pre-release info New First Look: Lafayette

[chaosprophet]

So, we have basically a Revolutionist in America (Harriet Tubman), and an American Revolutionist who went to France (Franklin), A French Revolutionist who went to America (Lafayette), and a French Revolutionist (Napoleon), now?

Revolutions all the way down... now lets have all 4 in the same game!

 

[Gen.Washington]

I've resisted too much, I must say it at least once. These last decades, her figure has been more and more used by the far right here in France.

Far right this, Woke that. It's all peepee-poopoo

Moderator Action: Please do not drag politics into the gaming forums. Thanks.--Zaarin

 

[uppi]

no, but the base game has an obvious lack of french content that needs to be filled with dlc. and filled fast! /s

Yeah, we need

1. Gauls
2. Franks
3. Burgundy
4. Kingdom of France
5. French Republic
6. and the Angevin Empire (to avoid having to include the English in some non-French way)

The only question is, how do we fill the remaining two spots in the next two DLC packs?

 

[Siptah]

Yeah, we need

1. Gauls
2. Franks
3. Burgundy
4. Kingdom of France
5. French Republic
6. and the Angevin Empire (to avoid having to include the English in some non-French way)

The only question is, how do we fill the remaining two spots in the next two DLC packs?

I think Provence and Brittany would be good options.

 

[Nic@Melbourne]

Liking all the nontraditional picks so far

 

[Gori the Grey]

Vive la Revolution! Vive la France!

 

[Zaarin]

I've resisted too much, I must say it at least once. These last decades, her figure has been more and more used by the far right here in France.

So claim her back.

 

[ehecatzin]

I've resisted too much, I must say it at least once. These last decades, her figure has been more and more used by the far right here in France.

I wasn't aware of that...man that's so dissapointing.

 

[Willie5000]

I’m going to choose to associate him with France rather than say we have a third American-adjacent leader

He's both. Which is silly on every count.

 

[FishFishFish]

Very controversial incoming but the previous approach to picking leaders meant each Civ got a leader from their respective nation. Now we get 3 US-centric picks in the base game. Is it because the devs are American and now have the ability to pick more American figures that they find interesting (especially with being a head of state being deemphasized)? Regardless, Civ 7's new philosophy of picking leaders has been utterly disappointing and makes me appreciate Civ 6's selection more.

 

[Patine]

Not to forget Charlemagne!

To be fair, no one was, "French," in Charlemagne's day.

 

[Lonecat Nekophrodite]

And no Chateau here. for France.
IS there a plan for Medieval France in the expansions or DLCs?

 

[moondog385]

Very controversial incoming but the previous approach to picking leaders meant each Civ got a leader from their respective nation. Now we get 3 US-centric picks in the base game. Is it because the devs are American and now have the ability to pick more American figures that they find interesting (especially with being a head of state being deemphasized)? Regardless, Civ 7's new philosophy of picking leaders has been utterly disappointing and makes me appreciate Civ 6's selection more.

I figured that a less interesting selection of leaders was going to be the end result of this separation. On the other hand, we got what I consider to be a more interesting selection of civs than we’ve ever had in the base game so I can’t complain too much.

That said, I hope Firaxis is willing to dig a little deeper for future leaders. They made some cool choices in VI and I don’t want them to totally abandon that philosophy.

 

[Zaarin]

I figured that a less interesting selection of leaders was going to be the end result of this separation. On the other hand, we got what I consider to be a more interesting selection of civs than we’ve ever had in the base game so I can’t complain too much.

That said, I hope Firaxis is willing to dig a little deeper for future leaders. They made some cool choices in VI and I don’t want them to totally abandon that philosophy.

Yes, I'm hoping that they chose a boring roster of leaders to soften the blow of civ-switching and to offset some unique civ choices, but, having accomplished that, I hope they'll make some bolder choices going forward.

 

[Willie5000]

To be fair, no one was, "French," in Charlemagne's day.

They were Franks. Which is why the country is called "France" and not "Gaul" or something else.

 

[Nic@Melbourne]

They were Franks. Which is why the country is called "France" and not "Gaul" or something else.

Maybe Charlemagne was but many in his country wouldn't of been. From wikipedia "Studies of ethnicity in the Carolingian Empire have been largely limited. However, it is accepted that the empire was inhabited by major ethnic groups such as Franks, Alemanni, Bavarians, Thuringians, Frisians, Lombards, Goths, Romans, Celts, Basques and Slavs".

 

[fantsu]

I wouldn't say people are being anti-American or Europhobic but rather there is a wish for a more diverse selection of leaders. I personally think Africa needs a lot more attention in leader department, currently.

Tubman leads Africa already. I think its enough already.
Moderator Action: Warned for trolling. The_J

 

[moysturfurmer]

Tubman leads Africa already. I think it’s enough already.

By that logic, JFK ought to lead Ireland, yeah? Cleopatra of Macedon?

 

[fantsu]

By that logic, JFK ought to lead Ireland, yeah? Cleopatra of Macedon?

Leaders arent connected to civilizations anymore. Also it would be racist to create civilization in Africa that disappears when the new era kicks in.

 

[moysturfurmer]

Organize your thoughts.