1. We have added a Gift Upgrades feature that allows you to gift an account upgrade to another member, just in time for the holiday season. You can see the gift option when going to the Account Upgrades screen, or on any user profile screen.
    Dismiss Notice

What Kinds of Leaders Should Be In Future Civ Games and Expansions

Discussion in 'Civ - Ideas & Suggestions' started by InsidiousMage, Mar 25, 2021.

  1. InsidiousMage

    InsidiousMage Prince

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2021
    Messages:
    554
    I made a semi-joke in another thread about Sappho leading the Greeks but then, thinking on it more, why couldn't she lead the Greeks? It's called Civilization and a civilization is more than it's politicians and generals so why couldn't artists, theologians, and philosophers be leaders in the game.

    Would you like to see different kinds of leaders in the game and, if so, who would be good choices.
     
  2. Henri Christophe

    Henri Christophe King

    Joined:
    Aug 17, 2018
    Messages:
    906
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Rio de Janeiro, K11 (Kwanza)
    If artists and important people can appear as leaders, I would like to see Bob Marley leading Jamaica civilization, Rastafari as Unique Units
     
  3. João III

    João III Warlord

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2021
    Messages:
    111
    Location:
    Império Português
    The only issue I could see is that politicians and generals are inherently leaders whereas artists, etc. are not and I feel like the great people covers them already. However, I think it would be interesting for theologians and/or philosophers to be introduced as new categories of great people
     
  4. Equilin

    Equilin King

    Joined:
    May 8, 2017
    Messages:
    633
    Gender:
    Male
    Because the position is called leaders. Unless the person in question leads that group of people (or leads the group which leads that group of people) then it should be a no. Gandhi, a classic example, is a leader (not the only, but one of many) of modern India's independence and get a Leader spot, without being (directly) a politician or general.
     
  5. Wellfooled

    Wellfooled Chieftain

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2016
    Messages:
    61
    This is something that I think has to be a case-by-case basis. I don't think the game needs to be strictly limited to government rulers (and because of Gandhi, it has never been so limited), but opening it up to any influential person from that Civilization also would feel wrong. I think it would still need to be someone who has a strong connection to governing and politics. Gandhi for example, while never literally leading a country's government, was instrumental in Indian independence from Britain and politics in general and guided his Civilization by example.

    Sappho, had cultural influence in her time, but (as far as I know) had no connection to politics or governing. I think if the historical figure never sat in the driver's seat of government (regardless of whether or not they owned the car) and we can't reasonably imagine them doing so, that should disqualify them from the position of Civilization leader. Sappho as a great writer though, is a perfect fit.
     
  6. MonkeyPaw

    MonkeyPaw Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2002
    Messages:
    86
    I'd rather leaders be less resource-intensive so they can add a lot more of them. I'd like leaders to be able to be overthrown (including players), through uprisings or elections, so every civ would need a couple back-up leaders to take over. This would add a new level to the game- managing domestic threats as well as foreign.
     
    Gedemon likes this.
  7. Futumch

    Futumch Calm as a Coma

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2001
    Messages:
    744
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    142 E 42 S
    This is sort of tangentially related. Hopefully you are aware of the old freeware game called Freeciv, which is an old implementation of Civ 2 but released under the GPL back in the late 1990s. It allowed the player to rule as anyone they want. All you did was fill in name, civ name, demonym and then you could have a little customised national flag and a list of cities. ( e.g. Magnus, Iceland, Icelandic)
    That's the sort of thing I'd like to see. Complete free reign over the player identifiers as well as the more traditional leaders we have come to expect.

    To be honest I'd be happy to see the animated leaders go completely if we were able to choose from a wider range of static images.
     
    Gedemon, GIDS888 and mitsho like this.
  8. mitsho

    mitsho Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    7,933
    Location:
    Europe, more or less
    I don‘t think there should be leaders anymore. At least not ones that last for the whole game. There are other options out there.

    To answer the opening question though: anyone that is fun. This is a game not a historiographical treatise. This is not academia, but it reaches a lot of people who have not had much contact with history. So it would be a bonus if the choices are also educational. That‘s not a must though, fun is priority number one. :)
     
    PhoenicianGold and AsH2 like this.
  9. GIDS888

    GIDS888 King

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2005
    Messages:
    796
    Location:
    England South West
    Historical leaders pivotal to modern history, whether they upset Woke tummies or not!!
     
  10. nunor

    nunor King

    Joined:
    Feb 28, 2010
    Messages:
    786
    Representatives are not leaders. Artists and "great people" may represent certain civilizations or nations, but they don't lead them politically. And, ultimately, it is the decisions of political leaders that determine the success or failure of a nation, and that means that nation's ability to "produce" great people.
     
  11. Laurana Kanan

    Laurana Kanan Don’t underestimate who I am. Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2014
    Messages:
    3,391
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Near the Greatest Snow on Earth
    Moderator Action: Moved to Ideas and Suggestions.
     
    Henri Christophe likes this.
  12. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    To all the detractors, here's the thing:

    While we call them leaders, the fundamental functions of leaders are to a) represent and/or personify the people/culture/polity, b) serve as a personality to build a diplomatic rapport with, and in the case of VI c) loosely embody that particular civ's playstyle to further the aims of a) and b). Ultimately, whether they led the civ or not matters very little for purposes of gameplay or even historical value, except to those historical pedants who insist on a particular design paradigm (one that is eroded away with every new installment, first Gandhi, then Sitting Bull and Kamehameha, and now CdM and Kupe and Ba Trieu).

    Much like how the roster desires to be limited to imperial or expansionist civs because of the chosen term "empires," the only real limitation I see to broadening options for leaders is a strict interpretation of the term "leader" itself. But if the franchise continues to stray further and further away from textbook empires and cults of personality and further toward representing peoples and cultural legacies, how important is it really that the nations in question be represented by sovereigns? Do we really need to keep making the same game over and over again, running down the usual list of bland, mechanically uninteresting general-kings?

    As long as each game is designed with a pretty solid theme or design goal in mind, I don't particularly care what direction they take it. The integrity of that particular installment's message is much more important to me than whether it blindly/cowardly conforms to the expectations set by previous entries.
     
    mitsho likes this.
  13. Alexander's Hetaroi

    Alexander's Hetaroi Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    7,166
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    How do Sitting Bull and Kamehameha not fit the quintessential role of a leader of their people?
     
  14. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    I was citing them mostly as leaders who didn't actually lead the "civ" in question. Although honestly that problem goes back as far as Civ II. I just think the problem is more defined and egregious to this particular "rule" because it was transgressed in IV and V, where the devs should have known better by now.
     
    Alexander's Hetaroi likes this.
  15. Alexander's Hetaroi

    Alexander's Hetaroi Deity

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2017
    Messages:
    7,166
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Texas
    So you mean how Sitting Bull and Kamehameha were portrayed as leading the whole group of Native Americans and Polynesia?

    I'd still put them in a separate category than the others, along with Boudicca, because they were official leaders of their respective groups of people, the Lakota and Kingdom of Hawaii, despite leading a blobby civ of similar cultures.
     
  16. The googles do nothing

    The googles do nothing King

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    658
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    Just make leaders more like Governors. Some games add Pericles and start promoting him, some games add Sappho and start promoting her. Go ahead and call them representatives or something other then leaders.

    From a business perspective been able to widen the pool of people available to create DLC for seems like something they would do. They tried out the "unified" promotion system with Secret societies and it's seems well received. Just give use one really good system with Representatives, Religion, Governors, Corporations, and what ever else they can think off.
     
    mitsho likes this.
  17. mitsho

    mitsho Deity

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2003
    Messages:
    7,933
    Location:
    Europe, more or less
    I love that: make leaders into governors meaning they occupy a place on the map and an area of special influence where in medieval times, you have to move your king through the kingdom to keep stability.

    Also give them a skill tree meaning they get better they longer they rule. Though you can always switch to another leader, more peaceful or more warlike one depending on your needs. It's a choice, level up one leader or optimize by changing often. That could also be a benefit for the old big civs versus the smaller ones: Sure, Gran Colombia is excellent at what it does, but Spain can switch between 3 leaders. I always hate that the "vanilla" civs are quite bland, that can help them gain some more weight without just broadening them.

    I'd argue for all leaders to be unlocked at the start for fun and balance, as well as them having a type (administrator, warrior, explorer) and one unique thing each. As well as several nations sharing one, f.e. Charlemagne.

    Leader screens would have to be adapted though... :)
     
  18. Phrozen

    Phrozen King

    Joined:
    May 7, 2012
    Messages:
    909
    Marshal Zhukov for Russian leader?
     
  19. mdl5000

    mdl5000 Prince

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2012
    Messages:
    367
    ones that know how to shut up.
     
  20. PhoenicianGold

    PhoenicianGold Emperor

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2018
    Messages:
    1,828
    I guess. I still consider them at least tangential to the issue of whether leaders actually led their civ in question; their discrepancy just rests more on the chosen civ itself rather than the choice of leader.

    Also, I could throw Lautaro in with Ba Trieu as more of a militaristic rather than political leader.
     

Share This Page