Confirmed Civs and leaders.

[Elok]

LEADER TRAIT: Burns cakes. -1 happiness from wheat.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Oliver Cromwell for some real variety. -Ironic, since he was no friend of variety.

-Take it, Elok!

[Elok]

I assume that, under the Civ6 system, Cromwell's agenda would be to act aggressively towards anyone who pursued a monarchical form of government?

(don't actually know much about Cromwell)

[giblets]

What, she was in charge in V? Admittedly, she wore the pants much of the time, but ehhhhh . . . why not Basil II, or Manuel I? The Empire only lasted a thousand friggin' years, after all.

Yes, and in III

[dannubis]

I assume that, under the Civ6 system, Cromwell's agenda would be to act aggressively towards anyone who pursued a monarchical form of government?

(don't actually know much about Cromwell)

Kill the celts.

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

Cromwell's a complex figure they seriously could do something with - capable general and administrator, stern and brutal man, who either had no problem with monarchy as a form of government to begin with despite what he said, or changed his mind profoundly as circumstances evolved, to dismiss a corrupt parliament and rule as a despot far more absolute than Charles' most megalomaniac dreams. -Or maybe it was truly religious all along, or he was just a hypocrite. Plenty to play with as an England leader...

[Buster Crabbe's Uncle]

A German site yesterday reported that France is definitely in...

[C0ckney]

yeah i doubt they'll leave out any of the old favourites.

[Lorizael]

I'm curious about that. If we were to make a list of the greatest civilizations in history ranked by, say, length of time they existed, who would make the cut in a civ game? Figuring out how long a civilization has existed is, of course, a tricky and somewhat arbitrary measurement, but not an impossible one. China, India, Rome, and Egypt would fare well by that measure. What others would?

[Elok]

Byzantium, more than a thousand years--about as long as the Roman Empire and Republic put together. But you knew I would say that. Russia, in one form or another, also more than a thousand years old, younger if you exclude Kievan Rus. The Ottomans lasted more than five hundred. Muslim Arabs, about as long, maybe slightly longer if you let your focus drift to Spain after 1250. With Persia, it depends on if you consider the three very different pre-Islamic dynasties separately or lump them all together (and possibly throw in the Safavids just to confuse the issue).

OTOH, Greece definitely deserves inclusion, and their lifespan as an empire (not a bunch of city-states poking each other with spears every summer to resolve two-inch border differences) was rather brief. Athens had a nice one going for less than a century, and then Alexander built a half-Greek civilization that decayed until Rome ate it. They just had an enormous cultural legacy. And as for us? Not even three hundred yet.

[C0ckney]

sumeria, assyria and babylonia should certainly qualify.

the greeks definitely. greek civilisation (if we consider the mycenaean greeks, which we should) lasted a very long time.

a couple of more leftfield ones. how about the kush empire? more than 1,000 years, although not a great deal is known about its internal organisation. or maybe the silla empire in korea? quite small but lasted for nearly a millennium.

[C0ckney]

perhaps vietnam can be included, unique unit: spambot.

[Ming]

We can usually count on them to include leaders from countries with the best game sales potential

[Lorizael]

We can usually count on them to include leaders from countries with the best game sales potential

I get that, but only kind of. If America were not included in Civ, I'd probably chuckle, but I'd still buy the game. I wouldn't feel offended. I might think it was a stupid or inconsistent choice (depending on their deciding factors) but I also might not. For example, if Firaxis chose to only have civs that were around in 4000-ish BC, then I'd be totally fine with them not including America (as long as some others weren't included either). I'd also be fine with there not being any reason at all for America's non-inclusion, because there are many civs that never get included in a civ game for basically no reason except that only so many civs get in. But no matter what, it wouldn't make me not buy the game.

[Ming]

Many of the hard cores will probably buy the game no matter what. The other hard cores will wait until the reviews come out.

But for the mass audience, having a leader from your country could make the difference, and provides a good promotion point in country.
Also, not having a leader from a major country might piss some people off.
Every bit helps