 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Verto
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by The Templar
I'd go with Lenin over Cathrine, and Napoleon over Joan of Arc.
While Hitler would be fun to play against, I suppose Hitler IS, after all, as offensive to Germans as Reagan is to Americans. Then again, a WWII scenario featuring Hitler and a cold war scenario featuring Reagan would both be fun. |
Reagan doesn't offend me, and I'm not sure how you can compare the two...
I don't think we should automatically reject Hitler because it wouldn't be "PC" and people won't like him, etc. I don't like Mao, but he's in.
Jeanne d'arc needs to be changed to a GL. Napoleon would make a good choice, along with several kings, but I'd go with Napoleon.
I'm not sure about Lincoln for America. Mostly because of his ridiculous animation. I can't stand it.
Washington was a great general and President. On the other hand, he didn't preside during a world war, or have much of a foreign policy: England and France were really the ones closest to America.
Jefferson made the Louisiana Purchase, wrote the Declaration of Independence, donated his own library to start the Library of Congress, etc.
FDR might be acceptable. He is a Democrat, though 
Someone said JFK. I'm going to assume he was joking.
I want to see Nixon animated  He should take lessons from Reagon about how to deal with communist countries.
Jimmy Carter? What a joke. What a joke...
Ronald Reagon was a good president. Reagonomics, fighting the evil empire, but are these the requirements for Civ3? Maybe a few leaders that aren't purely military would help balance the diplomacy/total conquest gameplay.
Bush Sr.? Gulf War, not much else.
Clinton?  I'll leave it at that, lest this become OT.
I'm not overly familiar with Russian history, but would Peter the Great be a good choice?
Remember in Civ 2 how each civ had 2 leaders - a male and a female? Bring it back, because the idea that someone should be in simply because she's female, and there are so many men, is ridiculous, and it would put an end to it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
Hitler would have been a bad choice for Firaxis.
If someone wants to download a Hitler to play against that's their choice, but Hitler does not deserve to be in the original game. If you were a German, would you want Hitler to be the default to represent you??? You would have to take time to alter the original game, just so your picture would not be Hitler.
quote:
Of course, Firaxis chose Ghandi, as well as all the others, based on their Recognizability Quotient (TM,) not on any sense of historical accuracy. |
True, but I wouldn't say that Recognizability Quotient is the only factor.
Joan may have also been added to fill a Female Quota... if Cleo, Catherine, & Joan were all replaced with the others suggested here than the only female leader would be Elisabeth.
I can accept most of the leaders. The only one I voted to change was Joan.
quote:
I really wish we had a choice of genders. Would it really have been that hard to give us two or more choices for leaders? |
I agree, this way you could be up against either one. Civ2 had this, but I suppose they didn't have the time to do this in Civ3.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tomji
|
|
what would be cool is to be able to choose a leader. Or maybe even switch him sometimes.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Blaukrieger
|
|
I think Bismarck was a great German leader. But I think the the Austrians, the other German speaking nation, cant identify themselves with him, because he made war against Austria. So I think it would be better to take a mediaval emperor. I d prefer Friedrich Barbarossa, because he was a great leader and after his death he was object of legends (Kyffhäuser).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
France should definitely be charlemagne 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mad Bomber
|
 |
Columbus, Ohio
Nov 2002
time: 00:20
|
|
Pioneer:
Lincoln is better than Jefferson? Was it not Jefferson who penned the Declaration of Independence which is the basis of our Government, our liberty, our sense of National Unity? Was Jefferson not the thrid president of our nation? Did he not establish the long and widly held view of America as a country that would not interfere in world politics, and that America should set its views on the expansion of the lands to the west? I am not saying that Lincoln was not an important President, he most certainly was, but to dismiss Jefferson without so much as an afterthought is the height of arrogance, and ignorance.
Alexander was not really Greek, he was Macadonian, Pericles fits Greece much better, although I would accept a Spartan king also.
Byzantines...read a few books on them and perhaps you could learn some history.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
metalhead
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Byzantines need to be included somewhere. Sure they regarded themselves as romans (or decendents of the Roman empire) but they were a distinct culture to themselves, and deserve some recognition. |
Damn straight they need to be included. But they never thought of themselves as Romans, really. The inhabitants of the Eastern Empire were largely of Greek descent. After the Western Empire fell, the Roman influence gradually disappeared in the East. The emperors felt they were descendants of the line of Augustus, but by the seventh century, Greek had replaced Latin as the language of the empire. Their architecture and art was more hellenistic than Roman. The people themselves had welcomed the benefits of being in the Roman empire, but they had never considered themselves Roman, even while the empire was unified under Western control, and always retained their own Greek identity.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
congobeast
|
 |
The Mountains of Madness
Nov 2002
time: 00:20
|
|
All in all, I think most of the choices are decent; though some of them could be debated, ad naseum. Most such debates are truly a matter of taste.
IMHO, a national leader should be one who led a nation into it's 'Golden Age'; as it were. For that reason, I think the following changes are in order:
France: Charles Magnus. Though one could argue that historically, his kingdom was every bit as Germanic as it was Frankish. Unlike Napoleon, the Empire suffered for his death; whereas Bonaparte led France to both greatness... and disaster. "After me, the deluge."
Egypt: Snefru. While he doesn't carry the same 'name recognition' as either Ramses or Cleopatra; can anyone question that his pioneering of masonry, leading to the constuction of the Pyramids sparked and marked the golden age of Egypt?
America: Franklin Delano Roosevelt. While it is certainly easy to argue that Lincoln led the United States through their roughest trial, I think FDR was the one that took to possibilities sparked by Lincoln, his cousin Teddy, and Woodrow Wilson, and truly turned America into the first class world power that it is today. It was under Roosevelt that the US emerged not as one national power among many, but as one of two bipolar superpowers. His projects also led the US out of the Great Depression; and the industrial growth that came with his administration- and the flush of victory from the second World War- led to what many have called the US' golden age- the 1950s.
China- Qin Shi Huangdi. As the first Qin Emperor, Qin was the driving force behind the building of the Great Wall; and was responsible for standarizing Chinese writing, bureaucracy, scholarship, law, currency, weights and measures. He expanded the Chinese empire, built a capital in Xian, a system of roads, and massive fortifications and palaces. No small group of feats, while the jury is still out on Mao; who's Communist regime is showing more and more signs of conversion to capitalism.
That's my 2 cents, anyway; and worth every penny you paid for 'e,.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sharule
|
|
I for one, would say that I would not buy the game if it featured Hitler as a world leader, that would be too offensive to me. Also, Hitler served Germany her most humiliating defeat ever. If you check sources, Hitlers Ego lost the war. His generals could have won it, but he got in the way, its the same with stalin, but he actualy steped aside and let his generals plan the battles, effectively winning the war for the Soviets.
As for me
Elizebeth - Churchill(he was a great leader.)
Cathrene - Lenin(For uniting Russia under one idealology and begining a new, industrial era for Russia, and delivering it from generations of Beauracracy.)
Joan o' Arc - Napolean(cause he kicked butt, twice!)
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20.
Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
19-07-2002 06:07
While Hitler would be fun to play against, I suppose Hitler IS, after all, as offensive to Germans as Reagan is to Americans. Then again, a WWII scenario featuring Hitler and a cold war scenario featuring Reagan would both be fun.
)
It's true!
|