More Alternate Leaders?

[Zaarin]

Persia: Not likely IMHO since they’re a DLC.

I'd imagine it would work like this: If you have the DLC, you have Persia with Cyrus and Leader #2 (Darius? Xerxes? We all know Firaxis is unaware Persia existed after the Achaemenids, so you can forget Khosrow II or Shapur II ); if you don't have the DLC, you have Persia and Leader #2. This could also apply to Kublai and Mongolia or other DLC/expansion civs.

 

[The Kingmaker]

I'd imagine it would work like this: If you have the DLC, you have Persia with Cyrus and Leader #2 (Darius? Xerxes? We all know Firaxis is unaware Persia existed after the Achaemenids, so you can forget Khosrow II or Shapur II ); if you don't have the DLC, you have Persia and Leader #2. This could also apply to Kublai and Mongolia or other DLC/expansion civs.

That’s honestly what I’m expecting for Kublai.

 

[Patine]

China/Mongolia: Double up with Kublai Khan. I know Mongolia was in an XP. They’d have to find a way around it, because this one is too tempting to ignore. Xanadu as his ability, maybes gives culture bonuses for improving conquered land or building certain districts in conquered cities.

I don't think the Chinese (who have, in the modern day and age, huge cache in the computer game market by having so many gamers in their borders) would like that, anymore than the French or Polish would like "doubling up" with Germany under Hitler, or the Greeks with Italy under Mussolini.

Egypt: Hatshepsut is less likely because they’ll want to differentiate from Cleopatra. Khufu or Ramses II are likely as builders. Akhenaten would be a fun, but quirky dark horse..

Why should Hatsheput require special differentiation from Cleopatra. The two women were as different as day and night. And, at least Hatsheput WAS ethnically Egyptian and fluently spoke the Egyptian language.

Germany: Probably not Frederick the Great, since we already have a Frederick in the game. Bismarck has a history in the franchise, but I’m expecting someone who could double up with another civ, whether Charles V, Maria Theresa, or Charlemagne..

European monarchial names are so commonly re-used, even among "great monarch" that the idea "there is already a <Blank> in the game" is going to cause trouble at some point as it is. Best not to start such a precedent in the first place.

Persia/Ottomans: Not likely IMHO since they’re from DLC/XPs. I might actually expect a second leader for Arabia, maybe Harun al-Rashid, to move that capital out of Cairo..

It would have been nice if he was the leader in the first place for Arabia, and NOT one who was not an Arab, not a Caliph, and had no recognized power or lineage in Islamic jurisprudence. Don't get me wrong - I have great respect Saladin. It's just the civilization he led was woefully inappropriate to his historical situation.

Rome: We have someone in armor, let’s get someone in a toga. Cicero for the republic? I’d say Scipio, but that’s just more armor. Livia could represent the machinations of a power behind the throne. Nero as a big personality villain? There’s always the same old Caesars too. Maybe Constantine for a very different Rome? Some people expect Theodora or another Byzantine but I still think they may get their own Civ.

I think Vespasian is often overlooked.

Russia: No commies. Ivan the Terrible could be a wild unpredictable character. Would love a streltsy UU. Catherine has been in every game since Civ2. We already have a Catherine in France though, but we don’t have an English Elizabeth. Empress Elizabeth would act similar to Catherine the Great, if somewhat less obliging..

You just dismiss "commies" off hand, but how many other leaders of Russia have been less brutal, autocratic, harsh, intolerant, nasty, atrocious, and even willing to set up secret police and jail, execute, exile, or sentence to hard labour those who disagreed with them. I can't think of any, myself, except maybe Yeltsin on a good day. Also, the CPSU regime industrialized and modernized Russia, and built it into one of the two most powerful nations in the world during the Cold War, and won their greatest struggle for mere survival - "The Great Patriotic War," or the Eastern Front of the European Theatre of WW2. No Tsar came remotely close these global and transformative achievement, and since morality and respect for human rights isn't a comparative issue either way, I wouldn't dismiss the "commies" so simply, I'm afraid.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Simply put, there are still people alive who lost close family members in genocide perpetuated by communist dictators. Last time Mao and Stalin were seen in the main line of games was Civ4, and I’m happy to let them remain there.

Alexander, Genghis Khan and others have equally bloody hands, but they didn’t kill grandpa.

 

[The Kingmaker]

I don't think the Chinese (who have, in the modern day and age, huge cache in the computer game market by having so many gamers in their borders) would like that, anymore than the French or Polish would like "doubling up" with Germany under Hitler, or the Greeks with Italy under Mussolini.

I wouldn’t invoke Godwin’s Law just yet. The Yuan dynasty was considered to have the “mandate of heaven” and is considered an official dynasty, not just a little foreign invasion.

Kublai Khan was actually Emperor of China. None of the fascists you mentioned have been afforded the same consideration of legitimacy, nor did they leave behind a dynasty of successors.

You know the Yuan tried to sinicize and ingratiate themselves with their Chinese subjects...

 

[Patine]

I wouldn’t invoke Godwin’s Law just yet. The Yuan dynasty was considered to have the “mandate of heaven” and is considered an official dynasty, not just a little foreign invasion.

Kublai Khan was actually Emperor of China. None of the fascists you mentioned have been afforded the same consideration of legitimacy, nor did they leave behind a dynasty of successors.

You know the Yuan tried to sinicize and ingratiate themselves with their Chinese subjects...

He was Emperor of China because he massacred the whole Song Dynasty Imperial Family (except a 9-year-old heir, whom the Chancellor of the West dragged, along with himself, to drown in the Pearl River Delta for fear of what "the barbarian chieftain" would do him to torture out a declaration of passing the Mandate), and, after having slaughtered over 30 million Chinese civilians while invading the country (the largest single deliberate, malicious genocide of civilians in one event, at one time, for one purpose in recorded history - equal to about the total of the Holocaust and Armenian, Cambodian, and Rwandan Genocides times THREE - hence the Fascist leaders' comparison, mostly), no one really wanted to gainsay his claim to the Mandate after all was and said and all the killing done. Also, I personally believe Godwin's Law is malarkey - very close to superstition, in fact - and blocks up rational, insightful, and open historical discussion.

 

[Patine]

Simply put, there are still people alive who lost close family members in genocide perpetuated by communist dictators. Last time Mao and Stalin were seen in the main line of games was Civ4, and I’m happy to let them remain there.

Alexander, Genghis Khan and others have equally bloody hands, but they didn’t kill grandpa.

There are people alive today whose family have lost lives because of American foreign meddling and corporatism. You're point is?

 

[The Kingmaker]

There are people alive today whose family have lost lives because of American foreign meddling and corporatism. You're point is?

Nowhere near as many.

 

[Patine]

Nowhere near as many.

The Soviet records were declassified with the Fall of the USSR. The American numbers, in large part, remain classified, are attributed to Third World tyrants, or insurgent or terrorist groups funded, trained, and directed by the U.S. instead, are officially denied by the U.S. government, or, in the case of deaths to corporatism, are a real jabberwocky to get full numbers on. And, the deaths caused by the Soviet and American sources are just as horrid, malicious, and criminal, and based on promoting intolerant political agendas and denying people the right of self-determination, in the end.

 

[The Kingmaker]

Well, I think this thread has gotten far enough afield, don’t you?

 

[Patine]

Well, I think this thread has gotten far enough afield, don’t you?

My point is this. Atrocities, massacres, oppression, unjust wars, and all manners of other horrid and unforgivable acts have been committed by practically every nation or civilization on Earth - especially ones with the scope, scale, and ambition to be an obvious consideration for a slot in a game like a Civ iteration. Saying certain ones are off-limits because they did such things - regardless of the specific context they did them in - while all others are "off the hook," so to speak, is disingenuous, at best. THAT is what I was trying to say, and I was ONLY using the U.S. as a counter-example to say the "recent memory" clause is disingenuous, too.

 

[The Kingmaker]

I respectfully disagree. Shall we leave it at that?

 

[Patine]

I respectfully disagree. Shall we leave it at that?

If you don't skewer me for opining that Brezhnev or Mao might be alternatives to consider at some point in one of these threads in an undirected post in the future JUST because they're Communists in living memory alone, then I agree.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

It's already been mentioned before but including certain modern leaders in game, such as Hitler and Mao, would get them banned in their respective countries of Germany and China, for ironically different reasons, so there is no way Firaxis would do that. Those are the only leaders I am aware of that it would happen. Alexander and Genghis do not have that stigma going against them so they can appear.

 

[Patine]

It's already been mentioned before but including certain modern leaders in game, such as Hitler and Mao, would get them banned in their respective countries of Germany and China, for ironically different reasons, so there is no way Firaxis would do that. Those are the only leaders I am aware of that it would happen. Alexander and Genghis do not have that stigma going against them so they can appear.

But does Brezhnev? I highly doubt that. Also, I don't know about a ban, but a lot of Chinese, given their official historiography on the matter, would probably be upset if Kublai Khaqan were seen as a legitimate Chinese leader, and not just a "hinterlands warlord and chieftain who seized the Mandate of Heaven against all of it's own traditions at swordpoint in the most barbaric and savage way possible" - again, the modern Chinese historical view on Kublai Khaqan's rulership of China. In that matter, I'd say he should JUST be an alternate Mongol leader. And I never did advocate Hitler - he was just an example of why a "doubling up" of Chinese and Mongols under Kublai Khaqan might not go over so well in China.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

But does Brezhnev? I highly doubt that. Also, I don't know about a ban, but a lot of Chinese, given their official historiography on the matter, would probably be upset if Kublai Khaqan were seen as a legitimate Chinese leader, and not just a "hinterlands warlord and chieftain who seized the Mandate of Heaven against all of it's own traditions at swordpoint in the most barbaric and savage way possible" - again, the modern Chinese historical view on Kublai Khaqan's rulership of China. In that matter, I'd say he should JUST be an alternate Mongol leader. And I never did advocate Hitler - he was just an example of why a "doubling up" of Chinese and Mongols under Kublai Khaqan might not go over so well in China.

I was generally mentioning why certain leaders wouldn't be able to make it in the game for those various reasons, not necessarily insinuating that you wanted them. But like I said, I know for certain that Mao could not be depicted, as long as they want to sell the game in China, and not necessarily for just being a communist dictator, but quite the opposite. If Mao would be a leader in the game, it would be "illegal" if he would ever be shown losing a game.
In regards to Kublai Khan, I think it would be interesting if he could lead both China and Mongolia. I'm also unaware if there would be any controversy, so in that case, fine let him just lead Mongolia. If not I don't see any reason why he couldn't lead China as he is listed as one of the emperors from it's history. Both Seondeok and Kristina are also controversial picks from people of their own country but that also didn't stop Firaxis from using them.

 

[PhoenicianGold]

Simply put, there are still people alive who lost close family members in genocide perpetuated by communist dictators. Last time Mao and Stalin were seen in the main line of games was Civ4, and I’m happy to let them remain there.

Alexander, Genghis Khan and others have equally bloody hands, but they didn’t kill grandpa.

THAT recently? As in they had animations? Ew.

I'm happy to leave that part of the franchise behind. Call me delusional but I really like how VI is trying portray the best of every civ, rather than just making everyone a militaristic butthead.

I think Kublai is riding the line of what would be acceptable as an "invader" leader, because of his attempts to integrate. I'm not sure which side of the line he lies on, but I mean, we have Poundmaker and Kristina in the game so as far as I can tell, Firaxis is unflappable.

 

[Patine]

THAT recently? As in they had animations? Ew.

I'm happy to leave that part of the franchise behind. Call me delusional but I really like how VI is trying portray the best of every civ, rather than just making everyone a militaristic butthead.

I think Kublai is riding the line of what would be acceptable as an "invader" leader, because of his attempts to integrate. I'm not sure which side of the line he lies on, but I mean, we have Poundmaker and Kristina in the game so as far as I can tell, Firaxis is unflappable.

Theodore Roosevelt has pictures and animated footage and, while not personally behind the atrocities I listed above that the United States is internationally responsible for, above, McKinley and him truly started the nation's path from an isolationist, self-absorbed backwater nation in a corner of the world the Great Powers didn't worry about too much toward the national attitudes that quickly grew into the international engine of atrocity in the ways I've mentioned, above.

 

[Zaarin]

I don't think the Chinese (who have, in the modern day and age, huge cache in the computer game market by having so many gamers in their borders) would like that

The Chinese regard the Yuan, Ming, and Qing as legitimate as any other dynasty. You're projecting Western values where they don't apply.

Why should Hatsheput require special differentiation from Cleopatra. The two women were as different as day and night.

Hatshepsut's most important accomplishments involved the expansion of trade, which also overlaps with Cleo, though.

 

[Patine]

The Chinese regard the Yuan, Ming, and Qing as legitimate as any other dynasty. You're projecting Western values where they don't apply.

I was going by a translation of a historical book on Kublai Khaqan written by a long-term history professor at the main Shanghai University whose title was translated to English as "The Years The Rice Fields Were Watered in Blood" in the viewpoint I expressed there.