK.

Although I would still like to see an America led by Eisenhower. I am starting to lean toward JFK to give the Franchise a more familiar name that all could get behind. I did post a design American Civ led by Kennedy a few months ago in the America Thread. Here it is a bit modified.

Kennedy leads America for Civilization VII
John F Kennedy: Camelot comes alive. Kennedy establishes a New Frontier. America strives to meet all challenges. Kennedy represents an American Civilization that is strong, energetic and forward thinking. I know opinions can fly in many different directions when it comes to JFK. Although his tenure was cut short. it was as memorable as any who served two full terms. Due to the Cold War and other tensions abroad, Kennedy's call to service became a call to arms. His Military build-up produced some impressive military hardware. Patriotism was at quite a peak during the Kennedy years. Even as the Whole World held it's breath during the Cuban Missle Crises. Kennedy's legacy, as debated as it is, was the push toward Space. And Landing On the Moon. Bringing a hightened emphasis on Science education.
New Frontier: Commerce and Industrial Districts/Zones are available early. Each completed building in the Commerce and Industrial District/Zone adds a bonus to Science output.
Highway System: Greatly increases mobility of Units as well as movement of Commerce.
Space Program: Spaceship parts are mass produced faster and cheaper.
Special Units: B-52 Bomber-Replaces regular Bomber. Can be equipped with Atomic Weapons, F111 Fighter Bomber-Combines the funtion of Fighters and Bombers, USS John F Kennedy-Doubles the plane capacity, M60A1 Battle Tank-Replaces regular Tank, Special Forces Unit: Green Berets-Used for covert or special operations, can be used for spy missions.
Special Buildings: Kennedy Space Center: Doubles production of Spaceship components, Increases assurance of Launch success, New York Stock Exchange-Triples Gold surplus, Ellis Island-Doubles process speed rate of Immigrant Process Centers, Special Warfare Center-Produces Green Berets
Great Performers: George Burns, Sammy Davis Jr, Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra, Louis Armstrong, Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Eddie Van Halen
Great Actors/Actresses: Marlon Brando, Judy Garland, Elizabeth Taylor, Clint Eastwood, Grace Kelly, Henry Fonda, James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall
Great General: Douglas MacArthur, George Patton
Great Admiral: Chester Nimitz

Maybe this is a bit over the top. But the America in the last Civ game was a bit boring. Let's change that.

 

[Patine]

Although I would still like to see an America led by Eisenhower. I am starting to lean toward JFK to give the Franchise a more familiar name that all could get behind. I did post a design American Civ led by Kennedy a few months ago in the America Thread. Here it is a bit modified.

Kennedy leads America for Civilization VII
John F Kennedy: Camelot comes alive. Kennedy establishes a New Frontier. America strives to meet all challenges. Kennedy represents an American Civilization that is strong, energetic and forward thinking. I know opinions can fly in many different directions when it comes to JFK. Although his tenure was cut short. it was as memorable as any who served two full terms. Due to the Cold War and other tensions abroad, Kennedy's call to service became a call to arms. His Military build-up produced some impressive military hardware. Patriotism was at quite a peak during the Kennedy years. Even as the Whole World held it's breath during the Cuban Missle Crises. Kennedy's legacy, as debated as it is, was the push toward Space. And Landing On the Moon. Bringing a hightened emphasis on Science education.
New Frontier: Commerce and Industrial Districts/Zones are available early. Each completed building in the Commerce and Industrial District/Zone adds a bonus to Science output.
Highway System: Greatly increases mobility of Units as well as movement of Commerce.
Space Program: Spaceship parts are mass produced faster and cheaper.
Special Units: B-52 Bomber-Replaces regular Bomber. Can be equipped with Atomic Weapons, F111 Fighter Bomber-Combines the funtion of Fighters and Bombers, USS John F Kennedy-Doubles the plane capacity, M60A1 Battle Tank-Replaces regular Tank, Special Forces Unit: Green Berets-Used for covert or special operations, can be used for spy missions.
Special Buildings: Kennedy Space Center: Doubles production of Spaceship components, Increases assurance of Launch success, New York Stock Exchange-Triples Gold surplus, Ellis Island-Doubles process speed rate of Immigrant Process Centers, Special Warfare Center-Produces Green Berets
Great Performers: George Burns, Sammy Davis Jr, Elvis Presley, Frank Sinatra, Louis Armstrong, Benny Goodman, Count Basie, Eddie Van Halen
Great Actors/Actresses: Marlon Brando, Judy Garland, Elizabeth Taylor, Clint Eastwood, Grace Kelly, Henry Fonda, James Cagney, Humphrey Bogart, Lauren Bacall
Great General: Douglas MacArthur, George Patton
Great Admiral: Chester Nimitz

Maybe this is a bit over the top. But the America in the last Civ game was a bit boring. Let's change that.

If Civ7 was that generous for UU's, UA's, and UB's for all civ's, it would be like the similar jump between Age of Empires 2 and 3 in a way. Though, some civ's would find it harder to come up with that many, and, personally, I would think the spread of such uniques over the different era, rather than clumping them in one era would be far more important.

Fun fact: Each of Turkey and Israel have used significantly more M60A1's in combat than the U.S. has in real history. A dubious, "unique."

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Fun fact: Each of Turkey and Israel have used significantly more M60A1's in combat than the U.S. has in real history. A dubious, "unique."

I was a driver on an M60A1 back in 1964 - 65 when they were first being fielded, and I remember taking part in numerous 'demonstrations' to show off the tank's capabilities to various foreign delegations: Belgian, Dutch, Turkish, Israeli, etc that the US was trying to sell them to. The M60A1 was one of the first two "Main Battle Tanks' in service anywhere, and the 105mm M68C cannon on it, even before they fitted the laser rangefinders and solid-state fire control computers, was a tank killer: the APDS round could penetrate any armor in the world at the time, and I watched experienced sergeants who had been estimating ranges to within 20 meters on older tanks for 10+ years hit a target with the 105 on the first shot at ranges of over 3000 meters - which was not supposed to be possible without the improved sighting devices, and probably wasn't with the lack of experience in the post-Vietnam military.

Ironically, the only armored war the US fought between 1945 and 2000 was the First Gulf War in 1991, by which time the 'standard' main battle tank was the M1 with the 120mm gun, so the M60A1 saw practically no combat action with the US Army.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Special Units: B-52 Bomber-Replaces regular Bomber. Can be equipped with Atomic Weapons, F111 Fighter Bomber-Combines the funtion of Fighters and Bombers

Why would we need a bomber replacement if we could also get a fighter with the abilities of a bomber as well?

Clint Eastwood,

He's still alive. I'd also leave Great People to be recruited by any civ.

 

[AffineConstant]

Great General: Douglas MacArthur, George Patton

Personally I'd stick with actual great generals like Bradley, unfortunately Macarthur and Patton were only ever great at getting publicity. That being said, is there a "Great People" thread?

 

[jsciv69]

Personally I'd stick with actual great generals like Bradley, unfortunately Macarthur and Patton were only ever great at getting publicity. That being said, is there a "Great People" thread?

My Grandfather fought under Macarthur. He didn't care for him much either. I think if Ike(myfirst choice) led America, Bradley can be included. As they both are linked with D-Day.

 

[Vahnstad]

For USA

I think generally post-WW2 leaders is too recent, while FDR is somewhat of an atypical president for USA. I would take no offense with Ike or JFK as president at the latest though, they would be decent picks.

Coolidge would be a dark horse. So would Cleveland be. There are also many early American candidates such as Jefferson potentially but i'm not too familiar with those and some might be controversial because quite a few of them were slaveholders. And second part of 19th century didn't feature many great or famous American presidents. I'm confident in that they'll pick a good candidate for the USA here.

 

[jsciv69]

For USA

I think generally post-WW2 leaders is too recent, while FDR is somewhat of an atypical president for USA. I would take no offense with Ike or JFK as president at the latest though, they would be decent picks.

Coolidge would be a dark horse. So would Cleveland be. There are also many early American candidates such as Jefferson potentially but i'm not too familiar with those and some might be controversial because quite a few of them were slaveholders. And second part of 19th century didn't feature many great or famous American presidents. I'm confident in that they'll pick a good candidate for the USA here.

As time goes by some eras become not so recent anymore. My idea of Ike is not because he's one of my favorite people in history. But more for the period of the mid-late 1950's. When America's prestige and standing in the World was a high as ever. The Highway System is a symbol of what America is. Always on the move. Of course I can also see having JFK just as that name resonates to this day. Also the likes of Lincoln and Washington seem just too cliche'. Of the late-19th century. Although no name jumps at anybody. But for an alternate leader, I would suggest Ulysses.S. Grant. He and Ike would share some similar traits. As both were successful War Generals that became Presidents.

 

[Patine]

As time goes by some eras become not so recent anymore. My idea of Ike is not because he's one of my favorite people in history. But more for the period of the mid-late 1950's. When America's prestige and standing in the World was a high as ever. The Highway System is a symbol of what America is. Always on the move. Of course I can also see having JFK just as that name resonates to this day. Also the likes of Lincoln and Washington seem just too cliche'. Of the late-19th century. Although no name jumps at anybody. But for an alternate leader, I would suggest Ulysses.S. Grant. He and Ike would share some similar traits. As both were successful War Generals that became Presidents.

Compared to Antiquity, the Medieval Era, and the Early Modern Era, that relevant shift isn't coming anytime soon...

 

[Phrozen]

JFK is known and revered because he was assassinated. His actual record as president was pretty mediocre.

 

[pokiehl]

JFK is known and revered because he was assassinated. His actual record as president was pretty mediocre.

Pretty vague criticism that I don’t think holds true. If you were correct, McKinley and Garfield would also be “known and revered” but they definitely aren’t.

In fact, Kennedy is routinely rated in the top 10 across the major scholarly presidential ranking surveys (Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, Siena, C-SPAN, etc.). These surveys are multidimensional and measure a lot of factors. In the most recent assessment from PGPES (which ranks him #10 overall), Kennedy is actually in the top 10 for 'least polarizing'. Also notable is that he is absent from the list of 'difficult to assess' presidents.

 

[GeneralZIft]

I don't know guys... just keep an... open mind

 

[Patine]

If you were correct, McKinley and Garfield would also be “known and revered” but they definitely aren’t.

Maybe McKinley, but Garfield's Presidency was moreso defined by his assassination and the cloud it put over Arthur's Presidency, and illuminating, if indirectly, the sharp and divisive political divide beetween the Stalwart and Half-Breed Factions of the U.S. Republican Party at the time. The Presidencies of William Henry Harrison and Zachary Taylor were far more defined by their untimely deaths (the former not assasination, despite the semantic and hyperbolic decrying by his daughter, and the latter may have been assassination by poisoning, but not recognized as such at the tiime). Warren Harding had a forgettable Presidency and forgettable death in office, save that the polocy roots of the 1929 Wall Street Crash began there. But was Kennedy a good President? Maybe not a horrid one - though he is the only one who has ever DIRECTLY threatened to start a nuclear war, which is a HUGE black mark against him by me, and should be by any one with a sense of morality or humanity - but his status as being among the best U.S. Presidents I think is hype. It's like how many musicians (Freddy Mercury, Sid Vicious, the Notorious B.I.G., Tupac Shakur, etc.) immensely increased in popularity and music sales after their tragic and untimely, but heavily-publicized deaths, even if they alredy had a significantly large fan base.

 

[Phrozen]

Pretty vague criticism that I don’t think holds true. If you were correct, McKinley and Garfield would also be “known and revered” but they definitely aren’t.

In fact, Kennedy is routinely rated in the top 10 across the major scholarly presidential ranking surveys (Presidential Greatness Project Expert Survey, Siena, C-SPAN, etc.). These surveys are multidimensional and measure a lot of factors. In the most recent assessment from PGPES (which ranks him #10 overall), Kennedy is actually in the top 10 for 'least polarizing'. Also notable is that he is absent from the list of 'difficult to assess' presidents.

There are certainly ten better than Kennedy. He was assassinated in the mass media era and the cult of the president was already in full swing when it was not in an earlier era. He gets more credit for what could of been than what actually was.

 

[pokiehl]

There are certainly ten better than Kennedy. He was assassinated in the mass media era and the cult of the president was already in full swing when it was not in an earlier era. He gets more credit for what could have been than what actually was.

You just repeated yourself with different words while not responding to anything I said.

 

[Patine]

You just repeated yourself with different words while not responding to anything I said.

They were, obviously, agreeing with me, in other words, on media and hype playing a distortive role in Kennedy's legacy.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

Siam: Another one I'd love to see return from Civ5. I enjoy the SEA civs a lot, and while it seems like there's a cap on how many of them we can get per game, I'd welcome more of them in Civ7. (Khmer and Vietnam are two of my go-tos in Civ6, and I don't know what it is about the region that leads to such interesting mechanical design, but there seems to be something there.)

War between Siam and Dai Viet in the 1830s-1850s. actually the first war with flintlock fusils are used in large quantities on both sides. Note that Siam bought (second hand?) brownbess through Mr. Robert Hunter.
The leaders of two nations should be reigning monarches of that time. just like Tomyris and Cyrus are in Civ6. the two are enemies that actually met each other and it was Cyrus who lost his head (but not his empire, yes Scythians couldn't bring down Persian Empire he created within Tomyris's lifetime).

 

[Patine]

War between Siam and Dai Viet in the 1830s-1850s. actually the first war with flintlock fusils are used in large quantities on both sides. Note that Siam bought (second hand?) brownbess through Mr. Robert Hunter.
The leaders of two nations should be reigning monarches of that time. just like Tomyris and Cyrus are in Civ6. the two are enemies that actually met each other and it was Cyrus who lost his head (but not his empire, yes Scythians couldn't bring down Persian Empire he created within Tomyris's lifetime).

I think the only significant Non-Monarchial Thai leader commonly known would be Phibun, who, very dubiously, like Franco and Salazar, was very Pro-Axis until the Instruments of Surrender, and then became a good little pet tyrant for the Western Bloc of the Cold War, even sending troops to the U.S. war effort in Vietnam.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

I think the only significant Non-Monarchial Thai leader commonly known would be Phibun, who, very dubiously, like Franco and Salazar, was very Pro-Axis until the Instruments of Surrender, and then became a good little pet tyrant for the Western Bloc of the Cold War, even sending troops to the U.S. war effort in Vietnam.

As per legal constrains today yes.
if Phibun ever leads Siam, his UI would be either 'Thammasart Center' or 'Kasetsart University'. being research lab replacements.
his UU would be tankettes.

but my idea goes for King Jessadabordin VS Emperor Min Mang. since the two are equal enemies and contemporary leaderships. Note that Bangkok Era saw significant changes in Siamese strategy. became more offensive and more 'outward' than Ayutthaya. since it was proven that defending a siege doesn't work for them, but meeting enemies outside works much better. Note that various cities got defense upgrades, with 'more modern' fortresse being built.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

War between Siam and Dai Viet in the 1830s-1850s. actually the first war with flintlock fusils are used in large quantities on both sides. Note that Siam bought (second hand?) brownbess through Mr. Robert Hunter.
The leaders of two nations should be reigning monarches of that time. just like Tomyris and Cyrus are in Civ6. the two are enemies that actually met each other and it was Cyrus who lost his head (but not his empire, yes Scythians couldn't bring down Persian Empire he created within Tomyris's lifetime).

I'm fine with a Siamese leader from around that time period. I'd rather Vietnam have a leader from an earlier time.