Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by Optimizer, Jul 23, 2007.
Abu Bekr for sure
Ali the Caliph and Imam.
Shi'ites believe that Muhammad expressed God's wish that Ali become the Caliph after his death, and resent Abu Bakr for becoming Caliph in violation of God's will. By contrast, Ali is both recognised as a rightful Caliph, by Shi'ites through divine appointment and by Sunnis by election by the Muslims, revered by both sects and recognised as a great warrior, diplomat and theologian.
Viking represented by a norwegian ????
Danes was in control of norway most of the time, and it was mainly danes that took controll of what they later formed into England !
Sweyn I, or Sweyn Forkbeard, in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicles, also known as Swegen and Swein, (Old Norse: Sveinn Tjúguskegg, Norwegian: Svein Tjugeskjegg, Swedish: Sven Tveskägg; Danish: Svend Tveskæg, originally Tjugeskæg or Tyvskæg), (c. 960February 3, 1014), was king of Denmark and England, as well as parts of Norway. He was a Viking leader and the father of Canute the Great. He was, on his own father Harald Bluetooth's death, King of Denmark, in late 986, or early 987, and was ruler over most of Norway in 1000, with allegiance of the Trondejarl, Erik of Lade. In 1013, he was, shortly before his death, King of England, after a long forbade conquest. With the last months of his life, he was the Danish sovereign of a North Sea empire, which only his son Cnut was to rival in northern Europe.
Xerxes because he is kind
There is no scandinavea civ.
Personally, I'd say for the Japanese, Emperor Meiji for starters. Also, perhaps they could add the Japanese Goddess Izanami from Shinto mythology in as a female leader for Japan? She was pretty important in religion and heck, isn't Gilgamesh basically "mythology", as is Pericles, yet there both still in?
I do think for a World War II scenario that both Hitler and Chiang Kai-Shek should be modded in. Firaxis/2K should have just pulled a Paradox and not added either Hitler or Chiang in German or Chinese versions, like Paradox do with their HOI 2 series.
It's debatable wether or not FDR is worth having in at all. To be honest, I'd prefer Teddy Roosevelt. Thomas Jefferson would be good. What about John F Kennedy? And Ronald Reagan......perhaps. To be honest, I don't mind Reagan.
Queen Dido is a legendary character, not a real queen- what traits would she have, madly falling in love with Trojans when Venus decides she wants her to? Setting herself on fire?
And to the person asking who won the naval war against the Persians (at Salamis): That'd be Themistocles
I find it ironic that with Pericles as your leader, by all rights, when you found Sparta, the city should declare war against your capitol.
And as to a leader I would have chosen:
Gaius Marius (Rome) or Diocletian (Rome)
Xerxes because after i saw 300 all I wanted to do was be Xerxes and attack sparta with my immortals and war elephants, and get slaughtered by their phalanx
I voted for Meiji, Philip II and Abu Bakr. I also would like Gustav II Adolf of Sweden in. But that would mean a new Civ.
that is the whole reason there are two branches of islam and we all know Abu Bekr was a better leader.
I KNOW he wasn't an option in the poll and I'm not trying to start a big flame war or another Hitler discussion here. I just think it's interesting to have leaders both famous and infamous to choose from.
It's sad that chancellor Adenauer doesn't get more support. He restored sovereignty, created the Wirtschaftswunder (Financial & Organized?), reconciled with France, started a settlement with Israel and opened diplomacy with the USSR.
I would call him the greatest of all European post-war politicians.
I second that.
Being a German, I am really disappointed with the German leaders in the game - two Prussians!? Sure they are both fascinating historic figures, but it's hard to identify with them. And more diversity would have been good.
I was hoping for Firaxis to include a modern German leader in BtS. My favourite is Adenauer - another good choice would be Friedrich Ebert.
Disagree about the traits though - Adenauer should definitely be Industrious. Industrious + Financial.
I also agree to the poster who mentioned Gustav Adolph - I really miss the Swedes. I mean, look what big a lobby Poland has on this forum. And Austria is mentioned quite often. But hardly anyone seems to like the Swedish, though they were imho far more important than the latter two.
Oh, and another leader no one has mentioned yet that I'd like to see in Civ: Wallenstein for the HRE. He's not exactly been a "leader", however, I still think he qualifies for a leader position in the game.
do we all know that?
speak for yourself.
Yi Song-gye and Park Chung-hee of Korea. They both have played role that is arguably far more prominent than Wang Kon.
Rome should have Trajan or Marcus Aurelius.
Lack of Nehru for India is at best, a disturbing oversight. Same for Adenauer.
I do think that leaders should be limited to 4 at the most. In fact four might be too many
I ACTUALLY thought Justinian looked a lot lik a woman in BTS hehe.
And there isn't many women's leader because most 'important' civilizations had/have very few women's leader. They were more likely the leader of the 'Castle's' cleaners
NO MORE Americans! Bring on the ARABS!!!
Which reminds, Saladin being the ruler of the arabian empire is wrong because
1. He was a Kurd
2. He was then King of Egypt.....
Ali didn't have an opportunity to achieve more because he didn't want to increase Muslim disunity by challenging the Sunni Rashidun who were elected before him.
The fact is that most Sunnis agree that Ali was as great a man as Abu Bakr. Using Abu Bakr could be seen as endorsing the Sunni opinion on the succession to Muhammad, and there's no need to do something so contentious when there is a perfectly good alternative in Ali.
Saladin may have been ethnically Kurdish, but Arabness is usually associated with the Arabic culture and in particular language rather than ethnicity itself. Ancient Macedonian identity is similar, being considered Greek (ish) even if they were ethnically distinct, so why do we have no problem with the idea of the Macedonian Alexander the Great leading the Greeks? The simplest answer would be because he did. Someone doesn't have to be an ethnic Greek to lead the Greeks, just as someone doesn't have to be an ethnic Arab to lead the Arabs. Catherine the Great was a Prussian, but there's no denying that however she got there she was Empress of Russia.
May i ask why people want Xerxes I ? he really wasent that great there are alot more persian leaders that did more than him
Gilgamesh is a mythological figure, but Pericles is solidly historical.
Separate names with a comma.