New possible leaders?

[phungus420]

...It would certainly be a marketing nightmare, and reduce the number of copies sold [everywhere]

Agree entirely. Firaxis was smart not to include Hitler. Hell not doing so is common sense. I just think it's silly how inconsistent society is with regard to Hitler. I mean including Mao and Stalin is fine and dandy, but Hitler isn't? I can't find a logical or philosophically consistent measure to determine who is "worse" between Hitler, Mao, Stalin, or Pol-Pot; yet society has branded Hitler as a boogy man, and spared the other three.

As far as the people who bring up Genghis and Julius, or other ancient leaders. Those names are from a different time. You can't honestly compare the moral actions of persons from ancient times to modern times. Doing so is simply disingenuous, or shows a complete lack of historical understanding.

 

[NWP20]

Firstly, isn't there a WWII mod? Isn't Hitler in that?

Secondly, I think the biggest problem would be the difficult of Hitler DOW'ing on any Jewish civ. That would never make it passed the media spotlight. Ever.

 

[kochman]

Firstly, isn't there a WWII mod? Isn't Hitler in that?

Secondly, I think the biggest problem would be the difficult of Hitler DOW'ing on any Jewish civ. That would never make it passed the media spotlight. Ever.

The Firaxis included WW2 mod has someone who looks a bit like an older Hitler might have looked, without the moustache I believe.

There are mods from private citizens that include Hitler.

There is also already several LHs of Hitler that you can easily add to Germany for a custom game/mod setting.

 

[Badtz Maru]

bloody fanatics.....they'd actually do that?

I've played a couple of games that not only had depictions of Muhammad, but very derogatory depictions, and none of those developers ended up beheaded as far as I know.

 

[kochman]

@Badtz Maru
Probably those designers haven't tried to head to Mecca recently, or they would most likely, if discovered, be killed. Depicitions of "the prophet" have lead to many killings, international rioting, etc... Ask Denmark.

 

[Sveon]

What about Timur Lenk - a creative, aggressive Kahn. Sound like a nice close neighbour to me.

Edit: Oops forgot Kublai allready have those traits.

 

[Hasuike]

I assume you want a Sid Meier's head to be placed on a Pike in Saudi Arabia as a warning to those who add Muhammed to PC games?

Including the prophet in any form would be forbidden as many Muslims would see it as similar to idolatry. The main reasoning is that allowing depictions of Muhammad would lead to the "danger" of the prophet being deified as oppose to Allah. Moderate Muslims might be angry or annoyed by a depiction of Muhammad but only the radicals kill over it.

Stalin has reason to be included not because of his leadership in ww2 or even his status as an ally during the war. Its not as if he was a complete ally either. Churchill and Roosevelt were much closer in terms of trust and material assistance. In fact, there were tensions from the beginning because Stalin realized that the USA was never going to send USSR the same sort of assitance they provided to the UK. Stalin's longest lasting contribution will always be the changes he made to Communism regarding cult of personality/reducing the idea of the vanguard group to only one person.

Hitler? Absolutely not. He was not a good leader, good commander, or even a seriously important figure in the long run of things. Politically he combined fascism with racism which to me is not a noteworthy contribution to politics or history. Besides why would I give the chance to modern nazi types to live out their what if scenario fantasy of conquering the world? Many will point to other "bloody" leaders and say why are they in the game then and that answer is simple: other meaningful contributions or innovations.
People are also making the mistake of judging someone like Genghis by the morals/laws of war that we use today which is not appropriate for true study of history. Besides that, he did do other things other than conquer and pillage such as allow free trade (The Economist did a good piece on how he was possibly the first "globalizer"). Mongols are also notorious for settling in a conquered area and adopting local customs to the point of assimilation. So Mongols will mess you up when they invade but after that is over with, life goes on like normal. Can that even be called an occupation?

One thing I'm curious about is whether or not any of the already included leaders ever went on Crusade? That would definitely raise eyebrows with not only my Muslim friends but ALL of my Middle Eastern friends whether they be orthodox Christian, Jew, or whatever. Richard I of England or Guy de Lusignan would seriously arouse more anger than Muhammad among my near east friends.

So for those with ADD, my summary:
1. Muhammad=bad idea
2. Hitler? Never
3. Genghis gets a worse rap than deserved like the Vikings used to.
4. Apply modern morals to history = rather fruitless endeavor
5. Crusade leaders worse than depicting prophet.
6. WTH no second leader for Japan? (preferably not from ww2)

 

[kochman]

Hitler? Absolutely not. He was not a good leader, good commander, or even a seriously important figure in the long run of things.

Really? Come on... that's just crazy talk. Hitler was evil, but he made an impact...
Leadership (for his country)
1) Led Germany from the worst country economically in Europe to the richest (people in Germany were burning money because it was cheaper than fire wood)...
2) Created first "highway" system, that is now used all over the world in countries that can afford it, and is key infrastructure
3) Led his country to numerous (military mainly) technological advances, including rockets
4) Annexed his neighbor Austria
5) Took back the Rhineland (sovereignty of his nation)
6) Annexed Sudetenland and Czeckoslovakia
7) Made Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria his lackies

Commander
1) Conquered Poland in 2 weeks
2) Conquered France, which the biggest land army in Europe at the time, in 6 weeks
3) Conquered Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway and Denmark with barely any conflict
4) Rolled through "Yugoslavia", don't know the time frame exactly
5) Same with Greece
6) Destroyed over 200 Russian military divisions in the first 2 years

Impact in History
1) Due to Holocaust, Zionist movement took over Israel, which many today attribute at least partially to problems with the Muslim World to this day
2) It took almost the entire civilized world at the time united to defeat his army, and the results left the CCCP in charge of E. Europe, which only recently was made free. Without Hitler being such an a-hole, Russia would never have been able to take over E. Europe like that
3) Today is the epitome of evil, guiding civilized nations in clear terms of how NOT to behave...

I would say his impact overall is pretty much, while clearly a terrible stain in history, an undeniable fact.

 

[Gooblah]

Note to other posters:

NO HITLER DISCUSSION PLEASE.

That may be borderline spammy, but we've had dozens of threads degenerate into 'he was bad but still important!' versus 'he was too bad and unmarketable!' arguments. It's a pain.

 

[Eklabiaan]

He guys, let's end these endless discussions on Hitler. The guy doesn't deserve the credit of all this attention.
If Germany needs a new Civ leader, take Adenauer. He rebuild his country after WWII and reintegrated (west) Germany in Europe. No small feat. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adenauer)

Another single leader Civ, the Netherlands could have one of:
Wilhelmina, like Willem van Oranje a national focal point in a repressive period of our history. Ruled for 50 years.

Johan van Oldebarneveld; one of the most capable statesman of the Republic in the 17th century, kept the 7 Provinces together in the darkest part of the 80-years war http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johan_van_Oldenbarnevelt.

Willem III; saved the Republic in an allout war against France, England and 2 german bishoprics. He led several alliances against Louis XIV and both ruled the Republic and England http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_III_of_England

(Republic = Republic of the 7 United Provinces = what became later the Netherlands)

 

[mechaerik]

The Firaxis included WW2 mod has someone who looks a bit like an older Hitler might have looked, without the moustache I believe.(/QUOTE]

Its a small reskin of FDR, he's supposed to be Von Papen.

 

[kochman]

@ Gooblah & Eklabiaan & anyone else trying to boss people around on the internet:
Good luck with that.

 

[Molybdeus]

Germany's successful economic redevelopment was due to Hjalmar Schacht, not Hitler. Schacht was opposed to Hitler, and Hitler soon replaced him to the detriment of the German economy. Stalin was as bad as Hitler morally, but he was a much more effective administrator and thus deserving of being in the game.

If you really wanted to add another German leader to the game (I don't as they already have two good ones,) Frederick William I would be a really good choice.

 

[Grimberht]

People are also making the mistake of judging someone like Genghis by the morals/laws of war that we use today which is not appropriate for true study of history. Besides that, he did do other things other than conquer and pillage such as allow free trade (The Economist did a good piece on how he was possibly the first "globalizer"). Mongols are also notorious for settling in a conquered area and adopting local customs to the point of assimilation. So Mongols will mess you up when they invade but after that is over with, life goes on like normal. Can that even be called an occupation?

I want to add some point to this. It's a good chance to argue or add information in another language. First the concept of "globalization" is completly anachronic with how "governement" were in Antiquity / Medieval time. Mongols even more... they were an highly organized armed gang more then anything else. The free trade they "allowed" was simply cause they didnt care! They let it run cause they didnt had any share in it.

Usually in those time invaders didnt actually try to force changes, mainly cause it wasnt impractical.. every attemps has failed. So invaders we're force to adapt to the culture they just conquer. Alexander is a perfect exemple or the influance of the greek culture on the Romans, the same was true for Mongols, Mamelouks, Ottomans, even every german tribe settled on the Roman territory.

Last point for everyone else on the Mongols, they used terror has a weapons, they werent more cruel than any other in those time... sure they destroyed some cities to set an exemple, but so did everyone else, Greece à Mélos, Alexander with Thebes, Roman with Carthage and Corinthe (the same year), so Mongol pilling up head leaving few witness behind aint that cruel. Basil II, Byzatine empire, blinded 15000 bulgar prisoner leaving 1% to guide the others back in they country... This is cruelty! Think about what kind of impact it has been on the minds and on society. But when you compare to modern violence (thanks to the nazis) it's child play!

 

[Grimberht]

Commander
1) Conquered Poland in 2 weeks
2) Conquered France, which the biggest land army in Europe at the time, in 6 weeks
3) Conquered Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg, Norway and Denmark with barely any conflict
4) Rolled through "Yugoslavia", don't know the time frame exactly
5) Same with Greece
6) Destroyed over 200 Russian military divisions in the first 2 years

We call it... we have Tanks and planes and you dont not being a good commander. A good commander would have listen to his general and finish of Moskow right away, not pursuit a 4 fronts war soon to be 5.

Impact in History
1) Due to Holocaust, Zionist movement took over Israel, which many today attribute at least partially to problems with the Muslim World to this day
2) It took almost the entire civilized world at the time united to defeat his army, and the results left the CCCP in charge of E. Europe, which only recently was made free. Without Hitler being such an a-hole, Russia would never have been able to take over E. Europe like that
3) Today is the epitome of evil, guiding civilized nations in clear terms of how NOT to behave...

Well we cant know how relation would have been between muslim and jews if Hitler didnt exist. Has far as I know, a project to find a land to the jews was underway before WWII. Even Hitler had a plan to send them to Madagascar before realizing he was a stupid to persecute them, crippling the economy of the country he invaded making them a burden instead of a "bonus"

Furthermore, Hitler made history because he was stupid! WWII was a suicide, a last attempt to satisfy this old Prussian expantionist dream, when WWI failed to neutralize them, it was just a matter of time before round 2 begin. Hitler wasnt the great evil genius behind all of it, he's the guy who sold it and took all the blame in the end.

 

[NWP20]

Well we cant know how relation would have been between muslim and jews if Hitler didnt exist. Has far as I know, a project to find a land to the jews was underway before WWII.

Interstingly, and massively off-topic,Uganda was mooted as the new Jewish homeland until the Ugandan diplomat in charge of negotiations died unexpectedly. It is amaxing how he death of one man affects the world so much.

 

[Otaku-sama]

Hitler was a psycho ninny with a twisted dream to destroy anyone who is part of an Abramic religion (Yes, he also killed Christians and Muslims along with the Jews). Hitler wasn't a good commander. I watched the 'Apocalypse: World at War' documentaries on National Geographic, and Hitler was a freaking idiot who had no idea how to wage war. He was fighting the whole world at once, quite literally. He also declared war on America in a desperate attempt to get the Japanese to help him with the USSR (silly Hitler! The Japanese would never help you! They're too busy kicking @$$ in the South-East). Hitler also went senile in his later years.

In conclusion, Hitler was an ninny and doesn't really deserve to represent a nation at its height.

No more Hitler talk now. I don't want Godwin's Law to end this thread.

Back on topic:

Meiji could be a good second leader for Japan because he will actually trade! A trading Japan! Its too good to be true!

Taizong looks like a good third leader for China considering that after his reign, all emperors were compared to him.

Any other ideas?

 

[Olfart]

To all suggesting an end to the Hitler discussions - BRAVO!! Such discussions tend to run on forever and accomplish nothing. I would prefer to stick more closely to the original topic. Some interesting ideas are getting buried under the tedious Hitler sidebar.

 

[phungus420]

Here's a tip. Instead of trying to get the last word by adding a "No more talk about Hitler" to the end of your statement; how about saying nothing at all, and just let it die. If you try to make a point that's contentious, someone is going to point that out. You're just being stupid/arrogant/whinny by trying to get in the last word and asking others that disagree with you to leave it at that. In short, your actions speak louder then words; so if you really want to stop talking about Hitler, how about, stop talking about Hitler.

 

[kochman]

We call it... we have Tanks and planes and you dont not being a good commander. A good commander would have listen to his general and finish of Moskow right away, not pursuit a 4 fronts war soon to be 5.

Thank God he wasn't a better commander! Anyway, what are you talking about?
France had tanks and planes, so did Russia... and Britain was on the mainland with their tanks and planes too... that just doesn't make sense.