leaders for the the next ex pack

Bongo-Bongo said:
Personally, I see no reason to add extra leaders to England, Russia, Egypt, America, Rome, Germany, France, India, China and the Mongols. They've all got two, and in England and Russias case, three, so it would make much more sense to add to the civs with only one to add some variety to them.
Agreed:goodjob:
 
se7en said:
nasser for egypt

Ah, nice.

How about Moses and Israel?

For US... Lincoln, I also like the Eisenhower nomination.

Mexico ... Porfirio Diaz or Benito Juarez

Hawaii... Queen Lili

South Africa.... Nelson Mandela

Iran... The Shah and the Ayotollah Khomeni
 
America

John F. Kennedy
Woodrow Wilson
Abraham Lincoln
Thomas Jefferson

Arabia

Take out Saladin, not actually Arabic (a Seljuk Turk to be precise)
Abu Bakr
Muhammad
Omar
Usman

Aztec

Replace Montezuma (II) with Montezuma I.

England

Henry VII

France

Charles de Gaulle

Rome

Trajan
Constantine

Greece

Pericles
Draco

Persia

Xerxes
Darius

Ottomans

Suleyman

Spain

Philip II
Charles V

Germany

Barbarossa
Adolf Hitler

Russia

Vladimir Lenin
Ivan "Moneybags"

Carthage

Dido

Egpyt

Cleopatra
Ptomely


I'm positive I'm forgetting some leaders, I'll add them to this post later.
 
Native American Leader: Tecumseh
 
(listing according to preference)
America: Lincoln, Kennedy, Nixon
Arabia: Harun al-Rashid, Abu Bakr, Caliph Omar, Abd ar-Rahman
Aztec: none in particular
China: Wu Di (Han dynasty), Wu Zhao (Tang Dynasty), Taizong (Tang Dynasty), Sun Yat-Sen.
Egypt: Cleopatra, Nasser (could also be Arab), Thutmose III, Ptolemy I
England: none in particular
France: Joan of Arc, Charlemagne
Germany: Barbarossa, Otto I, Hitler
Greece: Pericles, Agamemnon
Inca: Pachacuti, Topa Inca
India: Akbar, Chandragupta (Gupta dynasty), Shah Jahan
Japan: Emperor Meiji, Empress Suiko, Oda Nobunaga
Mali: Sundiata Keita
Mongolia: Ogadei Khan
Persia: Darius I, Xerxes, Shapur I (or II), Khosrau I (or II), Abbas the Great, Timur, Nadir Shah
Rome: Constantine, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius
Russia: Ivan IV, Alexander Nevsky, Lenin
Spain: Philip II
Carthage: Dido, Hamilcar (father of Hannibal), Hanno the Great
Celts: Boadicea, Vercingetorix
Korea: Sejong the Great
Ottoman: Suleyman, Osman
Viking: Canute the Great
Zulu: Cetshwayo
 
Charlemagne will never be a leader in this game, because he was not French, nor German, he was Frankish. His descendants founded both Germany and France. His capital was Aachen, in present-day Germany. You may think of him as "French" but he is too in-the-middle to accurately belong to either civ. However making a Frankish civ would be redundant.

If people think all of the leaders they mentioned will be in the game, they've got their head in the clouds. The only ones I can see realistically being added are Lincoln (since he was in the three previous installments and, in my opinion, is more worthy of a slot than FDR), Abu Bakr, Pericles, Darius/Xerxes and Meiji.
 
Is R. Reagan really thought of as a great president in the US ? :confused:
 
If the Dutch aren't included we take back parts of Asia and New York and once more rule the oceans. :)
 
kristopherb said:
jamesI for england
james III for scotland

Never, ever mix up England and Scotland. We are NOT the same nation and you'll really piss off the Scots in particular... (I'm English)
 
none that have existed!
...

(unplayable) Great Barbarian: especially with games with large/huge maps, some continents can be populated with many barbarian cities.
…If more than, say, 4 barbarian cities are created in a continent, and your civ is in contact with one of those cities, a diplomacy screen exists with a Great Barbarian
…no civic proposal, no goods proposal, no treaty except cease fire (no Peace Treaties)
…can only be bribed with gold or a military technology (no growth, no economic or scientific) or military units or cities
…can propose slaves (workers), maps and cities for sale and at high price (for just giving the feeling that it is better to destroy them than deal with them!).
… they can also propose skilled explorers for hire. (Explorers are modified for being invisible to Barbarians, as otherwise they are too easily killed and pointless, especially in large maps where Barbarians are quickly way too strong for Explorers)
…The Great Barbarian can NOT be contacted at will via diplomacy screen, he/she (walkiry) contacts you when he/she feels the needs, and only when you have a unit against a Barbarian cities (barbarian units in the wild are just illiterates…). Especially useful on large/huge maps and marathon play!!

OPEN leader: a generic leader, available in Custom Games only, with Sid or Soren’s face or a female pretty-but-tough face (!), and you choose the associations (philo, aggress, fin, cult, etc…) AND the starting 2 tecs.
…Other specifications are taken randomly from another civ (special building/unit, color) at game start, or can be also choosen by player (in this case, take the whole civ spec: special unit+color+civ name+city names).
…For choosing this customized leader, game difficulty can NOT be less than Monarch (or perhaps Emperor)! This allows what-if games, and test the highest challenges for those who can not do it with a normal game (99% of us??...)
 
neferator said:
Never, ever mix up England and Scotland. We are NOT the same nation and you'll really piss off the Scots in particular... (I'm English)
he teckinkly founded the british nation
 
I think that could be a great idea make a character like Charles V of Germany and I of Spain. This is a leader that could be in two civs, and its interesting that the two civs could select it to play.

For Greece i want or Licurgo (the spartan) or Pericles.

France with Charlemagne or Clodoveo (The first frank king)

Cartage could have Asdrubal.

Arabs Abu Bakr or Harun al-Rashid (who inspired The Book of One Thousand and One Nights)
 
kristopherb said:
he teckinkly founded the british nation

What the heck are you on about? The UK was created in 1707 and and King James III lived quite a while before that (King James I of England was James VI of Scotland, and he lived in the early 1600s!)

Also, Britain and England are NOT the same thing, thank you very much.
 
The British/Britain/scot argument is a bit off topic and acid don't you think?
If you like to discuss those internal/epidermic matters, at least add something constructive to this thread and present a list of Scot, Welsh, Irish, etc leaders...
 
It's a simple mis-understanding over the numbers, it was listed as James I/III & as has been pointed out it's James I/VI.
Why you'd want him as a leader since the Stuarts (James I & II & Charles I & II) were pretty useless, Charles I & James II were both kicked out.
 
Back
Top Bottom