"Less Popular" Leader Elimination Thread

[Siptah]

Dear @AnonymousSpeed I think for the sake of this and other elimination threads it is the best to just ignore Morningcalm's comments and reasons for voting. I know it is very tempting to dive into the discussion because it seems always very easy to 'correct' the comment. But Moringcalm won't let go and support his views until the end, even if you bring good arguments or texts or agree to disagree. There's really no point in discussing with such people. Problem is that they like to start discussions and will try to do so at every turn. I decided to not discuss the topic further and hoped it would end with Akhenaten's elimination, but I guess it didn't. In my eyes, that person lost all credibility, but this is completely subjective.
So why not change the rules of the thread(s) and, except for score corrections, ban all posts without votes? This would maintain some more order and I think that's also how it is supposed to be. Extended discussion can always take place in the World History Forums or private messages, in the latter case it doesn't even have to be done in a civilized manner.
[I edited this text since the first draft was rather unfriendly]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 24
Atahualpa (Inca) 23 as before
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 14
Calvin Coolidge (America) 2
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Hezekiah (Judah) 17 as before
Menawa (Creek) 17
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Morningcalm]

Dear @AnonymousSpeed I think for the sake of this and other elimination threads it is the best to just ignore Morningcalm's comments and reasons for voting. I know it is very tempting to dive into the discussion because it seems always very easy to 'correct' the comment. But Moringcalm won't let go and support his views until the end, even if you bring good arguments or texts or agree to disagree. There's really no point in discussing with such people. Problem is that they like to start discussions and will try to do so at every turn. I decided to not discuss the topic further and hoped it would end with Akhenaten's elimination, but I guess it didn't. In my eyes, that person lost all credibility, but this is completely subjective.
So why not change the rules of the thread(s) and, except for score corrections, ban all posts without votes? This would maintain some more order and I think that's also how it is supposed to be. Extended discussion can always take place in the World History Forums or private messages, in the latter case it doesn't even have to be done in a civilized manner.
[I edited this text since the first draft was rather unfriendly]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 24
Atahualpa (Inca) 23 as before
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 14
Calvin Coolidge (America) 2
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Hezekiah (Judah) 17 as before
Menawa (Creek) 17
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

Dear SIptah,

Your edited draft is also unfriendly, frankly. As I will be criticizing you in this post as you have criticized me in yours, I am going to courteously address you as though it were a letter.

Firstly, I take issue with your characterization that I "lost all credibility". My disagreement with you re: Akhenaten was continuously evidenced with hyperlinks to articles and notes about scholarly views on him which were critical of Akhenaten's actions on foreign policy, military and taxation specifically. You simply ignored that point, and focused instead on his having made "reforms" on religious grounds, which did not rebut my criticism of Akhenaten on other grounds, so your implicit statement that you brought "good arguments or texts" is not applicable as regards Akhenaten's non-religious actions. If you take issue with my disagreement, that's one thing, but taking issue with my responding to others who also talk about Akhenaten is no sin, and should not be treated as such.

I will also point out that it was AnonymousSpeed who continued the discussion after Akhenaten's elimination here, not me. I simply responded to his post. I am sorry if you find this inconvenient or rude, but I will note that other posters have also out-of-turn commented or discussed outside of their 24 hour votes in elimination games.

And while you are discussing rules and such regarding this elimination game, can you please color your votes and add + and - modifiers?

Sincerely,
Morningcalm

 

[Browd]

Moderator Action: We indulge these elimination threads only as game threads. They are not intended for deeper discussion or overly contentious debate, and no one should be posting in this thread unless they are also voting in that post or correcting the vote count. In any event, this thread has, in the last several pages, displayed a degree of rancor that is unacceptable. Akhenaten is eliminated, so there is no further basis to discuss him or anyone's votes or expressed views about him. If you want to debate Akhenaten, open a thread in the World History forum.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Kimiimaro]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 24+1=25 - When his reign started, Byzantium was weak and in a horrible situation. Although he wasn't a perfect monarch, he was mostly a good leader. He stopped the decline of Byzantium, started restoration of territorries, armies and finances and at the end of his reign, Byzantium was strong and stable again.
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 14-3=11 - I prefer Akbar the Great and Shah Jahan to be the Mughal leader.
Calvin Coolidge (America) 2
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Hezekiah (Judah) 17
Menawa (Creek) 17
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Morningcalm]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 25
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 11
Calvin Coolidge (America) 2 - 3 = Eliminated (Not iconic enough, and not possessed of any key struggle in his life on the scale of those faced by Washington or Lincoln or Adams or Teddy Roosevelt or FDR)
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 15
Hezekiah (Judah) 17 + 1 = 18 (His defensive, diplomatic and religious overtures could all make for an interesting leader ability. Revered by his people and well-attested, this king created alliances against the mighty Sennacherib of Assyria, keeping the capital of Jerusalem out of his grasping hands.)
Menawa (Creek) 17
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Guandao]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 25 -
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 11
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) (15-3)=12 I prefer Matthias Corvinus as a Hungarian leader, and there are other more noteworthy medieval Hungarian Kings to choose from besides Coloman.
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) (17+1)=18 I still think he's a better leader choice for the Muscogee/Creek than William McIntosh. He wanted to maintain a lot of the traditional culture as opposed to assimilating completely into Anglo/Euro-American society.
Napoleon III (France) 23
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Zaarin]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 25
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 11
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 9 (12 - 3) -- I like him, but I can't just keep downvoting Aurangzeb every time.
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 18
Napoleon III (France) 24 (23 + 1) -- I'm not usually a fan of such late rulers (and given the choice I still want a Medieval king of France), but Louis-Napoleon modernized his country in a way that was revolutionary, despite setbacks abroad. Also it would be hilarious to have him and Bismarck in the same game.
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Manifold]

Alexander II (Russia) 21
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26 (25+1) He should be in lead
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 11
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 6 (9-3) who?
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 18
Napoleon III (France) 24
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Kimiimaro]

Alexander II (Russia) 21+1=22 - The Liberator would make a great alternate Russian leader.
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 11-3=8 - Both Akbar and Shah Jahan would make better Mughal leaders. I'm not interested in seeing him as the leader of India or Mughals.
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 6
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 18
Napoleon III (France) 24
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Guandao]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 8
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) (6-3)=3 I don't know much about Coloman's rule, but I believe there are better choices for a Hungarian ruler in Civ6.
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) (18+1)=19 He deserves a point for trying to maintain Creek cultural traditions in the face of total assimilation into Euro-American society.
Napoleon III (France) 24
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Morningcalm]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 8
Coloman the Learned (Hungary) 3 - 3 = Goodbye. There are definitely better Hungarian leaders, and shedding innocent blood is what he's known for.
Hezekiah (Judah) 18 + 1 = 19 (I would like the luxury of being able to upvote someone else, but I know Siptah will downvote him again in the future, despite Hezekiah's busy alliance-making and defensive measures)
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 24
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Siptah]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 8
Hezekiah (Judah) 16 (19-3) Well, he's the only one left who I don't want to have in the game...
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 25 (24+1) Reasons given before. And I'd like to add that I think it would be a fun choice - just imagine the leader screen...
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 24
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Zaarin]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 5 (8 - 3) -- Shah Jahan and Akbar are simply better choices for a Mughal civ.
Hezekiah (Judah) 16
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 25
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25 (24 + 1) -- Eyewitnesses who had met James I and Elizabeth I called him the equal of any European monarch in state and majesty.
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21

 

[Kimiimaro]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 5-3=2 - Not my choice to represent Mughals. Both Akbar and Shah Jahan are better choice, so why not to choose one of these two?
Hezekiah (Judah) 16
Menawa (Creek) 19
Napoleon III (France) 25
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 21+1=22 - One of my choices to represent China.

 

[Guandao]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Aurangzeb (India / Mughal) 2-3=0 Might as well eliminate you Aurangzeb...You are third choice for a Mughal leader
Hezekiah (Judah) 16
Menawa (Creek) (19+1)=20 I think there's value in having an Amerindian leader who strives to preserve or maintain some of his people's traditional culture. And I think McIntosh would be a poor choice to represent the Creek in game.
Napoleon III (France) 25
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 22

 

[Morningcalm]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Hezekiah (Judah) 16 + 1 = 17 (Defensive measures; religious; alliance-maker and defied the mighty Assyrian empire)
Menawa (Creek) 20
Napoleon III (France) 25
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 22 - 3 = 19 (We don't need another naval leader, the treasure fleet is already part of Spain's ability, and there are far better emperors who didn't violate Confucian principles so strenuously. Kangxi comes to mind.)

 

[RFormica]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Hezekiah (Judah) 17 + 1 = 18 I like Judah! (And why are we calling it Judah?) and he is perfect for it. (If there ever is an "infamous leader elimination" thread, religious zealot Asa or crazy king Saul would be perfect.)
Menawa (Creek) 20
Napoleon III (France) 25 - 3 = 22 I'm sorry, but I really don't like Napoleon much; I think that he should stay a great general.
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 19

 

[Zaarin]

Napoleon III (France) 25 - 3 = 22 I'm sorry, but I really don't like Napoleon much; I think that he should stay a great general.

Wrong Napoleon. Napoleon III, aka Louis Napoleon, was Napoleon Bonaparte's nephew; unlike his uncle, he kinda sucked at war. Also, why call it Judah? Probably because Hezekiah was never king of Israel.

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 20
Napoleon III (France) 23 (22 + 1) -- I'd prefer either Louis XIV or a Medieval king like Francis I or Louis IX. But if we must have a Napoleon, I much prefer Louis Napoleon to his uncle.
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 16 (19 - 3) -- I don't think Yongle is a bad choice for China (and I think I may have upvoted him before?), but as choices narrow there are other emperors I'd prefer, like Taizong or Wu Zetian.

 

[Kimiimaro]

Hmm... Voting is now quite harder with Aurangzeb left...

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23
Hezekiah (Judah) 18
Menawa (Creek) 20
Napoleon III (France) 23-3=20 - It seems that people have different tastes about him and his uncle I prefer his uncle, although Napoleon III wouldn't be a bad choice. I think he would make an interesting leader of France, but I haven't really decided yet who should I target on now, so he gets my downvote, because he can afford it.
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 16+1=17 - Two meaningless words that come on my mind as an unconvicing argument: Yongle Encyclopedia.

 

[Morningcalm]

Alexander II (Russia) 22
Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) 26
Atahualpa (Inca) 23 - 3 = 20 (A bit too high for a vicious leader that failed to see the Spanish strategems and was ultimately defeated (essentially an Incan Montezuma II), and the Inca had many more glorious rulers who were more iconic and would fit the big personalities of VI better. The Earth Shaker Pacachuti comes to mind.)
Hezekiah (Judah) 18 + 1 = 19 (His personality and agenda-making would fit VI rather well.)
Menawa (Creek) 20
Napoleon III (France) 20
Powhatan (Powhatan Confederacy) 25
Vercingetorix (Celts / Gauls) 22
Yongle Emperor 17