Female leaders

[Patine]

Like I said, I think she was a fascinating person; I just don't think being queen of Sweden was among her more interesting accomplishments.

Similar to Vaclav Havel, where many of his biggest supporters, and even himself, liked to say that being the first President of post-Communist Czechoslovakia was his third- or fourth-greatest achievement in life...

 

[liv]

For the US is there a possibility of a female leader (in the game of civ I mean )
I saw Abigail Adams mentioned in the civ7 leader discussion
Should she on a list of possibilities?

 

[Patine]

For the US is there a possibility of a female leader (in the game of civ I mean )
I saw Abigail Adams mentioned in the civ7 leader discussion
Should she on a list of possibilities?

Harriet Beecher Stowe, the woman who led to the U.S. Civil War, the resolution of the Slavery issue and the irreconcilable divide, and forever changed American society and politics by writing a fiction novel...

 

[awesome]

Mao Zedong died in 1976, about 21 years before he appeared as the leader of China. As far as I know, this is the shortest time between somebody died and they appeared as a leaderhead in any game in the series, so I'd say a better rule of thumb is to wait at least 30 years after the death of w Hoover our first female president is going to be, before making them a leaderhead.

 

[MonkeyPaw]

For the US is there a possibility of a female leader (in the game of civ I mean )
I saw Abigail Adams mentioned in the civ7 leader discussion
Should she on a list of possibilities?

Eleanor Roosevelt would be a good addition for a United Nations/World Congress expansion

 

[Patine]

Eleanor Roosevelt would be a good addition for a United Nations/World Congress expansion

So would Emma Watson and Leonardo DiCaprio...

 

[LiamX]

For the US is there a possibility of a female leader (in the game of civ I mean )
I saw Abigail Adams mentioned in the civ7 leader discussion
Should she on a list of possibilities?

The only qualified female leader for America would have been Hillary Clinton had she won the elections.
I'm fairly certain firaxis would force her on us had she won regardless of competence or popularity given where civ is heading.

 

[Stomper66]

Does anybody else prefer Catherine the Great from Civ5 to Peter? I don't know why but a female leader for Russia just feels right. It is the motherland after all.

I don't understand why Civ 6 is trying to make out they've made some breakthrough with female leaders when there were so many strong female leaders in Civ5 anyway.

Elizebeth, Boudica, Catherine, Maria Theresa, Theadora. They were all good. In my opinion it's better to have a smaller more careful selection of the strongest female leaders than to have a 50 % quota of weaker female leaders for the sake of PC.

 

[LiamX]

Does anybody else prefer Catherine the Great from Civ5 to Peter? I don't know why but a female leader for Russia just feels right. It is the motherland after all.

I don't understand why Civ 6 is trying to make out they've made some breakthrough with female leaders when there were so many strong female leaders in Civ5 anyway.

Elizebeth, Boudica, Catherine, Maria Theresa, Theadora. They were all good. In my opinion it's better to have a smaller more careful selection of the strongest female leaders than to have a 50 % quota of weaker female leaders for the sake of PC.

Theodora was a bad pick imo. She was just co-ruler to Justinian who was the legitimate (and more competent) leader of the two. But Catherine has been used since Civ 3 (or Civ 2?) She's getting boring. Another leader for Russia was a breath of fresh air.
Plus people have this argument of "we can't have the same faces over and over again" when talking about some male leaders. Why do we exempt female leaders?
We shouldn't have double standards.

 

[awesome]

I think I remember them saying that they purposely picked different leaders than in the last game. That obviously didn't happen with India, but it did for a lot of civs.

 

[Guandao]

Theodora was a bad pick imo. She was just co-ruler to Justinian who was the legitimate (and more competent) leader of the two. But Catherine has been used since Civ 3 (or Civ 2?) She's getting boring. Another leader for Russia was a breath of fresh air.
Plus people have this argument of "we can't have the same faces over and over again" when talking about some male leaders. Why do we exempt female leaders?
We shouldn't have double standards.

Was Justinian that much more "competent" than his wife? I thought she was responsible for him not fleeing the capital during the Nikos riots. Just wondering, since I'm not too big an expert on the Byzantines.

 

[Stomper66]

Yeah I suppose it was refreshing to see a different leader for Russia. They have such a rich history and so many memorable leaders that it's a civ that will always be spoilt for choice.

As an English person I wouldn't really mind having Elizabeth in future Civilisation instalments. Again she just feels right and no one can really question her legitimacy as a leader. I wouldn't really prefer another leader for England even though there are several options available. Victoria is okay but she was more of a symbolic figure and didn't really make any decisions for the country.

I don't know nearly enough on the history to comment on Byzantium I just liked the design of Theodara in Civ5.

 

[Patine]

Does anybody else prefer Catherine the Great from Civ5 to Peter? I don't know why but a female leader for Russia just feels right. It is the motherland after all.

In my opinion, Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Ivan the Terrible, and Vladimir Lenin are probably the standout historical leaders of Russia. Peter has been in Civ4? (I kind of skipped 4, so I'm assuming here) and 6, Catherine in 3 and 5, Lenin and Catherine in 2 (Civ2 had a male and female default leader for each Civ, and had a lot of wonky and questionable female leaders), and I can't remember off hand who was the Russian leader(s) in Civ1. Age of Empires III's default Russian AI personality is Ivan the Terrible, just as a note.

 

[awesome]

In my opinion, Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Ivan the Terrible, and Vladimir Lenin are probably the standout historical leaders of Russia. Peter has been in Civ4? (I kind of skipped 4, so I'm assuming here) and 6, Catherine in 3 and 5, Lenin and Catherine in 2 (Civ2 had a male and female default leader for each Civ, and had a lot of wonky and questionable female leaders), and I can't remember off hand who was the Russian leader(s) in Civ1. Age of Empires III's default Russian AI personality is Ivan the Terrible, just as a note.

Both of the greats were in 4. And I think Stalin was in 1.

 

[Zaarin]

For the US is there a possibility of a female leader (in the game of civ I mean )
I saw Abigail Adams mentioned in the civ7 leader discussion
Should she on a list of possibilities?

I think America, like France, is a dubious civilization to choose a female leader for, but if we're going to I think Abigail Adams is far and away the best choice for that.

 

[Patine]

I think America, like France, is a dubious civilization to choose a female leader for, but if we're going to I think Abigail Adams is far and away the best choice for that.

The Romans (if viewed as a separate civ from the Byzantines) are very dubious for strong female leaders too.

 

[chronoturner]

Was Justinian that much more "competent" than his wife? I thought she was responsible for him not fleeing the capital during the Nikos riots. Just wondering, since I'm not too big an expert on the Byzantines.

Justinian is frankly overrated, but that's perhaps a discussion for another thread, not here. Theodora was an interesting choice as she is much more a woman behind the man in this case. Some female leaders of the Byzantine besides Theodora could be Irene of Athens who could provide interesting gameplay mechanics relating to not wanting religions destroyed or places of cultural importance pillaged (Irene). Although her end might not be the best, she still is important for ending Iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire. Although I'd far prefer a member of the Macedonian dynasty, I wouldn't mind Irene, to say the least.

 

[halfhalfharp]

Does anybody else prefer Catherine the Great from Civ5 to Peter? I don't know why but a female leader for Russia just feels right. It is the motherland after all.

I don't understand why Civ 6 is trying to make out they've made some breakthrough with female leaders when there were so many strong female leaders in Civ5 anyway.

Elizebeth, Boudica, Catherine, Maria Theresa, Theadora. They were all good. In my opinion it's better to have a smaller more careful selection of the strongest female leaders than to have a 50 % quota of weaker female leaders for the sake of PC.

Personally I do favor Yekaterina. But she has already appeared in V, so making her again will not please the aim of giving fresh elements. And with Peter in the game, now the chance for having her is vague, as they were in the same imperial era. But I would like to see her again.

And I understand that they are trying to bring more new faces to the game. For me it brings a dilemma. At one side, I want to see the strong and legendary female leaders. At another side, I also like expansion of new faces to my history knowledge. Can we have them all actually?

Justinian is frankly overrated, but that's perhaps a discussion for another thread, not here. Theodora was an interesting choice as she is much more a woman behind the man in this case. Some female leaders of the Byzantine besides Theodora could be Irene of Athens who could provide interesting gameplay mechanics relating to not wanting religions destroyed or places of cultural importance pillaged (Irene). Although her end might not be the best, she still is important for ending Iconoclasm in the Byzantine Empire. Although I'd far prefer a member of the Macedonian dynasty, I wouldn't mind Irene, to say the least.

Every time I saw Theodora, I wanna ask where has her husband gone. Its a bit wierd to see only one of the co-rulers, right?

Irene was sole ruler so I prefered her over the others (zoe and theodoras were all corulers).
Oh yeah I remember I created a kit for Irene as well. But first we need the Byzantine in the game. At least we need to design its CUA to create a better overview of her niche, if we want Irene. You are welcome to visit and comment on the Byzantine riler thread.

 

[halfhalfharp]

Btw, why are we not making Cixi as chinese leader?

I knew everyone concerns the result of her rule--the decline and end of imperial China.

The confrontation of western and eastern powers and China's weakness in military was unavoidable. And she made some fatal mis-judgements that worsened the condition to an irreversible state.

But apart from that, in fact, by the standard of a ruler, Cixi was a very capable one.

Numerous rebellions she put down, numerous threats she resolved, all done by a woman behind the throne, who had never left the palace. She carefully managed the incoming foreigners, giving as much tolerance she could to avoid conflict. And she was the sole de facto ruler all the time. 0.4 billion subjects, a few thousand miles of landmass, a crumbling empire in tides of changes, yet Cixi managed to hold it.

The only catch of her ability was that, she was unable to have a proper picture of foreign diplomacy, nor the power of industrialization. Actually 99% chinese at that time was the same, so this could not be a blame to her.

I won't mark the results as a discouragement of her being a leader. Look at CdM, Gorgo, Cleo, Seowndeok, even Gitarja, they didn't have pushed their countries to golden ages.

Qin Shi Huang's dynasty was not golden age as well. It lasted for one or two decades, but the chinese marked him as the milstone of history.

Similarly, I will say Cixi was the same in being a milestone of chinese history.
She was highly iconic, representing Manchurian Imperial China and all chinese knows of her. And modern chinese doesn't hate her at all. She was a dead person more than 100 years ago.
She was also a capable ruler in her right, with detailed descriptions of her personality and deeds. And she was the ruler most involved in diplomatic relationships. Previous chinese emperors viewed foreign kingdoms either as vassal states or barbarians. Cixi was undoubtedly doing sth her precessors never attempted. For this reason, I credit her worthy as a player on the chessboard representing China.

I really want to bring her up to attention, if we can have a chinese alternative female leader other than Wu.

 

[Patine]

Btw, why are we not making Cixi as chinese leader?

I knew everyone concerns the result of her rule--the decline and end of imperial China.

The confrontation of western and eastern powers and China's weakness in military was unavoidable. And she made some fatal mis-judgements that worsened the condition to an irreversible state.

But apart from that, in fact, by the standard of a ruler, Cixi was a very capable one.

Numerous rebellions she put down, numerous threats she resolved, all done by a woman behind the throne, who had never left the palace. She carefully managed the incoming foreigners, giving as much tolerance she could to avoid conflict. And she was the sole de facto ruler all the time. 0.4 billion subjects, a few thousand miles of landmass, a crumbling empire in tides of changes, yet Cixi managed to hold it.

The only catch of her ability was that, she was unable to have a proper picture of foreign diplomacy, nor the power of industrialization. Actually 99% chinese at that time was the same, so this could not be a blame to her.

I won't mark the results as a discouragement of her being a leader. Look at CdM, Gorgo, Cleo, Seowndeok, even Gitarja, they didn't have pushed their countries to golden ages.

Qin Shi Huang's dynasty was not golden age as well. It lasted for one or two decades, but the chinese marked him as the milstone of history.

Similarly, I will say Cixi was the same in being a milestone of chinese history.
She was highly iconic, representing Manchurian Imperial China and all chinese knows of her. And modern chinese doesn't hate her at all. She was a dead person more than 100 years ago.
She was also a capable ruler in her right, with detailed descriptions of her personality and deeds. And she was the ruler most involved in diplomatic relationships. Previous chinese emperors viewed foreign kingdoms either as vassal states or barbarians. Cixi was undoubtedly doing sth her precessors never attempted. For this reason, I credit her worthy as a player on the chessboard representing China.

I really want to bring her up to attention, if we can have a chinese alternative female leader other than Wu.

Actually, I opined on this one already. Having Cixi as a leader is like having Nicholas II as a Russian leader. Cixi presided over the last days of, if not the civilization, people, and culture she lived in as a whole, a very long-standing way of governing it and having it's culture manifest. Like Nicholas, the empire was collapsing around her, due to internal and external forces, and the whole expectations and way of life she grew up with were all being called into question. Also like Nicholas, her empire began a fundamental social, cultural, political, and economic, and irrevocable, transformation during her reign that she was only really an attempted stopgap to try to prevent, and a failed one at that. Not a very good legacy, and certainly not as good as Wu Zetian's.