New Leader Idea: Adolf Hitler

[Boris Gudenuf]

The problem with Hitler as a leader is that too often people confuse the traits of the German Military and the German Science and Industry with the traits of the Nazis.
Ain't the same thing at all.
Just for a few furinstances:

U-Boat warfare was started and (within the limits of the technology) perfected in WWI. Under the Nazi regime, they just added the use of better boats and radio-direction-finding and control and ran with it - and after mid-1943, having fallen well behind in radar, sank with it.

The dive-bombing Stuka had nothing to do with Hitler or the Nazis at all. It was the German air force's attempt to find a way to get better effect (accuracy) from bombing, and it was a technique they 'borrowed' after seeing it used by the people who developed the technique: The US Marine Corps air wing!

The Panzers and the 'Blitzkrieg' are probably the most often associated with the Nazi regime, but Hitler considered Blitzkrieg a 'silly word', never used it, and the panzer divisions were a logical outgrowth of the German 'Bewegungskrieg' (Maneuver Warfare) concept which had been around since at least Frederick the Great (Robert Citino argues that it dates back to the 1680s, but I think he's reaching just a bit: point is, it's a Prussian concept, not a Nazi one)

Finally, I question why anyone would want to play a leader whose sole accomplishment was to make his 1000 Year Reich last just 12 years, and destroy his own country in the process. It's a little like preferring to play Rome as Nero, but without the music...

 

[Leyrann]

The problem with Hitler as a leader is that too often people confuse the traits of the German Military and the German Science and Industry with the traits of the Nazis.
Ain't the same thing at all.
Just for a few furinstances:

U-Boat warfare was started and (within the limits of the technology) perfected in WWI. Under the Nazi regime, they just added the use of better boats and radio-direction-finding and control and ran with it - and after mid-1943, having fallen well behind in radar, sank with it.

The dive-bombing Stuka had nothing to do with Hitler or the Nazis at all. It was the German air force's attempt to find a way to get better effect (accuracy) from bombing, and it was a technique they 'borrowed' after seeing it used by the people who developed the technique: The US Marine Corps air wing!

The Panzers and the 'Blitzkrieg' are probably the most often associated with the Nazi regime, but Hitler considered Blitzkrieg a 'silly word', never used it, and the panzer divisions were a logical outgrowth of the German 'Bewegungskrieg' (Maneuver Warfare) concept which had been around since at least Frederick the Great (Robert Citino argues that it dates back to the 1680s, but I think he's reaching just a bit: point is, it's a Prussian concept, not a Nazi one)

Finally, I question why anyone would want to play a leader whose sole accomplishment was to make his 1000 Year Reich last just 12 years, and destroy his own country in the process. It's a little like preferring to play Rome as Nero, but without the music...

Now that's a bit harsh on Nero. Historians currently suspect that Nero has been painted quite a bit worse than he was by history writers of the time, and he most certainly did not dance and sing while the city burned, even if only because he wasn't in the city at the time.

 

[vit_sin]

Glorifying(by adding into game) Hitler-The-Monstor that responsible for killing millions of people around the world - the worst idea ever.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Now that's a bit harsh on Nero. Historians currently suspect that Nero has been painted quite a bit worse than he was by history writers of the time, and he most certainly did not dance and sing while the city burned, even if only because he wasn't in the city at the time.

Ah, but the popular-though-false image of Nero the Fiddling Monster is no more inaccurate than the modern image of Hitler-as-a-Great-Leader. He took one of the most technically and culturally advanced countries in the world and in just 12 years managed to turn them into barbarians. His sole '1000 year accomplishment' was that on 11 May 1945 for the first time in 1000 years there was not a square centimeter of land anywhere in the world governed by Germans, or even German-speakers: he had managed to get every single German state destroyed.

Now, if you want alternate German leaders, there are a bunch of candidates that are far more accomplished and with, I think, better possibilities for characteristics in the game:

Bismarck - but not necessarily the military-statesman, he also established the Social Democratic system of Unions enmeshed in businesses and a technical school system that fed both that, arguably, gave Germany her edge in technical innovation and precision manufacturing throughout the 20th century.

Friedrich II, The Great - don't forget that in addition to training the first really modern cavalry (able to charge In Formation and in good order for 1000 yards or more to get maximum Shock Effect) he also played the flute, wrote music, and corresponded with durn near every intellectual in Europe. A Great possibility for a Military-Culture combination!

The Great Elector - his grandfather - who really established the Prussian Army and started its emphasis on 'Lively Wars' - don't fight a war you don't have the resources for - but also single-mindedly exploited every possible human and natural resource in his sandbox of a minor state. Here's a leader that could get extra resources out of Map Resources or Constructions in his cities, including inviting trained people from other countries to migrate and set up shop in his state.

These are 'thumbnail' off the cuff descriptions, but I throw them out to show that there are several much better leaders available for Germany that lend themselves to much more interesting and variable characteristics than Hitler.

 

[Quoth the Raven]

Mods are your answer. There are a number of Civ IV and V mods that add Hitler as a leader of Germany. I am not sure about Civ VI though as I do not own it.

About Hitler being in the base game, I have no problem with it, but I would only think it would work if there were something like 4 leaders per civ, or if there was a WWII scenario. Although Mao and Stalin made it into the base game of Civ IV so there is some precedent. Mao was responsible for an estimated 40-70 million deaths, and Stalin for an estimated 15-25 million. Hitler is just more infamous because his atrocities are much more documented.

 

[Leyrann]

Ah, but the popular-though-false image of Nero the Fiddling Monster is no more inaccurate than the modern image of Hitler-as-a-Great-Leader. He took one of the most technically and culturally advanced countries in the world and in just 12 years managed to turn them into barbarians. His sole '1000 year accomplishment' was that on 11 May 1945 for the first time in 1000 years there was not a square centimeter of land anywhere in the world governed by Germans, or even German-speakers: he had managed to get every single German state destroyed.

Now, if you want alternate German leaders, there are a bunch of candidates that are far more accomplished and with, I think, better possibilities for characteristics in the game:

Bismarck - but not necessarily the military-statesman, he also established the Social Democratic system of Unions enmeshed in businesses and a technical school system that fed both that, arguably, gave Germany her edge in technical innovation and precision manufacturing throughout the 20th century.

Friedrich II, The Great - don't forget that in addition to training the first really modern cavalry (able to charge In Formation and in good order for 1000 yards or more to get maximum Shock Effect) he also played the flute, wrote music, and corresponded with durn near every intellectual in Europe. A Great possibility for a Military-Culture combination!

The Great Elector - his grandfather - who really established the Prussian Army and started its emphasis on 'Lively Wars' - don't fight a war you don't have the resources for - but also single-mindedly exploited every possible human and natural resource in his sandbox of a minor state. Here's a leader that could get extra resources out of Map Resources or Constructions in his cities, including inviting trained people from other countries to migrate and set up shop in his state.

These are 'thumbnail' off the cuff descriptions, but I throw them out to show that there are several much better leaders available for Germany that lend themselves to much more interesting and variable characteristics than Hitler.

Which is precisely why I said you shouldn't compare it with Nero. Hitler was in every way much worse than Nero.

That said, it's not true that there was no country anymore governed by German-speakers; there still was Austria, and most of Switzerland speaks German too.

 

[Boris Gudenuf]

Which is precisely why I said you shouldn't compare it with Nero. Hitler was in every way much worse than Nero.

I suggest that we don't have enough evidence to be sure of that, although I will give you that he was 'better' in that the Roman Empire survived him; but it took a Year of 5 Emperors (mercifully short Roman Civil War, in essence) to clean up after him.

That said, it's not true that there was no country anymore governed by German-speakers; there still was Austria, and most of Switzerland speaks German too.

I will give you part of Switzerland as Partially German-speaking, but Austria had been incorporated into the German Reich in 1938 and so in 1945 was governed by the Occupying Powers. There was no Austrian government run by Austrians until later, as in the (East and West) Germanies.