Wait, is it all French? Always has been. (POLL)

[SuperFly47]

Napolean La Grande Armée bonus would have worked for many other leaders. Alexander the Great relied upon speed in his battles.

 

[ehecatzin]

I was sure we wouldn't be getting another French revolutionary leader because we have 2 Napoleons, but here we are. And to echo others, yes they are good leader choices, but It's pretty obvious France and America are eating up leader spots like there's no tomorrow.

The whole point of the leaders decoupling from civs was to have a larger pool of candidates and yet, Franklin and friends could very well start a musical as of now.

 

[Willie5000]

The leader choices have been stale enough without getting rid of the few interesting choices they've made to replace with more stale choices.

Appearing in previous civ games doesn't make them stale. There is a reason they keep appearing in the games time and time again, and that's because they're all important to their countries and their histories.

Actually... Ben Franklin should have been George Washington or even Thomas Jefferson.

 

[Evie]

No, ditch Lafayette, put Genghis Khan in the game.

While we're at it...

Ibn Battuta should have been Saladin.

Confucius should have been Qin Shi Huangdi

Machiavelli should have been Gandhi or Alexander the Great.

Harriet Tubman I can forgive but could have been Lincoln or Frederick Douglass.

There's my take.

Having every single leader in the game be French would still be more diverse than having every single leader be a political figure/ruler like here, ten times out of ten.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

No, ditch Lafayette, put Genghis Khan in the game.

While we're at it...

Ibn Battuta should have been Saladin.

Confucius should have been Qin Shi Huangdi

Machiavelli should have been Gandhi or Alexander the Great.

Harriet Tubman I can forgive but could have been Lincoln or Frederick Douglass.

There's my take.

With the exception of Douglass we've already seen those people before, some of them several times before. Why would I want to see them again when there are so many great choices who've never had the chance to get in? What's the point of a new civ game if I'm going to see the same faces again?

If I were in charge of the franchise, I'd make it a rule that except for two or three leaders, no other leader should appear in consecutive titles

 

[Zaarin]

they're all important to their countries and their histories.

So was everyone you said should be replaced so apparently that's not the relevant metric here. Sixth grade history textbooks should not be the definition of who is "worthy" of being in Civ or not; I'd rather have someone interesting than the same small handful of leaders every iteration.

 

[Eagle Pursuit]

Appearing in previous civ games doesn't make them stale. There is a reason they keep appearing in the games time and time again, and that's because they're all important to their countries and their histories.

Actually... Ben Franklin should have been George Washington or even Thomas Jefferson.

Firaxis is finally loading the game with non heads of state. Chuck those old moldy pizza crust leaders out so we can get these new guys.

 

[Evie]

We all know the definition of important here is "political leader or ruler", because some people cannot imagine any other kind of importance to a country than ruling it.

 

[Willie5000]

With the exception of Douglass we've already seen those people before, some of them several times before. Why would I want to see them again when there are so many great choices who've never had the chance to get in? What's the point of a new civ game if I'm going to see the same faces again?

If I were in charge of the franchise, I'd make it a rule that except for two or three leaders, no other leader should appear in consecutive titles

Yes we've seen them before because they're more significant than Lafayette. A lot of Americans don't know who he is.

Having every single leader in the game be French would still be more diverse than having every single leader be a political figure/ruler like here, ten times out of ten.

Because political figures and rulers do matter more. Plus we already had great people for the ones that aren't. Lafayette should be a great general, not a leader whose presence takes slots away from a non-white or European figure that actually led people.

They keep appearing because they actually deserve to keep appearing.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

A lot of Americans don't know who he is

All the more reason he should be in (though I am underwhelmed by Lafayette's inclusion myself)

Because political figures and rulers do matter more. Plus we already had great people for the ones that aren't. Lafayette should be a great general, not a leader whose presence takes slots away from a non-white or European figure that actually led people

Ruling and leading are two different things

 

[Zaarin]

Because political figures and rulers do matter more.

What a sad way to view the world.

All the more reason he should be in (though I am underwhelmed by Lafayette's inclusion myself)

"Ignorance is like a delicate exotic fruit; touch it and the bloom is gone.... Fortunately...education produces no effect whatsoever."--Lady Bracknell, The Importance of Being Earnest

 

[Evie]

They quite simply do not matter more, except in the opinion of people whose understanding of history has not evolved past nineteenth century scholarship, and perhaps even more so the tradition of medieval hagiographies where history was written, not to give an accurate account but to glorify (kiss the behind of) this or that ruler.

The separation between "leaders" and "great people" has always been an artificial one - as can be seen from the number of historical figures who are great people in one version of civ and leaders in others (or even in the same version, being moved to great people to leader in later expansions).

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Fine but Lafayette didn't deserve to be a leader over Genghis Khan or even Gandhi. Come on.

If we play the game of who is most deserving, we'd end up with the same roster every single iteration. Do you not see the problem with that?

 

[Xandinho]

Lafayette is a very interesting choice. I like him more than some of the other non-ruling leader picks we’ve seen (Hello, Confucius. Hello, Himiko). I’d rather have him over Napoleon at this point. That said, I'd postpone Napoleon’s inclusion for 3 or 4 years and let his spot be filled by a non-European leader.

We also don’t need two American and two German leaders right now (considering Charlemagne as adjacent to Germany, I'd delay Frederick’s inclusion as well). I’d use those spots for a Polynesian leader, a Latin American leader, and an African or Asian leader.

 

[Zaarin]

If we play the game of who is most deserving, we'd end up with the same roster every single iteration. Do you not see the problem with that?

Not to mention "deserves" is a very loaded word. It's a game, not the Nobel Prize or Historical Hall of Fame. What does "deserve" even mean in this context?

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

"Deserves" as a concept when assessing leader selections is not something I care much about. I want to see a variety of interesting figures. If we simply went by who is most famous, Greece, Mongolia, France, and others would never see a leader selection other than the default again.

 

[Willie5000]

If we play the game of who is most deserving, we'd end up with the same roster every single iteration. Do you not see the problem with that?

Maybe we should then. Or at least have actual leaders and more broad representation from all over the world.

 

[Evie]

Actually, that discussion on who has the most importance, influence and impact bring to mind a thought I was having - we need to have a historian as a leader. Or a biographer. Someone whose contribution and influence on history was by shaping people's perception of it - after all, if history is written by the victors then those whose vision of history are remembered for centuries must be the greatest of all victors!

I don't care if it's Herodotus or Livy or Geoffrey of Monmouth or Sima Qian, but *one* of them at least has to make it in.

 

[Zaarin]

Geoffrey of Monmouth

This suddenly became my preferred English leader.

 

[Bonyduck Campersang]

Maybe we should then.

Should what?