In your opinion, do VI's leader bonuses portend the addition of alternate leaders?

We gettin mutiple leaders?

  • Yes

    Votes: 83 50.0%

  • No

    Votes: 45 27.1%

  • Switzerland

    Votes: 38 22.9%
  • Total voters
    166
  • Poll closed .
If I were to choose between multiple leaders and new civilizations, it is obvious I would choose new civilizations - like most people probably.

Though, some people say that Deluxe edition suggests we are getting multiple leaders, though. And this would be great. Some civilizations should have muliple leaders including the traditional ones from the past games that many people would be angry if they missed, and something new, alternative, and fresh at the same time for people who might be a bit bored with them.

It is the 25th anniversary - fans need to be appreciated and spoiled to the maximum! And Firaxis needs to get even richer :)
 
darko82 said:
If I were to choose between multiple leaders and new civilizations, it is obvious I would choose new civilizations - like most people probably.

Deluxe edition suggests we are getting multiple leaders, though. And this is great. Some civilizations should have muliple leaders including the traditional ones from the past games that many people would be angry if they missed, and something new, alternative, and fresh at the same time for people who might be a bit bored with them.

It is the 25th anniversary - fans need to be appreciated and spoiled to the maximum!
Click to expand...

Multiple leaders are a reasonable vehicle for adding in new civs. Take Germany & India for instance. By adding Widukind & Shah Jahan as alternate leaders for those civs, both Saxony & the Mughals have representation in the game.
 
moysturfurmer said:
Multiple leaders are a reasonable vehicle for adding in new civs. Take Germany & India for instance. By adding Widukind & Shah Jahan as alternate leaders for those civs, both Saxony & the Mughals have representation in the game.
Click to expand...
This is exactly the way I'd want multiple leaders to be used (if for some reason they don't want an actual Mughals civ). I'd be happy with that, but I really don't feel much desire to have 3 America leaders that ruled the same nation 70 years apart. (Okay. I might be kind of thrilled with Benjamin Franklin just because that could be cool.)
 
Yeah, but Ed Beach said they had to do agendas for 18 leaders, so don't expect it in the base game.
 
I'd love it if the first DLC was a second, alternate leader for every civ. That's probably less work than adding 18 new civs, but increases variety by a lot.

Greeks: Pericles or Alexander
Russia: Peter or Catherine
France: Napoleon or Louis
America: Roosevelt or Washington

Pretty easy to find new options that would play very differently.
 
ftl said:
I'd love it if the first DLC was a second, alternate leader for every civ. That's probably less work than adding 18 new civs, but increases variety by a lot.

Greeks: Pericles or Alexander
Russia: Peter or Catherine
France: Napoleon or Louis
America: Roosevelt or Washington

Pretty easy to find new options that would play very differently.
Click to expand...

Are you also prepared for the first DLC to cost $30 and not be included in the Deluxe Edition? ;) Overall I don't want alternate leaders, but I'd make a few exceptions: I'd love to see Akhenaten for Egypt, and I wouldn't mind seeing a real leader (like Shah Jahan) for India. And if we do get stuck with Napoleon, I'd like to see Louis XIV.
 
Since the majority of the cost of creating a new civilization is in the leader art and voiceovers, I think you'd get a lot more gameplay from a number of new civilizations than you would from the same number of the same number of alternate leaders to the existing civilizations, for more or less the same cost. But there's no way you're getting 18 of either in a single expansion.

Zaarin said:
I'd love to see Akhenaten for Egypt, and I wouldn't mind seeing a real leader (like Shah Jahan) for India.
Click to expand...
Why Akhenaten? His chief accomplishment was to rule so badly that he was overthrown. I can see his leader characteristics now:

Leader Ability: "I worship the Aten" -- When Egypt founds a new religion, Akhenaten must raze his capital and build a new one 10 tiles away.
Historical Agenda: "You can be my Yoko Ono" -- Akhenaten changes his victory goal every 30 turns (being constantly henpecked by his priestess girlfriend Nefertiti).
 
I don't think having a massive DLC to add an extra leader to every civ would be the way to go. I think it would be better to just release one new leader every now and then, for less than the price of a full civ. And the full expansions should take a page from Civ IV's expansions and add mostly new civs with a few additional leaders for existing civs thrown in.

I'm not sure that every single civ needs alternate leaders, to be honest. (At least, not from the official development team. If multi-leader civs really are a thing in this one, I'm sure the modding community will put out lots of options for each civ in time, and I'll probably grab a lot of them just for the variety.) As much as I want multi-leader civs, the main concern should be whether the additional leader plays differently enough from the main leader that it's worth including both.

There are lots of pharaohs to choose from who would have drastically different agendas and bonuses from Cleopatra, so one or two additional Egyptian leaders are definitely in order. Similarly, there are a lot of Indian leaders who would play differently from Gandhi, Louis XIV would play differently from Napoleon, and Washington or Lincoln would play differently from TR. But what additional leader for the Aztecs would be all that distinct from Montezuma? Internally, he was disliked by his subjects because he was more heavy-handed than previous rulers, but I'm not sure his agendas and foreign policies were all that different. Would running across Itzcoatl or Montezuma I as a rival civ really be significantly distinct from running across Montezuma II?
 
To tell you the truth, there won't be any additional leaders released, to my mind. I mean, you can have a whole new civilizations for the same price. Which is better? Of course, new civilizations, which also include new leaders, new units, buildings and everything else...
 
AriochIV said:
Since the majority of the cost of creating a new civilization is in the leader art and voiceovers, I think you'd get a lot more gameplay from a number of new civilizations than you would from the same number of the same number of alternate leaders to the existing civilizations, for more or less the same cost. But there's no way you're getting 18 of either in a single expansion.


Why Akhenaten? His chief accomplishment was to rule so badly that he was overthrown. I can see his leader characteristics now:

Leader Ability: "I worship the Aten" -- When Egypt founds a new religion, Akhenaten must raze his capital and build a new one 10 tiles away.
Historical Agenda: "You can be my Yoko Ono" -- Akhenaten changes his victory goal every 30 turns (being constantly henpecked by his priestess girlfriend Nefertiti).
Click to expand...

I don't think Akhenaten can be called a bad leader simply because his successors chose to blot out his memory (the expected result for a "heretic king") nor because his declining years seem to have been marked by grief and bad health. Akhenaten managed to bring about colossal social, religious, and cultural reform in an extraordinarily conservative and change-resistant society; that those reforms did not outlive him by many years only underscores how remarkable it was that he made them in the first place--and is perhaps more telling of the weakness of Tutankhamun than the failure of Akhenaten's policies. On top of that, there's no denying that he's the second biggest drama queen in Egyptian history (after Cleopatra), and that seems to be the kind of leader Firaxis is going for. As for Nefertiti, she seems to have been a powerful woman, almost certainly Akhenaten's co-regent for much of his reign and very probably his successor Neferneferuaten.
 
Zaarin said:
I don't think Akhenaten can be called a bad leader simply because his successors chose to blot out his memory (the expected result for a "heretic king") nor because his declining years seem to have been marked by grief and bad health. Akhenaten managed to bring about colossal social, religious, and cultural reform in an extraordinarily conservative and change-resistant society; that those reforms did not outlive him by many years only underscores how remarkable it was that he made them in the first place--and is perhaps more telling of the weakness of Tutankhamun than the failure of Akhenaten's policies.
Click to expand...
When a king's changes are undone the moment he dies, that's a sign that they weren't done well. I'm going off vague memory, but aside from his alienation of the Amun-Ra priesthood, wasn't one of the other problems that his building of a new capital bankrupted the kingdom?

Zaarin said:
On top of that, there's no denying that he's the second biggest drama queen in Egyptian history (after Cleopatra), and that seems to be the kind of leader Firaxis is going for. As for Nefertiti, she seems to have been a powerful woman, almost certainly Akhenaten's co-regent for much of his reign and very probably his successor Neferneferuaten.
Click to expand...
I'd argue that Yoko... er, I mean Nefertiti would make a more interesting choice, but I don't think we need two female Egyptian leaders.
 
I'd rather have Firaxis working on civs and leave the multiplying of leaders to the modders... I very much prefer having complete civs from developer-sides.
If they come in an AddOn I'd be fine, though... ;)
 
No, definitely not at launch and pretty unlikely post launch. The fundamental issue of time vs reward for leaders as opposed to extra civs hasn't been changed at all. Leaders are still a significant majority of the work for each civ, so why add more leaders when you could add more civs, which are more exciting and will sell better?
 
AriochIV said:
When a king's changes are undone the moment he dies, that's a sign that they weren't done well. I'm going off vague memory, but aside from his alienation of the Amun-Ra priesthood, wasn't one of the other problems that his building of a new capital bankrupted the kingdom?
Click to expand...

I think that's more of a result of poor management late in Akhenaten's reign, when the pharaoh was in poor health and much withdrawn from public affairs.

I'd argue that Yoko... er, I mean Nefertiti would make a more interesting choice, but I don't think we need two female Egyptian leaders.
Click to expand...

I agree, Nefertiti would make a fantastic ruler, arguably a better choice of consort than, say, Theodora. I would have blithely taken Nefertiti over the Drama Queen of the Nile. ;)
 
m15a said:
This is exactly the way I'd want multiple leaders to be used (if for some reason they don't want an actual Mughals civ). I'd be happy with that, but I really don't feel much desire to have 3 America leaders that ruled the same nation 70 years apart. (Okay. I might be kind of thrilled with Benjamin Franklin just because that could be cool.)
Click to expand...

Ben Franklin wasn't a President... lol
 
Well, he was a "founding father," and, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who has appeared on U.S. money should be eligible. That would include Alexander Hamilton, Salmon Chase, both Lewis and Clark, Susan B. Anthony, Sacagewea, the Goddess of Liberty from the Liberty head nickel (if Dido can be in the game, so can she) and the Native American from the Buffalo nickel (I would not make the buffalo eligible).
 
Browd said:
Well, he was a "founding father," and, as far as I'm concerned, anyone who has appeared on U.S. money should be eligible. That would include Alexander Hamilton, Salmon Chase, both Lewis and Clark, Susan B. Anthony, Sacagewea, the Goddess of Liberty from the Liberty head nickel (if Dido can be in the game, so can she) and the Native American from the Buffalo nickel (I would not make the buffalo eligible).
Click to expand...

Give it 20 years and we'll have former first lady Kim Kardashian-West on the dollar.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom