Whose the woman with the bicorn hat?
They added that to Civ 6 when they started doing the monthly challenges because they gave you free limited use of some DLCs. So, I wouldn't say it automatically means loot boxes or gacha or whatever.
They're civ 4 leader images... Catherine, Ashoka and Louis XIV
I didn't play Civ4, actually, save for a very limited, promo, pre-release demo, that made you play Gandhi (groan) on a pre-made with a very limited number of turns.
There've been a few surprises, but overall I feel like Civ7's leader choices have been very, very safe, especially compared to Civ6. Even the new faces have tended towards safe choices, like the much requested Trung Trac and Ben Franklin. I think the only really surprising choices so far have been Machiavelli and Amina. ETA: Oh, and Confucius. Not sure he's a pleasant surprise. If anything, he's a surprise but still a very, very safe choice as someone Westerners generically associate with China.
craziest thing is Jeanne d’Arc would’ve been even better of a leader choice in this game than most, what with spiritual and ideological leaders being more appropriateI think Tolstoy would have been a great pick. Rasputin would have been fun. Ivan IV would have been fun. Anastasia Romanovna would have been interesting. Even Nikolai II is sort of charming in his charismatic stupidity. I'm just bored of every iteration of Civ having either Peter or Catherine; there's more to Russian history than those two.
I'm disappointed they went with Napoleon over literally anyone else. Give me Louis V the Do-nothing. Francis II who died before even reaching majority. Jean d'Arc (Jeanne's brother--yes, I'm serious she had a brother Jean). A random peasant from Rocamadour named Jacme. Anyone but Napoleon.
I think that's fair; but given everything that has changed, it seems a sensible strategy for launch. Plenty of time to go wild later.
Yes, I think they're trying to offset some wilder civ choices and some bold new design decisions with a very safe leader roster. I can understand it from a marketing perspective, but it doesn't appeal to me personally. I hope they make some bolder leader decisions later on.
this is neither here nor there but in the nicest way possible, i don’t think this is a real concern for civ nor one that the devs should be worried about.
The horse story is myth, but Catherine definitely is one of the most sexually charged leaders we know of in history (though i’d argue a lot of it is only documented explicitly as sexual as it was because she was a woman). I doubt it’ll come up in anything more than the civopedia but it’s not necessarily an incorrect thing to mention in her portrayal when it’s true—she had many, many lovers, most of whom got major political and bureaucratic roles due to their affairs with her.That said, if the sexual themes are due to her introduction, then I’ll be a tiny bit bummed - hope her portrayal will be more nuanced than just “that one horse story” (Mongolia > Russia confirmed in the most cursed way?)
it’s smart, but i do think i’d have much rather seen an ambitious civ roster to match. Rajaraja Chola or Akbar the Great would’ve been far more interesting to me than Ashoka the Great again. And I do like Confucius, but was China really the civ to be using one of those leaders-but-not-really cards? they’ve got so many good options. I would’ve even found Siddhartha Gautama as a leader for the Indian civs/untied to a civ to be more interesting in that religious/philosophical space. We’re yet to even see a safe leader who isn’t as well known like Pachacuti/Tupac Amaru/Montezuma…the leaders have been almost *too* well known and predictable. Bar those you mentioned, and maybe Himiko
Yes, they have, and things look promising, but they can do a bit better. With such a huge pool of Roman emperors to choose from and with the inclusion of scientists, philosophers, writers, artists as leaders, nobody wanted Octavian to be the Roman leader again, at least not at launch. I guess you are right, though, it's subjective. I didn't want to see Octavian again, but I was thrilled with the reveal of Xerxes.
this is also what civ 6 did to great success—tomyris, frederick barbarossa, catherine di medici, gorgo, teddy roosevelt, hojo tokimune, mvemba a nzinga, chandragupta maurya etc.
i mean, i assume a lot of this does stem from the rough response civ 6 had when so many fan favorites were missing, people forget how much ire was thrown out because genghis, shaka and others were missing initially, how much controversy picks like seondeok and kristina drew, etc.They would definitely be criticised by all the people who want the fan favourites, people accusing them of money grubbing by putting said favourites behind DLC, that sort of thing.
I don't disagree at all, by the way. I'd be quite happy with a whole array of totally new choices, especially with the possibilities that decoupled leaders open up. I just think they're damned if they do, damned if they don't.
