1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Dismiss Notice
  6. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

Should Prime Ministers lead the 'English Empire'?

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by TyrannusRex, May 21, 2018.

  1. TyrannusRex

    TyrannusRex Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2017
    Messages:
    65
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Virginia
    I understand that the concept of the English/British Empire is different from the modern-day United Kingdom (as I saw one person put it, "Brits, Scots, Welsh and Irish all helped build them both"), but would it be wrong to have an elected Prime Minister lead the game's "English Empire" instead of a monarch? (That being said, the game calls every civ an empire, which I don't have a problem with, because that's kind of your goal in the game, and it feels like everyone's on equal footing.) For instance, I could see Winston Churchill making an excellent alternate leader for the English, even though he technically stood for all countries in the UK.
    I'd love to hear from UK residents; would you be offended if Firaxis included a Prime Minster like Churchill, or do you prefer monarchs representing your civilization?
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  2. Phrozen

    Phrozen Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    658
    Better than Victoria who while reigned for sometime was pretty much a figurehead while the actual executive ruling was done by Disraeli, Gladstone, Palmerston, Peel, or Grey depending on the year.
     
  3. TyrannusRex

    TyrannusRex Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2017
    Messages:
    65
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Virginia
    Very true, though they arguably chose her for marketing because most people know who Queen Victoria is, or at least have heard of Victorian fashion or architecture.
    That's undoubtedly why they chose Cleopatra as well. "Figure from Country X that most people have heard of."
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  4. Alexander's Hetaroi

    Alexander's Hetaroi Warlord

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    1,342
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    I don't see this being controversial at all. Churchill was an alternate leader in Civ 4 and Civ Rev2 for England. Of course I'm an American, so what do I know? :cool:
    Honestly if I had to choose I would have wanted Churchill as a leader but maybe along with Elizabeth instead of Victoria just because their time periods seem so close.
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  5. Uberfrog

    Uberfrog Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,030
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    England
    Not offended, no, but my preference would be for a new and interesting choice of leader rather than Churchill. I would like to see some more creative choices, like Alfred or a later medieval king. Elizabeth is a good choice too, of course, but she's been featured a lot.
     
    TahamiTsunami and Zaarin like this.
  6. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    3,833
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    Personally I'd rather no English leaders later than the Tudors. From Anne on the monarchs began styling themselves "King/Queen of the United Kingdom" rather than "King/Queen of England," and the monarchy declined rapidly in both power and personality after Charles I got a very close haircut. As for prime ministers, too modern. :sleep: I'd rather see either Elizabeth I return, or else a Medieval king, Henry V or Henry II being my top choices.
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  7. TyrannusRex

    TyrannusRex Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jun 18, 2017
    Messages:
    65
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    West Virginia
    I always liked Alfred the Great.
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  8. Zaarin

    Zaarin My Dearest Doctor

    Joined:
    May 14, 2016
    Messages:
    3,833
    Location:
    Terok Nor
    Me too, but not for England as it stands now. If added, he should lead Wessex or "the Anglo-Saxons" IMO.
     
  9. Stomper66

    Stomper66 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Messages:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    I'm English but I'm not a monarchist so I could see why a prime minister would be suitable as a leader instead of a king or queen.

    But in Civilisation games I always want to see a English Monarch as leader because prime ministers are just quite boring figures. Churchill would be the strongest candidate but I don't really want to see a Modern leader with England it just doesn't feel right. Left after that you've got people like Margaret Thatcher, Charles Grey, Robert Peel and Benjamin Disraeli. They're all just a bit bland. Plus you can't have a British prime minister representing just England, especially now that Scotland is in the game.

    On the monarchy side we just have had so many colourful monarchs that it is just hard to choose from for an interesting english civ leader. Examples include Alfred the Great, William the Conqueror, Edward Long shanks, Richard the Lion Heart, Henry V, Henry VIII, Elizebeth I, Charles I, Charles II and George III. Apart from 2 on the list all these monarchs ruled the country directly and were not just ceremonial figures (even Queen Victoria was mainly just a figurehead) so they are nearly all legitimate candidates to 'lead' England.

    I would say the same for France even though leaders like Napoleon or Charle De Gaulle are legitimate candidates French monarchs are much more interesting.
     
    Last edited: Jun 12, 2018
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  10. Ferocitus

    Ferocitus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Messages:
    1,662
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Oliver Cromwell, because he was so disgustingly violent, a
    religious nutter, and it would give Irish players a perfect target. :)
    .
     
  11. Stomper66

    Stomper66 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Messages:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    I think if you look at Englands history and leaders its all pretty disgustingly violent.
    I was going to say Cromwell but he's just a bit too much of an un conventional leader for England. A Puritan Republican leader would have been better for Holland especially with the type of clothing that Cromwell wears in portraits. All the Monarchs I suggested could be a perfect target for a lot of different civs so they would make a great foil for Englands opponents.

    Alfred the great - Foil for Norway (Vikings)
    William the Conquer - Foil for Scotland
    Edward Longshanks - Foil for Scotland
    Richard the Lionheart - Foil for Arabia
    Henry V - Foil for France
    Henry VIII - Foil for France
    Elizebeth I - Foil for Spain
    Charles I - Foil for Scotland
    Charles II - Foil for Holland
    George III - Foil for America

    Another reason for Kings and Queens being preferable to prime ministers . Churchill foil for Germany yes but for the rest the PMs foils would be other MPs.
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  12. Phrozen

    Phrozen Chieftain

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    658
    Plenty of PMs where not fans of other countries. France in particular in the case of Pitt the Elder and Robert Jenkinson.
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  13. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Location:
    South Wales
    I'd have no problem with a PM leading England, although by the time Walpole became the 1st PM it was no longer just England that Parliament ruled, but Churchill aside I don't think any have the name recognition to mean much to non-Brits or even many Brits. They also tended to be in power for much shorter periods than monarchs. Besides Churchill I could see maybe either of the Pitts or Lloyd George being possible. Of course if Margaret Thatcher was included I could have the satisfaction of destroying her every game.
     
  14. Ferocitus

    Ferocitus Warlord

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2016
    Messages:
    1,662
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Adelaide, South Australia
  15. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Location:
    South Wales
    Even from a similar time period Alfred, Athelstan and Edmund Ironside are just as important and much better known. Name recognition helps sell the game, hence Montezuma II and Shaka keep returning.
     
  16. Uberfrog

    Uberfrog Warlord

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2007
    Messages:
    2,030
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    England
    Well for the last two games at least we've had Montezuma I, who was actually a successful ruler (it does of course help that he shares his name with his more famous, if ill-fated grandson). Shaka is likewise a good pick for the Zulu, even if he is getting over-familiar.

    Honestly, I think that of the names you mention only Alfred is a "much better known" figure. Æthelstan and Edmund aren't well-known to your average player, and it would surprise me quite a bit if anyone could identify them without knowing who Æthelflæd was as well. Plus Æthelflæd currently has the advantage of being a Great General in Civ VI already... :p
     
    TahamiTsunami likes this.
  17. AmazonQueen

    AmazonQueen Chieftain

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Messages:
    803
    Location:
    South Wales
     
  18. Stomper66

    Stomper66 Chieftain

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2018
    Messages:
    92
    Gender:
    Male
    If England had another leader I wouldn't go for an Anglo Saxon one. They are too similar to vikings and we already have a viking leader in the game. I think for an alternate leader they shouldn't go too modern but they also shouldn't go too old. A leader between 1066 and 1800 would be best.

    My personal favourite would be Henry V. He was a Medieval warrior king and the prominant English figure in the famous Hundred Years War with France winning decisive victories at Agincourt, Pointiers and Crecy. He's been played by Jude Law and Kenneth Branagh in film and tv and Shakespeare made a play about him.

    Even though he's more of a British leader than just an English one it would also be interesting to see George III. His style just goes with whole trade, redcoats and white whigs thing and I think leaders from the enlightenment era are missing from the game.
     
    Last edited: Jun 14, 2018
  19. liv

    liv Warlord

    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2010
    Messages:
    1,187
    How about Walpole? Not technically a prime minister but a towering figure in that period and in building up an "English" Empire.
     
  20. Gray Bell

    Gray Bell Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2018
    Messages:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    England is such a disproportionately large chunk of the UK (population wise) that it would make sense to have a UK pm representing England rather than Scotland ... Although just making the name England/UK interchangeable would fix the problem.

    (as would Scottish independence (FREEDOM))

    My personal choices would be

    Wellington, won the Battle of Waterloo and twice Prime Minister.
    Special ability "Le vainqueur du vainqueur du monde"
    All allied forces at war with a common enemy gain +1 movement. All melee/calvary units gain +5 combat and all ranged units gain +1 range when 3 identical units are adjacent to each other.

    Tony Blair,
    Special Ability "education, education, education"
    Can build commercial and scientific districts and buildings with gold even if this causes a negative gold balance. While gold balance is negative Blair receives -2 to all era scores (minimum of zero).
     

Share This Page