Leaders that shouldn't be there!

Taizong was a better leader than both Mao (who won a war, and then proceeded to become the most evil man to ever live) and Qin Shi Huang (the unification of China was mostly a result of Bai Qi's genius, not his own).

To put it mildly, he was a crap leader. He was hated by his people, I mean he was assassinated by his own brother. I know it's unlikely that people know of another Zulu leader, but he just wasn't that special.

He also transformed the Zulu from a backwater tribe in a worthless territory to an empire that ruled South Africa, and reformed the tactics of African combat from ritualistic, meaningless battles into bloodthirsty total-war.
 
I have only one thing to say about those WW2 Pearl Harbor posts after mine: that better be sarcasm (*cough dutchking *cough).

At least we have one enlightened Chinese emperor in Civ4 (except that he doen't happen to be a Chinese leader!).

I didn't know that Stalin was from Georgia! I did know that he was educated there though.

And some people are saying that Frederick should be moved to the HRE; this is like having Alexander lead the Persians.

At least all the Civ1 leaders are back!


People may be getting Frederick "Barbarossa" and Frederick II the Great (from Brandenburg) confused. The Frederick in the game is the 18th century Prussian king who fought in the 7 Years War (in America, the French and Indian War). He is not the centuries-older red-haired leader with a similar name.
 
Hmm...Well, I've read this entire thread, and I can honestly reply that Charlemange does not belong as the HRE. He wasn't apart of the HRE, Otto I is the first HRE to be officially recognized by the church. Charlemange was leader of the Frankish Empire, and a member of the Carolingian family line. Granted, his kingdom when it was later divided part of it became known as the entity HRE, part of his kingdom also became commonly known as France, and Burgundy...So, honestly how does he even qualify as a HRE emperor? On the note of Frederick or "Barbarossa" perhaps he should be a better representative of the HRE, yet ultimately he did fail to fully unite the German Princes and create a cohesive empire. If he hadn't been betrayed of course he probably would've succeeded, but that's a what if, ultimately he did fail and HRE remained a poor excuse of an empire...Neither Holy, Roman, nor an Empire.
 
There is a lot of opinion presented as fact in this thread, as well as outright ignorance.

In my opinion, Washington, Roosevelt and Lincoln are great choices for the 3 American leaders. The only one I'd add beyond them is Teddy Roosevelt. Franklin would be an interesting choice for America too.
 
BTW, Saladin shouldn't be in either, he was actually a Kurd, not an Arab. The only leader of a united "Arab" nation in all of history Abu Bakr (correct me if I'm wrong).
 
That can't be right; his capital was Damascus, and he died there of yellow fever in 1193. Saladin was actually born in Tikrit, Iraq.
 
I don't know...half of the people I talk to who don't play civ don't know who any of these people are...:crazyeye:
Leaders that shouldn't be there!
BRENNUS. Found my pick...
 
Saladin was an Egyptian sultan that managed to rule most of the Middle East through political machinations.
 
BTW, Saladin shouldn't be in either, he was actually a Kurd, not an Arab. The only leader of a united "Arab" nation in all of history Abu Bakr (correct me if I'm wrong).

Saladin was in because he managed to unite the Arab world (well, most of the Arab world) at a time when they're fighting each other and he recaptured Jeruselem for them. Most importantly however, he's in the game because he's the Muslim leader people in the West is most familiar with.

Saladin was a Kurd, so what? Cleopatra was a Greek, Catherine a German, Stalin a Georgian and Napoleon a Corsican who spoke Italian.
 
Tailless, as always, is correct. ;)
I'm still dead set on Brennus. There isn't a thing on the internet about him. No one (except firaxis) knows who he is. What did he do? Vercingtorix would've been a better choice for an original Celtic leader...
 
Tailless, as always, is correct. ;)
I'm still dead set on Brennus. There isn't a thing on the internet about him. No one (except firaxis) knows who he is. What did he do? Vercingtorix would've been a better choice for an original Celtic leader...

Brennus led the Celts in the First Sack of Rome, and that's all we know about him.
 
There is a lot of opinion presented as fact in this thread, as well as outright ignorance.

In my opinion, Washington, Roosevelt and Lincoln are great choices for the 3 American leaders. The only one I'd add beyond them is Teddy Roosevelt. Franklin would be an interesting choice for America too.

I would second your first statement. I can't second your second, though, because Franklin wasn't a president. He deserves to be a great person, his name should appear, but he's not an official US leader. Jefferson would be my substitute for that one.

To clarify: Cleopatra is actually a Macedonian, I think, descended from Ptolemy, one of Alexander's generals. However, taillesskangaru's points are still valid.
 
Well in all fairness he did double the size of the US and write the Declaration and the university he founded was one of the first in the US to offer now standard courses like agriculture and philosophy. According to Wiki anyways.
 
Back
Top Bottom