"Less Popular" Leader Elimination Thread

[Zaarin]

Menawa (Creek) 18 I think Menawa is actually a somewhat interesting character in history. However, he did only lead the Red Sticks faction of the Creek, and while Vercingetorix shows that a failing rebellion can still qualify one to be a Civilization leader, the Creek have other options they could go for, while Vercingetorix is one of if not the only good leaders for the Celts or Gauls. As mentioned above I don't really dislike any of the options left, but I think they out-prioritize Menawa.

Who, then? William McIntosh is the most obvious choice, but McIntosh was a blatant sellout who wantonly traded Creek land and sovereignty for his own enrichment. Choosing McIntosh as the only Native American leader in the game would be a bigger slap in the face than Mvemba is for Africa. IMO a leader of the Creek pretty much has to be a Red Stick, either Menawa or Opothleyahola. In that respect, the Chickasaw might be a better option for Southeastern tribes: Tishomingo might be less interesting than Menawa or Opothleyahola, but he'd be less controversial than William McIntosh. Pushmataha of the Choctaw would also work.

 

[Guandao]

Akhenaten 13
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 24
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) (16-3)=13 Would I be pleased to see Coolidge as the second American leader? Definitely not...he's also too close in era to Teddy Roosevelt, and probably have no spoken dialogue
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 17
Hezekiah (Judah) 20
Menawa (Creek) (18+1)=19 No thank you to sell-out McIntosh
Napoleon III (France) 22
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 22
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21

 

[Morningcalm]

Akhenaten 13 - 3 = 10 (For reasons cited on other pages, including his agenda duplicating agendas already in the game. Egypt was polytheistic pre-Akhenaten. The "trauma" caused by Akhenaten's Atenism banning worship of the many other Egyptian gods meant that shortly after Akhenaten, his general, vizier and son dismantled his legacy and returned Egypt to the way it was before.)
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 24
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 17
Hezekiah (Judah) 20 + 1 = 21 (One of the more distinctive leaders on this list, with a unique and well-attested history. Defying Sennacherib's Assyrian Empire is a worthy feat of this alliance-building, defensive leader.)
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 22
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 22
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21

 

[AnonymousSpeed]

Who, then?

Well, you mentioned some just now, and there's also Alexander McGillivray, I guess. Rather than play this off coolly though I'll go ahead and admit that I actually just confused the Creek and the Cree, and I only know about McGillivray because I googled "Creek Leaders" and he was the first thing that came up.

For reasons cited on other pages, including his agenda duplicating agendas already in the game.

I don't think you couldn't do something with a Tin Hinan leader-

You could do some interesting psychoanalytics here.

Calvin Coolidge (America) (16-3)=13 Would I be pleased to see Coolidge as the second American leader? Definitely not...he's also too close in era to Teddy Roosevelt, and probably have no spoken dialogue

Also this is actually funny, have a lollipop.

Er, well...a slice of bread.

Akhenaten 10
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21 Sorry Kimiimaro, but I can't let Alexios run away with this one just yet. We have to keep things reasonably level until MorningCalm and Zaarin move on from Akhenaten, at which point the real competition will begin.
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13 I'll take another break from Aurangzeb to stick up for Silent Cal. I will admit something about Coolidge though: I never actually got around to reading his biography. However, what I know of his convictions and his demeanor, I like him.
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 17
Hezekiah (Judah) 21
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 22
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 22
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21

I was considering upvoting Akhentaten, but I didn't want to start a deadlock of Siptah, Zaarin and me upvoting him and then MorningCalm downvoting him, letting Guando and Kimiimari have all the fun.

 

[Zaarin]

Well, you mentioned some just now, and there's also Alexander McGillivray, I guess. Rather than play this off coolly though I'll go ahead and admit that I actually just confused the Creek and the Cree, and I only know about McGillivray because I googled "Creek Leaders" and he was the first thing that came up.

Unfortunately, McGillivray, while not as bad as McIntosh, has the same issue. However, the more I think about it the more attractive I find the idea of Pushmataha and the Choctaw. Pushmataha definitely has more personality than Tishomingo, and while the Choctaw can't be connected to a specific mound site the way the Chickasaw can they most certainly did come from one (or more than one), probably Nanih Waiya among others.

 

[Zaarin]

Akhenaten 10
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13 -- I don't want him in Civ6 because he'd too close to TR, but I'd love to see him in Civ7. He was a great president, and his terseness could be enormously entertaining.
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 14 (17 - 3) -- I'd rather see a Plantagenet; I'd like to see Wessex presented as a separate civ led by Alfred the Great. Either way, Edward the Confessor doesn't fit.
Hezekiah (Judah) 21
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 22
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23 (22 + 1) -- Regal, cunning, charismatic, and a chance for an alternative to the Iroquois' diplomatic Native American civ niche.
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21

 

[Siptah]

Akhenaten 10
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 14
Hezekiah (Judah) 18 (21-3) same as before, civ - bla bla bla, other leaders - bla bla bla. By far the worst option on the list imho. I wish I could down vote some else again.
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23 (22+1) France would be very different today without him and what is typically French would be viewed different as well. I mean, can you imagine Paris without his changes? The fin de siècle without his work before? He could have interesting agendas as well (as long as they don't focus on his early reign).
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21

 

[Kimiimaro]

Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21 Sorry Kimiimaro, but I can't let Alexios run away with this one just yet. We have to keep things reasonably level until MorningCalm and Zaarin move on from Akhenaten, at which point the real competition will begin.

Run away? Heh, if you haven't seen Adam Smith's score in the "Great Merchant Elimination Thread", then you don't know what does "running away with the prize" even mean.

Akhenaten 10
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18
Edward the Confessor (England) 14-3=11 - I'm not interested in seeing him as an alternate English leader. If there is a need for an Anglo-Saxon king of England, then Alfred the Great is the best choice.
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 21+1=22 - On the other way, I'm quite interested in seeing him as an alternate Chinese leader. Yongle Encyclopedia would make an interesting bonus.

 

[Phrozen]

Akhenaten 10
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 13 +1 = 14. Would bring variety being much more serious and terse than the bombastic leaders currently in Civ VI. When it comes to governance doing nothing usually brings a better outcome than doing something. Also, last true federalist as a President.
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 18 -3 = 15. If Hungry is going to be in the game than Matthias Corvinus and his Black Army would be a much more suitable choice.
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 22

 

[Morningcalm]

Akhenaten 10 - 3 = 7 (Hated in his lifetime, with an actual Damnatio Memoriae performed against him via ancient Egyptian execration texts. As the Ancient Encyclopedia states, "In the case of Akhenaten, the execration text took the physical form of completely eradicating his memory from history. He had inscribed his name and that of his god at the Temple of Amun at Karnak; these were erased. He had erected other monuments and temples elsewhere; these were torn down. He had replaced the name of Amun at the Temple of Hatshepsut with the name of Aten; this was changed back. He had built a grand city on the banks of the Nile surrounded by inscriptions which told the story of its building, its builder, and his god; this was razed to the ground." Also, this choice tidbit: "The lives of his people, trade contracts and alliances with foreign powers, as well as maintenance of the country’s infrastructure and military, all seem to have become secondary concerns to his religious devotions. The religious reforms he instituted would not last beyond his death." Akhenaten might belong in some computer game in the future, but most decidedly not Civ, which is all about interaction with foreign powers.)
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 18 + 1 = 19 (Definitely not the worst leader on this list. He of the House of David was not reviled by his people, and had numerous accomplishments whereby he elevated Judah from a kingdom to an important power player between Assyria and Egypt. As a religious reformer who successfully defended his capital from the Assyrian Empire, he also increased Judah's defensive and military power, as well as having boosted its diplomatic footprint, with an Egyptian-Judah alliance and overtures to Babylon and other states. An excellent archaeological and biblical record of Hezekiah's life exists, whereas Josiah (of whom Siptah is so fond), can only be found in biblical record, not historical record.)
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 18
Yongle Emperor (China) 22

 

[Guandao]

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 21
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 23
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) (18+1)=19 Although his resistance failed, he's the first Gallic leader that comes to my mind. If we want to split up the Celts, he can be the leader of Gaul. I don't care too much about either Brennus as a leader since we barely know much about them except for their sacking of Delphi/Rome.
Yongle Emperor (China) (22-3)=19 I couldn't resist , he's just not my first choice for a Chinese alt ruler, and I don't find the Ming Dynasty that interesting. Plus his personality would be similar to Qin Shi Huang.

 

[Zaarin]

Yongle Emperor (China) (22-3)=19 I couldn't resist , he's just not my first choice for a Chinese alt ruler, and I don't find the Ming Dynasty that interesting. Plus his personality would be similar to Qin Shi Huang.

He's not my first choice either, but I don't think he'd be all that similar to Qin--certainly not compared to, say, Wu of Han. Yongle was absolutely brutal in seizing power, but once he had it he didn't display the casual brutality of Qin. He also lavished gifts on Tibet and Buddhist monasteries. However, his game stats might be similar, given that he was chiefly known for constructing the Forbidden Palace. That being said, one could also use his Yongle Encyclopedia to give him more bonuses to science (because China needs them ) and an agenda based around liking civs who are behind him on the tech tree. (But I personally would prefer a Tang emperor, either Wu Zetian or Taizong.)

 

[Zaarin]

Akhenaten 7 -- Such strong feelings about a man 3,000 years dead.
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 22 (21 + 1) -- My personal choice for Byzantium: a great ruler and one who would distance Byzantium from both Greece and Rome.
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 20 (23 - 3) -- I'd prefer Shah Jahan or Akbar.
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 19
Yongle Emperor (China) 19

 

[Siptah]

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 22
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 17 (20-3) I have to agree with Zaarin. Akbar is such a good choice that I won't consider any other Mughal rulers until he appeared at least once.
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 20 (19+1) Downvoted him before and am still ambivalent. But Guandao is right, he is the first that comes to mind appearing in the two things we all read and know about the Gauls: Commentarii de Bello Gallico and Asterix. That's enough reason for an upvote this time. (And if you don't know the two, why would you even want to include the Gauls?)
Yongle Emperor (China) 19

 

[Kimiimaro]

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 22
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 17-3=14 - He was a maybe a good conqueror, but a bad leader. Extremely religiously intolerant. Banned music, theatre and dance. He had to fight against the rebels during his entire reign. Also, the costs of his giant army ruined the Mughal economy.
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 11
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 20
Yongle Emperor 19+1=20 - I think he is a worthy choice to be an alternative Chinese leader.

 

[Zaarin]

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 22
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 14
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 8 (11 - 3) -- I think he'd be interesting, but I'd prefer Alfred the Great or a Plantagenet.
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 21 (20 + 1) -- Lugus save us from the return of dreadlocked, woad-tattooed, Welsh-speaking, kilt-wearing, ceilidh-throwing Boudica in Edinburgh. And the unknown Brennus isn't much better.
Yongle Emperor 20

 

[AnonymousSpeed]

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 22
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 15
Despite accusations of Aurangzeb destroying the Mughals with his religious intolerance and wars, most of this is untrue or, in my opinion, deserves to be looked at differently. Firstly, it was under Aurangzeb that Hindus made up the largest part of the Mughal bureaucracy. The total number of temples he destroyed was a mere 15, and according to Ian Copland more were built under his administration than destroyed. It's also not like he went around destroying temples just for fun, the temples he destroyed where centers of political conspiracies against him, and he was equally willing to destroy Mosques harboring the same sorts of plots. Temples where not just important religious centers, but also political ones, which they have been for most of history, because religion and politics strongly impact each other even in secular governments.
Also, many of actually discriminatory legal reforms weren't just because he was a jerk; Aurangzeb brought 500 Muslim scholars from across the world to India in order to create a system of law based on Sharia law. Some of his bans which we would see as excessive, like against music, drinking, and certain forms of dancing, were because they were deplorable to his religion. While I don't think we have to agree with his reforms and it does contradict his claim to be secular made when criticized for all the Hindus in his government, I think it's also a bit obnoxious to say Aurangzeb was a radical bigot because he wanted his country to be more in line with what he thought was a supreme order desired by the omnibenevolent creator of the universe.
And yes, Aurangzeb exhausted his treasury fighting rebellions, but he wasn't fighting those rebellions because people where all of the sudden mad about his intolerance, it was the result of long running and deep seeded Hindu nationalism which was inevitable due to the Mughals being an Muslim aristocracy over a Hindu populace. It's also not like he bankrupted a rich country, his predecessors had also done their fair share to keep the treasury empty with their own conquests and extravagant lifestyles and building projects. Aurangzeb ended much of this excess, perhaps out of prudence but also probably out of piety.
And let's talk for a moment about his actually pious Aurangzeb was. He promoted Islamic calligraphy, had many Mosques built, based his administration's laws on the ones he felt where correct because of his religion, etc. I respect that about him, even though I'm not a Muslim. Meanwhile, the more popular Akbar (who sucks) was just as brutal a conqueror as Aurangzeb, so hardly enlightened, and the religious plurality he was famed for is largely believed to be so he could depower the Muslim aristocrats who'd be upset when he tried to pass himself off as partially divine, which is problematic when the beliefs of those people are strongly based on the idea of their being only one actual God. Also, Akbar had some questionable scientific ethics, like locking a bunch of children in a room and letting no one speak to them to discover the natural language of man kind. Certainly it's something we're all curious about, but useful? No, decidedly not, especially given the cost in human rights violations. Aurangzeb had some of his opponents executed, sure, but not really that many of them, like, five, which is a pretty small drop compared to the actual wars he and Akbar waged, so we can't really say Akbar was more humane that Aurangzeb.
Calvin Coolidge (America) 14
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 8
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 16 Again, I like him, but not as much as the other options.
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 21
Yongle Emperor 20

Akhenaten might belong in some computer game in the future, but most decidedly not Civ, which is all about interaction with foreign powers.

I would disagree with you there, I don't think interacting with foreign powers is really a key part of the "pitch" of civ even if its a constant part of the gameplay. Ultimately you're in competition with them, the war and not the trade is what you'd tell people about the games. The real pitch is about taking control of famous figures throughout history, and while Civilization has generally chosen leaders more agreed on to be successful, Civ6 is an excellent oppurtunity to go with people who are simply interesting, and I don't think you could argue Akhenaten isn't an interesting part of world history. Besides, plenty of isolationist leaders of Japan have been featured and no one complained.

 

[Siptah]

Also, Akbar had some questionable scientific ethics, like locking a bunch of children in a room and letting no one speak to them to discover the natural language of man kind. Certainly it's something we're all curious about, but useful? No, decidedly not, especially given the cost in human rights violations.

I didn't know Akbar did this, too. It was done by some other rulers throughout history as well. Most famous is probably Amasis (or was it Psamtik?), as told by Herodot. He found out that the language is phrygian. What did Akbar find out? And while I'm not a big fan of the experiment, I think if you start looking for human rights violation in history....

Akhenaten 7
Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 23 (22+1) as I said before
Atahualpa (Inca) 22
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 15
Calvin Coolidge (America) 11 (14-3) Not a bad choice per se, and a fresh one. But I think he is too close to Teddy in time.
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Edward the Confessor (England) 8
Hezekiah (Judah) 19
Menawa (Creek) 16
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 23
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 21
Yongle Emperor 20

 

[Morningcalm]

I would disagree with you there, I don't think interacting with foreign powers is really a key part of the "pitch" of civ even if its a constant part of the gameplay. Ultimately you're in competition with them, the war and not the trade is what you'd tell people about the games. The real pitch is about taking control of famous figures throughout history, and while Civilization has generally chosen leaders more agreed on to be successful, Civ6 is an excellent oppurtunity to go with people who are simply interesting, and I don't think you could argue Akhenaten isn't an interesting part of world history. Besides, plenty of isolationist leaders of Japan have been featured and no one complained.

Nero was interesting. Hitler was interesting. There are plenty of bad leaders who were "interesting". Akhenaten is one of them (due to his neglect of military, taxation and foreign affairs, and the degree to which he abandoned them in favor of selfish self-aggrandizement). If Akhenaten appeared in Civ he would be far more isolationist (and disinterested) than Tokugawa Ieyasu, to whom I am guessing you refer to. By the way, Ieyasu was not isolationist--he simply preferred to limit western influence to a minor degree, but still granted trade rights, consulted foreigners, etc. Akhenaten pretty much neglected foreign affairs. By the way, it was Ieyasu's descendants who began Japan's true isolation (until Perry). Ieyasu was not isolationist.

 

[Zaarin]

I didn't know Akbar did this, too. It was done by some other rulers throughout history as well. Most famous is probably Amasis (or was it Psamtik?), as told by Herodot. He found out that the language is phrygian. What did Akbar find out? And while I'm not a big fan of the experiment, I think if you start looking for human rights violation in history....

I imagine he found that children who aren't taught a language develop no language. Astonishing.

Nero was interesting. Hitler was interesting. There are plenty of bad leaders who were "interesting". Akhenaten is one of them (due to his neglect of military, taxation and foreign affairs, and the degree to which he abandoned them in favor of selfish self-aggrandizement). If Akhenaten appeared in Civ he would be far more isolationist (and disinterested) than Tokugawa Ieyasu, to whom I am guessing you refer to. By the way, Ieyasu wasn't isolationist at all--that was the stance of his descendants.

I'd just like to point out that unlike Nero and Hitler, Akhenaten wasn't guilty of mass murder...I'd also point out that "selfish self-aggrandizement" is the central tenet of the Egyptian pharaoh's playbook. Did you think Ramesses II created hundreds of monuments of himself because he was very, very humble? Egyptian theology taught that the soul was immortal so long as it was remembered; Egypt wasn't ruled by Buddhist monks seeking enlightenment.