New Leader Crumbs?

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

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.

Come to think of it all of them besides Benjamin Franklin were Great People in Civ 6, Amina being the latest addition replacing Mbande Nzinga, so I would say maybe her inclusion was foreshadowing her appearance in Civ 7?

 

[Nikolai II]

If that's Catherine, it confirms Russia over Mexico. She could theoretically be a Central/Eastern Europe regional leader (as a German princess and Russian Tsaress), but with Frederick there, it makes her scope more narrow.

How does Catherine disprove Mexico?

 

[Lord Lakely]

She does not. EaglePursuit is doing EaglePursuit things, that's all (but that's why we like him so much)


(also I'm pretty sure there is a mesoamerican leader of sorts - NONE of the currently revealed leaders default to the Mayan Civ, and that doesn't feel correct. and IF Mexico are in, that leader would default to them as well.)

 

[Patine]

then came alexander, cyrus, genghis, shaka, hammurabi to bring back core fans

You forgot Gandhi. He's to numbered Civ iterations what Anthony Daniels' C-3P0 is to numbered Star Wars movies.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

You forgot Gandhi. He's to numbered Civ iterations what Anthony Daniels' C-3P0 is to numbered Star Wars movies.

gandhi was there at launch

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

(also I'm pretty sure there is a mesoamerican leader of sorts - NONE of the currently revealed leaders default to the Mayan Civ, and that doesn't feel correct. and IF Mexico are in, that leader would default to them as well.)

I strongly suspect Montezuma I to show up, considering the Aztecs presumably won't be in the game at launch.

 

[Lord Lakely]

He better not. We've had our fair share of Monty memes over the years, and the well is quite dry. Benito Suarez would be my choice - indigenous PM and a good way to have Mexico represented without necessarily having them as a playable Civ (yes there are circumstantial indicators they're in the Modern Era but like... none of it actually confirms their inclusion.)

Though I WILL SCREAM if there is an Aztec leader and it ends up being Itzcoatl, just like Ara.

 

[Xandinho]

I would have chosen Ivan IV (the Terrible), but perhaps now isn’t the best time for an expansionist Russian leader.

By the way, we’re seeing the return of some figures we haven’t seen since Civ4. That’s great.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

He better not. We've had our fair share of Monty memes over the years, and the well is quite dry. Benito Suarez would be my choice - indigenous PM and a good way to have Mexico represented without necessarily having them as a playable Civ (yes there are circumstantial indicators they're in the Modern Era but like... none of it actually confirms their inclusion.)

I think they are more likely to be a civ, given the clues we have seen such as a wonder and Latin American city architecture, which is why I went with a potential Aztec leader instead.

 

[The Fanatical]

I strongly suspect Montezuma I to show up, considering the Aztecs presumably won't be in the game at launch.

I will miss those Jaguar Warriors and Samurai, but I have faith for the future. Firaxis is keen on spoiling us.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

He better not. We've had our fair share of Monty memes over the years, and the well is quite dry. Benito Suarez would be my choice - indigenous PM and a good way to have Mexico represented without necessarily having them as a playable Civ (yes there are circumstantial indicators they're in the Modern Era but like... none of it actually confirms their inclusion.)

Though I WILL SCREAM if there is an Aztec leader and it ends up being Itzcoatl, just like Ara.

If we gotta have an Aztec Leader, this is the perfect game for Tlacaelel, chief advisor (Cihuacoatl) to 4 Aztec emperors and possibly the character who started the "Flower Wars" to take sacrificial candidates. Talk about a basis for something really Unique in a bonus!

 

[The Fanatical]

If we gotta have an Aztec Leader, this is the perfect game for Tlacaelel, chief advisor (Cihuacoatl) to 4 Aztec emperors and possibly the character who started the "Flower Wars" to take sacrificial candidates. Talk about a basis for something really Unique in a bonus!

A son of an emperor too. Not far of the mark, just like Confucius and Machiavelli.

 

[Thenewwwguy]

Aztecs do feel like a civ that could use more detail on the civ design and go without a leader for now…

I would want Emiliano Zapata, Pancho Villa or Benito Suarez for a Mexico civ tho. Prob in that order. Though with civ’s design philosophy at the moment, I wouldn’t be surprised if Mexico was led by Frida Kahlo (in the same way that Civ 6 went for “big personalities”—which Pancho Villa probably would’ve fit better for, it seems like Civ 7 wants to go for leaders who are highly representative of their cultures and motivations. not one note, but perhaps highly driven individuals. Changemakers, if you will). Plus Kahlo was extremely politically influential and active. Would be an interesting way to include a communist when most other communist leaders would probably not be included due to American stigma, even if they’re prob fine by all other civ metrics (looking at you, Ho Chi Minh). Though if we’re talking a stand-alone leader with no need to be tied to a civ who could be a great representative for communism and socialism, I’d really encourage Firaxis to pick Thomas Sankara or Patrick Lumumba. Maybe even Franz Fanon.

In terms of Indigenous Mesoamerica, I would still place my first choice in Princess Erendira of Purepecha (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Eréndira)

I think she’d fit well in an Amina (adjacent to Songhai, charismatic, interesting in her own right) role, or alongside a Purepecha civ.

 

[Patine]

I will miss those Jaguar Warriors and Samurai

Sounds like a typical, "Ultimate Warrior," match-up.

 

[dagriggstar]

Firaxis needs a leader to fill the “token flirty female” trope and if it isn’t Cleopatra then it has to be Catherine. Somehow, this makes for good gameplay.

 

[Zaarin]

It's quite possible that they're revealing the safest leaders first and saving the more out-there ones for closer to release. Get the mainstream fans hyped first, then satisfy the history nerds.

That won't appease my disappointment at Augustus, Catherine the Great, and, above all, Naboringon Boreapart.

(also I'm pretty sure there is a mesoamerican leader of sorts - NONE of the currently revealed leaders default to the Mayan Civ, and that doesn't feel correct. and IF Mexico are in, that leader would default to them as well.)

My bets are on Montezuma I. Between the fact that he's a Civ staple and the apparent absence of the Aztecs, he seems like a logical fit. If it's not him, I suspect it will be Benito Juarez. (I do hope we get K'inich Janaab Pakal in the future, though--with an elongated skull and all bedecked in jade instead of Firaxis contributing to the extinction of the resplendent quetzal for a change. )

 

[BuchiTaton]

Aztecs do feel like a civ that could use more detail on the civ design and go without a leader for now…

I would want Emiliano Zapata, Pancho Villa or Benito Suarez for a Mexico civ tho. Prob in that order. Though with civ’s design philosophy at the moment, I wouldn’t be surprised if Mexico was led by Frida Kahlo (in the same way that Civ 6 went for “big personalities”—which Pancho Villa probably would’ve fit better for, it seems like Civ 7 wants to go for leaders who are highly representative of their cultures and motivations. not one note, but perhaps highly driven individuals. Changemakers, if you will). Plus Kahlo was extremely politically influential and active. Would be an interesting way to include a communist when most other communist leaders would probably not be included due to American stigma, even if they’re prob fine by all other civ metrics (looking at you, Ho Chi Minh). Though if we’re talking a stand-alone leader with no need to be tied to a civ who could be a great representative for communism and socialism, I’d really encourage Firaxis to pick Thomas Sankara or Patrick Lumumba. Maybe even Franz Fanon.

In terms of Indigenous Mesoamerica, I would still place my first choice in Princess Erendira of Purepecha (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Eréndira)

I think she’d fit well in an Amina (adjacent to Songhai, charismatic, interesting in her own right) role, or alongside a Purepecha civ.

Under the new CIV7'S criteria for leaders the best options for a Mexican leader are Benito Juarez and Emiliano Zapata. Juárez is the mandatory image of the ideal president in Mexico and Zapata's ideals and ways as a revolutionary leader are doubtless unlike Doroteo Arango (Francisco Villa) whose figure always was questionable, with a lot of doubtful events, propaganda and detractors. I mean, people here always says that civ should not use leaders whose negative actions are still in the memory of their victims so at 101 years of his dead is not difficult to find recent interviews with the witnesses of the "excess" of the revolution.
Meanwhile Frida Kahlo like El Che Guevara is a fine example of how capitalism can turn a communist figure into a marketable t-shirt.

By the way Erendira was almost for sure a 19th century fabrication by Eduardo Ruíz.

 

[ColtSeavers]

Words can't express how disappointed I am going to be if Russian and German leader are ONCE AGAIN!!! Catherine and Frederick, as if those countries of a millenium of history can only rotate between like four imperialist rulers from two of the most overused periods and aspects of their civilisations

Overall probably the only one thing I am increasingly very disappointed in is civ7 weird insistence to pick the most "orthodox", overused, stereotypical leaders possible for its main civs, with their only refreshing grace being absent from one or max two iteriations of the game. Seriously - Ben Franklin, Confucius, Augustus, Catherine, Frederick, Ashoka, Xerxes? And here I was wasting time trying to juggle between Eisenhower, Song era emperor, Diocletian, Nevsky, Konrad Adenauer, Lakshmibai and other leaders to defy the most stale pophistory stereotypes, such as "German leaders are inherently warlike" (very harmful one) or "Roman empire is only decline in its final three centuries of existence"

I feel quiet the opposite. For Civ 6, there were too many leaders, who just got into the game for change's sake, like Catherine of Medici or Ludwig II. I'd be glad, if they brought some real established leaders back. Plus Frederick the Great has not been part of last two games and Catherine wasn't in Civ 6 either.

 

[BackseatTyrant]

Once they revealed they were going for non-political leaders, my mind quickly went to wanting Rasputin. But I'll take her over anyone else for Russia, if we can't have him.

I would've personally suggested Nikita Khrushchev, if for no other reason than that his administration was responsible for the greatest rise of living standards in Russian history

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Rasputin would be fun, but the best Russian "thought leader" would be Tolstoy, I think.