Remind me why Peaceman is leader again?
- Thread starter julystork
- Start date
El Caballerion
King
Agreed. He never led the country, and because of his continual presence, the overwhelming might of the Mughal and Hindu rulers will never be featured. Hence, we'll always have a PEACEFUL India... even the thought of an AGGRESSIVE India sounds like any oxymoron, but I'd love to see it...
I think there was another Indian leader in CIV IV (Akbar?), but Gandhi is still still crowd favorite.
I think there was another Indian leader in CIV IV (Akbar?), but Gandhi is still still crowd favorite.
ObadiahtheSlim
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2011
- Messages
- 76
Because everyone else will be like "whose that?" or "why isn't it Gandhi?"
victorpras
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2013
- Messages
- 59
I don't have a good source, but I heard that Civ developers love Gandhi so much because of the nuclear bug in one of the earliest Civ game. IMO Gandhi has pretty much become the "symbol" of civ franchise for the non-hardcore fans.
HerrDoktor
Mad Scientist
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2007
- Messages
- 333
I was thinking about the thing with nukes too. It's preserved in all Civ iterations. Just out of curiosity, what would be the symbol of Civ to hardcore fans?
Dralix
Killer of threads
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2001
- Messages
- 2,407
Spearman vs tank
Hmmm... Maybe "One More Turn"?
redwings1340
Emperor
Spoiler :
victorpras
Chieftain
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2013
- Messages
- 59
I am not sure either, and I wouldn't call myself a hardcore fans yet. Civ 5 is my first civ game and I only installed like 2 months ago. But when I told my friends that I started playing civ, they were all like "did you play as Gandhi?" or "did Gandhi bomb you?". That's why I think Gandhi is the most well known figure in civ franchise.
Also if you read other gaming forum (reddit for instance), there will be some reference to Gandhi's nukes in civ here and there.
Enrico Swagolo
Deity
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2013
- Messages
- 2,387
Don't you dare oppose the Lord Gandhi's presence in this game, or you'll face public DENOUNCEMENT from me.
He's pretty much the staple leader of the game. Anyone who knows anything about Civilization, also knows that Gandhi is hiding in there somewhere, cheerfully nuking the unaware people.
It would be a very bad choice for Firaxis to not pick him with only one leader per nation, just like not choosing Monty/Genghis/Shaka/Napoleon/Alex for their respective civs would be a bad idea. Most people associate those civs with those leaders, and as they're the most known, they're more likely to entice people into buying the game.
Gandhi truly deserves to stay.
Because he's the leader India deserves and the one it needs right now... and so we will DoW him, because he can take it. Because he's not a hero. He's a silent wonder-hog, a city-state protector...a nuke-happy lunatic.
He's pretty much the staple leader of the game. Anyone who knows anything about Civilization, also knows that Gandhi is hiding in there somewhere, cheerfully nuking the unaware people.
It would be a very bad choice for Firaxis to not pick him with only one leader per nation, just like not choosing Monty/Genghis/Shaka/Napoleon/Alex for their respective civs would be a bad idea. Most people associate those civs with those leaders, and as they're the most known, they're more likely to entice people into buying the game.
Gandhi truly deserves to stay.
Because he's the leader India deserves and the one it needs right now... and so we will DoW him, because he can take it. Because he's not a hero. He's a silent wonder-hog, a city-state protector...a nuke-happy lunatic.
Talcove
Slayer of Spies
Why? Because it just wouldn't be Civ if it didn't have Ghandi nuking everybody back to the stone age!
I_pity_the_fool
Warlord
Because of this -
Spoiler :
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
Ashoka was the alternate leader in CIV.
Anyway, Ghandi is just one of those leaders who are every game. Alexander, Elizabeth I, Montezuma, and Mao are the only other leaders that appear in all the games I believe.
But Mao doesn't appear in Civ 5 and Montezuma is actually Montezuma I. and not II. as usual.
Well, but it's a shame that civs only have one leader in civ 5.
Mao is not in Civ V, and they used a different Montezuma in Civ V to the one used in I-IV.
Ghandi loves a good
. He's willing to drop them more then North Korea if you pick on him. 
I've frequently experienced this in my games when fighting India in late games. 
The QC
Quietly Confident
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2011
- Messages
- 335
I think Ghandi's "Our words are backed by nuclear weapons" would be pretty high in a list of such symbols.
No leader is guaranteed a spot in new Civ games. If they created a Carthage without Hannibal, they can certainly create an India without Ghandi. But, out of all of Civ's iconic leaders, I think that Ghandi would be the last to fall. He's not just iconic in history, he's also specifically a Civ icon in a way that no other leader is.
PhroX
Deity
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,680
While I'd love to see people like that, they shouldn't be the leaders of India. They should be the leaders of their own Maurya and Mughal civilisations respectively. Keep India, lead by Ghandi, as the modern state, but do add other nations from the subcontinent, as the current situation with the modern idea of "India" representing the region's entire history is, quite frankly, silly - akin to, say, incorporating the native american civilisations into America: instead that we've got two independent Amerind civs (which had relatively little impact on history), and yet no Mughals....
Memoryjar
Emperor
Yeah, give me back Louis XIV. Build chateau and musketers is better with him.
I'm stuck with Hand-in-my-pocket-léon since years.
Just to say, Gandhi or Napoléon are more populared. People like playing great history persons they know.
TheGrandWazoo
Warlord
I think personally playing civ has taught me about the existence of several leaders I'd never heard of (caveat-I wasn't really a history buff before civ I)
