Africa

t. him

>Barbarossa
>bonus to combat
If only he'd been able to combat the current.

>barbarosa
>all units die if they cross a river

Do your worse, Veeky Forums.

Holy shit

MOMMY

Dayum

Why'd they make Gilgamesh an Arab?

WE

WUZ

Because Sumerians weren't even Semites.

>Rus under Olga
Can start fires in other civ's cities as a diplomatic action.

Has anyone ever noticed how fucking broken Buenos Aires as an ally is? Once you become their Suzerain ever Bonus resource you own turns into a luxury resource and provides amenities. That's just flat our broken.

They were Semites, just not Arabs.

>all of those females
Aside from Victoria this is peak retardation.

No they were literally not Semitic. Akkadians were though.

The dutch and french choices are just fucking terrible.

REEEEEEEEEEEEE TOO MANY FEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEMALES

It's an issue when they only reason they were picked is because they are a female who existed.

Don't the devs realize that only men existed?

Yeah. Of all possible French rulers you pick that one? Tamar for Georgia instead of David IV? I'm surprised it doesn't feature fucking Boudica for Britain.

Tamar is a perfectly good choice, though they kind of screwed up how she really looked.

David IV is widely recognized as the greatest Georgian king. Tamar is mostly known for being a woman.

Hungary under Kossuth
Kingdom of Jerusalem
The Confederacy under Jefferson Davis

>Hungary under Kossuth
Lasted like a year.

Irrelevant yes, but I wouldn't call Australia a literal who. It is an entire continent.

They were trying to make him look like the statues/carvings, just more muscular

Boudica is generally the pick for a vague "Celts" civ

So is Antarctica

>Tamar is mostly known for being a woman.
And a saint, and a fairly successful queen during her reign.

We'll get that penguin civ one day.
youtube.com/watch?v=T__UsjPFp4I

I still can't believe they went with the Cree, who were literally pre agricultural savages, an not the Creek, who were the descendants of the Mound Builders and who embraced Western civilization enthusiastically. So baffling and retarded.

Tamar is a fine choice. She doesn't look very Georgian tho.

Also 1/3 of the units you build suddenly dies.

"when u see the d" could be all of them, tbqh.

No, Sumerian language is not Semitic, they were an isolate.

Yeah they fucked up her look pretty hard.

Does anyone else remember how in Civ 2, you could pick between TWO leaders for each civ, one male and one female? Why did they stop doing that?

If they wanted to go full western embracing they would've picked the Cherokee. But that would trigger every other tribe as they consider the Cherokee race traitors, even though it means the Cherokee survived and thrived when everyone else was practically wiped out.

>Rodrigo Borgia for renaissance italy
>Bonus to buying great people with gold or faith
>Unique unit: Condottieri that can be bougt cheaper than other units
>Unique district: Palazzo. Neighbourhood replacement that gives less housing but gives adjacency bonusess and great people points to adjacent districts.

Because now they use models that actually talk in the native language of that civ and that's kind of a bitch to double up on.

Why is everyone so ugly?

Cherokee would be fine too, Creek would also be fine and afaik no-one hates the Creek so there would be backlash for using them. But no, let's pick the LITERAL savages who never even got as far as agriculture for our game about CIVILIZATIONS. Fick this gay Earth.

That's not the problem, the problem is where is there such a disparity between the ugly cariacatures and the relatively normal-looking leaders.

Stop doing that, then? No-one likes them anyway. First thing I do is turn the retarded cartoon animations off. Plus I can't imagine it would matter that much, yes it would double the budget for the leaderheads but how big is that budget in the first place? A few thousand bucks? Not exactly hard to make a cartoon man walk across a screen tbqh.

>Stop doing that, then? No-one likes them anyway.
People praised it when Civ V introduced it to the series.

People liked the "talking in their own language" shtick, but that's the cheap part. Just go down to a college campus and talk to some academics / language students, you can probably get away with paying them in beer.

That would be fine if the male and female leaders played exactly the same, but they don't. Civ 6 is making a point of civ that have multiple leaders playing differently from each leader and that it's not simply a leader swap. Pericles and Gorgo are both Greece (admittedly one is Athens and the other Sparta), but they are designed around a completely different playstyle due to having unique traits/units/buildings. This requires a good deal of extra programming.

tbf who has ever seen a Georgian?

Stalin?

Katie Melua is mai waifu
youtube.com/watch?v=eHQG6-DojVw

This. Stalin is the world's red pill on Georgians.

The issue is picking a female ruler who contributed little or nothing over a male who helped define that civilization because they are a female. You're purposefully being obtuse.

Well I just meant that if you need a Georgian male for reference, he's one.

Eh I'm fine with them having different abilities, I don;t care so much that both figureheads are equally playable, only that genderwarriors will stop with their retarded "hurr y u haf more peenor than vagoo?" comments. If they wanted to move the game in the direction of Master of Magic and introduce a "leader builder" RPG type system that would be ideal, really any of the leader effects can be applied to any nation, if you pick the right leaderhead.

>only that genderwarriors will stop with their retarded "hurr y u haf more peenor than vagoo?" comments
The only thing i see is everyone complaining that it has as much vagoo as peenor.

You can ignore such complaints when the game is designed to have equal numbers of each, tho. It;s one thing for a genderwarrior to complain that a civ has a "useless" or "token" cunt leading it instead of a dick-waver, but when every civ has you pick between a cock and a cunt, these complaints become pathetic and can be ignored.

They don't though. 24 male leaders, 11 female.

How can one man be so based

I just wish they'd stop being pussies and get Mao back

>-40% food requirement
>bonus to war against birds

>bonus to war against birds
NOT THIS
NOT THIS

>lose a war against birds
>get included in a civ game
What did noted bird-haters Firaxis mean by this?

>they were an isolate.

Nope, they were Indo-Europeans

Any Inuit civilization at all, the mod was tons of fun in Civ 5.

>America
>Civilisation

>still no Mississippian civ
THEY'RE ALL FUCKING DEAD WHO THE FUCK WOULD YOU PC KEKS PISS OFF BESIDES LITERAL FUCKING BONES IN THE GROUND GOD IM MAD

I joked they'd go with Suleiman's favorite concubine Roxana something because she was smart and he listened to her and clearly if a man treats his concubine or wife like an equal that means they are actually the ruler.

That was a joke but now I am pretty sure they may actually give us that.

>Sumarian language was Indo-European
You're thinking of the Hittite language, boy. No amount of infographs will change that.

>tfw no dixie civ

hold me dixiebros

Frederick the II for the Kingdom of Sicily
Bonus to culture and faith
Unique unit: Muslim freelance Archers

They would need a name for the Mississippi civ and its cities.

They seriously couldn't find a single semitic leader?

Great Moravia under Svatopluk I

Is cyrus not good enough?

WE

Bring back the true Mommy and maybe someone a little more important and can swim for the Krauts

Fuck off. You "muh relevancy" newfaggots are as retarded as more forthright /pol/ ghettoists like OP.

They aren't "now including literal whos", series classic Civ II released 22 years ago had a completely fictional character for the Zulu female leader as just one example.

Hopi, Comanche and Apache when, honestly though It's hard to take any native tribes that lived East of the Great Plains seriously considering they got more royally BTFO

The immersion in these games is half of the reason I enjoy them so much, If I wanted to go talk to a scholar in Latin then I wouldn't be playing fucking video games

Hopi / Pueblo people would be fine, Comanche and Apache are savages, they don't belong in civ except maybe as barbarians.

I;m not suggesting YOU talk to the scholar, sweetie, I'm saying that's all Firaxis had to do to get these "native language" quotes. It's not expensive, even if you double the number by making every civ have a male and a female ruler.

I just want to play as my Spanish waifu dammit

Nice trips, but I would really like seeing at least some kind of south western united states culture other than Montezuma, the Aztecs were kind of ass hats

Mod Catherine di Medici into Isabella, then. She has the right look and leader ability already, you just need to change her name and the civ she belongs to, two easy fixes in text files.

I'm actually surprised we never got the Kingdom of David in any Civ game. It doesn't have to be modern israel, Judea is an option.

Post playtimes

Okay but why pick literal savages who never even developed agriculture? You realize doing this is LITERALY the first thing you do in civ, meaning your "Apache civ" is ahistoricaal from TURN ONE. We've had the Maya in the past, it would be nice to see them back, and maybe the Olmec as well. Anazasi / Hopi are a stretch but at least they took the first steps to civilization, I;d be fine with them, too.

Why does it surprise you, given that it is possible to genocide a civ in this game, and given that Arabs and Sjews exist, and will boycott a game featuring Israel?

Doesn't stop grand strategy games really.

At least 400,000 hours in civ 2, the same again in civ 4. Civ 5 was garbage, and civ 6 is the same crap again, so I have less than one hour in each.

Doesn't it? Not many such games with Israel in them. Even ancient settings where they might show up, usually has them as an unplayable minor or something.