If you could suggest a new leader for each civ

[Mursi lives]

@Ceaser, Well, I knew William came from France, that was about it, whether or not he was King of France though, I was just guessing.
So he was King of Normandy at the time?, was that not a part of France? How many Kings does france need. Who knows. I say none.

William was Duke of Normandy and yes Normandy was technically part of France. But to tell the truth, the King of France had no real power and Normandy was actually independant. So were big feudal powers like Burgundy, Aquitaine or Bretagne.


About Richard Lionheart: He almost never visited England because he was actually Count of Anjou, Duke of Normandy and Duke of Aquitaine. Those french lands were much more populated and much richer than that oversea kingdom his ancestor William conquered 80 years earlier. So if you really want to make him a civ leader, he should rather be France.

 

[duckofspades]

Rome:
Hadrin

Reailized Rome couldn't infintley expand. Has Every Roman leader been Augustus or Julius.

 

[nody]

Would also love to see Bill Clinton for USA, although I feel that's only slightly more likely than Hitler coming in an expansion.

Totally agree! LOL! He could voice-act his own character... would be funny too to put a Monica Lewinsky in the background sitting on a cigar-box.


My humble (other) suggestions:

- Rome - Julius Caesar, who else? Okay, Nero?
- Germany - Adolf Hitler, just as an option, not as the default leader.
- Russia - Stalin, who else did you expect of me?
- Egypt - Cleopatra, of course in diplo you would take a famous milk bath with her...
- England - King George III, would be cool to fight him as Washington.
- France - Louis XIV, in diplo you can catch him shaving (remember Civ IV?)
- Japan - Hirohito

Greece: Pericles. NEED MOAR PERICLES!!!

What's so great about him? Do you have a man-crush on his hairy body? (Assuming you're a man, correct me if I'm wrong)

 

[candle86]

America
Ronald Reagan

Greece
Leonidas (he was real not just in a movie)

Rome
Gaius Miriam (senator responsible for the Roman Legion we know today, and did away with the old system)

England
King Arthur (while largely fictionalized there was a real King Arthur who really did fight the battle of Hastings and won)

 

[Altaria87]

I must again say there's a lot of ignorance going around about English leaders:
Richard the Lionheart
As I've said before, he visited the country TWICE. To collect TAXES. He wasn't a leader by any strech of the imagination. and, as someone else said, he was French anyway.
Henry VIII
Erm... Lolwut? Sure, the Church of England was created in his rule, but that was the only lasting influence he had, and religion isn't even in Civ V for Diplomacy (which was pretty much what the CoE did)
Victoria
Yeah, she may have been queen during the peak time of the Empire, but she was an incredibly bad queen to be honest. Once Albert died she never showed her face in public again- by that time in History, the monarch of England had almsot got to their current 'figurehead' status, but Victoria was bad as a figurehead as well. If we want an Empire-Era leader, take Gladstone (for goody-two-shoes factor) or Disraeli (for expansionism).
George III
Yes, it was under his rule that America gained indepenence. But his only other defining factor was that he was Bat**** INSANE. If you haven't noticed the leaders tend to be competent.
Henry V
Ok, if you REALLY want a guy who was famous for winning one battle and then died, go right ahead. But that was all he did...

My personal choices would be:
Gladsotne/Disraeli (for the Empire, leaning towards Disraeli because he was slightly less boring)
Churchill (Only if you want to emphasis the whole 'British Stubborness', he would have to come with an ability like that, perhaps making English cities much harder to subjugate)
Lloyd George (He was Welsh. And he was a womaniser. And he was at the Treaty of Versailles. 'Nuff said)
And if you really want a Military-Minded guy:
Oliver Cromwell (Britain's first, and arugably only, Military dictator)

Oh, and for pity's sake, just change the name to Britain.

 

[Will9]

I'm surprised I'm the only one to have suggested Edward I for England

 

[Shirastro]

James A. Garfield for America, definitely!

 

[CHEESE!]

Iroquios: Ayenwatha

Ayenwatha is Hiawatha is Haio Hwa Ta. All the same person. So I put forward Denkanawida, the Great Peacemaker, as Iroquois 2nd leader.

 

[CHEESE!]

I must again say there's a lot of ignorance going around about English leaders:
Richard the Lionheart
As I've said before, he visited the country TWICE. To collect TAXES. He wasn't a leader by any strech of the imagination. and, as someone else said, he was French anyway.
Henry VIII
Erm... Lolwut? Sure, the Church of England was created in his rule, but that was the only lasting influence he had, and religion isn't even in Civ V for Diplomacy (which was pretty much what the CoE did)
Victoria
Yeah, she may have been queen during the peak time of the Empire, but she was an incredibly bad queen to be honest. Once Albert died she never showed her face in public again- by that time in History, the monarch of England had almsot got to their current 'figurehead' status, but Victoria was bad as a figurehead as well. If we want an Empire-Era leader, take Gladstone (for goody-two-shoes factor) or Disraeli (for expansionism).
George III
Yes, it was under his rule that America gained indepenence. But his only other defining factor was that he was Bat**** INSANE. If you haven't noticed the leaders tend to be competent.
Henry V
Ok, if you REALLY want a guy who was famous for winning one battle and then died, go right ahead. But that was all he did...

My personal choices would be:
Gladsotne/Disraeli (for the Empire, leaning towards Disraeli because he was slightly less boring)
Churchill (Only if you want to emphasis the whole 'British Stubborness', he would have to come with an ability like that, perhaps making English cities much harder to subjugate)
Lloyd George (He was Welsh. And he was a womaniser. And he was at the Treaty of Versailles. 'Nuff said)
And if you really want a Military-Minded guy:
Oliver Cromwell (Britain's first, and arugably only, Military dictator)

Oh, and for pity's sake, just change the name to Britain.

Why not Henry VII? Leading BRITAIN. Maybe Pitt the Younger?

 

[Aramel]

Rome
Gaius Miriam (senator responsible for the Roman Legion we know today, and did away with the old system)

You mean perhaps Gaius Marius?

 

[candle86]

You mean perhaps Gaius Marius?

little misseplling but yes

 

[Skwink]

Rome: Julius Caesar

 

[nody]

Rome: Julius Caesar

Really? I totally expected you to say:

Rome: Skwink Caesar

 

[Mango Elephant]

I think the leader of America should be Jefferson Davis. Drag queens are super sexy.

 

[astrognash]

America needs John Adams, but only if Paul Giamatti does the dialogue.

 

[brianshapiro]

Germany -
Albrecht von Wallenstein
Yes, he was never officially the head of state of the HRE, but he had enough loyalty from his army that he could have been (and was suspected as being involved in a coup attempt by Ferdinand). He also had his own palace in Prague and ruled a duchy in Bohemia. Also, one should note that Otto von Bismarck was never officially head of state either, he was always only Chancellor to the king, though obviously he set more policy than Wallenstein. It would be as appropriate to play as him as any official leader of Germany.

Rome -
Marcus Arelius
Held the Empire and instituted reforms, right before it would eventually start to collapse. Waged a successful war with Parthia -- occupying and reconstructing Armenia.

 

[brianshapiro]

Victoria
Yeah, she may have been queen during the peak time of the Empire, but she was an incredibly bad queen to be honest. Once Albert died she never showed her face in public again- by that time in History, the monarch of England had almsot got to their current 'figurehead' status, but Victoria was bad as a figurehead as well. If we want an Empire-Era leader, take Gladstone (for goody-two-shoes factor) or Disraeli (for expansionism).

I don't think she had to be a 'good figurehead' by anyone's standards, its enough that who she was and her personality, sense of morality and standards, defined the era for a lot of people --- she at least became important as a figurehead for the people of the time. She'll be remembered far longer than other monarchs, and not because her reign just so happened to coincide with the peak of the Empire.

 

[Churchdown Yank]

Rome: Trajan

My favorite emperor