One leader for dual civilization

[Lord of War N02]

Civilization 6 is the first game that introduced one leader for dual civs like Kublai Khan for Mongolia and China, and Eleanor for England and France. I think this is an interesting idea that could be possible added into civilization 7.

For what I know that in history there are leaders that could be considered as a leader for leading 2 civs at same time such as Charlemagne for France and Germany, Louis I of Hungary and Poland for Hungary and Poland, Constantine I for Rome and Byzantium, Franz Joseph for Austria and Hungary and Piye and Taharqa possible for Nubia and Egypt.

What are other leader candidates that can be considered as a leader to lead 2 civs?

 

[Henri Christophe]

Piye and Taharqa possible for Nubia and Egypt.

I rly want that one.

Constantine I for Rome and Byzantium

That will be fun, despite he is just leader of Rome.


But to add something new, it can have D.João VI or D.Pedro I as mutual leader of Brazil and Portugal.

 

[Lord of War N02]

I rly want that one.


That will be fun, despite he is just leader of Rome.


But to add something new, it can have D.João VI or D.Pedro I as mutual leader of Brazil and Portugal.

D.Pedro I was King of Portugal for briefly and D.Joao VI, he was not good leader for Brazil yet what I know.

 

[Henri Christophe]

D.Pedro I was King of Portugal for briefly and D.Joao VI, he was not good leader for Brazil yet what I know.

D.Pedro I of Brazil was named D.Pedro IV of Portugal, fought a civil war against his brother Miguel and won. I don't know details but D.Pedro IV of Portugal is a national hero (to Portugueses) who back from Brazil to save Portugal.

D.João VI is an amazing leader to Brazil, he is the one who brings the capital from Lisbon to Rio de Janeiro. He isn't a good leader to Portugal, who lost his king and become kind of a colony of Brazil on Europe.

D.João VI is portraited as a fat guy who likes to eat chicken, but despite of it he was a great leader who founded the first school of Medicine of Brazil, the national bank, the botanic gardens and promotode Brazil to united kingdom of Brazil, Portugal and Algarves.

 

[Venceslau Pietro Pietra]

D.Pedro I was King of Portugal for briefly and D.Joao VI, he was not good leader for Brazil yet what I know.

He was a very impactful figure in brazil, modernized Rio de Janeiro and prevented the brazilian provinces from shattering like the spanish colonies, he also popular in historical dramas and telenovelas, the goofy fat king João VI myth is well stablished in brazilian imaginary
First he ruled portugal as regent for Maria the Mad and later left Portugal to be king in Brazil, and came back to be king in Portugal, fits perfectly for a dual leader, just like Eleanor

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

How would that even work? There's already a lot of micromanagement going on with leading just one civ, so leading two civs at the same time seems not like a good idea. Besides I'm sure if dual leaders were to return, they would keep it how it is considering Kublai Khan also ruled Mongolia and China at the same time.

 

[pokiehl]

I really don't like this concept. I hope it doesn't return in Civ 7.

 

[Henri Christophe]

How would that even work? There's already a lot of micromanagement going on with leading just one civ, so leading two civs at the same time seems not like a good idea. Besides I'm sure if dual leaders were to return, they would keep it how it is considering Kublai Khan also ruled Mongolia and China at the same time.

Speaking about Mongolia, it should have Akbar as alt leader.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Speaking about Mongolia, it should have Akbar as alt leader.

No. Akbar should be a leader for it's own Mughal civ.

 

[Caesar of Bread]

What about William the Conqueror for England/France (or Normandy). Or Margaret I for Denmark (or Norway)/Sweden?

 

[Henri Christophe]

it's own Mughal civ.

Mughal is just the transliteration of the world Mongol. But in Akbar's language Mongol and Mughal is the same thing.
I rly believe is possible a only civ have this two leaders.
But since this game separate Byzantium from Rome, make sense separate also Mughals from Mongols.

 

[Evie]

Mughals is not what they called themselves. It's what others called them. In more precise term, while they did claim relation to Genghis, they were a hybrid of Mongol, Turk, Persian and general Islamic influences - so quite a distinct group from the more famous steppe mongols further north.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Mughals is not what they called themselves

How they call they self?

It's what others called them

And who called them Mughals and why?

while they did claim relation to Genghis

That is it a bold claim, if it's true. Akbar could lead the same civ as Gengis Khan.

they were a hybrid of Mongol, Turk, Persian and general Islamic influences - so quite a distinct group from the more famous steppe mongols further north.

On that I agree, Mughals and Mongols are very different, they don't even share land territory.
But other society changed as well, ancient egypt don't resemble on nothing on coptic egypt, for example.

But we live a spot dilema here. But we can go around if we made alt leaders for a single civ. If Mongols with Gengis Khan is giving as an obvious choice for Fire Axis, would be easier just to do an alt leader as Akbar and don't need to do an entire new civ just to him.

 

[pokiehl]

That is it a bold claim, if it's true. Akbar could lead the same civ as Gengis Khan.

This is why I really don't like the "one leader for two civs" idea. It always encourages people to fantasize about silly but "technically correct" pairings.

I try to use the common sense rule. Would a reasonable person find it sensible for Akbar, a Mughal emperor of India, to lead the Mongol Empire? Of course not.

 

[Evie]

If Akbar is to be an alt leader for any existing civilization, that should be India.

Having him be an alt leader for the Mongols is roughly equivalent to having Cleopatra lead Greece. Which, sure, she was technically Greek, but she never actually ruled any actually Greek realm.

(Cleopatra VII of the Ptolemaid dynasty, not Cleopatra of Epirus, sister of Alexander).

Good dual leader options do exist, many of which involve Germany in some fashion (Charlemagne with France, Frederic II Hoenstauffen with Italy, Charles V with Spain), but this is no place for shoehorning people based on tenuous claims and limited influence *glares at Eleanor*.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

How they call they self?

They called themselves Gurkani, which also referred to the earlier Timurid dynasty as well.

On that I agree, Mughals and Mongols are very different, they don't even share land territory.
But other society changed as well, ancient egypt don't resemble on nothing on coptic egypt, for example.

But we live a spot dilema here. But we can go around if we made alt leaders for a single civ. If Mongols with Gengis Khan is giving as an obvious choice for Fire Axis, would be easier just to do an alt leader as Akbar and don't need to do an entire new civ just to him.

As @Evie said he'd be better off being another leader for India, if no separate Mughal civ were to appear.

 

[Lord of War N02]

Akbar can be alt leader for India, there is no need to make Mughal civ.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Akbar can be alt leader for India, there is no need to make Mughal civ.

I agree, at least for Civ 6. I think a Mughal civ could appear in Civ 7.

 

[Henri Christophe]

Akbar can be alt leader for India, there is no need to make Mughal civ.

Or maybe have a Mughal civ and don't have more India. Instead have a lot of Indian's civs

 

[Lord of War N02]

Or maybe have a Mughal civ and don't have more India. Instead have a lot of Indian's civs

India can be divided like Hindustan (Northern India), Dravida (Southern Indian) and Bengal/Bangala (Bengali) so Dravida can have Chola, Vijayanagara or Mysore rulers, Hindustan can have Gupta, Delhi, Maurya or Mughal leaders, and Bengal can have Pala leaders or even Bangladeshi leaders.