What does Sup Forums think of Civ 6's leader choices?

What does Sup Forums think of Civ 6's leader choices?

They look like those characters of that chicken movie where everyone is made of clay.

bismark was way better

>Gorgo
Did they finally lose it and made a trans?

Harald is the weirdest choice for a token scandi leader

>ugly
>"secondary" choices instead of the most profilic or important leaders
>3many womyn, but it was 2016 so...

But I don´t really care, I have the animations disabled.

>Catherine de Medici
>france

lul

> of all the charismatic leaders France had for the last 1600 years, they pick an Italian golddigger
France btfo

>no ottomans

they've already had danes and swedes in the previous games, so it had to be a norwegian this time

Only americans like their leader in civ VI

Catherine de medici for France is a horrible choice. Ridiculous, even. I bet they only did it because she is a woman.

too many wimminz, but I guess that it is the current year

some pixar shit

theyall arent attractive but literally look like a dummy and some cartoon for kids

Gender diversity quotas. It's 2016.

Like in every previous civ game actually.

I think Russia got such pathetic bonuses because of geopolitical situation between us and americans.
Playing for Greece though.

This is the correct opinion

Agreed.

>No Stalin or Mao
Stalin was the best in Civ IV.

>Sub-saharan africna civilisation
>Le shiggy diggy man face
I don't get why Firaxis can't just accept that Britain's more relevant than England's ever been either

honestly i dont care about the leaders
what pisses me off is their stupid agenda and horrible ai

As someone from Cologne I appreciate Barbarossa

>England
Why?

>a shiton of cool french leaders
>they pick a woman
>who is not even really french

I don't really think about Civ 5 and 6.

Teddy is the only leader that actually looks good

civilization is a shit game, into the trash it goes

No blonde people?

Would you be interested in a trade agreement with England?

wow, we get Jadwiga? nice
I can't say I would prefer a male leader, because who doesn't love little girls
Better choice than Kazimierz III, but Mieszko I would be probably the best

>Based leader tier
England
Russia
Rome
Greece (athens)
China
Scythia
USA

>OK leader tier
Germany
Japan
Kongo
Egypt
Aztec
Brazil

>Meme leader tier
Norway
India
Sumer

>Is not even from its civilization tier
Arabia

>Let's take some irrelevant chicks so they can't call us sexist because we have too few women leaders tier
France
Greece (sparta)
Poland

>arabia theme is "katibim"
man we got cucked

Too many fucking token women, most of them I've never even heard of.

Also, they make our beloved Emperor look like some goddamn secondary character in from a Disney movie.

I hate them for dumbing down the game so much and I hate them even more for these ridiculous leader choices.

I hope they go bankrupt, the same with Paradox for becoming full-on cucks.

this
Jadwiga she wasn't even polish

Scythe was a nice surprize, I always liked it from the OG Rometw plus they were the magog n the hyksos can't top the sacas the really white unlike ppl on \int/

>leaders of Germany
>drowned in a puddle

LOL

>decent tier
Russia, Greece/Pericles, China, USA, Aztecs, Egypt, Arabia, Sumeria

>acceptable tier
Augustus > Trajan. Gandhi is overrated. Tokugawa > Tokimune.

>meme tier
England was never an empire and Victoria was the BRITISH Empress.
"Meme women" for France and Poland are some stupid excuse to not include Napoleon/Louis XIV and Casimir III/Boleslaw I.
Brazil is not relevant and Peter II is laughable.
Who's Gorgo again?

>OOGA BOOGA I HAS MUD HUT! I IS CIVILIZATION AND EMPIRE! tier
Kongo, Germany, Norway, Scythia /bashes club on ground

Blonde people are not relevant

>England was never an empire and Victoria was the BRITISH Empress.

That's the trouble with these games, you can start off during an earlier period to when the leader was around and carry on all through the centuries and even keep going even if the leader had died.

I think the leader and the country name should be based on the most relevant timeframe of the country. Pre-Union England wasn't relevant, specially not as much as Britain - what they did there is akin to put Trajan to lead an "Italian Empire".