u/LegendOfBaron

Had the best game of my life with Alexander and Egypt, stacking wonders in every city watching navigable rivers turn into giant profiting yields.
While excelling through the culture tree..

BUT 60 turns into exploration I won the culture victory and I thought wow that’s cool… but I wasn’t allowed to continue playing into the modern which is where I really wanted to see it shine the most.

SO WITH THAT SAID!

Does anyone know if this is a feature I can turn off? It was good until it wasn’t good.
Don’t get me wrong I want an early victory but sometimes I just wanna play a game out and that was one of those games.
I couldn’t even get Alexander to level 3 because of how quick and devastating it was.

Civilizations are pretty well designed for the most part and “unique” with that is you are needing to sometimes change or add onto it which gets even more creative.
However “Some” Leaders tend to feel similar or of the same playstyle but slightly different where one could arguably be considered the better of the other and there isn’t really any more progression for the leader to feel any different with each era.
I’d hope for a little more uniqueness to every leader enough to justify each and every one of them to be unique and game changing to more extremes.

Examples of Well designed Leaders.

Blackbeard: is a very unique and fun leader that’s able to pretty much make any civilization into a pirate of the republic nation. Granted I wish there was a little extra ability that worked differently when you played “pirates of republic” BUT in terms of whenever you’re a different civilization it is incredibly game changing and rewarding experience.

Gilgamesh: Incredible Versatility this man can flex whatever victory he may be looking for simply with just alliances the amount of scaling and power shifts is incredibly satisfying and as even an opponent it is fun to guess what kind of enemy or friend he will be.

Isabella: She takes the original design of civ and just emphasizes on it. She has one goal and very direct approach to it with even seed biases towards achieving a strong start.
The ability is slow but so rewarding when you achieve that journey.
She’s simple but affective.

These three examples show different approaches and yet all enjoyable journeys through a different experience from one another. Leaders that at least to me show identity and respect to their origins.

Examples of poor leaders or just underperforming.

I’m going to pair these two up to get a point out.

Genghis Khan and Charlemagne:

These two play fairly similar and yet I’d argue that Charlemagne is more comfortably fitting with even Mongolia over Genghis himself. Due to the happiness and celebrations in of itself is quite powerful when you are consistently achieving it you can essentially keep a steady push capturing civilizations while Genghis has a more challenging way to keep his combat strength up.

This is where I’d recommend they dive a bit deeper to their identity’s a bit more to create a diversity in playstyle and yet not shadow over one another.

Genghis:
Converting barbs is nice + but I wouldn’t say that’s strong or unique with Genghis but I wish they had a unique sanction that represented Genghis influence had over Japan. Hell even if they could incorporate the colours of conquest into his sanctions could be a very useful and effective way of utilizing him.

Charlemagne:
is fine for what he does but once again to separate the Calvary leaders from eachother I wish they emphasized on some of his religious roots. Maybe we could see some implementations down the road with expansions but once again more identity diving would be nice to see.

This turned a little more lengthy than I expected and for anyone who read this or will be interested in providing a discussion; Thank you for holding out and keeping your interest.

The closing statement id like to share is I do think there is some strong leaders clearly and very unique but once again as examples have been shown there’s some that felt rushed or lacked enough identity to be justified any different.
I’d argue most fixes would be unique interactions with “diplomacy or mechanics” rather than just xyz district adjancey yields etc etc. Those leaders aren’t always bad to have but preferably they aren’t anything special enough to warrant a good experience or refreshing gameplay it’s rather stale and boring.

I’d love to hear whatever else people think about this or HEY if you got ideas or leaders you don’t like why not express it here and say what you think would help them be more interesting and fun!

Thank you again y’all for reading and look forward to what y’all will share!