You now have Baba Yetu playing in your head
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HQfa5E1o_tc
More seriously, how accurate the descriptions, related bonus and chosen main character for each nation in Civilization is ?
Would you have EVERY TIME chosen Napoleon for France as the best and only leader ? Would you EVERY TIME decide their best troops to be mousquetaires ? Or giving them only cultural bonus ?
Let's discuss:
> Major nations not in any games and that should be there.
> Changing some "best leader" for existing nations
> Proposing new bonus if you know the game enough.
> Explain why Gandhi is a fucking psychotic killer in every game.
I'm pulling all this from vague memory but I remember reading somewhere that ghandi has the lowest aggression level but something happens and it loop lowers his aggression from 1 to 10 because of how the game works. Making him bloodthirsty. Someone else might have more details.
Let's start with France:
> Leaders
Louis XIV: It's the highest point of French might if you consider Charlemagne isn't french. We ruled Europe and bongs were too weak to opposite at the time. He's also the first absolute king, sharing no power and having no rivals in the kingdom.
Philippe-Auguste: He shaped the modern shape of France, took back half of it and made kings important again. He also beat the crap out of Richard Lionheart and King John. Oh and he was a crusader.
Henri IV: Stopped religious wars, put a clean break from degenerate kings and create a lasting peace in the kingdom. He created several laws and rules making France a rich country and powerful again. He's probably the reason why Louis XIV got such a powerful France in his hands.
Joan of Arc: Almost mythic but still reason heroine, managed to rally France at his lowest point in History, managed to win several battles and reverse the situation in the century war. She was a wise strategist with modern artillery tactics and every man in her army saw her as a living Saint.
All of them would be better than "hey let's ruin forever the only thing France has in its favor compare to Europe: it's population" Napoleon.
> Bonus
Should be an agricultural bonus obviously. France is "le pays de caucagne" the most fertile country in Europe and people didn't need advance agricultural technics to get a good crop. France was also an exemple of pure feodalism with the largest peasant population in Europe. We're good at building religious stuff too.
> Best troops
What about frigging knights with Francisques ? Those guys terrified arabs for generations and hacked light cavalery like it was nothing. It was the most effective troops the French people ever had.
Modern Legion Etrangère is also a good and renown troops with a very interesting use and possible set of rules (in the game). We would also consider WW1 infantery.
Also Germany is arguably best because of leader traits and Dat assembly plant, also panzers
>>706228
Germany should be thankful Bismark exists because their next most influencial leader is obviously Hitler.
>>706224
It was originally a bug and then they made it like that again in Civ 5 on purpose because memes.
>>706228
Bismarck is pretty shit, Incans are best tier.
Now let's do Rome
> Leaders
Caius Octavius Augustus: First and probably most successfull emperor he MADE the Roman Empire, both by ending the endless quarrels in the Senate and reducing all opposition to nothing (sorry based Marc-Antony). More than that, he created a vast set of rules and codes putting the basis for a lasting empire, he was both cruel and effective but it was clearly for the best, the Roman Empire is still one of the greatest human accomplishment and outshined the Republic.
Trajan: Famously declared by the senate as the best ruler, optimus princeps which means “the best ruler”. Under his rule, the empire reached its largest extent. He was remembered as a successful soldier-emperor who presided over the greatest military expansion in Roman history, leading the empire to attain its maximum territorial extent by the time of his death.
Marcus Aurelius: Considered as the last of the five good emperors, and one of the most stoic philosophers. During his reign, the Empire defeated a revitalized Parthian Empire in the East, in central Europe, he fought the Marcomanni, Quadi, and Sarmatians with success during the Marcomannic Wars, with the threat of the Germanic tribes beginning to represent a troubling reality for the Empire. A possible revolt in the East led by Avidius Cassius might have caused serious issues if it had gained momentum, but Aurelius suppressed it immediately.
All of them better than Julius "muh ego" Caesar, famous for corrupting the Senate to a breaking point.
> best troops
Well duh !
> bonus
No, the best thing about the Roman Empire isn't "muh roads". It's not about bread and games nor about pretty constructions. It's multiculturalism. The single fact they managed to conquer so many countries and imposed the Pax Romana for so long, integrating various people and cultures and having a lasting effect even in today's culture shows how good the Romans were at adapting to foreign cultures. Sorry /pol/.
I'd like to continue but only if if some people contributes.
Stalin & China combo all the way, niggas.
>>706174
>> Major nations not in any games and that should be there.
Hwan Empire
Ancient Finnish Empire
>> Changing some "best leader" for existing nations
Hitler
>> Proposing new bonus if you know the game enough.
Hitler can choose to lose 1 population in any city in exchange for 50 local happiness
>> Explain why Gandhi is a fucking psychotic killer in every game.
Originally a bug, then it became a meme because game devs love memes.
>>706174
I want new leaders in the next Civ. People bitched that the latest civ had a lot of women but It was pretty necessary considering we'll otherwise end up with the same goddamn fucking Napoleon in every single game. An alternative is having each civ have several leaders to people's autism will be fixed.
>>706224
Gandhi in Civ II have an aggressive level of 1 out of 10, but adopting Democracy reduces a civilizations level by 2. This ended up giving him Gandhi 10.
In Civ V they've adopted the meme and set him to be pretty peaceful yet is the most prone of all civilizations to build nukes and use them when at war.
>>706384
>I want new leaders in the next Civ. People bitched that the latest civ had a lot of women but It was pretty necessary considering we'll otherwise end up with the same goddamn fucking Napoleon in every single game.
Actually they did the female leader thing because of feminism.
>An alternative is having each civ have several leaders to people's autism will be fixed.
AKA civ 4.
>>706395
>Actually they did the female leader thing because of feminism.
Source?
>Major nations not in any games and that should be there
Indian civilizations in general. They basically just consist of India, Siam, and Indonesia. India really shouldn't be lumped together as one thing when we could have had Mughals, Cholas, Mauryans, Vijayanagara, Sikhs, etc. Lumping them all under India just seems lazy to me.
I would have liked to see Pagan and especially Angkor too. I've seen people argue that they're too similar to Siam, which doesn't make much sense to me considering we have both Germany and Austria.
Also Persia should have really been split in tp Achaemenids, Sassanids, and Safavids (or maybe Timurids).
As far as I know there are mods that add all of these.
>>706174
The leaders and units are not the best ones the nation had, but the most notable ones
>>706409
Isn't it just obvious? Wu Zetian literally did nothing. It's obviously just a girl power thing.
>>706653
Managing to be a woman in power is already a thing...
>>706674
>overcoming the patriarchy to be in a position of power is significant enough to place them next to Napoleon
Exactly, it's a feminist thing. Nobody who isn't a feminist would think recognizing women simply for having power is a good thing.
>>706174
I like Pericles of Greece, the Phalanx is a baller unit and Philosophical is busted. If you're using unrestricted leaders, Lincoln is a great leader, but the American civ sucks.
In multiplayer, I usually pick Elizabeth of the English, because her traits allow you to pick between the game's two economic models, depending on what terrain you spawn in.
>>706174
>Major nations not in any games and that should be there.
Poland.
>Changing some "best leader" for existing nations
I always thought it was daft to have Gandhi as a leader. I guess Neru isn't well known enough? At least IV had Ashoka, that was nice.
>>706689
Overcoming the odds to put a female leader is generaly indicating a strong leader.
But it depends, some women came in power just for political reasons and were puppets like child kings can be.
>>706699
You do understand we're not discusing gaming but mostly the historical views made by the game ?
>>706718
Poland is one of the most OP Civs in V. Apparently, Polan can into space pretty easily.
>>706239
>Not Old Fritz
>>706723
>Overcoming the odds to put a female leader is generaly indicating a strong leader.
Only if you already accept the feminist viewpoint.
Most historians would say, Wu Zetian's rise to power was insignificant, her reign was insignificant, and she was insignificant. The only significance is the modern feminist lens which places female accomplishment on a pedestal.
>>706734
There's good reasons to put some of the female leaders they did in the game, it's just obvious that they put a few shitty/insignificant female leaders in to make the leaderheads more gender neutral.
>>706174
>Would you have EVERY TIME chosen Napoleon for France as the best and only leader ?
Gonna be totally frank, I almost always play as Ghandi in Civ IV when I play with friends. The fast workers and bonus to building monuments makes bum rushing the pyramids viable, which gives you huge bonuses when you're able to change civics however you want without revolt. Having police state early on is super useful.
Since you aren't busy balancing researching nonmilitary techs, India can get to gunpowder way faster, especially since their towns develop faster with the fast workers.
>>706752
Poland can into anything in Civ V
>>706781
Are you a troll ?
What was the last online civ game you guys played like? My game sort of shattered after I decided to be a dick and conquer Babylon, as Assyria.
Dem Siege towers.
/his/ should make a steam group for a weekly civ5 game.
Who would be up for it?
>>706760
Pretty much this. When you examine the historical context (and factor in academic opinion), her reign was actually very brief and an anomaly in the 'winding river' of Chinese dynastical history.
>>706753
Well then that would be Prussia, not Germany. It would piss off the non-Prussians in Germany, especially the Bavarians. The only good leaders united Germany ever had were Bismarck and arguably Kaiser Wilhelm I.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LwqZIIVTrkk
As for balance changes, I feel that Swedens UA is silly, Carthages UA is just a dumb gimmick, and that Germanys UA could(should) be put in Rome instead. Germany could have something related to production.
I would've liked to see more boers in the game, and really wouldn't have minded less female leaders, just because of how of them there were. I mean, the Celts? Obsolete and rushed civillization.
>>706927
Germany's UA could certainly make sense on Rome (probably better than on Germany, yeah), but Rome's current UA is already a great fit.
>>706288
No need for courthouses maybe?
>>706844
3 people, 8 civs, on noble
Me (Catherine) and another friend (Bismark) ended up on a continent with Japan, so I had Japan to the North and Germany to the South. The third player was conquered by Mali (fuck Mansa Musa) fairly early on.
We ended up initially in a competitive settling feud over flood plains and stone resources. We eventually made some city swaps to correct weirdly intersecting borders. When Japan declared war on me, me and Germany allied to take them on, my borders were saved, but Germany took most of the land.
I kept open borders with him but stopped trading as sanctions for taking some of the cities, and he began amassing armies of elephants near my borders. I offered to pay him to disband his troops (Russia being the economically stronger nation), but he refused. When I accidentally sent my Jewish missionary into his lands because of AI pathfinding, he took it as an act of religious-based terrorism (an event now known as the "elephant Jew incident") and attacked me.
Unfortunately, I was trapped fighting the krauts on two fronts, and Moscow was razed by war elephant SoDs.
>>706174
>Major nations not in any games and that should be there
I found it odd that there's no civ to represent Central Asia: Bactria, Khwarezmia, Timurids, Afghanistan, etc. Bits and pieces are split between Mongols, India, and Persia and that's about it.
>>707185
They also had the Huns.
>>707288
I don't know if that really counts. The Huns just have Atilla's Court and nothing else, and no ties to anyplace but someplace beyond Eastern Europe.
>>706239
Frederick!
>>706875
i'd play.
>>706227
>Joan of Arc
Glorified Cheeleader
>>706653
> Wu Zetian literally did nothing.
> The importance to history of Wu Zetian's period of political and military leadership includes the major expansion of the Chinese empire, extending it far beyond its previous territorial limits, deep into Central Asia, and engaging in a series of wars on the Korean peninsula, first allying with Silla against Goguryeo, and then against Silla over occupation of formerly Goguryeo territory. Within China, besides the more direct consequences of her struggle to gain and maintain supreme power, Wu's leadership resulted in important effects regarding social class in Chinese society and in relation to state support for Taoism, Buddhism, education, and literature. Wu Zetian also had a monumental impact upon the statuary of the Longmen Grottoes and the "Wordless Stele" at the Qianling Mausoleum, as well as the construction of some major buildings and bronze castings that no longer survive.
>>707605
>Despite the important aspects of her reign, together with the suggestions of modern scholarship as to the long-term effects of some of her innovations in governance, much of the attention paid to Wu Zetian has been to her gender, as the anomalous female sovereign of a unified Chinese empire officially holding the title of Emperor of China (Huangdi, 皇帝).
>implying you knew anything about Wu Zetian before you looked up her Wikipedia article
>>707616
Jokes on you, I didn't knew anything about any Chinese leader before I look them up on wikipedia.
>>707620
I don't know anything about grammar either.
>>706384
No man, Gandhi got an aggressivness level of 255, overflow errors are crazy
>>706653
USURPER FUCKING SHITS
CIV V is shit CIV IV is way better, and it also address the "one leader per civ' thing, making this thread useless.
>>708667
>muh stacks of doom
>>706239
>Forgetting about Charlemagne
>>706781
> Gonna be totally frank
Kek
>>706227
>Modern Legion Etrangère is also a good and renown troops with a very interesting use and possible set of rules (in the game).
Some sort of conversion ability and extra movement?
>>706174
>how accurate the descriptions, related bonus and chosen main character for each nation in Civilization is ?
Well, Germany wasn't led by Bismarck during the medieval ages....
>>706288
>The single fact they managed to conquer so many countries and imposed the Pax Romana for so long, integrating various people and cultures and having a lasting effect even in today's culture shows how good the Romans were at adapting to foreign cultures. Sorry /pol/.
Should alexander/philip o' macedon also receive some sort of Hellenism bonus?
I always thought Spain's ability in Civ5 was a bit odd, their units fit perfectly but I never really understood their natural wonder thing.
Surely something that gives more money from looting/makes conversions easier would be better?
>>709864
Its dumb idea in itself.
Rome and Multiculturalism is literally oximoron.
Rome was literally melting pot of different cultures, subjugated to latin one.
>>706174
>The people
>Are
>The heroes
>Now
>>706239
Someone's forgetting about Napoleon.
I always thought that seriously, the Inca should be taken down two notches, and this is definitely personal bias, because I got sick, sick, sick, sick of Glorious Golden retards picking the Inca, sitting with their one size 35 city and Tradition, bum rushing the great library and resisting all attempts at playing the game otherwise because it wasn't sure to win every time. I've played over 1000 hours of Civ 5, and maybe 60 online games (call it autism or poor taste), and this was the situation every goddamn time. Every goddamn time.
Changing leaders:
America - Teddy Roosevelt
China - Emperor Gaozu
>>706174
Meme women leaders for one shouldn't be leaders.
Isabel, Catherine and Elizabeth are good choices, all the rest women leaders are memes.
They should really make France with Sun King instead, with a focus on population and artillery.
In Civ5 it is really stupid France is just a weird combination, Early modern Château combined with Musketeers lead by Napoleon, really?
>>711047
I think it is supposed to be about their treasure fleets taking loads of gold and silver from Americas.
