What do you think of the Leaders?

[The Fanatical]

Leaders don't really need to have a specific age. Even Augustus is fine, to be honest. Maybe Firaxis decided to depict him at the young age of nineteen, around the time the battle of Philippi took place. If that isn't intentional, then he could have looked better, especially his lorica musculata, since the armour's appearance has survived on a statue with beautiful depictions on it.

For instance, If Leonidas was chosen to appear in the game (or any leader for that matter), he doesn't have to look close to sixty years of age around the time of his death at Thermopylae. He could be depicted younger à la 300, since he was a human being with varying stages of age. That can be applied to all people. An existing example is Pericles, he was younger in Civilization IV, but older in Civilization VI.

 

[luca 83]

Leaders don't really need to have a specific age. Even Augustus is fine, to be honest. Maybe Firaxis decided to depict him at the young age of nineteen, around the time the battle of Philippi took place. If that isn't intentional, then he could have looked better, especially his lorica musculata, since the armour's appearance has survived on a statue with beautiful depictions on it.

For instance, If Leonidas was chosen to appear in the game (or any leader for that matter), he doesn't have to look close to sixty years of age around the time of his death at Thermopylae. He could be depicted younger à la 300, since he was a human being with varying stages of age. That can be applied to all people. An existing example is Pericles, he was younger in Civilization IV, but older in Civilization VI.

View attachment 708162View attachment 708163

The discussions on this forum are only cosmetics based on national desires, countries: August for example to have August you should first have a caesar a civil war the crisis of the republic , the introduction of mario’s military, the civil war of Silla and the military coup d'état of Silla, up to the tensions between aristocracy, plebeians and knights from the third to the sixth century BC

 

[sTAPler27]

It’s really silly that Ben Franklin was chosen as the America representative just because he’s “different”. They could have gone with George Washington or Thomas Jefferson.

Likewise having Confucius doesn’t communicate “we’re broadening who a leader is” it says “we don’t know anything about Chinese history and don’t want to learn”.

What's next? They'll make Gandhi a leader for India?

 

[Disgustipated]

I really don't want to see Gandhi this game. It's time to give him a break, he's been nuking enough. If they go with this uncoupled leaders for Civ 8, then perhaps then it will be time to bring him back.

As for their appearances, I agree most look too young. Aside from Confucius and Xerxes. Tecumseh looks good to me, and it's one reason I want to play him first. Machiavelli does look close to that statue, so I'm fine with him.

I'm not saying Civ 7 is doing this, but I hope they don't go the route of appealing to younger gamers by making everyone look young and disney/pixar-ish. Like a certain game that came out last Thursday which I won't bring up here. I would hate to see Civ go in that direction.

 

[Voidwalkin]

Really need to know the extent of these bonuses to evaluate strength of the leader. Xerxes appears to get a combat strength bonus in enemy territory. Obviously that's good, but depending on the numbers it could be world beating or just strong.

Gameplay wise, I would suspect Revolutionary Napoleon to be the best for pure meta. Increased movement speed lets you get further in what is ultimately a racing game. At the top tier of conquest, the real speedbump is movement. Rev Nap is probably the best bet for fastest wins on conquest victories from the available list.

 

[luca 83]

Really need to know the extent of these bonuses to evaluate strength of the leader. Xerxes appears to get a combat strength bonus in enemy territory. Obviously that's good, but depending on the numbers it could be world beating or just strong.

Gameplay wise, I would suspect Revolutionary Napoleon to be the best for pure meta. Increased movement speed lets you get further in what is ultimately a racing game. At the top tier of conquest, the real speedbump is movement. Rev Nap is probably the best bet for fastest wins on conquest victories from the available list.

There should be any events to have a caesar or a napoleon and not only in france or rome but possibly in china or the maya empire

 

[dagriggstar]

My feel on the changes (decoupled leaders and great people as leaders) is that the game will feel less “game where you play through history” and more “board game you play against celebrities”….

I don’t know it’s like visualising Franklin leading Greece breaks my suspension of historical immersion

 

[gdr_willter]

My feel on the changes (decoupled leaders and great people as leaders) is that the game will feel less “game where you play through history” and more “board game you play against celebrities”….

Celebrities who can represent sort of historical human groups, I think. I'm totally fine with them.

 

[TheGhostEnthusiast]

the game will feel less “game where you play through history” and more “board game you play against celebrities”…

I've always thought that those two ideas sort of coexist in civ. The year is 4000 BC, I'm leading my nation through history, and so is Teddy Roosevelt over there. The historical inaccuracy shifting from him offering me apple pie and teddy bears before the invention of pottery to his nation looking like an ancient culture he wasn't actually around for doesn't bother me much. Was the little visually non-distinct village he was leading last game any more like the United States? Frankly, I'm so excited to have a big variety of architectural styles and relevant gameplay bonuses on the board from turn one that it feels like an improvement.

 

[sTAPler27]

My feel on the changes (decoupled leaders and great people as leaders) is that the game will feel less “game where you play through history” and more “board game you play against celebrities”….

I don’t know it’s like visualising Franklin leading Greece breaks my suspension of historical immersion

The people they've chose while not heads of state are still very important to the ways and not just popular faces, so far we have diplomats, philosophers and writers which are crucial to a well rounded nation. They have qualities a leader would require even if they never lead in a political sense themselves, just like Gandhi has done through the entire civ series

 

[bitula]

Did a quick look up:

Amina: took the throne at age 43, died aged 77

Asoka: took the throne at age 36, died aged 78

Hatshepsut: took power aged 38, died aged 49

Napoleon: made his reputation for the Revolution at Toulon aged 26, became Emperor aged 35, died aged 52

Tecumseh: Noted war chief aged 26, died aged 45

Xerxes I: took the throne aged 32, died aged 53.

So, basically, every one of them "came to power" in their twenties or early thirties except for Asoka and Amina, and also except for those two, none of them lived past their early 50s.

Based on this, they are not far off the mark: virtually all of them were, by modern standards, fairly young when they first made their mark and except for Ben Franklin, Confucius, Amina and Asoka, all died relatively young - and I think Franklin and Confucius show their age well. Asoka and Amina could possibly be aged a decade or so, but the rest are well withn the range I would expect to show them 'in their prime', so to speak

Thanks for the info! To me they (except Franklin, Confucius - but did not see those yet) all look below twenty or early twenty, but maybe its just me, i'm not too good at guessing someones age. (But they do look cartoonis and Disney-like, even more so than civ 6 leaders and very far from civ 5 leaders, which latter I consider a more "serious" and "realistic" depiction, which I would have preferred for a civ game.

 

[luca 83]

Celebrities who can represent sort of historical human groups, I think. I'm totally fine with them.

The groups of leaders can represent military interests, and political , economic , sure, but it needs their rise to power , hereditary, coup d'état , election

 

[gdr_willter]

The groups of leaders can represent military interests, and political , economic , sure, but it needs their rise to power , hereditary, coup d'état , election

Try to lead people with ideology, not only rule them with power

 

[luca 83]

Try to lead people with ideology, not only rule them with power

But before the power and ideology there is the struggle for power that could fail a clash between factions

 

[gdr_willter]

But before the power and ideology there is the struggle for power that could fail a clash between factions

Do you know how many kings in China begged to invite Confucius and listen to his teaching, and how his lesson become the ruling ideology and national religion of a lot of dynasties later? He governed East Asia much longer then any other rulers existed. He didn't need to struggle or compete in political or militaristic way for this.

 

[luca 83]

Do you know how many kings in China begged to invite Confucius and listen to his teaching, and how his lesson become the ruling ideology and national religion of a lot of dynasties later? He governed East Asia much longer then any other rulers existed. He didn't need to struggle or compete in political or militaristic way for this.

And the English revolution? And the Russian and French and Chinese you read marx ?

 

[gdr_willter]

And the English revolution? And the Russian and French and Chinese you read marx ?

I can't understand what exactly you want to talk about! Is It because my English or yours?

Anyway, I already wrote about my entire idea at the other thread before. My idea is simple enough: Leaders represent people, Civs represent systems.

 

[luca 83]

I can't understand what exactly you want to talk about! Is It because my English or yours?

Anyway, I already wrote about my entire idea at the other thread before. My idea is simple enough: Leaders represent people, Civs represent systems.

They agree that it is non-national representations, but the political economic circumstances must be simulated in which one. Personita and rise to power!

 

[Lord Lakely]

Ashoka could definitely pass for someone in his 40s based on his sprite. Amina I would date as being in her late 20s, but she's a fairly obscure historical figure so a few liberties don't detract from the immersion here.

 

[notNamed]

Ashoka could definitely pass for someone in his 40s based on his sprite. Amina I would date as being in her late 20s, but she's a fairly obscure historical figure so a few liberties don't detract from the immersion here.

I guess it depends on what a person looks for. The easiest tell that a person is 30 or above for me is that they have wrinkles under their eyes.
People who go all-in on skincare their whole life and avoid direct sunshine can delay it a little bit, but it gets us all in the end.

Wrinkles, however, are not a detail one wants to add to their character unless they specifically go for realism or explicit "old" age.