Never Before Seen Leader Elimination

[Morningcalm]

Akbar (India) 9 + 1 = 10 (Best leader remaining gameplay wise IMO)
Alexander II (Russia) 6 - 3 = 3 (Liberator, but also too much a repetition of other reforming leaders, and not different enough from Peter to be a worthy entrant)
Alfred the Great (England) 8
Taizong (China) 1

 

[God of Kings]

Akbar (India) 9 + 1 = 10 Best Mughal leader
Alexander II (Russia) 6
Alfred the Great (England) 8
Taizong (China) 1 - 3 = ELIMINATED Fourth place is good enough; I prefer Yongle

 

[The Kingmaker]

Akbar (India) 11-3=8 Still would rather have Ashoka.
Alexander II (Russia) 3
Alfred the Great (England) 8+1=9 Without Alfred, there wouldn't be an England.

Edit: Looks like there was some cross-posting. Tried to correct it above.

 

[Phrozen]

Just fixing the vote totals as God of Kings and Morningcalm have cross posted so the totals are not accurate.

Akbar (India) 8
Alexander II (Russia) 3
Alfred the Great (England) 9

 

[Kimiimaro]

It seems that we have a cross-post about cross-posts.

 

[Guandao]

Akbar (India) 8
Alexander II (Russia) 3-3=0 My revenge for Taizong getting fourth place Not interesting when compared to Akbar and Alfred.
Alfred the Great (England) (9+1)=10 My choice for first place

 

[Phrozen]

It is down to Akbar and Alfred. There will be another short nomination period before the start of round 2.

 

[God of Kings]

Yongle could be added in for China.

 

[Guandao]

Yongle could be added in for China.

I guess people like Yongle emperor as a leader because of Zheng He and the treasure ships.....
How about Kangxi Emperor as a alternate leader for China? I think the Qing Dynasty can count as Chinese, and Kangxi was their greatest emperor.

 

[Morningcalm]

I agree with the idea of Kangxi, who could get some Great Writer bonuses (he was also a very capable military leader). Far better ruler than Yongle, though both were notable.

Yongle, however, was brutal in his rise to power:

With many scholar-bureaucrats in Nanjing refusing to recognise the legitimacy of his claim to the throne, the Yongle Emperor began a thorough purge of them and their families, including women and children. Other supporters of the Jianwen Emperor's regime were extirpated throughout the country, while a reign of terror was seen due to eunuchs settling scores with the two prior administrations.

I guess he shares that kind of brutality with Wu Zetian though.

 

[Manifold]

Akbar (India) 9 (8+1) both are good candidates, some other had to decide, if this game is not ended tomorrow I will vote for the other
Alfred the Great (England) 7 (10-3) both are good candidates, some other had to decide, if this game is not ended tomorrow I will vote for the other

It is down to Akbar and Alfred. There will be another short nomination period before the start of round 2.

my suggestions:

Khufu (Egypt)
Scipio Africanus (Rome)
Yongle Emperor (China)
Sun Yat-sen (China)
Hanno the Navigator (Carthage)
Hiram I (Phoenicia)
Oliver Cromwell (England)
Agamemnon (Greece)
Nikita Khrushchev (Russia)
Ike Eisenhower (America)
Clovis (Franks)
Baron vom und zum Stein (Germany)
Umar (Arabia)
Cardinal Richelieu (France)
Togo Heihachirō (Japan)
Roxelana (Ottoman)

I guess people like Yongle emperor as a leader because of Zheng He and the treasure ships.....
How about Kangxi Emperor as a alternate leader for China? I think the Qing Dynasty can count as Chinese, and Kangxi was their greatest emperor.

I am skeptical about Kangxi. Of course he was the second Qing emperor so I guess he could be a possible Chinese leader BUT I do not like his capy and IMO the Mings are more typical Chinese from my point of view. Yongle gives China another direction more diversity. What is the different between Qin and Kangxi? More a different representation of China brings also Sun Yat-sen.

 

[God of Kings]

Yongle also started the Age of Discovery, as Zheng He's Treasure Fleets were the first since the Polynesians to cross a large ocean.

 

[Morningcalm]

I am skeptical about Kangxi. Of course he was the second Qing emperor so I guess he could be a possible Chinese leader BUT I do not like his capy and IMO the Mings are more typical Chinese from my point of view. Yongle gives China another direction more diversity. What is the different between Qin and Kangxi? More a different representation of China brings also Sun Yat-sen.

What is a "capy"?

Yongle is way more similar to Qin Shi Huangdi than Kangxi, lol. Yongle even *looks* like Qin--you would really have to accentuate the long beard and the yellow robe and even then they would look similar. Further, Kangxi was a better emperor than Yongle, and Kangxi as a Qing leader brings more diversity to China than Yongle does. We already have a treasure fleet bonus in the form of Spain, and even then exploration bonuses are better suited for the Polynesians/Maori or Portuguese.

Sun Yat-sen is...rather dull, though important. A Christian Chinese leader is a bit odd though.

My suggestions:

Alexander Nevsky / Ivan the Terrible (Russia) -- Both good choices, both very different. Ivan would be easy to craft an agenda for.
Chandragupta Maurya (Mauryans / India)
Dihya (Berbers)
Thutmose III (Egypt)
Henry V (England)
Hongi Hika (Maori)
Kangxi Emperor (China)
Lady Six Sky / Lady K'abel (Mayans) -- Both good choices, and both warrior queens
Mahmud II (Ottomans) -- A reforming Ottoman sultan who started the famous Tanzimat reforms.
Maurice, Prince of Orange (Netherlands)
Puduhepa (Hittites)
Red Cloud (Lakota)
Queen Idia (Benin)
Queen Seondeok of Silla (Korea)
Simon Bolivar (Gran Colombia) -- Too important a leader to South American history to ignore forever.
Yaa Asantewa (Ashanti)
Zenobia (Palmyra)

 

[Roman Citizen]

We should also look for an emperor from the Han dynasty, I think Emperor Zhao or Emperor Wen of Han would be good options.

 

[Roman Citizen]

My suggestions
Emperor Yongle (China)
Emperor Kangxi (China)
Emperor Zhao of Han (China)
Emperor Wen of Han (China) I think a Han Dynasty leader would be great.
Shivaji (India) I sincerely think that we should have a Maratha ruler in this round.
Ahilyabai Holkar (India)
Krishnadevaraya (India)
Ranjit Singh (India)
Chandragupta Maurya (India)
Robert Jenkinson (England) One of the best British Prime ministers who oversaw the defeat of Napoleon and america (War of 1812)
Henry V (England)
Edmund Ironside (England)
Alexander I (Russia)
Alexander Nevsky (Russia)
Ivan the Terrible (Russia)
Nikita Khrushchev (Russia)
Rasputin (Russia) Why not, we've had many non ruler leaders in the civ games and I think he would be a great addition.
Charles VI (France)
Raymond Poincare (France)
William the conqueror (France)
James Madison (America)
John F Kennedy (America)
Dwight d. Eisenhower (America)
Himiko (Japan)
Toyotomi Hideyoshi (Japan)
Saigo Takamori (Japan) I think Saigo Takamori would be a good place in for Emperor Meiji, Saigo was more than just a Samurai and he was a Japanese hero and a symbol of an ending era.
Otto the Great (Germany)
John III Sobieski (Poland) Best Polish leader of all time.
Emir Faisal (Arabia)
Abu Muslim (Arabia)
Constantine (Rome)
Scipio Africanus (Rome)
Gaius Gracchus (Rome)
Emperor Nero (Rome)
Emperor Caligula (Rome)

 

[Kimiimaro]

Akbar (India) 9+1=10 - India is in a bigger need of another leader than England.
Alfred the Great (England) 7-3=4 - Sorry Alf, but England doesn't suffer from a cancer called "leader that wasn't actually a leader but we keep putting him as leader because we think that his nuke obsession is funny"

I see that we are also posting suggestions about leaders of never before seen Civs like Benin. Here are my sugestions.

- Bolesław I the Brave (Poland) - He is the one responsible for that we say "Kingdom of Poland", not "Duchy of Poland". First Polish king who also expanded Polish lands. Also, he was duke of Bohemia for some time
- Joseph II (Austria) - Son of Maria Theresa. Continued in her Enlightened reforms and the Habsburg monarchy continued in its prosperity.
- Franz Joseph I (Austria) - Liberalized the Austria-Hungary and he was very popular during his reign (mainly in the later years)
- Philip II (Macedon) - Great king, father of Alexander. He practically prepared him for his conquests.
- Charles IV (Bohemia) - First Bohemian king that also became the Holy Roman Emperor. At start of his reign, Bohemia was devastated and poor, because his father, John, was a warrior that loved fighting, but he needed money for it. He fixed this. During his reign, Bohemia became centre of culture, trade and education and Prague became one of the most important cities in the whole Europe. He brought here Gothic from France, and he was also a great builder. He completely rebuilt Prague, he founded the oldest university in Central Europe, then he built Charles Bridge, Karlovy Vary/Carlsbad, Karlštejn Castle, he ordered creation of Bohemian Crown Jewels, etc.
- Ottokar II (Bohemia) - "The Iron and Golden King". Great conqueror and diplomat. During his reign, territory of Bohemia was almost reaching to the Adriatic sea. He also made Bohemia very rich. He was one of the strongest, if not the strongest king in Europe in his time.
- Wenceslaus II (Bohemia) - During his reign, silver was found in Kutná Hora. He used it to create the Prague groschen, one of the most stable and used currencies in Europe. He was also great diplomat. He also became king of Poland and he gained title of king of Hungary for his son, Wenceslaus III.
- Alexios I Komnenos (Byzantium) - Great choice. One of the best Byzantine emperors. He made the Byzantine Empire great again. He stopped the decline of Byzantine Empire. He protected Byzantium, then he reconquered the lost territory. He also started restoration of army and finances.
- Basil II (Byzantium) - Another good choice. He made the empire strong, vast, well organised and rich.

 

[Shalvan]

A couple of possible leaders for Poland:
- Bolesław the Brave, as mentioned, makes a fine choice
- Bolesław II the Generous is a very good choice as one of the most capable Polish kings, as well as a controversial figure with a strong personality - his rule ended after he personally killed bishop Stanislaus, who was later made a saint. In truth, he plotted to remove Bolesław from power and was de facto a traitor.
- Stephen Batory - a Hungarian elected king who created the Winged Hussar formations and fought successful wars against Russia.
- Władysław IV Vasa - Polish-Lithuanian king from a Swedish dynasty who was also the Tsar of Russia for a moment. That alone makes him pretty interesting
- John III Sobieski is definitely not the best Polish leader of all time, so I disaggree with that nomination. I am not that fond of him. He was a good general and he was popular, but I don't think he left the country stronger than it was when he took the crown. He failed to introduce the much needed reforms and Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth entered the 18th century with outdated laws and military.

Other than that:
Hasdrubal Barca - Carthage - an interesting character, father of Hannibal, who conquered vast land in Spain which allowed Carthage to recover from the loss in the Second Punic War. He would look quite similar to Hannibal though.
Mago I of Carthage - the founder of Magonid dynasty who expanded the influence of Carthage over the western Mediterranean
Philip II (Macedon) - I second the choice.
Pyrrus of Epir - I think he's interesting, could pass as a Greek leader.
Vercingetorix - if the Gauls are introduced, or make him a Celt leader.
Roxolana - as a figure similar to Catherine the Medici

 

[Siptah]

Akbar (India) 11 (10+1) Good choice for India who really needs someone new
Alfred the Great (England) 1 (4-3) Should be satisfied with second place. After all, Akbar was called the Great during his lifetime and he wasn't.

He would look quite similar to Hannibal though.

Which isn't a problem since we have no clue how Hannibal looked. Neither portraits, nor busts nor coins created during his lifetime can be verified to represent him. So Hasdrubal would look like just any 3nd century BC Carthaginian of some stand, just like Hannibal would do as well.

Some suggestions - and I don't include civs that are not present (even if I would like to have Mago I for Carthage), but it would just make the list needlessly long.

Gustav Stresemann (Germany)
Frederik II Stupor Mundi (Germany)
Senusret III (Egypt)
Snofru (Egypt)
Philip IV the Fair (France)
Haakon IV the Old (Norway)
Diocletian (Rome)
Constantius I (Rome)
Ur-Nammu (Sumer)
al-Ma'mun (Arabia)

 

[RFormica]

Alfred the Great (England) 7-3=4 - Sorry Alf, but England doesn't suffer from a cancer called "leader that wasn't actually a leader but we keep putting him as leader because we think that his nuke obsession is funny"

First of all, he was king in 871 AD. No nukes. Also, if it weren't for him, England would have been conquered by the Vikings. So, good leader. I also think that Civilization has a good habit of putting some forgotten rulers into the spotlight.

Akbar (India) 8 (11-3)
Alfred the Great (England) 2 (1+1)

 

[Kimiimaro]

First of all, he was king in 871 AD. No nukes. Also, if it weren't for him, England would have been conquered by the Vikings. So, good leader. I also think that Civilization has a good habit of putting some forgotten rulers into the spotlight.

You don't understand. I'm talking about Firaxis' obsession to put Gandhi in every game just for his obsession with nukes. This is what I mean by that "cancer". India is just in bigger need of another leader.