ITT: Post better leaders for civilisations, if they exist

ITT: Post better leaders for civilisations, if they exist.

Probably not that hard mode: They can't have been in a previous video game.

Other urls found in this thread:

twitter.com/realpeerreview
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

>Victoria
>England

>Saladin
>Arabia

>Cleopatra
>Egypt

Are these jokes?

No.

The leader direction was a bit borked on this one, not too over the top SJW level but still kind of odd.
Scythians were included for being a "progressive" civ.

No clue why they put fucking Gorgo in there when previously all they had was Alexander.

Chandragupta Maurya, Ashoka, Chandragupta II, Akbar or anybody else for India (or ideally, multiple Indian civs).

Louis IX, Francis I or Louis XIV for France.

Overall I'd rather just have a different choice of civilizations.

>Kongo, Sparta, Poland and Brazil (well at least Brazil might have a good theme again)
>no Byzantium
>no Dutch
>no Ottomans
>no Persia, in any form (just once I want something other than the Achaemenids)
>no Angkor, Siam, or Pagan
>no Java
>no Inca
>Scythians instead of Mongols
>Aztec instead of Maya

Honestly the Indian blob civ is one of my biggest pet peeves with civ. Other civilizations get blobbed too, like the celts or Polynesians, but nobody gets it as bad or consistently as India.

Yeah, I can get the likes of Celts or Polynesians since individual tribes or regions aren't really notable enough on their own, but with India it's like including 'Middle East' or 'Europe' as a civilization. I'd love to see the likes of the Mauryans, Cholas, Vijayanagara, Mughals, etc, represented separately. At the very least they could include one Hindu and one Islamic Indian one.

Persia bother me too, since Achaemenid, Sassanid and Islamic Persia were so hugely different, but at least they were the same people. With India there's just no excuse.

Ptolomeus or Naseer
William de Normandy
Enrico Dendolo
Justinian
Andrew Jacksom
Lawrence of Arabia
Otto von Bismarck or some Salian
Sima Yi
Emperor Asoka
Charlemagne or Napoopan

>Gilgamesh
>Tomyris

That's fucking stupid, might as well put Romulus as the leader of Rome.

Nezahualcoyotl would be a better pic over Moctezuma for the Aztecs.

I would like to have a generic "Italian" civ, as Rome is blatantly supposed to depict the Roman Empire and not Italy post-Fall of Ravenna (as it should be, by the way), despite many people's claims. I would like to have either Lawrence the Magnificent or Alessandro Sforza as leader.

Anyways, as for the existing civilizations:

>India.
>Asoka.

>Egypt.
>Pepi II or Ramnses II.

>France
>Francis I or Lous XIV

>Greece.
>Epaminondas/Pericles.

>Inca
>Manco Capac.

>Arabia
>Fatimah

That's what dlc is for
happymerchant.jpg

They'll waste the DLC on Zulus and Huns. Just you watch.

>America
John Smith
>Arabia
Mohammed
>Aztecs
Cortes
>Brazil
Pope Alexander VI
>China
Laozi
>Egypt
Arius
>England
Henry VIII
>France
John Calvin
>Germany
Martin Luther
>Greece
Homer
>India
Siddharta Guatama
>Japan
Emperor Jimmu
>Kongo
Pope Julius II
>Poland
Miesko I
>Rome
Jesus Christ
>Russia
Saint Cyril

Why does Greece have two civs?

Pericles is confirmed for Civ VI.

>Arabia
>Saladin

The should have picked Olaf the Saint, not Hardrada

>Arabia
Nasser

>France
Napoleon

>England
William I

>Germany
Frederick the Great

>Poland
Jozef Pilsudski

>Russia
Ivan IV

>India
Shah Jahan

>Japan
Meiji

>Nasser
Literally who?

I must unite the Arabian peoples under one flag.

>Isabella is still in this game

Is she the only one to appear in every major title?

USA - Eisenhower
Aztecs - Hernan Cortes
France - Francis I
Germany - Wilhelm I
Greece - Basil II
Greece - Justinian
India - Warren Hastings
Norway - Vidkun Quisling
Poland - John III Sobieski
Rome - Claudius
Spain - Charles V
Spain - King St. Ferdinand III

>I hate dunecoons who disagree with me but I hate other countries even more

>China

ZHU

YUAN

ZHANG

THE GREAT HONGWU EMEPEROR

The two absolutely retarded ones are France and Egypt.

Literally almost anyone else would be better. But I guess Napoleon for France (or De Gaulle, or Richelieu, or Philip Augustus, or Saint Louis, or Louis XIV, or Charlemagne, or Clovis, or Philip the Fair, or Odo, or Louis XI, or Francis I, or Henry IV, or Vercingetorix, or Robespierre...), and Hatshepsut for Egypt since they clearly want to have as many female leaders as possible.

The next game should have 2 leaders for each civ, one male, one female.

>America
George Washington
Abigail Adams (or possibly Pocahontas?)
>Arabia
Saladin
Lubna of Córdoba
>Assyria
Sargon II
Shammuramat
>Aztecs
Montezuma
Tzihuacxochitzin I
>Babylon
Nebuchadnezzar II
Semiramis
>Carthage
Hannibal Barca
Dido
>Celts
Brennus
Boudica
>China
Qin Shi Huang
Wu Zetian
>Egypt
Ramesses II
Hatsheput
>England
Richard III
Elizabeth I
>Ethiopia
Menelik II
Queen of Sheba
>France
Henry IV
Joan d'Arc
>Germany
Otto von Bismarck
Elisabeth Selbert
>Greece
Alexander the Great
Helen of Troy
>Holy Rome
Charlemagne
Constance
>Inca
Atahualpa
Angelina Yupanqui
>India
Emperor Ashoka
Razia Sultana
>Japan
Oda Nobunaga
Himiko
>Judah
David
Hadassah (Esther)
>Mali
Mansa Musa
Sassouma Bereté
>Maya
Pakal I
Lady Eveningstar
>Mongolia
Genghis Khan
Sorghaghtani Beki
>Netherlands
William I
Wilhelmina
>Ottomans
Osman I
Nurbanu Sultan
>Persia
Xerxes I
Boran
>Portugal
Afonso I
Maria I
>Rome
Augustus Caesar
Livia
>Russia
Ivan the Terrible
Anna
>Spain
Carlos I
Queen Isabella
>Sumeria
Gilgamesh
Puabi
>Zulu
Shaka
Nandi

Muh Equality.

It's just so that you get to choose between 2 and not get stuck with 1, and so that "girls" who play won't feel they have to boycott.

Also in Civ 2, you can choose to be Male or Female.

where the fuck is Turkey

Why is nobody choosing Philip Augustus
it look a tiny (really tiny) too religious

>Helen of Troy

Not as important historically as Scythia or Congo

the civ choices are pretty shit themselves, desu

fucking norway but no netherlands? india the modern country instead of one of the ancient indian kingdoms? where the fuck are the khmer and the greatest prehistorical boatsmen alive, the ancient malayan peoples, who span the area from taiwan to fucking madagascar? "kongo"?

civ games are shit anyway

also where are the mongols. they decided to leave out one of the longest recorded ages, the age of cavalry. wtf

>muh "muh"
It's what they did in Civ II, widely regarded as the classic of the series.

>no Byzantium
Basil II
Irene

>implying girls like history
>implying every female faculty member in the history department isn't some "intersectional" cunt

>Egypt is Cleopatra and not Nefertiti

bummed

You ain´t very smart, ain´t you?

feminist "science" twitter.com/realpeerreview

Africa

Confirmed.

just in the last week
>historian claims anthropologists are sexist because they can identify sex by the skeleton, when sex is clearly a social construct with no bilogical basis
>2 history papers generated by computers find their way into peer review journals
>woman can't figure out why men outperform women in mixed group sporting events
wew

lets not forget
>imperialism in an accounting of colonial childbirth
or my favorite
>feminist glaciology

>i can't understand arguments

I don't get why they keep insisting that brazil is a "Civilization", first BNW then BE and now VI as well
>muh size

might as well just add mexico

implying those are arguments

Yeah, I forgot them AND Vikings.

>Femnazi journals exist
>Therefore no legitimate female historians/scientists exist

You're retarded, therefore I guess this entire board is.

>Phillip II
He failed at everything

why the fuck isn't Cleopatra black

Replace John Smith with James Buchanan and that is the worst list I've ever seen.

>England
Henry VIII
>France
Charles Martel
>Germany
Otto the Great
>Rome
Marcus Aurelius
>Russia
Ivan the Terrible
>United States
Donald Trump

What I don't understand is why England is not "Britain". The leader and the civ bonuses are all Empire related, why not just go the full mile?

I genuinely want to see Hitler for Germany. And Lenin or Stalin for the motherland. But they'll never do it, even though the current leaders aren't exactly "angels"...

Also, where's Vietnam at? I want Ho Chi Minh with combat bonuses in jungles

They aim more for classical leaders/civs rather than modern/contemporary ones. That's for player-made mods/scenarios.

>luther
>pope
>arius
make me giggle, 10/10

>not Eleanor Roosevelt for America
>not Maria Theresa for
>H
>R
>E
>not la Malinche for Aztecs
>not Indira Gandhi for India
>not Catherine for Russia
>not Mehmed or Suleiman for Ottomans

indira gandhi/nehru for india
more relevant and influential than a guy who was killed 1 year after independence

>France
Napoleon
>Japan
Himiko Tennu
>Mongolia
Subutai or Ögedei Khagan
>China
Kublai Khan
>Persia
Timur or Tughril
>Arabia
Abdullah bin Rashid
>America
Obama
>Rome
Mehmed II
>Greece
Suleiman the Magnificent
>Germany
Merkel
>Brazil/Portugal
Alberto Barbossa
>England
Sadiq Khan
>India
Babur Khan
>Russia
Lenin
>Poland
Berke Khan
>Spain
Abd al-Rahman I
>Aztecs
who gives a fuck
>Egypt
Shajar ad-Durr
>Sumeria, Assyria, Babylon, etc
Saddam Hussein

Also
>female
>"rulers"
>mfw

>Female "Rulers"
>His country wasn't unified by a spanish qt that sponsored the discovery of America and expelled the muslims from her territories.

Anyone saying Phillip II is not the best choice for Spain doesn't know history at all.

>Saladin muh muslim muh not good muh
Fuck off

>Turkey
Abdullah Öcalan

England should have a fucking English leader for one or be renamed Britain

stalin and mao were civ4 leaders dude
though hitler would never happen yeah, and neither would a graphically depicted mohammed

>might as well just add mexico

Or USA

I'm half Spanish, and I had been hoping for Phillip II since they announced a new game. He honestly is the best choice, and Ferdinand/Isabella would be second.

People saying King Carlos I / HRE Charles V are only saying it bc he was Holy Roman Emperor.

They already do have Mexico, only they call it "Aztecs."

Brazil is has been an important political and economic force in South America for a long time. I see nothing wrong with having a more modern option for South and Central America (rather than the usual Aztecs and Mayans and Incans).

Honestly, the female choices they make just highlight the insignificance of great women in nations' histories. There are a few exceptions, perhaps, but mostly they pick wives of powerful men, borderline mythological figures, women briefly famous for their influence, or royal figureheads whose nations were run by governmental bodies and advisors. They're just desperate to add ANY woman of any historical significance, and it shows.

By Civ IX, Lola Montez will be Germany's leader.

This is so fucking cucked holy shit.

Fucking literally who women and niggers included for muh diversity.

Like who the fuck is Tomyris, who the fuck even are scythians?

Why do we have poo in loos like Gandhi?

Why do we have sandnigger mudshits like Saladin, who was a genocidal fucking maniac??

real top leader list incoming
USA: FDR, Andrew Jackson
Arabia: Abd-Al Malik
Aztecs: remove them, they've been in every civ game with unique civs and literally always have only monty
Brazil: Pedro's fine
China: Taizu of Song, Zhang Xianzhong
Egypt: Nothing wrong with Cleopatra, more fitting than fucking Gorgo anyway
England: Alfred the Great, Cromwell
France: Charlemagne, Louis IX, Napoleon
Germany: Karl the Great (same traits as his French counterpart), the Great Elector, Barbarossa
Greece: Agamemnon (more historical than Gilgamesh anyway, you can thank the Hittites for that), Philip of Macedon, Pyrrhus
India: Chandragupta, Gandhi's never getting removed because memes
Japan: Meiji, Tokimune's fine
Kongo: uh sure
Norway: Hardrada's a good choice
Poland: John III Sobieski
Rome: Trajan, Hadrian
Russia: Ivan the Terrible
Scythians: delete this holy fuck
Spain: ok as is
Sumeria: ye ok

new civs:
Hittites: Suppiluliuma
Georgia: Tamar (there's your female ruler quota)
Bohemia: Charles IV

meme pick:
Chile: Pinochet

should've quoted the OP w/e

>tfw Kauravas and Pandavas as civs never

Cleopatra is the most overrated figure in history. She mingled with Romans diplomatically a bit but ultimately did nothing for Egypt which was quickly folded into the empire. Egypt has an incredibly long and varied history with numerous leaders to draw from.

But no, Cleopatra remains history gaming's go-to girl. Even referenced in games like TW: Medieval 2 where it makes NO FUCKING SENSE.

Americans literally can't understand the Union.

>Homer

I'd change Brazil's Pedro II into Vargas.

>Trajan
>Jadwiga
>Gorgo
>Gandhi
>Kongo
>Cleopatra
>Aztecs
>Norway

Enrico Dandolo, Justinian, Charlemagne, Bismarck and Asoka were in previous Civ games.

Fuck you.

>who the fuck even are scythians?
Veeky Forums

They made him smug as fuck.

>Trajan
>Jadwiga
Actually important historical figures? Unless you're denying that the PLC was a major feature in Eastern European history?

>Gandhi
>Cleopatra
Characters with traditional appearance in Civ games who are kinda stuck as defaults for their civs?

>Gorgo
Kinda gotta agree, if only because there shouldn't be only one Greece but rather the city-states separate.

>Kongo
I guess they got bored of the Mali/Mansa Musa combination? Maybe they could have gone with Benin?

>Aztecs
>Norway
Literally nothing wrong with including them?

>Trajan
>Jadwiga
Not the best choice for their countries.
>Gandhi
>Cleopatra
Worst possible choices for their countries
>Aztecs
>Norway
Irrelevant af, Hispania and Denmark would be so much better.

Gorgo is the most obvious pandering, especially since they didn't include other important civs like Persia. Tomyris is also only in the game for being a woman.

Rome
Aurelian

I don't think he's been in a video game

Renaissance Italian civ could be cool, maybe it could be city-state based like Venice in Civ V. Maybe led by Lorenzo De Medici

I dkn't think anyone rates Cleopatra highly. She's well known. That's why you keep seeing her in everywhere.

>historian claims anthropologists are sexist because they can identify sex by the skeleton, when sex is clearly a social construct with no bilogical basis

GENDER
THE WORD
IS GENDER

>implying there is a difference
Kill yourself

Definitely pandering. Why not just have based Leonidas if you want to do Sparta? His animations would have the potential to be GOAT

To feminists, yes.

You were talking about feminists.

Did Zuly actually do anything to deserve any sort of elevated status compared to African states?
As I get it the only thing they did was forcing the Brits into maximum damage control after losing against a bunch of literal spear chuckers.

Two Greece? Athens and Sparta? Fuggin mint

>America
>ok
>Arabia
>having shitskins on your list
>Aztecs
>Having savages on your list
>Brazil
>not sure if white
>China
>I don't speak Xing Ling Yao
>Egypt
>Female '''''''''leaders''''''''''
>England
>again
>France
>AGAIN
>Germany
>cool
Greece1
>no
Greece2
>yes
>India
>Having street-shitters in your list
>Japan
>Cool
>Kongo
>We wuz Kongoz?
>Norway
>HAVING SAVAGES IN YOUR LIST
>Poland
>NO GOD DAMN IT
>Rome
>TRIGGERED
>Russia
>cool
>Scythians
>cool
>Spain1
>PUTA MADRE
>Spain2
>cool
>Sumeria
>Cool
>Civet
>Cool

>As I get it the only thing they did was forcing the Brits into maximum damage control after losing against a bunch of literal spear chuckers.

This is pretty much why they had been added. They wanted to have another African civ, but they figured that featuring more relevant kingdoms like Ethiopia, Mali or Zanzibar would have caused more tilted heads than it was worth.

>who the fuck even are scythians?

Why are you on this board?

Egypt had Hatshepsut tho

Hat she put where?

Autismo maxim0

Woah, for a second I thought I was on /v/ due to amount of stupidity in this thread.