Which will the 6(5) new leaders be ? (for civilizations that are already in game)

[scy12]

Take a guess , discuss the Leaders and their traits, show your preferences .

I Feel like this thread was needed by the civfanatics population and it would be opened sooner or later. Better to do it myself.


(This is different to the 19 unused Trait combinations topic because it comes at a different time where we have more knowledge about the new leaders , there are several different parameters to think like new traits or Firaxis giving old trait combinations to new leaders etc. Again it must be said that it is opened on a time that the matter is very popular)


Here are my 3 picks.

Japan - Meiji : Organized - Industrious
France- Charlemagne : Spiritual- Aggressive
Greece Pericles :Creative - Philosophical



American: Lincoln - Charismatic, Philosophical
Celtic: Boudica - Aggressive, Charismatic
French: De Gaulle - Charismatic, Industrious
Greek: Pericles - Creative, Philosophical
Ottoman: Suleiman - Imperialistic, Philosophical
Persia: Darius I - Financial, Organized

 

[Duraska]

Boudica for the Celts?
Maybe Aggressive and Charismatic?

Charlamagne for the Germans? (a stretch, I know... but Germany considers itself the offspring of the HRE). Charismatic and Organized. Or Imperial.

Bill Clinton for America (ha, just kidding). Charismatic and Amorous.

 

[Sofista]

I've thought of Boadicea myself, as a safe bet. Reasons:

- the Celts have only one leader, and making it two won't hurt;
- Warlords added no female leaders, so they'll probably put in at least one.

 

[Kietharr]

Lincoln - America (confirmed) Charasmatic/Industrious (traits not confirmed)
Charles de Gaulle - France (Pictures have been seen from Firaxis, not confirmed but a safe bet) no idea on the traits

Axayacatl - Aztecs, Aggressive/Expansive (he subjugated the city of Tlatelolco, expanding the influence of Tenochtitlan and eliminating Tlatelolco's say in Aztec policy, allowing Tenochtitlan to gain autocratic power, the great stone of the sun was also carved during his rule, going out of my way on this one because Aztec leaders are less known than old world ones)
Percicles - Greece, Philisophical/Creative
Abu Bakr - Arabs, Expansive/Financial
Timur - Persia, Imperialistic/somthing, don't really know a good second trait for him.

If there were more possibilities, i'd like to see Meji (org/ind), Boudica (cha/pro, yes churchill's traits fit her :/), Trajan (pro/cre, his greatest accomplishments are his wall and column, Rome hit its top size during his rule), and a spanish leader, don't know who would be the most worthy.

 

[Loose Nut]

I'm most strongly pulling for Pericles - the Greeks really need a #2. After that, any of Meiji/Japan, Darius/Persia, Sundiata/Mali, Abu Bakr/Arabia, or, as mentioned, Boadicea/Celts would be nice.

 

[Catharsis]

Well, the xpack is called 'Beyond the Sword' so maybe Boudicca isn't a likely new leader. Although I would like to see her in.

Don't know about traits, but:

America - Abraham Lincoln (we already know this one)
Greece - Pericles
Mali - Sundiata Keita
Japan - Meiji
China - Empress Wu
Inca - Pachacuti

 

[The Almighty dF]

We know two

de Gaulle
Lincoln

For the rest, I'm hoping:

Robert The Bruce
Adolf Hitler
Hirohito

Dunno who could be the sixth.
We need Hirohito. C'mon.

 

[marioflag]

I'm almost sure there will be a new Persian leader.A lot of them are very well know (Darius,Xerxes) and Persia was among the most powerful empires in the past.I would bet also for a new leader for Greece (Pericles) and Japan.
Other 2 leaders probably will be a choice between France,China,Germany,Spain,Arabia

 

[scy12]

I'm almost sure there will be a new Persian leader.A lot of them are very well know (Darius,Xerxes) and Persia was among the most powerful empires in the past.I would bet also for a new leader for Greece (Pericles) and Japan.
Other 2 leaders probably will be a choice between France,China,Germany,Spain,Arabia

Well i think that neither Xerxes or Darius where successful Leaders ... Are there any other Persian Leaders that are famous through the world ?

So Charlemagne and Lincoln are confirmed . I guess that leaves Japan , Greece, Germany,Ottoman Empire , China as the most possible candidates.

 

[Scaramanga]

We know two

de Gaulle
Lincoln

For the rest, I'm hoping:

Robert The Bruce
Adolf Hitler
Hirohito

Dunno who could be the sixth.
We need Hirohito. C'mon.

I'm not sure de Gaulle has been confirmed.

 

[Thedrin]

We know two

de Gaulle

So Charlemagne and Lincoln are confirmed

Where are either Charlemagne or de Gaulle confirmed?

 

[Julian Delphiki]

It seems that repeating it over and over makes it true. Bleh. Oh, btw did i mention that there is already thread about this?

 

[mitsho]

Well i think that neither Xerxes or Darius where successful Leaders ... Are there any other Persian Leaders that are famous through the world ?

Shapur? Akbar? Ayatolla Khomeini? Mahmud Ahmadinejad? (joking on the last one )

There are enough great Persian ones. But I do really think that the civs that are at the moment most stereotyped into one gameplay style should come first: Japan (I do think a successfull Japan AI would be nice once or two), Spain (non-religious madness please) and Arabia (I have never seen Saladin coping well in any of my games, too protective perhaps?). Together with the obvious Greeks and the known Abe Lincoln, we have got 6 new ones then.

I don't think neither Charlemagne (just a scenario?) nor de Gaulle (Railroads - the game - perhaps?) are confirmed so far...

mick

 

[Martinus]

So Charlemagne and Lincoln are confirmed.

1. There is a Charlemagne UNIT (probably from a scenario), not a LEADER.

2. De Gaulle's screenshot that people get excited about is from Railroads, not Civ4.

Stop spreading misinformation.

 

[Duuk]

Since the expansion is about the post-gunpowder age, I'd suspect Meiji, Lincoln for sure. Ataturk for the Ottomans (possibly). DeGaulle possibly - traits Useless and Arrogant would fit.

 

[Antilogic]

Thank you, I was wondering why there has been a de Gaulle craze.

The scenario image that I have seen entitled Charlemagne, I assumed, was an offshoot of the Middle Ages scenario that I loved so very much in Civ3. I haven't seen a Charlemagne leader yet.

I'm wanting the following list, myself:

Lincoln for the US (confirmed)
Pericles for Greece
Meiji for Japan
Abu Bakr for Arabia
Pachachuti for the Inca
Philip Augustus for France
Barbarossa for Germany
Suleiman for the Ottomans
Darius for the Persians
Charles V for Spain (could also run Austria, if they add him, but Austria would need two leaders)

There are other good leaders as well, but I picked these to go on my list. I know there are more than 6, but I'll be happy with any combination of these.


Why can't anyone understand that Hirohito and Hitler were not good leaders? Villians and infamous, maybe, but not the kind of leaders that Civ is reflecting. Look at the before and after shot of Japan and Germany of their administrations. Hitler turned a poor country suffering from internal revolutions into a...pair of puppet states for two other superpowers. Wow, that was an incredible feat! How about Japan? Meiji is the figurehead for the modernization of Japan from that feudal system of ages ago into a modern country, and beat the stuffing out of the Russian navy. Then, you get Hirohito--overreached his grasp, got himself into a war with the US, and then lost horribly, being the one leader to suffer the dubious honor of being nuked. The only guy to be on the receiving end of a nuclear strike.

Even as mass-murderers go, Hitler wasn't that bad. 6 million Jews? Hah, even the Belgians beat him in the Congo (they killed 10 million under King Leopold)! I don't get the craze, I just don't. I guess it's just because everybody pays attention to their World War II history and automatically assumes those names are the best ones around. We've already got rid of Xerxes, why mess up the trend?

 

[scy12]

1. There is a Charlemagne UNIT (probably from a scenario), not a LEADER.

2. De Gaulle's screenshot that people get excited about is from Railroads, not Civ4.

Stop spreading misinformation.

IMHO
My comment was a response to the above comments claiming that those Leaders are known. By all means you are free to disprove those claims . However you are not the one to judge on who is spreading misinformation or not. This thread is created in the virtue that all ideas , thoughts claims about the possible inclusion of a Leader is encouraged. If something proves to be wrong along the road so be it . Doesn't mean we should spread lies and checking your sources is a good advice but it is not always practical or feasible. We should keep an open mind and good manners to the people that may suggest something that can afterwards be proved wrong since the point of the topic is above all discussion . I don't see the topic to be in that bad direction and i really wish it doesn't start to.
Don't respond to the above.

Lincoln for the US (confirmed)
Pericles for Greece
Meiji for Japan
Abu Bakr for Arabia
Pachachuti for the Inca
Philip Augustus for France
Barbarossa for Germany
Suleiman for the Ottomans
Darius for the Persians
Charles V for Spain (could also run Austria, if they add him, but Austria would need two leaders)

There are other good leaders as well, but I picked these to go on my list. I know there are more than 6, but I'll be happy with any combination of these.

I really like your list , most of the choices seem realistic to have a good chance to be included in a generic Civilization 4 game but i am wondering about the "Gunpowder factor" and how important it will be to the inclusion of new leaders.

Why can't anyone understand that Hirohito and Hitler were not good leaders? Villians and infamous, maybe, but not the kind of leaders that Civ is reflecting. Look at the before and after shot of Japan and Germany of their administrations. Hitler turned a poor country suffering from internal revolutions into a...pair of puppet states for two other superpowers. Wow, that was an incredible feat! How about Japan? Meiji is the figurehead for the modernization of Japan from that feudal system of ages ago into a modern country, and beat the stuffing out of the Russian navy. Then, you get Hirohito--overreached his grasp, got himself into a war with the US, and then lost horribly, being the one leader to suffer the dubious honor of being nuked. The only guy to be on the receiving end of a nuclear strike.

I have a more mixed opinion about Hitler. The way he used his Charisma to rise from the Lower ranks of the Nazi Party to the top and subsequently transforming a small party into his own Ideals is amazing . Then after several years of planned political and violent movements he seized power . Many of that plans were a reality due to the thousands Persons he brought to his side by his charisma.

After seizing power he created the biggest war machine in the world but then he thought , he could rule it (the world) .... His actions prior the war was the best strategy for going into war , his actions into the war proved to be disastrous .

Like many before him his ambition and arrogance was the biggest flaw one could have.

But then it is a positive he was all that because he was also a genocidal madman that would leave the world into chaos.

I think he could be included.

 

[Nordiska]

I think they should add another leader for the Ottomans and possibly the Celts also but I believe I remember reading that beyond the sword would be a stand alone xpack. That being the case I doubt they would add any leaders for the xpansion civs from warlords.
I would assume the new leaders would be for the new civs from beyond the sword and the original vanilla.

 

[Mowque]

by SCY12- "But then it is a positive he was all that because he was also a genocidal madman that would leave the world into chaos.

I think he could be included."

what the hell? you WANT a genocidal madman???

 

[scy12]

by SCY12- "But then it is a positive he was all that because he was also a genocidal madman that would leave the world into chaos.

I think he could be included."

what the hell? you WANT a genocidal madman???

Yes i want a genocidal madman for a Leader if i believe he was a good leader (which is arguable in the above case).