Leaders that should be there!

[Swein Forkbeard]

What leaders should be in Civ4 that aren't? I would just like to know your opinions.

 

[Dennis_Moore]

I wonder how long until Godwin's law takes effect in this topic.

 

[petepetepetep]

I'd kind of like to see Philip II or some other Spanish ruler (no, not a fascist).

He seems like a spiritual-imperialistic type of guy, though i can't remember if that's taken.

Also, Ethiopia should have like some Haile Selassie, or Menelik II, or at least someone besides Zara. I mean, come on, why Zara? Of all people.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I wonder how long until Godwin's law takes effect in this topic.

That was my first thought when I saw the thread.
Obviously Spain, Japan and the Aztecs are in dire need of more leaders.
I dunno who should lead Spain (I just know I don't want 20th century guy) but Meiji should be in for Japan.
Ther Aztecs could get Benito Juarez. He was a Mexican leaders, but this is weill in line with CIV's historical acuracy. Protective/Organized would be good. Per se a weak combo but OK with cheap sarificial altars.
I would also like to see Chosrau I for Persia. We have the first two Great Kings from the same era but no Sasanid leader.

 

[Dennis_Moore]

Yeah, there really should be a sassanid leader, since they were a significant Persian dynasty.




....and Basil II the Bulgar-slayer as a Byzantine leader.

 

[LightSpectra]

Trajan (Rome), Nebuchadnezzar II (Babylon), Muhammed Ali (Egypt), Constantine the Great (Byzantium), Taizong (China), Menelik II (Ethiopia), Akbar the Great (India), Abu Bakr and Harun al-Rashid (Arabia), Charles I (Spain), Meiji (Japan), Ivan III the Great (Russia).

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I am against Constantine. OK, he made Byzantium the new capital but still I seem him more as a Roman leader rather than a Byzantine. I consider Justinian almost too Roman.
Herakleois would be good.
He saved the Byzantine Empire from falling to Persia and was more or less responsible for the transition from a Roman to a Greek empire.

 

[AfterShafter]

I wonder how long until Godwin's law takes effect in this topic.

Now that you've brought it up, all the sooner - because whether anyone likes to admit it or not, outside of economic reasons concerning sales in a certain country, and certain other concerns which have been more or less ignored with the inclusion of another particular leader, there are cases to be made for the inclusion of a certain unmentionable individual in the game.

I've no interest in making such cases though, so I'll leave it for someone who cares one way or another on the issue

What I'd kind of like to see is a Pope in there, maybe even a Catholic nation... Technically they have their own country sitting in the heart of Rome and the leaders of said country have been some of the most influential men in European history. It would be a bit of an oddity (the Taoist Catholics?) and historically untrue, but eh, since when was Gandhi the sovereign ruler of India? As for which Pope, I have no earthly idea. Just a thought for a ruler/Civ.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

This is already covered by the Apostolic Palace. No need for a leader/civ.

 

[AfterShafter]

This is already covered by the Apostolic Palace. No need for a leader/civ.

Eh, there is a tech for monarchy but the game includes many individual monarchs. There is a State Property civic, but there are Communist leaders in the game. There's Pacificism as a religious Civic, but we still have Buddhism and Taoism as religions. Plenty of things in this game get "covered" in multiple ways.

What's more, the Apostolic Palace does not "cover" the things which the Popes did as leaders, it just represents the general form of their organization... It's a generalized gameplay mechanic. I might add, if they do include "leaders" like Gandhi, there is a lot of elbow room for what is "proper" in Civ.

Besides, since when is a Civ being there about whether it needs to be? I didn't see the game falling apart before the Koreans got an empire, but eh, he's fun to play.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

You are right: Civ is not about what needs to be or what was, but it is about what might have been
And for me Stalin kicking off a holy war of all Confucian countries against a Hindu heathen is already a sufficient representation of the pope in the game.

 

[JKWSN]

The idea of a pope as a leader is interesting, but, correct me if I am wrong, didn't the popes play more of a secondary role in ruling Europe (except the Papal States) by crowning Kings and the like to rule territory? Would you propose that the Pope (who ever it may be) be a ruler for the Holy Roman Empire or some other Civ?

And more to the point: is the Pope currently playing OCC?


The idea is interesting, but I think it would be too much for me to handle if I saw a Confucian Pope. This would have be a custom mod as Firaxis seems a little squeemish (and perhaps rightly so) with religions in game.

 

[SenhorDaGuerra]

D. Afonso Henriques for Portugal.
Don Quixote for Spain (for sh*ts and giggles.)

 

[intj_rational]

Tang Tai Zong (China)
Meiji (Japan)