Game 12 - Which Leader?

[Nugog]

Ok - too many options to list.

let's hear your opinions and arguments and pros/cons.

Then I will refine these into a shortlist poll.

[Nugog]

I reckon we should have Stalin - as he rocks!

'nuff said really.

[jbp26]

it doesnt really matter to me but PLEASE no more imperialistic leaders.

[draethor]

Huayna capac

[Nugog]

Seriously guys - we will be starting polls on many of the options today - however there are too many leaders to list.

I would like to get down to a short list of about 10 to 15.

[JungleIII]

There are quite a few good leaders that always crop up…

Jbp26 mentions he isn’t fond of Imperialistic leaders, but there are a few that are great:
Justinian – with the fantastic UU the Cataphract – having a UU with 12 when the competition has only 10’s is too good to pass up AND no anarchy between govt’s … You can’t rule out Imperialistic as Julius Caesar with his Praetorian is kicking too (although I do prefer Augustus). These two UU’s are the only two I choose for a specific unit tactic game, now that the Cossack was nerfed so bad in BtS. Joao was also a surprisingly good leader also – thanks for the game with him.

Anyway – I will put up my choices to NOT include:
NO Aggressive leaders – they all have a trait that dooms their nation except when playing a very aggressive game. This includes: Alexander, Boudica, Gengis Khan, Hammurabi, Kublai Khan, Montezuma, Ragnar, Shaka, Stalin and Tokugawa. Have you ever see one of these guys win a game in the end??? They may be a nuisance and dent their competition, but they don’t win games.

Another poor trait is Protective. This often leads to a wasted trait for humans because we don’t win by sitting still waiting for enemies to attack. I never have any luck with Wang Kon, Tokugawa, Qin, Mao, Gilgamesh, etc… Again, you don’t win well with these guys.

There are a lot of leaders in between the worst and the best. But for the best traits:
It’s hard to beat Spiritual for no Anarchy, and Financial for extra commerce. When you are playing at the Intermediate level, Industrious is also nice to go for the wonders and pick up the ½ priced forges. Creative is nice to pop your borders and get the knowledge going fast.

MY SHORT LIST:
Mansa Musa – Malinese: Spiritual and Financial
Asoka – Indian: Spiritual and Organized
Ramesses II – Egyptian: Spiritual and Creative
Justinian – Byzantine: Spiritual and Imperialistic
Willem van Oranje – Dutch: Financial and Creative
Louis XIV – French: Creative and Industrious
Zara Yaqob – Ethiopian: Creative and Organized
Roosevelt – American: Industrious and Organized
Augustus Caesar – Roman: Imperialistic and Industrious

If this is too much analysis or steps on toes, I apologise in advance. Hopefully it helps…

[RobWorham]

[Nugog]

Originally posted by JungleIII
Anyway – I will put up my choices to NOT include:
NO Aggressive leaders – they all have a trait that dooms their nation except when playing a very aggressive game. This includes: Alexander, Boudica, Gengis Khan, Hammurabi, Kublai Khan, Montezuma, Ragnar, Shaka, Stalin and Tokugawa. Have you ever see one of these guys win a game in the end??? They may be a nuisance and dent their competition, but they don’t win games.

We will have to agree to disagree on winning games with these leaders.

However I will happily concede that many of them offer a very one track gameplay option.

[Nugog]

Originally posted by JungleIII
MY SHORT LIST:
Mansa Musa – Malinese: Spiritual and Financial
Asoka – Indian: Spiritual and Organized
Ramesses II – Egyptian: Spiritual and Creative
Justinian – Byzantine: Spiritual and Imperialistic
Willem van Oranje – Dutch: Financial and Creative
Louis XIV – French: Creative and Industrious
Zara Yaqob – Ethiopian: Creative and Organized
Roosevelt – American: Industrious and Organized
Augustus Caesar – Roman: Imperialistic and Industrious

Thank You!

Originally posted by JungleIII
If this is too much analysis or steps on toes, I apologise in advance. Hopefully it helps…

No and no,no need to and it sure does help!

[jbp26]

my top 5 would be:

huanya capa
darius
zara yaqob
elizabeth
mansa musa

[Fleme]

Elizabeth because she is is VERY financial and is really good at approaching it through either a specialist economy or a cottage economy. Put her on a coast with a few fish sources and a river running nearby and.... ahh, wishful thinking.

Second choices would be Lincoln, Pericles, Frederick. Huayna is good but I think he's better for higher levels than Prince (personal preference).

If I were to create a game it'd be with a really good leader for standalone economy and the map Big and Small or other similar and also have it so that you wouldn't have contact with anyone prior to Optics so it'd be a test of how well a player techs. With that handicap, maybe for once we could get some half decent terrain to live on?

Just my thoughts.

[Swiss Pauli]

Someone you've not had yet (obviously), but I'm not bothered. Not played Hannibal in ages, but I admit I haven't checked whether you've already used him!

[Chuckman]

Gilgamesh

[Robert]

Lincoln.

[Ms_Summer]

I tried to pick civs with many options, but not necessarily overpowered, or previously played.

In no particular order:
Cyrus
Frederick
Justinian
Washington
Zara Yaqob