Question: If you were put in charge of picking the leaders to be included in a future Civilization game, would you pick purely historic figures that "deserve" to be in the game, or would you pick a mix of historic figures AND other famous leaders, even if those leaders were not really in charge of an empire in real history? Examples of deserving leaders: All leaders currently in Civ4, Gilgamesh of Sumeria, Justinian I of the Byzantine Empire, Pacal the Great of the Maya, Willem van Oranje of the Netherlands, Charlemagne of the Holy Roman Empire, Hammurabi of Babylon, Zara Yakob of Ethiopia, John II of Portugal, Suryavarman II of Khmer, Darius of Persia, Pericles of Greece, Suleiman the Magnificent of the Ottomans, Tuthmosis III of Egypt, Harun al-Rashid of Arabia, Abraham Lincoln of the Americans, Alara of Nubia. Examples of famous but not necessarily deserving leaders: Joan of Arc of France, Sitting Bull of the Sioux, Geronimo of the Apache, William Wallace of Scotland, Bill Clinton, Ronald Reagan, Fidel Castro, Nelson Mandela, Queen Hippolyte of the Amazons, King Arthur. Edit: To put it another way: would you choose an obscure but deserving leader (e.g. Zara Yakob of Ethiopia) over someone famous who was not really a leader of an empire (e.g William Wallace of Scotland)?