Why Ada Lovelace is not a good choice to lead Great Britain

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Data point: Ada's design is more inspiring than Great Britain's design.

 

[Leucarum]

Data point: Ada's design is more inspiring than Great Britain's design.

More an indisputable fact than a data point...

 

[Lord Lakely]

Data point: Ada's design is more inspiring than Great Britain's design.

INSPIRING? It's Sejong's ability, swapping out Eureka's for Masteries.

All three of the designs in the upcoming patch are like... reheated nachos from Civs V and VI.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

INSPIRING? It's Sejong's ability, swapping out Eureka's for Masteries.

Which is still more inspiring than calling a unique quarter "Financial Centre". Wall Street would like to have a word.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

Which is still more inspiring than calling a unique quarter "Financial Centre". Wall Street would like to have a word.

Wall St??!?? Here in old blighty we call it the Square Mile!

 

[criZp]

Ada has received more popularity recently as she was included in the very popular book by Walter Isaacson "The Innovators". She is described by Isaacson as a first algorithm coder.

I heard of her in that book as well. From what I remember, Isaacson didn't really explain why her work mattered. I just vaguely remember some theoretic mathematical stuff. (And I'm a guy who like mathematics, so I don't say mathematical as a negative.)

 

[Mesix]

Ian Fleming would make an interesting leader for Great Britian. Perhaps in a future expansion which includes new espionage mechanics.

 

[Republic of San Montuoso]

This ability just confirms it: if we ought to have a polymath scientist leader in Civ VII, it should have been Hildegard von Bingen. This ability would have perfectly fit her polymathic nature, at the border between faith and reason, between science and poetry. Plus, as opposed to all the people who keep proposing Babbage, Fleming and the likes, she's still a woman, and let's not put our heads in the sand: female representation, especially in those kind of games, is important.

So having her would have had the double advantage of still having a polymathic woman leading a civ in the game while allowing all the pearl-clutching people who would have preferred yet-another-man-in-a-suit-or-wig-or-armour-leading-England to still have a more "legitimate" (whatever that means) leader for England (which, she's not, she can lead whoever you want).

However, yeah, when they teased Ada saying she'll play with mechanics that are not the focus of the game, I was expecting something more... inspiring. More exciting. It's good, but it doesn't really make you play with the ability. Researching masteries is something you would often do nonetheless. It's not like Himiko where you have to cater your relationship and launch your endeavours, or Confucius who interacts with the specialists mini-game/puzzle.

I'll try her, she might be fun, but a tad disappointed. Hope it's better once you play her fully.

 

[Lebo44]

I heard of her in that book as well. From what I remember, Isaacson didn't really explain why her work mattered. I just vaguely remember some theoretic mathematical stuff. (And I'm a guy who like mathematics, so I don't say mathematical as a negative.)

While she didn't achieve any groundbreaking scientific discoveries, Ada Lovelace was likely the first known individual to recognize the potential of algorithms. This is why Isaacson placed her at the very beginning of the computer era. In a sense, she was akin to what Leonardo Da Vinci was for machinery or Otto Lilienthal was for modern aviation.

 

[Leyrann]

and let's not put our heads in the sand: female representation, especially in those kind of games, is important.

I have zero issue with women being in the game, and I've defended Lovelace's inclusion previously in this thread, but I don't see why it is important that they're in the game? Like, I appreciate the variety of not just looking at middle-aged men in age-appropriate combat gear whenever I open a diplomacy screen, but I wouldn't equate that with it being important that they're there. Or at least, I'm assuming that's not what you're referring to.

Also, wouldn't Hildegard von Bingen still have a separate niche? I was under the impression there's a significant religious aspect to her, which there isn't with Lovelace.

 

[Alexander's Hetaroi]

Wall St??!?? Here in old blighty we call it the Square Mile!

My point was calling the quarter "Financial Centre" is uninspiring and could reference just about any financial district in any city, and any country.
Obviously "Wall Street" would work if it was America but for Great Britain, I'd have gone for Bank Junction. I'd have never heard of the Square Mile before, but I'd go with that name over Financial Centre too.

Also, wouldn't Hildegard von Bingen still have a separate niche? I was under the impression there's a significant religious aspect to her, which there isn't with Lovelace.

Yes, there is. There's a reason why she's like the only Great Scientist in Civ 6 that needs a Holy Site rather than a campus.

That being said, I do agree with others that Ada's abilities could fit with Hildegard considering in this game culture also deals with religion, because there is no faith yield. I always thought Ada would have been more diplomatic and she'd provide influence instead of culture.

 

[Noble Zarkon]

My point was calling the quarter "Financial Centre" is uninspiring and could reference just about any financial district in any city, and any country.

Agree 100% just think "Square Mile" was just such an obvious choice!

 

[Racington]

I'm assuming more leaders for Britain will be added in the future? (Churchill, Queen Victoria, Queen Elizabeth, etc.)

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

the GB civilization is disappointing and boring overall. the British should not be defined by manufacturing aptitude as they were rapidly eclipsed in this by USA Germany and Japan. they should have focused more on influence and science as those areas were their strengths.

 

[agamemnon_of_the-bronze_]

Data point: Ada's design is more inspiring than Great Britain's design.

extremely boring design for GB.

 

[Sagax]

the GB civilization is disappointing and boring overall. the British should not be defined by manufacturing aptitude as they were rapidly eclipsed in this by USA Germany and Japan. they should have focused more on influence and science as those areas were their strengths.

This is what happens when the game wants to design civs around their best-known historical pinnacles, yet adapts three much wider historical periods instead of being more granular. The role of GB as the poster child for the Industrial Revolution is undeniable, so is US’s industrial might by the 20th century. But, within the game’s framing, they both belong to the same age and thus are forced to share the same time and progression scale.

That said, I agree that for now I’m just whelmed by GB. An industry-economy civ can be interesting, but I’m not getting that from their kit yet.

 

[Fluffball]

My biggest question for Britain getting ada Lovelace when we already have so many great female leaders to choose from and have already starred in the series, is why are they searching so low down the tree for Britain when we are stuck with boring old napoleon, xerxes, Augustus (ceaser) and pachacuti.

Where is the imagination and representation for them?

As a British person I certainly don't feel represented by ada Lovelace. I do as Victoria, or any of the Elizabeth's, Matilda, Margaret Thatcher, Florence Nightingale, Emmeline Parkhurst to just pick off the top of my head. All of which had significant impact on Britain as a nation and often the world we live in today.

 

[Sprenk]

As a British person I certainly don't feel represented by ada Lovelace. I do as Victoria, or any of the Elizabeth's, Matilda, Margaret Thatcher, Florence Nightingale, Emmeline Parkhurst to just pick off the top of my head. All of which had significant impact on Britain as a nation and often the world we live in today.

It's not like any of those would be bad choices (well, except for Thatcher, who probably won't stand the test of time). But we're living in the Age of Computers, and we're talking about a figure in a computer game. And because of that, Lovelace is a smart pick--just try a Google image search for "Steampunk Ada Lovelace." Nobody is cosplaying Matilda or Thatcher (thank goodness) these days

 

[Krikkit1]

This is what happens when the game wants to design civs around their best-known historical pinnacles, yet adapts three much wider historical periods instead of being more granular. The role of GB as the poster child for the Industrial Revolution is undeniable, so is US’s industrial might by the 20th century. But, within the game’s framing, they both belong to the same age and thus are forced to share the same time and progression scale.

That said, I agree that for now I’m just whelmed by GB. An industry-economy civ can be interesting, but I’m not getting that from their kit yet.

A good idea for GB might have been the ability to build RR and factories from the start of modern (ie they started it but were eclipsed)

 

[wilcoxchar]

Which is still more inspiring than calling a unique quarter "Financial Centre". Wall Street would like to have a word.

They should've named the unique quarter the Royal Exchange and named the gold building in it the Trading Hall.