Second Leader in a Civ

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Caligula

I don't want to know what effects his traits have

Horses in the Senate! Go, Incitatus, go!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Solver
And Nero's unique unit would be the City Torcher .

Or the Fiddle

[Alexander I]

The Roman unique unit, the Praetorian Guard, should be able to assassinate your leader as it's special ability!

[sophist]

Originally posted by Alexander01
Romans - Not Charlemagne. He was Frankish, so he'd get either French or Germans (leaning towards German, because old Frankish is more Germanic thatn Latin). Perhaps any of the following Caesars: Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Vespasian, Trajan, Hadrian, Marcus Aurelius, Diocletian, Constantine. The rest were mostly pushovers.

Caligula, Claudius, and Nero? Za?

Someone else pointed out how Pericles would be good because he ruled during the Golden Age of Athens, so that's definitely a vote for either Augustus or 4 of the 5 good emperors Tiberius, Trajan, Hadrian, and Marcus Aurelius (but not Nerva, as he only ruled for 2 years). Diocletian is a good dark horse candidate, since he pulled the empire out of a downward spiral (no emperor lasting more than 2 years over more than 50). Constantine, though, I think is a pass, since he's in between Rome and Byzantium, and so not truly of either. The Christianity thing throws a bit of a wrench in his Roman-ness in my eyes as well.

[Xorbon]

Originally posted by Solver
El Cid for Spanish sounds good .

I wouldn't pick El Cid. He was never the leader of Spain at any time. Now, if there were 'military' great leaders in the game, he'd definitely be one of them...

Stalin was in Civ1 because the USSR existed when Civ1 was released, and the "Russians" there were actually the Soviets. Plus, no one could be offended by Stalin at the time of Civ1's release.

I don't see how Stalin was any less offensive then as he is now. As for your first arguement, Russia had the majority of power in the USSR. So, I don't see any problem with any Soviet leader being a leader of the Russians.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Rome should get two. Maybe include Constantine, Trajan, Vespasian or Claudius, etc. with Julius Caesar.

[Solver]

I don't see how Stalin was any less offensive then as he is now. As for your first arguement, Russia had the majority of power in the USSR. So, I don't see any problem with any Soviet leader being a leader of the Russians.

Very simple. People in Western countries are quite unlikely to be really offended by Stalin being in the game. They have not directly suffered from him. And Civ1 was simply not available in the USSR - no games were. In 1995, when Civ2 was released, a computer was still a pretty rare thing over here, and there were definitely no games except a few places of pirated games being sold. In fact, here they started selling legal games about 2 years ago, and still sell few.

In other words, when Civ1 came out, there was a nearly zero chance of anyone from the USSR getting his hands on it, and obviously Microprose couldn't know it would collapse soon. Now, though, when players in former USSR will be playing Civ4 as well, there will be tons of those who may be offended by Stalin. There are, after all, many people here whose family members Stalin ordered sent to Siberia or shot.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Alexander01


Trouble is, Firaxis already put Charles V as the leader of the Austrians in the unused Civ in Civ3. That would be the first time a leader of one civ was used for another.

I know he was both King of Spain and Holy Roman Emperor, but ...

He was Archduke of Austria for about a year, but Holy Roman Emperor and King of the Germans and King of various Spanish kingdoms for considerably longer, as well as being holder of various other titles in the Low Countries.


Now to the objections to Catherine the Great as leader of Russia I'd say that there wasn't an ethnicity test you had to pass to be leader of the Russian Empire- given that Russia dynasties had been married into Byzantine, Mongol and Bulgar dynasties that would have been pretty pointless.

The criterion should only be: are they a representative leader of a time of great achievement in the civilization they represent ?

Catherine's reign certainly saw the legacy of Peter the Great continued and enhanced- aggrandisement of Russian territory, the opening to the West continued, Russia brought within the orbit of the Enlightenment and so on.

She was received into the Orthodox Church and learned to speak Russian- rather better achievements than those of the first two Hanoverian kings of Great Britain.

[xen001]

Germany. -------Hitler. Okay he was a bad leader, but he was a big part of the German Evolution. He did great things, very evil things, but still great things. Besides most of us wanna have the chance to kick his butt.

[Solver]

Not going to happen .

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by xen001
Germany. -------Hitler. Okay he was a bad leader, but he was a big part of the German Evolution. He did great things, very evil things, but still great things. Besides most of us wanna have the chance to kick his butt.

Be satisfied with Civ II's WWII scenario.

It's as about as likely as Jefferson Davis as leader of the U.S. or Saddam for the Arabs.

[xen001]

I understand that we have to take into consideration the sensibilities of the majority of gamers. I respect that, well I take heart that we have a very active modding community here that will take on issues and make modules for a greater civ-ing experience.

[Alexander I]

Well it looks at least like nobody thinks the Aztecs and Incas should have two leaders.

[Solver]

Originally posted by xen001
I understand that we have to take into consideration the sensibilities of the majority of gamers. I respect that, well I take heart that we have a very active modding community here that will take on issues and make modules for a greater civ-ing experience.

Just like there was a Fascism mod for Civ3, I'm sure there will be plenty of custom leaders for Civ4, including Hitler. Personally, I'd rather not see him. The only exception would be a WW2 scenario, where I would probably want real leaders from that time - Elizabeth, Bismarck and Lincoln in a WW2 scenario are just meh.

[Alexander I]

Originally posted by Solver


Just like there was a Fascism mod for Civ3, I'm sure there will be plenty of custom leaders for Civ4, including Hitler. Personally, I'd rather not see him. The only exception would be a WW2 scenario, where I would probably want real leaders from that time - Elizabeth, Bismarck and Lincoln in a WW2 scenario are just meh.

Yes, I think ol' Adolf's only place is in a WWII scenario.