Multiple leaders CONFIRMED!

[stealth_nsk]

No I have not over looked it, but it's not like they're going to cramp Buildings, IMprovements, Districts and Units onto every leader.

They don't need every civ to have second leader. Greece, America, England, Spain and India are enough.

 

[lorrydriverjr]

Posted this a couple of weeks ago:

Spoiler :

"American unique unit when Teddy Roosevelt is their leader."

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

They don't need every civ to have second leader. Greece, America, England, Spain and India are enough.

What's your point?

Posted this a couple of weeks ago:

"American unique unit when Teddy Roosevelt is their leader."

And?

Given their Multiplayer focus, it was possible that a game-mode allowed players to mix match leaders and civilization (Montezuma with France, Teddy with Japan, etc)

 

[Siptah]

They don't need every civ to have second leader. Greece, America, England, Spain and India are enough.

Why? We first need to be able to be sure that we can separate the bonuses that are attached to leaders, and then look where it makes sense to add a second possibility gameplay wise to a civ to assess something like this. It's not just about having another cool guy/gal displayed and adding random personalities to have more content. Lots of civs stand for more than one thing and not everything is represented as it is now.

 

[stealth_nsk]

Why? We first need to be able to be sure that we can separate the bonuses that are attached to leaders, and then look where it makes sense to add a second possibility gameplay wise to a civ to assess something like this. It's not just about having another cool guy/gal displayed and adding random personalities to have more content. Lots of civs stand for more than one thing and not everything is represented as it is now.

DLC are made to be sold. Second America and England leaders are good overall selling points, second India leader just to replace Ghandi, etc. But with amount of work needed to animate each leader and the fact what you need more than 1 leader packend into DLC for it to look complete, in most cases it's better to make new civilization instead of new leaders.

I'd say leader pack DLCs are more likely to be just for DLC diversity. So you'll not just buy Xth civ.

 

[Barathor]

Nice, I'm looking forward to lots of alternate DLC leaders to choose from and purchase.

I hope during map creation that the game randomly fills player slots by civ instead of by each leader, and then if that civ has multiple leaders available on the user's pc it does another random roll. I'd hate to see civs with two or more leaders appear more often than others, and I like to keep things random.

Another cool feature would be to have check mark boxes (well, something more elegant than check marks though) on all leader selections within the list, so that you can uncheck any leaders you don't want to be included within the random selections.

 

[anandus]

Posted this a couple of weeks ago:

Spoiler :

"American unique unit when Teddy Roosevelt is their leader."

Very interesting!

That would certainly spice up the game even more!

 

[Loaf Warden]

As far as I know, scenarios work like mods in the sense they completely change ruleset. When the scenario is loaded, it also loads the correct civilopedia. This has been the case since Civ IV, as far as I know.

It has been the case since Civ II. Scenarios have always been separate from the base game, and the Civilopedias do not bleed into each other.

Frankly, the mental gymnastics some people performed to try and keep multiple leaders from being a thing once Gorgo was confirmed were more impressive than the actual gymnastics we've seen from Rio this month.

Maybe that leader bingo chart was wrong? Said even after Catherine de Medici, Tomyris, and Frederick Barbarossa were already confirmed.

Maybe Greece is now two separate civs, and Pericles leads "Athens" while Gorgo leads "Sparta"? Even though they are both alphabetized under "Greece" in the leader bingo chart.

Maybe Gorgo is only in a Peloponnesian War scenario? Except that, as mentioned here, if that had been the case, we would not have seen her in the Civilopedia for the base game. That would also be a very odd development decision, considering Gorgo didn't live during the Peloponnesian War. Wikipedia doesn't mention a date of death for her, but it says she was probably born between 518 and 508 BC. The Peloponnesian War began in 431 BC. Even if we take the latest date for her birth, that would have made her 77 when that war began; it's not impossible that she lived to see its outbreak, but no mention is made of her having done anything during that war. In her time, the Greeks were far more concerned with fighting back the Persians.

Maybe Greece has a unique "Athenian Democracy" ability where they can switch rulers mid-game, so nobody else gets alternative rulers? Eh, I could actually see them doing something like that, but if they had, Gorgo would have been an odd choice to represent that. One would hope that they would know better than to cast around for additional leaders to represent Athenian Democracy, and then decide to use a Spartan queen.

Applying Occam's Razor, the simplest explanation was that the concept of alternative leaders was returning, and that Greece was simply the first civ for whom the second option was being rolled out. I never tried to claim it was "confirmed", because gamers shouting "Confirmed!" before something is actually confirmed is a pet peeve of mine. But the evidence in favor of multiple leaders was already there, and the Gorgo reveal made it vanishingly unlikely that the rest of the evidence was misleading.

 

[GenyaArikado]

.

Maybe Greece has a unique "Athenian Democracy" ability where they can switch rulers mid-game, so nobody else gets alternative rulers? Eh, I could actually see them doing something like that, but if they had, Gorgo would have been an odd choice to represent that. One would hope that they would know better than to cast around for additional leaders to represent Athenian Democracy, and then decide to use a Spartan queen.

Make it work the same but call it "Panhellenic League" and you're set.

 

[MAHRana]

Nice to finally see multiple leaders added again, makes sense for DLC sales as well. I kinda wonder if we'll end up seeing Alexander as a Greek leader though, if so, then what would stop other civs having 3 (or more) leaders?

 

[Verified_Confection_Being]

Nice to finally see multiple leaders added again, makes sense for DLC sales as well. I kinda wonder if we'll end up seeing Alexander as a Greek leader though, if so, then what would stop other civs having 3 (or more) leaders?

If we keep buying, they'll keep selling

 

[seasnake]

Civ IV had three leaders In Russia, America, England, France, etc. and it worked.

 

[ImperialChaos]

This is awesome. I wounder if Greece will be the only one in Vanilla and others will be added via DLC and expansions.

 

[mitsho]

They can give one civ 20 leaders and to all the other civs only one - it's their game after all and there is no need to balance things out here. But i'd put my money more on a Macedonian civ within a Alexanders conquest scenario (together with Persia that would make a good DLC).

 

[Morningcalm]

I'm surprisingly ok with multiple civ leaders, even though they won't vary too much from each other given that they'll share the same civ traits. I expect America will get a second leader, and perhaps Egypt could get Rameses II or Hatshepsut? China could get Kangxi? And two Mayan leaders would be great. Yuk'Noom the Great and Lady Six Sky. Two Korean leaders? Sejong and Seonddeok? Mandukhai the Wise and Genghis Khan for the Mongols?

The possibilities are limitless. (Though to be frank they are likely to give two leaders only to the "big" civs, aka China, France, Russia, etc, and not Mayans/Koreans/etc.)

I guess the art budget is free to do multiple leaders now that they got rid of the more realistic (but resource-taxing) leader backgrounds of Civ V.

 

[Loaf Warden]

I'm surprisingly ok with multiple civ leaders, even though they won't vary too much from each other given that they'll share the same civ traits.

It won't be like having two separate civs, no. But it's not supposed to be. Some of the traits go with the civ regardless of who is leading it, but the fact that they have distinct leader bonuses and leader-specific agendas will mean that the same civ will end up playing out differently depending on who is leading it. Ramesses II would have the Chariot Archer and the Sphinx and get bonuses for building by rivers, yes. But he would not have any interest in cuddling up with stronger military powers, and other civs wouldn't get extra food just for trading with him. He would have his own way of playing the game. So if you fire up a new game and find Egypt is your nearest neighbor, your reaction to them is going to be different depending on whether it's being ruled by Cleopatra ("Crap, better get my military up and running fast!" or Ramesses II. (Or Hatshepsut, or Djoser, or whoever else they might go with.)

 

[CaiusDrewart]

I think multiple leaders really makes some of the designer's off-the-wall choices more palatable. I can stomach Catherine de Medici leading France a lot more if there's a good chance we get Napoleon or Louis XIV or Robespierre later. Same for Cleopatra who will probably eventually be complemented by a traditional Egyptian pharoah (Khufu? Hatshepsut?)

Now, will there be an unrestricted leaders box I can tick in the main menu? Will I be able to play as Qin of Egypt (stacking two wonder construction bonuses) or Victoria of France (having two unique rifles, the Redcoat and the Imperial Guard!)

 

[Kobra]

Considering that each civ and each leader got uniques and different abilities it was obvious that Firaxis haven't made redundant abilities and that some civs would be able to choose between 2 or 3 leaders. No need to create multiple greek civs.

 

[anandus]

Considering that each civ and each leader got uniques and different abilities it was obvious that Firaxis haven't made redundant abilities and that some civs would be able to choose between 2 or 3 leaders.

Not per se.
In Civilization 5 each leader also had a unique ability, but they still had one leader per civ.

 

[Talcove]

Greecebowl fricking confirmed