Vahnstad
Emperor
Two options. Sorry if i forgot someone, could be esp. the case in early American history.
Every Civ game needs villains, but I think there are more interesting villains.Andrew Jackson
I would love to see an America partially focused around the 1900ish "gilded age" of industrialization, commerce, etc. William McKinley would make an excellent leader for this. When he died people thought he might end up being one of the most popular presidents ever; unfortunately, his VP, Teddy, kind of made everyone forget about him. But you've got stuff like his open door policy with China / asia; the spanish american war; support for the american factory worker & mercantilism. Factories! Railroads! Trade routes! While still capturing the expansionist vibe. He's even on the 500$ bill.William McKinley,
I wasn't thinking of him as a villain as he wasn't in real life. He was loyal and brave along with quick tempered. All people have good and bad traits. He was more of a gray characterEvery Civ game needs villains, but I think there are more interesting villains.![]()
I'd call him a villain in real life, and not simply for his treatment of Native Americans. He was reckless, violent, arrogant, and self-absorbed. He definitely qualifies as a big personality, though; I'll grant him that.I wasn't thinking of him as a villain as he wasn't in real life.
Goldwater is very controversial, because of his position on civil rights. I think Reagan or even Schwarzenegger (who would be a controversial picks) would be better. I should have included Luther King who's maybe more likely to be picked than Barack Obama.My vote for an American civ leader, would be Charles Lindbergh. That would obviously be controversial, but would be a great contrast with the policies of Teddy Roosevelt featured in Civ VI.
If you wanted someone who actually held office, I would go with President Coolidge, Senator Taft (as opposed to his father President Taft), William McKinley, Senator Barry Goldwater or even Generals Douglas MacArthur or Dwight Eisenhower.
To balance things out, I would also include an alternate American leader to contrast with the main leader.
Possible pairings:
Teddy Roosevelt / William McKinley (they may have been President / VP together, but represented very different political viewpoints)
Douglas MacArthur / Franklin D. Roosevelt
Senator Robert Taft / President Harry S. Truman
Barry M. Goldwater / John F. Kennedy
Charles Lindbergh / Franklin D. Roosevelt
Calvin Coolidge / Woodrow Wilson
Abraham Lincoln / Stephen A. Douglas
The obvious idea, being to select individuals who are polar opposites politically and ideologically, so that there is a real contrast between the two leaders and a meaningful difference in game play style.
First choice: Calvin Coolidge. For one thing, he happens to be my favorite president. For another, people on both sides generally at least respect him if not outright like him. Plus his famous terseness would make him fun and memorable to interact with, especially if leaders become more vocal again in Civ7 (as I hope they do).
Second choice: John Adams. Both of the Adamses are criminally underappreciated, and I'd love to see that changed. Also John Adams was famous for his combative, surly personality, which would also make him fun to interact with. Fun fact: John Adams is the reason the VP is not allowed to address the Senate. They got sick of hearing his voice.
Every Civ game needs villains, but I think there are more interesting villains.![]()
I'd call him a villain in real life, and not simply for his treatment of Native Americans. He was reckless, violent, arrogant, and self-absorbed. He definitely qualifies as a big personality, though; I'll grant him that.
I don't know Jackson very well, but the bland and boring presidents that followed him were arguably worse. Trump is however often compared to him a lot (and to Huey Long). Jackson was a populist who gave America a fresh breath because of his personality just like Trump is. I'm sure Trump won't go into history as a boring bland president, but as someone we all know for the rest of our lives.I'd call him a villain in real life, and not simply for his treatment of Native Americans. He was reckless, violent, arrogant, and self-absorbed. He definitely qualifies as a big personality, though; I'll grant him that.
Yes, those two statements would go together.I'm a Berniecrat, and I think he was one of the worst presidents of America
How do you mean. I've just said that, because I believe the left doesn't appreciate Coolidge a lot, while you say both sides admire him a lot. I could be wrong, but I have a lot more respect for the Republicans in the two decades before that, during the progressive era (and the progressive - republican split).Yes, those two statements would go together.