Old Civs, New Leaders

Nope, the civilopedia of both games clearly identify the Monties of 5 and 6 as Ilhuicamina, not Xocoyotzin
 
Anyhow, some other leader suggestions:

Pombal (Portugal)
Saigo Takamori (Japan)
Robert Walpole (England)
Francisco Javier Castaños (Spain)
 
Boris Gudenuf said:
Russia:
Ivan IV Vasilyevich
Also known as Ivan 'the Terrible' BUT as I have posted more than once, the better translation of grozhniy is Terrifying or Ivan the Mighty or Formidable (and yes, it says something about traditional Russian thinking that anyone mighty or powerful is automatically also Terrifying!)
So everybody thinks of him as the Conquerer of Novgorod, man who started the Streltsi pike and shot unit (well, barded axe and shot)
BUT (again)
He also started the first printing plant in Moscow, personally wrote (they've been able to check the handwriting on drafts) a stack of religious pamphlets (one modern Russian scholar called him "a pamphleteer of genius"), reformed the Muscovite Legal Code, set up a Council of Nobles and the Zemsky Sobor, or Council of (feudal) Estates, and had the Cathedral of Saint Vasily the Blessed built in Moscow - you know, Saint Basil's, to an architectural design ever used again anywhere.
He established Russia's first 'secret police/Royal Bodyguard', the Oprichnina
He also opened up Russia to trade with England's Muscovy Company (England's first Joint Stock Company) and started the Russian expansion into Siberia.

And he outdid Henry VIII, having at least 7 wives, with 4 recognized by the church and he was negotiating to marry a relative of Elizabeth I of England (and wouldn't That marriage have shaken up the dynastic history of both states!)

So, practically defined the Russian government and Russian army, has his own Unique Unit: the Streltsi, his own Wonder: St Basil's, and has chops for military, cultural, religious, economic, expansionist or trade bonuses
Click to expand...
Hasn't Ivan been feautured in a previous civilization game? Anyway, he was my first preference, but then I thought that he is already a well-known figure in pop history same as Catherine, Peter and Stalin, and so I went for the lesser-known Stolypin.
 
Boris Gudenuf said:
For Aleksandr of the Neva (Nevskii) his most important title was Grand Prince of Vladimir, which meant he was the highest-ranking Russian puppet under the Mongol khans of the Golden Horde based at Sarai (near modern Volgograd) on the Volga. While he was a very good military leader against the Christian west, he was completely subservient to the Mongols. That means his capital could be either Novgorod or Vladimir, but it also means he could do nothing without looking over his shoulder towards Sarai or Karakorum.

A better choice, and like Ivan IV also not a Romanov, would be:
Dmitrii Ivanovich (Demetrius Ioannovich)Donskoi - Dmitry of the Don, Prince of Moscow and Grand Prince of Vladimir and a Saint of the Orthodox church.

There are three great 'field battles' in Russian military history, and Dmitrii won the first of them: Kulikovo Field against the Mongol Golden Horde in 1380. He was the first Prince of Moscow to openly defy the Mongols and get away with it, because after Kulikovo by the Don River the Mongols never came back, Moscow stopped paying tribute, and under Dmitrii the city state of Moscow became the first really independent Russian polity and his son became Prince of Moscow without consulting the Mongol khans.
He also started the building of the Moscow Kreml (kremlin) in stone (there had been a wooden fort there for at least 300 years already) as a fortress, which put a punctuation mark on the independence of Moscow and the Muscovites. If anybody 'founded' independent Russia, it was Dmitrii, not Alekandr.

I'd still slightly prefer Ivan IV for Russia, though - also a pre-Romanov and also with a claim to 'founding' Russia - he was the first Grand Prince or Prince of Moscow to also adopt the title of Tsar of Russia.
Click to expand...
Yet who was the one who fended off the German invaders, so that Dmitri of the Don could create the Tsardom?
 
Bonyduck Campersang said:
But what you can do is have a fresh face for the civilizations each time, and you should, not only to break the monotony, but also because there are several great candidates for the staple civilisations who deserve to be known more about.
Click to expand...

I prefer the current approach of having some returning and some new leaders. New leaders and Civs encourage the player to learn more about them, but returning leaders reinforce the character driven element of the game, at least as long as the leaders retain their personalities across different titles (e.g. Montezuma). However, if the returning leaders are not at all congruent across different titles (e.g. Julius Caesar), then I'd rather have a completely new one.

In regards to returning leaders, they should nevertheless focus primarily on the ones which have not been in the preceding title (e.g. Hatsheput hasn't been in the game since Civ 4). But the release should have some familiar faces, and then keep bringing back a few with each dlc/expansion.

Napoleon and Frederick the Great are strong candidates which I would like to see returning in Civ 7, for instance.
 
AntSou said:
Napoleon and Frederick the Great are strong candidates which I would like to see returning in Civ 7, for instance.
Click to expand...
I would rather they don't – especially Napoleon – because both France and Germany have lots of interesting candidates who haven't been in the game yet
 
Bonyduck Campersang said:
I would rather they don't – especially Napoleon – because both France and Germany have lots of interesting candidates who haven't been in the game yet
Click to expand...
France:
Georges Clemenceau
Phillip II Augustus
Henry IV
Anne of Austria

Germany:
Rudolf II
Frederick II von Hofenstaufen
Otto I
Henry the Fowler
 
Richelieu also for France. There's a whole streak of kings and queens and regents and first ministers from the late Wars of Religion to the reign of Louis XIV who should get a turn.
 
Caesar of Bread said:
Yet who was the one who fended off the German invaders, so that Dmitri of the Don could create the Tsardom?
Click to expand...
Not quite, or, 'sort of'.
He got his title "Nevskii", or 'of the Neva' for defeating the Swedes on the Neva River, not the Germans. His famous 'Battle on the Ice' was against the Livonian Order, a branch of the Teutonic Knights but rather than German, it was comprised of a cadre of Germans and mostly Livonian (Lithuanian/Estonian) troops. And he never confronted the Mongols at all, but they were the ones that conquered or subjugated all the Russian cities, including Novgorod, Moscow and Vladimir, the three strongest. It was Dmitrii who broke that yoke and then Ivan who started Muscovy's assertion of primacy among the central Russian city states and started the Russian expansion into Siberia and to the south into the former lands of the Golden Horde. To be honest, there is no evidence that either the Swedes or the Livonian/Teutonic Knights ever threatened Moscow or central Russia - they were attacking Novgorod, their financial/trading rival in northwestern Russia.
Don't mistake the historical Aleksandr Yaroslavich for Eisenstein's movie version, which was designed to emphasize the Anti-German aspect for Soviet propaganda - note that the film came out in 1938, when Fascist Germany was considered the Soviet Union's greatest threat. After the Non-Aggression Pact signed in September 1939 between Germany and the USSR, the film was pulled out of theatres and not shown again until after the Germans invaded in 1941. Eisenstein was a genius, but also an accomplished propagandist - NOT a historian.

And here's another German Leader prospect for the Mill:
Friedrich Wilhelm, "The Great Elector" of Brandenburg and Duke of Prussia.
He virtually founded the Prussian standing army, led it to notable victories over the Swedes, but also showed remarkable religious tolerance, inviting French Huguenots and Catholics from other German states to settle in Brandenburg-Prussia and preventing the persecution of Jews, Catholics and other Protestants in Prussia (he was Calvinist himself, but obviously not a conventional one). He established a University in Berlin, the Berlin library, built canals all over Prussia to facilitate trade that are still in use, set up new industries in textiles, soap, iron, paper and promoted the commercial/mercantile classes over the Junker nobility (who, however, he exempted from taxes in return for their military service, a 'contract' that remained in effect for another 300 years)

Basically, everything considered 'typically German' (or Prussian) for the next 400 years starts with him!
 
Caesar of Bread said:
France:
Georges Clemenceau
Phillip II Augustus
Henry IV
Anne of Austria

Germany:
Rudolf II
Frederick II von Hofenstaufen
Otto I
Henry the Fowler
Click to expand...
I must, once again, add Charles de Galle for France.
 
Bonyduck Campersang said:
Hasn't Ivan been feautured in a previous civilization game? Anyway, he was my first preference, but then I thought that he is already a well-known figure in pop history same as Catherine, Peter and Stalin, and so I went for the lesser-known Stolypin.
Click to expand...
He's a well-known historical figure, but grossly mis-understood, starting with the translation of his title as "Terrible" instead of the more accurate "Terrifying" or "Mighty". Aside from the fact that he's much more multi-faceted than anyone (at least in the West) realizes, which I think makes a better overall basis for a Leader in Civ, the historian in me wants to see him more accurately presented to the gaming audience than he has been in games, movies, or other popular accounts.
 
Boris Gudenuf said:
Not quite, or, 'sort of'.
He got his title "Nevskii", or 'of the Neva' for defeating the Swedes on the Neva River, not the Germans. His famous 'Battle on the Ice' was against the Livonian Order, a branch of the Teutonic Knights but rather than German, it was comprised of a cadre of Germans and mostly Livonian (Lithuanian/Estonian) troops. And he never confronted the Mongols at all, but they were the ones that conquered or subjugated all the Russian cities, including Novgorod, Moscow and Vladimir, the three strongest. It was Dmitrii who broke that yoke and then Ivan who started Muscovy's assertion of primacy among the central Russian city states and started the Russian expansion into Siberia and to the south into the former lands of the Golden Horde. To be honest, there is no evidence that either the Swedes or the Livonian/Teutonic Knights ever threatened Moscow or central Russia - they were attacking Novgorod, their financial/trading rival in northwestern Russia.
Don't mistake the historical Aleksandr Yaroslavich for Eisenstein's movie version, which was designed to emphasize the Anti-German aspect for Soviet propaganda - note that the film came out in 1938, when Fascist Germany was considered the Soviet Union's greatest threat. After the Non-Aggression Pact signed in September 1939 between Germany and the USSR, the film was pulled out of theatres and not shown again until after the Germans invaded in 1941. Eisenstein was a genius, but also an accomplished propagandist - NOT a historian.

And here's another German Leader prospect for the Mill:
Friedrich Wilhelm, "The Great Elector" of Brandenburg and Duke of Prussia.
He virtually founded the Prussian standing army, led it to notable victories over the Swedes, but also showed remarkable religious tolerance, inviting French Huguenots and Catholics from other German states to settle in Brandenburg-Prussia and preventing the persecution of Jews, Catholics and other Protestants in Prussia (he was Calvinist himself, but obviously not a conventional one). He established a University in Berlin, the Berlin library, built canals all over Prussia to facilitate trade that are still in use, set up new industries in textiles, soap, iron, paper and promoted the commercial/mercantile classes over the Junker nobility (who, however, he exempted from taxes in return for their military service, a 'contract' that remained in effect for another 300 years)

Basically, everything considered 'typically German' (or Prussian) for the next 400 years starts with him!
Click to expand...
You seem like a well-accomplished historian! I really want to watch Einstein (alongside Orson Wells and Fritz Lang), but I never knew that the film was mostly propaganda.
 
Caesar of Bread said:
You seem like a well-accomplished historian! I really want to watch Einstein (alongside Orson Wells and Fritz Lang), but I never knew that the film was mostly propaganda.
Click to expand...
I dabble at it Full Time.
Eisenstein was a genius film-maker, but it helps to know the context of what you are seeing. He has the advantage that his films, even when made with a massive propaganda background, are still watchable simply as great cinematic story-telling.
 
How the heck have the Inca been around as a playable Civ without their most obvious leader???
Aaaa.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Navelgazer
Dream Civs/Leaders for Civ 7
2 3
Replies
48
Views
3K
Patine
Patine
King Phaedron
Evolving Civs and Leaders - Aztec to Mexico, Cherokee to America
2 3
Replies
44
Views
2K
Alexander's Hetaroi
Alexander's Hetaroi
R
Compilation of Civ 7 suggestions I have collected from Reddit:
2
Replies
20
Views
2K
The_goggles_do_nothing
T
The_J
GameRant: Civilization 7 Could Break New Ground with an Exciting Feature
Replies
12
Views
3K
Krajzen
Krajzen
GeneralZIft
Slavery
Replies
16
Views
337
GeneralZIft
GeneralZIft
Top Bottom