Why not have a different ruler for each age

dennis580 · June 14, 2001, 23:38

For example The French could have Joan of Arc in the Ancient times, Louis XIV in the Renissance times, Napoleon in the Industrial times, and Napoleon III in the modern times. These would be awesome

Bubba · June 15, 2001, 11:31

I agree. Unfortunately, it does not look like this is going to happen.

fluxcapacitor · June 15, 2001, 11:42

Yeah, I always thought it was stupid how like the Zulu's are still wearing loin cloths in 1999 or something. If not different leaders, at least have them change w/ the times...

Juggernaut · June 15, 2001, 11:46

It would be alot of heavy graphics, four animated rulers per civ.

What would be cool was if, after discovery of democracy, you are not guaranteed being the ruler. You have to please the people and win elections. If you lose an election, you may be out of the game, or have to comprimise with other party leaders of your civ.

Footie Mad · June 15, 2001, 11:55

Quote:

Originally posted by uncle_funk
It would be alot of heavy graphics, four animated rulers per civ.

What would be cool was if, after discovery of democracy, you are not guaranteed being the ruler. You have to please the people and win elections. If you lose an election, you may be out of the game, or have to comprimise with other party leaders of your civ.

Perhaps not out of the game but being unable to control some of your cities with a low popularity or a similar penalty.

Juggernaut · June 15, 2001, 12:03

Quote:

Perhaps not out of the game but being unable to control some of your cities with a low popularity or a similar penalty.

Or being degraded to like defense minister, just being able to control the military units. Fine to me.

LaRusso · June 15, 2001, 12:08

let me reiterate my position. dubbya!

Dauphin · June 15, 2001, 12:57

Quote:

Originally posted by dennis580
For example The French could have Joan of Arc in the Ancient times

Does 15th Century qualify as ancient?

Earwicker · June 15, 2001, 13:44

Yea, ancient times. The Fifties!

Gramphos · June 15, 2001, 14:22

No!!!!

I don't want then number of civs cut down to four.

Gangerolf · June 15, 2001, 14:45

Quote:

Originally posted by dennis580
For example The French could have Joan of Arc in the Ancient times, Louis XIV in the Renissance times, Napoleon in the Industrial times, and Napoleon III in the modern times. These would be awesome

Some of the civs (eg Egyptians, Babylonians) never made it to the renaissance, others were born in the industrial age (americans). Finding rulers for each age for every civilization is not possible unless one make up names.
But it would be cool if the leaders had different clothes in the different ages.

JamesJKirk · June 15, 2001, 16:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Gangerolf

Some of the civs (eg Egyptians, Babylonians) never made it to the renaissance, others were born in the industrial age (americans). Finding rulers for each age for every civilization is not possible unless one make up names.
But it would be cool if the leaders had different clothes in the different ages.

Well you could use Nassar for the modern Egyptian one, Ibn Saud for modern Babylonian, or something, but yeah, you'd run into a road block with Americans, and even Zulus, since they were only unified in like the 1800s or so

Sirotnikov · June 16, 2001, 15:02

I actually suggested a similar idea, of having a random ruler chosen from a pool each age. that could show changes in politics and be the changes needed for different and interesting games, and rise and fall of civilizations.

if you care to search deeper in the pages of this forum it is there... I once gathered it all in a thread called : Rise and Fall of Civs + Firaxis Read.

dennis580 · June 16, 2001, 19:57

Listen just pick the 4 best rulers for each civ the ruler doesn't necessarly have to live in the age they represent. I know Joan of Arc didn't live in Ancient times, but I just picked the 4 best Frecnh rulers and put them in order from thier date of birth.

Sean · June 16, 2001, 22:05

But it only adds novelty-value to the game. It won't improve game play. So, frankly, don't waste the space!!

Sabre2th · June 16, 2001, 23:13

this is just too much for a civ GAME. if firaxis starts adding stuff like this, they'll never finish the important stuff (AI, interface, GAMEPLAY)

dennis580 · June 18, 2001, 19:58

No it's not a novelty. This would add a lot to gameplay as each new ruler would have different attributes and charteristics. This would add a lot to gameplay.

Sabre2th · June 19, 2001, 00:36

even if firaxis made this functional in some way, it takes away from the time they can spend on everything else. i don't see how firaxis could make different personalities (4 or more new leader profiles for each civ) well without delaying the release of civ3. if different leaders are wanted that badly, maybe modmakers should do them instead. i would rather have one leader throughout, personally.

LaRusso · June 19, 2001, 09:13

well ancient us ruler could be fred flintstone, i guess. than that yankee on king arthur's castle for medieval times. um...lemme see what is next....
of course, dubbya, 50 percent polution up, ever second military unit free

Eddin · June 19, 2001, 09:59

It's not like the end of the world if a civ has just one leader running around in a small bearskin. I don't really care actually.

And from what I've seen with the small roman guys face which change every row, what ur saying may just be implemented

And on the election thing... would certainly add a new dimension. But who uses democracy anyway

Let those poor people give me their tithes

Kc7mxo · June 20, 2001, 06:46

How about they just change the name every few years. Pick a few names from their historical dominion. And then add numerals to their name. So perhaps you'd end up being George Washington the XXIV. Or tokugawa the V.

Simple. Easy. And a culture that doesn't have 3 named leaders doesn't desrve to be in civ3.