RFC Customization

[Panopticon]

The thing is that those leaders represent a very important time in world history - the Second World War was pretty much responsible for decolonisation and modern US foreign policy. I certainly agree that if national shame is the criterion, half of the Civ IV leaders shouldn't be in the game, and the reason why Stalin and Mao are "acceptable" while other bad leaders aren't is that they weren't the target of wartime propaganda during WWII.

 

[wolfigor]

This is a list which merges the leaders from SadoMacho's pack with the proposed new ideas:

....

Rome: Julius, Augustus, Justinian, Mussolini
Japan: Tokugawa, Hirohito

....

Vikings: Ragnar, Harald Hardraade

For Japan, I think we should add:
- The Meiji emperor (Mutsuhito), to represent the Meiji restoration and creation of a strong, modern, and industrialised Japan, letting his country emerge as one of the great powers on the world stage.
He could be used to cover all 19th century (even if his reign started in 1867).

- The Shōwa emperor (Hirohito)...
This is more tricky.
The Shōwa period was the longest reign of all Japanese emperors and japan went from ultra-nationalism with WWII, to modern democracy and strongly pacifist outline... all under the same emperor (Hirohito).
Funny enough Shōwa means "period of enlightened peace"... considering the events of WWII it's ironic.
However he was extremely influential in creating contemporary Japan and could be used to cover all 20th century (ascension date 1926).
Else we could use the current emperor... but his outlook is minor compared to the others.

Rome... leaders after Justinian maybe not really necessary.
Not always Rome survive or respawn in modern times.
For all middle age and renaissance there is not one single leader that can represent Rome or all Italy.
Maybe for this period we could use one of the many Popes like Pope Julius II (sistine chapel and a few wars) or one of the Borgia.
Else Lorenzo de' Medici could be a good candidate to represent a mercantilistic country.

For more modern times a leader representing the unification of Italy could be Camillo Benso, count of Cavour, that was the brain behind the return of Italy to independence (1861).
Else Victor Emmanuel, 1st king of Italy, could do.

After that Mussolini is a candidate for 20th century, and late try to create a colonial empire.
However in a longer historical view Mussolini didn't do so much new, mostly intensified processes already existing in the country.
Maybe it would be better to have somebody representing democratic Italy (from 1946), but no single name is big enough to emerge over the others.

Vikings:
17th century Gustavus Adolphus king of Sweden.
Under him Sweden emerged as a European Great Power controlling all scandinavia and baltic region.

20th century I would suggest Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme to represent social democratic scandinavia.
the current Swedish king Carl XVI Gustaf (since 1973) would be fine too.

 

[onedreamer]

Just looked it up: Franco was in power until 1975. Degaul was president until 1969. More importantly, DeGaul was the president of the current French republic, which I think makes him representative of the government as a whole.

Mitterand (random french president name) was the president of the current French republic as well, which I think makes him representative of the gov. as a whole.

And what about Mao, Stalin, Qin, Genghis Khan and many more leaders that slaughtered too but are in the game too.

@onedreamer: what leader do you suggest?

All the leaders you mentioned achieved something in their rule. And let me say not just anything. The means they used aren't in discussion especially since cultures are too different to agree on a common set of what is right and what is not. I should remind the users of these forums that what they think is right is NOT what is right, but what they think is right, no more, no less. Judging the course of actions of Qin Shi Huang is simply ridiculous. Just have a look at the personal and country achievements. Leaders like Mussolini and Hitler achieved what exactly ?

I suggest asking people from said countries. I am not spanish nor french but I doubt they'd choose Franco or DeGaulle as their favorite national leaders.

Like Wolfigor said the Roman Empire doesn't need one more leader, since it respawns as Roman Empire and not as Italy.

 

[Deego3]

Leaders like Mussolini and Hitler achieved what exactly ?

Only turn two war torn states into two of the most financally stable countries in Europe.

And you could say, without them we wouldnt have the UN.

 

[onedreamer]

1) they weren't financially stable at all.
2) the UN is a corrupted filo-western organization we'd probably do better without at this point.

 

[CyberChrist]

Vikings:
17th century Gustavus Adolphus king of Sweden.
Under him Sweden emerged as a European Great Power controlling all scandinavia and baltic region.

Your history is a little off here. Sweden did not control ALL of scandinavia, but Gustavus would be a good choice nevertheless.

20th century I would suggest Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme to represent social democratic scandinavia.
the current Swedish king Carl XVI Gustaf (since 1973) would be fine too.

Denmark have been very visibly active on the international scene in modern times(especially in recent years), so I'd have to say that Queen Margrethe II of Denmark (sice 1972) would be a better choice for a modern scandianavian leader.

 

[wolfigor]

Your history is a little off here. Sweden did not control ALL of scandinavia, but Gustavus would be a good choice nevertheless.

You are right.
I was trying so simplify... people can use wikipedia for details.
At the best controlled the territory of today Finland, Baltic repubblics, and "pieces" of territory in Norway, Germany, and Poland.
In other times, there was the Kalmar Union dominating the baltic region...


I suggested Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme for the 20th century because he is internationally famous, probably more than any of the roayals of any scandinavian country (to don't mention that at all practical effect they are now powerless).

 

[wr4th]

Only turn two war torn states into two of the most financally stable countries in Europe.

And you could say, without them we wouldnt have the UN.

Wow, you're twisting history here. First of all Germany was totally bankrupt during WWII and relied on future payments from the conquered contries.

And if you think that Hitlers downfall led to modern Germany with its leading position in european economy you are also wrong. Sure Hitlers reign had to end for that, but that is really no achievement!
History could have taken completely different paths afterwards. So a quick lesson on the most important German chancelors (from my point of view) after WWII.
First you would have to name the first West German chancelor Konrad Adenauer who was pushing for a close cooperation with the western powers and a democratic West Germany. This was not obvious at first, since many people wanted to be in a neutral position between russia and the usa. He also lead successfully the negotiations to free the last 30.000 german prisoners of war, that were still held in russia in 1955.
Then there is Ludwig Erhard, first minister of economic affairs, and later chancelor as well. He installed todays social market economy in germany and is called father of the "Wirtschaftswunder".
In the late 60s and early 70s there was chancelor Willy Brandt, who startet a new politics towards the east, opening up towards the German Democratic Republic and the other east european countries with the aim of opening the Berlin Wall. This is seen by most historians as the first step towards the ending of the cold war and the collapse of the communist regimes. Without him the world would look maybe very different today. He also recieved the Nobel Prize for Peace.

 

[JujuLautre]

Mitterand (random french president name) was the president of the current French republic as well, which I think makes him representative of the gov. as a whole.

I think he meant that De Gaulle made the actual French constitution (the 5th). Also, if you look at the politics history of France since his time, you had mostly people from the right, sometimes called "Gaullism" (in reference to De Gaulle). SO in a way, he is very representative of France since the war.

However, one problem with him as well as with Showa is that, when we speak of them, people mostly remember the war, and not what happened before or after. Just take a look at the CIV De Gaulle: it's the general we see, not the president.

Now please, do not turn this thread into a new "who must be in?" debate; as a matter of fact, I think this debate should deserve its own thread if it has to continue.

 

[CyberChrist]

In other times, there was the Kalmar Union dominating the baltic region...

Of course that union was formed and led by Queen Magrethe I of Denmark

I suggested Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme for the 20th century because he is internationally famous, probably more than any of the roayals of any scandinavian country (to don't mention that at all practical effect they are now powerless).

I guess that all depends on who you ask. Ie. try asking most Australian people today and I bet more would have heard of Magrethe II than of Oluf Palme.

Regarding the 'powerless royals' then that is a simplification also. While it is virtually unthinkable in this day and age that they would ever go against the will of the people, then their constitutional rights to govern, pardon and offer amnesti, propose and/or veto new laws, mint(strike coin) etc. is exactly the same as when constitutionalism was first introduced. And ... they ARE still the official head(s) of state.

 

[blizzrd]

I guess that all depends on who you ask. Ie. try asking most Australian people today and I bet more would have heard of Magrethe II than of Oluf Palme.

Sorry, but I haven't heard of either of these people.

Gustavus Adolphus I have certainly read about, or if you'd asked about Princess Mary though, then yes I've heard of her.

 

[Deego3]

Wow, you're twisting history here. First of all Germany was totally bankrupt during WWII and relied on future payments from the conquered contries.
And if you think that Hitlers downfall led to modern Germany with its leading position in european economy you are also wrong. Sure Hitlers reign had to end for that, but that is really no achievement!
History could have taken completely different paths afterwards. So a quick lesson on the most important German chancelors (from my point of view) after WWII..

After WWI Germany went bankrupt, I agree with you there. But by the second world war they could finance one of the strongest armies in Europe.

 

[wr4th]

After WWI Germany went bankrupt, I agree with you there. But by the second world war they could finance one of the strongest armies in Europe.

Sorry, you are wrong. Already in 1933 Germany started to massively print more money without increasing the gold reserves in order to finance the arms industry.
No inflation happened because the spent amounts were hidden (in the first place to disguise the breaking of the Versailles treaty, which limited Germanys military after WWI). Also the fact that there was no free market and the prices were guaranteed by the government helped to stabilize the currency. But in fact Germany was bankrupt and had enormeous depts. The only way out was to confiscate the gold reserves of the conquered countries and ask them for high reparations.

 

[Mattygerst]

My desire to customize is lessening the stability hit in terms of extending your empire's boundaries.

I understand the point of them being in this game...I'd just like to ease them a bit.

Anyone know where this would be done?...

 

[musicfreak]

My desire to customize is lessening the stability hit in terms of extending your empire's boundaries.

I understand the point of them being in this game...I'd just like to ease them a bit.

Anyone know where this would be done?...

Well, if you know Python, dig around Stability.py a bit. Honestly, I'd really like to see stability ported to XML, to make it much easier to edit, but I guess that's too much work.

 

[CyberChrist]

Sorry, but I haven't heard of either of these people.

Gustavus Adolphus I have certainly read about, or if you'd asked about Princess Mary though, then yes I've heard of her.

Heh heh, Queen Magrethe II is Princess Mary's mother-in-law.

Olof Palme was a swedish social democrat that in the 70-80's (assassinated in 86) fought to end the Vietnam war, Iraq-Iran conflict and Apartheid (among other) on the international scene - as well as being the Prime Minister of Sweden at the time of his death.

 

[wolfigor]

Sorry, but I haven't heard of either of these people.

I've no doubt about it!
Scandinavians are not that well know outside their borders, while the activities of their royals and prime ministers remain hidden in a fog of mistery for most of the world population.
Maybe we should settle for Björn Borg or somebody from ABBA.

 

[CyberChrist]

Maybe we should settle for Björn Borg or somebody from ABBA.

Who?!

Of course the same could be said for most leaders/celebreties of most countries all over the world. Who might be known by nearly everyone in one part of the world might be a total unknown in another part.

 

[ninerzfan_22]

Listen I'm no Nazi, but it is not truthful to say that Hitler didn't have any achievements. Hitler oversaw the construction of the Autobahn, Germany's superhighway, which was used as the model for the American one. He was able to turn Germany into a military and industrial powerhouse. And he founded Volkswagen. Of course, somebody else was probably the mind behind VW and it is just in his name because of their economic system at the time, but still. I don't think he should be included in the game as players should not try to emulate someone who killed millions of Jews, but if Stalin is in and Mao is in, then why not Hitler?

Gustavus Adolphus would be a great pick for the Scandinavians. i don't understand why some ppl want them excluded from RFC.

 

[wr4th]

Listen I'm no Nazi, but it is not truthful to say that Hitler didn't have any achievements. Hitler oversaw the construction of the Autobahn, Germany's superhighway, which was used as the model for the American one. He was able to turn Germany into a military and industrial powerhouse. And he founded Volkswagen. Of course, somebody else was probably the mind behind VW and it is just in his name because of their economic system at the time, but still. I don't think he should be included in the game as players should not try to emulate someone who killed millions of Jews, but if Stalin is in and Mao is in, then why not Hitler?

Gustavus Adolphus would be a great pick for the Scandinavians. i don't understand why some ppl want them excluded from RFC.

This is the typical one-sided view. Everything Hitler has done was aiming at the war, and this war led to the complete destruction of Germany. Without the the good will of the western Allies there would be no modern Germany!

The Autobahn... was built as a quick transport route for tanks, there were really not so many private cars that it was needed.
The unemployment rate was nearly zero... because all the people were working in arms industry.
Many new Kindergardens were opened... to get the children in contact with the ideology as early as possible.
Mothers got medals if they had more than 4,6 or 8 children... the female role in the society was limited to breeding soldiers.

You can go on endlessly. All "achievements" were bought with fictious money (as stated above) and were only extremely short-term. Does anybody really believe that Hitler could have won the war and could have stabilized all the conquered nations under German control?