Why not have a different ruler for each age

[Sabre2th]

this is just too much for a civ GAME. if firaxis starts adding stuff like this, they'll never finish the important stuff (AI, interface, GAMEPLAY)

[dennis580]

No it's not a novelty. This would add a lot to gameplay as each new ruler would have different attributes and charteristics. This would add a lot to gameplay.

[Sabre2th]

even if firaxis made this functional in some way, it takes away from the time they can spend on everything else. i don't see how firaxis could make different personalities (4 or more new leader profiles for each civ) well without delaying the release of civ3. if different leaders are wanted that badly, maybe modmakers should do them instead. i would rather have one leader throughout, personally.

[Fidel]

well ancient us ruler could be fred flintstone, i guess. than that yankee on king arthur's castle for medieval times. um...lemme see what is next....
of course, dubbya, 50 percent polution up, ever second military unit free

[Eddin]

Oh come on people

It's not like the end of the world if a civ has just one leader running around in a small bearskin. I don't really care actually.

And from what I've seen with the small roman guys face which change every row, what ur saying may just be implemented

And on the election thing... would certainly add a new dimension. But who uses democracy anyway
Let those poor people give me their tithes

[Kc7mxo]

How about they just change the name every few years. Pick a few names from their historical dominion. And then add numerals to their name. So perhaps you'd end up being George Washington the XXIV. Or tokugawa the V.

Simple. Easy. And a culture that doesn't have 3 named leaders doesn't desrve to be in civ3.