The idea for this thread is fairly simple. Essentially, we take the multiple-leader mechanic that they implemented for Civ VI and propose 1) a hallmark leader that embodies the traditional characteristics associated with the civ, and also 2) a leader that even if not very important, is unique in the civ's history and provides an unconventional way to play that civ. One of the problems that always comes up with civ reveals is some people taking issue with choosing esoteric leaders that don't 'feel' like the civ, while others feeling similarly when they end up retreading old ground repeatedly. So the idea here is to give every civ 2 leaders, one that satisfies the first player with a playstyle emblematic of the civ, and another that shows another facet of the civ that's completely different. For instance, France led by Catherine would be the second type, focusing on a specific, niche facet of French history in espionage; France led by Napoleon or Louis XIV would be the first, going all-in as a supercultural civ with a military backing. Conversely, Trajan leading Rome is quite on par with what one would expect from the civ, boosting city infrastructure as it expands. There are plenty of non-conventional Roman leaders, though, that could do something with Culture, or Gold, or any number of other mechanics alongside Trajan. So in this thread you'd propose two leaders, one of which may or may not already exist in the game, for a Civ, possibly a leader ability for each, and explain how one of them fits the traditional role that the civ occupies in the game/history, and how the other one explores something new or more esoteric to the civ's history, a la Louis's cultural France vs. Catherine's spy-based France. It would be a fun exercise in 1) defining the main traits or key figures of a civilization and 2) exploring a less-known part of its history.