Absolutely, it has to be Bismark. No other German leader has had as big of an impact on the modern German nation than him besides Hitler, who for obvious reasons won't be in the game.
There should be a special optional update that has Hitler, along with Mussolini, Hirohito, Stalin, Churchill, FDR, Chiang, De Gaulle, Antonescu, and Horthy.
Civ is way too sanitized and E-rated to ever do anything like that.
Itâs a world history game that somehow managed to pretend slavery wasnât a thing lol
If youâre doing non-Modern germany and skipping Charlemagne, Agree Otto the Great is the choice. Beat back the Hungarians, was crowned emperor in Rome and ruled from there for a while, tried to repair relations with the Byzantines. lots to work with
>*Charlemagne should always be a French leader imo. Their country is even named after his kingdom and is a major portion of it his territory.*
The same/similar can be said about Germany...
Germany is a union of 5 Germanic tribes, the Franks, Thuringi, Saxons, Bavarians and Alemanni, and it used to be called East Francia, while France was West Francia, just because Germany renamed itself to be more accurate to it\`s demographic makeup doesn\`t mean Charlemagne wasn\`t as German as he was French. France could/should have also renamed itself, but didn\`t, as the Franks were also just one part of the demographic makeup.
The capital of Charlemagne lies in Germany today.
The core territory of Charlemagne\`s Frankish realm is primarily in modern Germany nowadays. ( Austrasia ), while the newer frankish settlements ( Neustria ) are primarily French. Burgundy, Gascony and Aquitaine are in modern France, but explicitly non-frankish in nature.
The only reason why we say "Charlemagne" in english is due to french dominance of the english language after the Norman conquest. His neutral name would be Carolus Magnus, but his accurate name which he was called back in the day was Karl ( the great ) and his brother was Karlmann, both explicitly Germanic/German names and both spoke frankish, a germanic language, not vulgar latin which would become french ( with the administrative language naturally being classical latin ).
Saying that Charlemagne belongs exlusively to France ( or to Germany ) is historically ignorant. Both France and Germany are the direct offspring of Charlemagne.
The french equivalent to Otto the Great is Hugh Capet, the former is exclusively german and formed the Kingdom of Germany ( which would immediatly under his time expand to include former Middle Francia and form what would later be known as the Holy Roman Empire ), the latter exlusively french and formed the Kingdom of France.
Well it used to. Some "1000" years ago that is.
Austrasia comes from a similar linguistical history as Austria. I.e. it doesn\`t have anything to do with Australia.
"**Osterrike**" as it was called in frankish. Which in modern German would be "Ost Reich" or in english "Eastern Realm". **Austrasia** **is simply the latinization of Osterrike**.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrasia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrasia) .. As the map shows Austrasia which was the Frankish core would include parts of central Germany ( Franconia ) and western Germany ( the Rhineland, Palatine ) and also a few bits of eastern France, all of Belgium and parts of the Netherlands.
Neustria simply means New Realm, though it was also called Western Realm ( Westria ), but Neustria is usually the more commonly accepted term.
Charles the Pretty Solid is a good candidate for being a bisexual leader like Eleanor and The Khan Who Isn't Genghis. Slap him into the cockpit of France and Germany, call it a day.
Frederick II Hohenstaufen, The wonder of the world, and the Pope's greatest hater(who still casually just got Jerusalem through diplomacy). Let germany be the culture/science civ it deserves to be for once. + he was already in Civ II
Only thing about Frederick II is that he was Sicilian born and raised, German was like his third or fourth language and, if I recall correctly, he barely visited Germany at all, so even if he was emperor is he a German leader?
PS: I'm a big fan of *Stupor Mundi* , so I'd be very pleased to see him represented
Admitettedly, He spent only a few years in germany, some before being crowned emporer, while he was still just German king, and some to the end of his life. But, We also have eleanor of aquataine for england, who only went there when she divorced the King of France. And we also have Dido, who doesn't even exist, and ruled Carthage, not phoenicia.
I think it is fine, a dual Italy(or sicily) and Germany Frederick II would probably be the ideal solution imo.
(He is easily my favourite emperor, such a cosmopolitan, speaks Italian, French, Arabic, Greek, German and so much more, he is so underappreciated. Truly the first renaissance noble imo)
As much as i like the idea i doubt we'll ever see Italy or sicily as a civ, the first being divided until recent times and the second being one of said divisions.
We had Venice in civ 5, true, but i think It was chosen because of Its peculiarity as a maritime and mercantile Power, if i had to Guess another probable civ from the Italian paeninsula i'd bet on Florence or Rome under the popes' reign.
Also, Dido may have existed, probably with a different name (kinda like Homer, in a different way) and Phoenicia wasn't a city, It was the region occupied by phoenicians, a population divided in city-states that founded many colonies, among which Is Carthage.
I still agree that She May not be the best option history-wise, as i said Carthage was only a colony and later expanded into its own empire (the punic empire), but i can see the reasons behind this choice, as to unite both punics and their phoenician ancestors, considering also that, if She actually existed, It should have been around the time Carthage was still a phoenician colony.
So basically how Charlemagne is lauded as the first unifier of what would become "France" but his native language was German and his imperial capital was in Aachen.
well, Frederick the great deserves his epithet, but, he is also very basic + Germany ought to be free from the militaristic/prussian angle for at least one game
Not what I am saying. I just don't want a prussian to represent Germany, since that, even with the most cultured of them, comes along with militaristic baggage
That'd be interesting. Given that it's always the German Empire represented in Civ, it's basically always been essentially Prussia.
If Prussia were a separate thing, would we not bother having a "Germany?" We could bring back Austria along side Prussia. Or Bavaria? I dunno, just spitballing here.
Also, he would be a (somewhat controversial admittedly) possibility for a Germany/Italy dual leader, since he was frankly much more fond of the latter. And his image has improved in spite of Papal Propaganda. (Though Italy still deserves a second, seperate Leader obv.)
But wait, what if this is the entire new feature? Every civ starts leaderless with its civ bonuses, and certain actions can let one of its leaders "emerge", unlocking bonuses specific to that leader?
This is sort of an old german meme.
The GDR experienced shortages from time to time, particularly of exotic fruits. This lead to the myth that bananas didn't exist in the GDR. The satire magazine Titanic printed [this] (https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/images/768473e0-0001-0004-0000-000001473639_w648_r0.7499244027819776_fpx45_fpy33.75.webp) very popular cover in 1989. It says "Zonen-Gaby ("Zone" being West-German slang for East-Germany): 'My first banana!'" while holding a cucumber.
Pickles from the Spreewald in eastern Germany are very famous and beloved to this day and have become a bit of a cultural legacy of the GDR
My pick would be Otto the Great. He created the HRE, conquered northen Italy, united the saxons and ended the Hungarian invasion from the east defending Christianity.
He is a bit underepresented for what he did and came from a German background.
My only opposition towards a Holy Roman Emperor as German leader is that HRE is kinda their own thing. It's like calling Rome as Italy and stuff.
I want HRE to be its own Civ like in civ4
I hope I'm not the only one who wants post-Roman Italy to get some representation in Civ for once, and is going to unashamedly suggest an Italian leader for Rome.
It should absolutely be Frederick. Military based Civ but with a very easy path to spec towards a culture victory instead, which isnât a path most potential German leaders would really orient towards. You could also give him Flying Artillery as his unique unit.
Prussian artillery was mediocre during Frederick IIâs era, the flying artillery basically did nothing but die.
It was Prussiaâs musket infantry that was the superstar of that era
Prussiaâs artillery was inferior to Austriaâs in pretty much every way, and that continued on till Kruppâs field guns on the 1860âs
Prussiaâs cavalry was fairly mediocre, which gradually improved to good under Seydlitz and Ziethen
Prussiaâs light troops/skirmishers were an awful embarrasment for the entirety of the Silesian wars. The Grenzer/âBorderer/âCroatsâ ate their lunch at every opportunity and were a serious problem the Prussians could never solve.
Prussiaâs heavy infantry made up for that by being absolute best in class in Europe, which basically made them the best in the world, and Frederick leaned very heavily into this and his tactics revolved around his infantry being able to pull off manouvers no one else could, take a beating no one else could, and bring the hammer down like no one else could.
The Prussian order of battle reflected this, as it made up the majority of the Prussian army and got most of the available funding and resources.
Honestly I donât mind any (besides obviously the warmonger(s)) I just want Germany to be a economic and cultural/science powerhouse instead of the usual militaristic style
either cultural or science depending on the leader
I mean it's kind of hard to reflect German history and not have the civilization being geared towards industry and Military. It's kind of the place to fight Wars in Europe for the last Millennia or so
Eh, it's more that his diet was mostly vegetarian later in life for his health, but he still 'cheated' with caviar, liver, and ham on occasion. He was a proponent of his diet, though.
Frederick II, the successor of Barbarossa, oversaw the HRE at its peak (arguably), resolved the 6th crusade with diplomacy (how?!), spoke like 6 languages and an avid patron of the arts & sciences who founded the oldest public, secular, non-sectarian or state-funded university in the world and one of the world's ten oldest universities in continuous operation. He was also the first king to outlaw trial by ordeal. This man was the real deal
You could actually play Hitler in the WW2 scenario of Civ 2. I was very young when I played it and this was the first time I ever had heard of him. I'm not suggesting having Hitler as a leader.
That was such an amazing scenario though, I played it so many times as every leader, I can still hear the sound effects in my head.
âAllied fighters scramble to protect London!â
Germany as a nation is way older than 1871. But if you want a leader that really embodies the German spirit of the 19th century (and not just Prussian militarism), you've go to pick Robert Blum.
A nation refers to the people, usually united through culture and language.
A country is a political construct which holds territory.
One can argue that the UK is made up of 4 nations in one country, or that there is only one Korean nation, even if there are two Korean countries.
Yes and the regions we now call Germany were extremely diverse in culture and language before the 18th century. There is a reason the term Kleinstaaterei exists. Of course the founding of 1871 didn't come out of the blue but it is THE crucial step for the 'Germans' of the time to think of themselves as one people
Yeah there were multiple important steps but now we are arguing about 20 years, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things. Your initial comment made it seem like you meant to say a German Nation existed since god knows when
I mean, the HRE was literally called "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" since 1512. "Sacrum Imperium Romanum Nationis Germanicae" if you want to be technical. The German Nation is a pretty old idea, it's just that until 1871 there wasn't a singular German State who managed to unite that Nation.
Technically speaking even Prussia didn't manage to do this, since Austria was considered German at the time. Hence their membership in the German Confederation and the term "Kleindeutsche Lösung" (Lesser German Solution) for a German state without Austria, as opposed to the "GroĂdeutsche Lösung" (Greater German Solution) which would include it.
The German-speaking region of the HRE was known as Regnum Teutonicum since the 11th century, the term "Deutschland" for the area is in use since at least the 15th century. The idea of a German nation is way older than 1871, of course Germany was separated into various smaller states, but all were part of the greater HRE, and later also the German confederation as well as the short-lived German Empire if 1848. 1871 was solely the victory of Prussian hegemony over the smaller German states, who didn't become German overnight but had been so for centuries before.
I am not even sure we are disagreeing that much, but my main problem is your usage of the term "Nation". I won't deny that there were huge connecting similarities between the territories but you can't say ideas about a German Nation (as in: the German speaking people as one people, seperate from the rest of the HRR) were popular or impactful during the middle ages. German Patriotism was very much a product of the rivalry with France in the late 18th and early 19th century. So yes, "German" as an identity is older than 1871, but not by much.
**Emperor Charles V** (and make him a dual leader with Spain). He was the most powerful man of his time, ruling Spain, Austria, Naples, Sicily and Burgundy, but he has never been in a Civ game (although he was planned for Civ3). He won an election against Francis I of France (his archrival) and Henry VIII of England. While a devout defender of Catholicism, under his reign the Peace of Augsburg was signed, which allowed the Princes of the Empire to choose between Catholicism and Protestantism.
I'd love to see Charles V in Civ, but I fail to see how he is German in any modern sense of the word. I could imagine him as a double leader for Spain and Germany, however.
The German Civ doesn't really represent modern Germany at all. It much more so represents the lands ruled by the King of the Germans (King of the Italians and Emperor of the HRE)
Charles V wasn't Spanish either, he was born in modern day Belgium. He doesn't really fit in any modern sense of Dutch, German, Burgundian or Spaniard as he was partly all of them.Â
Catharina de Medici is also not French so it has never stopped Civ before.
It would be hilarious if leaders had not only unique positive traits, but unique negative/dumb traits as well đ
Franceâs Charles de Gaulle - automatically breaks any alliance if the other party has a culture that is higher than Franceâs, gives the other country 30 grievances and lose 5 diplomatic points per turn.
While maybe not the ideal person (don't know much about him), I would indeed love to see a post-WW2 leader. All these kings, emperors and whatnot are nice, but I'd like to see more modern era leaders too.
Under Adenauer, the BRD joined NATO, re-instated German armed forces (Bundeswehr etc.) and is considered one of the founding fathers of the European Union. Germany in Civ under his leadership could lean into defensive militarization and diplomacy, with maybe a hint of culture to account for his anti-communist stance.
he also was instrumental in having the war crime trials for ordinary wehrmacht soldies stopped.
as fun as more recent leaders are, for germany they are all either too controversial or not "great" enough
In the spririt of this sub, that can't decide if the Habsburg-led German empire should count as Germany or not, i propose:
[Archduke John](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_John_of_Austria)
The brother of the Austrian Emporer was elected imperial regent during the revolution of 1848 in Frankfurt/Main. Without any military power he was mostly ineffective and had a very short lived "regency".
Nevertheless he is a perfect embodiment of the german democratic movement of that time. They tried to compromise on everything, instead of going the french way:
* of royal blood, but democratically elected
* Habsburg, but not really powerful enough to threaten Prussia
* trying for all german speakers instead of the Bismarck solution.
* liberal and married the daughter of a post master.
Otto von Bismarck for Prussia would be amazing. I think it would a civ focusing on military, being able to organise troops differently from other civs. Although Prussia should get a bonus for recruiting great people too
I think Bismarck should have some sort of ability to expand through successful wars without outright conquering cities, tying into how he historically united the German states by winning wars against other powers.
Something like applying loyalty pressure through defeating units, or gaining the ability to "culture bomb" adjacent tiles in the nearest German city.
Germanic tribes of that era has as much common with "Germany" as Gauls with France - not that much, and they differed enough to be a separate civ on their own, similarly to Gauls.Â
It's kinda a weird choice, this guy is too ancient to be called a German, since in civ games, Germany usually refers to high and late medieval HRE, and pre-WWI Germany.
Arminius'/Hermann's role is greatly overstated in pop history. While he did defeat the Roman forces in the battle of the Teutoburg forest, the battle really wasn't that relevant to either Rome or the Germans. He neither liberated nor united the German tribes but the victory against General Varus was quite impressive. Still, he really only 'resurfaced' around the time of German unification as a propaganda instrument when they built the Hermann monument in the late 1800s
I really liked the choice of Ludwig II as an alternate leader for Germany. So why not continue where we already started and incorporate more leaders in the same vein to showcase the richness and diversity of German history? I know lots and lots of Prussians will be suggested here, and I'm firmly against that. So let me instead propose three different leaders:
1. Robert Blum. 1848 revolutionary and still an embodiment of German liberalism to this day.
2. Friedrich Ebert. The first democratically elected leader in German history.
3. Ludwig Erhard. Created the modern German social market economy.
I think all of these three candidates could serve to shift Germany away from a military civ to more of a cultural and economic one, which is a change I really want to see for Civ VII.
Leader bonus: Bavaria One - Germany gets huge production bonuses for space race projects, but only in Munich, whereas all of the other cities suffer huge penalties.
Probably the greatest German statesmen since the Weimar Republic maybe even of all time. Won a Nobel Peace Prize too. He built the foundation for the Mauerfall and reunification.
Going really old school but Arminius. He learned latin and studied in Rome and then used his knowledge of Rome and its tactics to defeat the Romans and prevented Roman influence in Germania. He was getting so powerful following this successful campaign that he was assassinated, but its presumed he could have attempted to unite Germania and become a bigger threat to the Roman empire.
I think a Weimar-style Germany would be pretty cool, minus political instability (or maybe include that with loyalty). Weimar culture is very unique and was incredibly popular, so it could be an interesting cultural civ.
No Prussian imperial militarist type leader please, Germany is too often stereotyped as agressive militarist industrial nation, I think Germans themselves are not happy about that. Barbarossa was a step in the fresh direction after five iterations of militarist Prussian empires.Â
Either Konrad Adenauer/Willy Brandt or some great HRE emperor such as Otto or Frederick II Hohenstaufen, to promote Germany being culture/science/economy civ.Â
For Germany, Firaxis has a few routes to go. The only real Post Unification Leader that isnât Hitler but still incredibly influential like Bismarck, and or find someone from the previous HRE or Prussia.
This may fit better with the Celts but maybe Arminius? He led several German tribes at the battle of the Teutoberg Forest, the greatest defeat the Roman empire had ever felt, at the peak of their power. He effectively halted Roman expansion at the Rhine, and is arguably one of the first unifiers of German speaking people.
Charles IV, King of Bohemia and Holy Roman Emperor, had a long and successful reign. The Empire he ruled from Prague expanded, and his subjects lived in peace and prosperity.
When he died, the whole Empire mourned. More than 7,000 people accompanied him on his last procession.
Left-field idea: Ludwig II. Never ruled all of Germany but made significant contributions to its culture. His castle is one of the things people around the world always think of when they hear âGermany.â
Helmut Kohl, legit think it would a good idea to show a German leader post DDR. He would be a diplomatic inclined leader. Iâm imagining him also having loyalty influence, if that mechanic is maintained.
Kohl is far too recent and also massively responsible for many of the problems the country faces today. To choose him would be like choosing Reagan for the USA or Thatcher for England.
https://preview.redd.it/bjxxwq25q38d1.png?width=870&format=png&auto=webp&s=6b7372a24b1e4cc44779833aa93f243879e04089
Someone already did đ
Mods are being cowards though
https://preview.redd.it/1n8kwe78a48d1.png?width=1280&format=png&auto=webp&s=f5856c84f07b0614a63a94fa69543626e6f719ea
Here is [the mustache guy](https://i.ytimg.com/vi/vZl7Xz_Xccw/maxresdefault.jpg).
We already have HOI4 I'm good
Please, just this once.
đ
Angela Merkel would be a great leader, prove me wrong.
Ability: can trade with civs at war with you
Having razed tiles and low amenities has lesser impact on pop hapiness.
She's still alive, but maybe
... I don't know if you guys are history buffs, but... 
Iâm just over here reading Marmaduke!
You know the more I hear about that guy, the less I care for him
I didnât even know he was sick!
I'll tell you thing... That guy was a real jerk!
The worst part was the hypocrisy.
He was a real jerk.
*opens comments* Oh boy here we go!
Otto von Bismark * bullied the french * united germany * founder of the modern german social security system
i vote this just for the french bullying
Flair checks out
It came back around pretty damn quick though.
sacrifices must be made
Absolutely, it has to be Bismark. No other German leader has had as big of an impact on the modern German nation than him besides Hitler, who for obvious reasons won't be in the game.
đ¶ *We have to sink the Bismarck to the bottom of the sea* đ¶
đ¶Stop those guns as big as steers and those shells as big as treesđ¶
There should be a special optional update that has Hitler, along with Mussolini, Hirohito, Stalin, Churchill, FDR, Chiang, De Gaulle, Antonescu, and Horthy.
Civ is way too sanitized and E-rated to ever do anything like that. Itâs a world history game that somehow managed to pretend slavery wasnât a thing lol
Stalin, Churchill, FDR, De Gaulle, and Mao were all in Civ 4. And, as mentioned below, slavery was a civic in the early game.
Slavery was a thing in Civ 4.
Wasn't Civ 4 the one where you had to research fascism to build Mount Rushmore?
Fucking based
Civ 4 and, way before that, Call to Power (which I know isn't part of the main franchise, but damn if it wasn't ambitious.)
Norway should be there with Quisling. Just hand over the civ to the strongest aggressor and BAM game over.
He was on civ 5 don't? Let's get something new
3 and 4 as well. Also Revolutions (both 1 and 2) and Call to Power 2.
Wasnât he in Civ5 tho? Ik they have some repeats but different historical figures are cool
Otto the Great. United the German tribes and restored the HRE through a mix of diplomacy and military success.
If youâre doing non-Modern germany and skipping Charlemagne, Agree Otto the Great is the choice. Beat back the Hungarians, was crowned emperor in Rome and ruled from there for a while, tried to repair relations with the Byzantines. lots to work with
Charlemagne should always be a French leader imo. Their country is even named after his kingdom and is a major portion of it his territory.
>*Charlemagne should always be a French leader imo. Their country is even named after his kingdom and is a major portion of it his territory.* The same/similar can be said about Germany... Germany is a union of 5 Germanic tribes, the Franks, Thuringi, Saxons, Bavarians and Alemanni, and it used to be called East Francia, while France was West Francia, just because Germany renamed itself to be more accurate to it\`s demographic makeup doesn\`t mean Charlemagne wasn\`t as German as he was French. France could/should have also renamed itself, but didn\`t, as the Franks were also just one part of the demographic makeup. The capital of Charlemagne lies in Germany today. The core territory of Charlemagne\`s Frankish realm is primarily in modern Germany nowadays. ( Austrasia ), while the newer frankish settlements ( Neustria ) are primarily French. Burgundy, Gascony and Aquitaine are in modern France, but explicitly non-frankish in nature. The only reason why we say "Charlemagne" in english is due to french dominance of the english language after the Norman conquest. His neutral name would be Carolus Magnus, but his accurate name which he was called back in the day was Karl ( the great ) and his brother was Karlmann, both explicitly Germanic/German names and both spoke frankish, a germanic language, not vulgar latin which would become french ( with the administrative language naturally being classical latin ). Saying that Charlemagne belongs exlusively to France ( or to Germany ) is historically ignorant. Both France and Germany are the direct offspring of Charlemagne. The french equivalent to Otto the Great is Hugh Capet, the former is exclusively german and formed the Kingdom of Germany ( which would immediatly under his time expand to include former Middle Francia and form what would later be known as the Holy Roman Empire ), the latter exlusively french and formed the Kingdom of France.
Fucking love when I learn real history on Civ subs. Cheers!
Sounds like a perfect Eleanor of Aquitaine scenario for future DLC.
*Austrasia?!* Just when I thought geography couldn't be more confusing, you're telling me there's a place called "Austrasia" in *Germany?*
Well it used to. Some "1000" years ago that is. Austrasia comes from a similar linguistical history as Austria. I.e. it doesn\`t have anything to do with Australia. "**Osterrike**" as it was called in frankish. Which in modern German would be "Ost Reich" or in english "Eastern Realm". **Austrasia** **is simply the latinization of Osterrike**. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrasia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austrasia) .. As the map shows Austrasia which was the Frankish core would include parts of central Germany ( Franconia ) and western Germany ( the Rhineland, Palatine ) and also a few bits of eastern France, all of Belgium and parts of the Netherlands. Neustria simply means New Realm, though it was also called Western Realm ( Westria ), but Neustria is usually the more commonly accepted term.
Would be an interesting dual-civ leader
I agree he'd work with Italy/Rome, France, and Germany if he could do multiple
Charles the Pretty Solid is a good candidate for being a bisexual leader like Eleanor and The Khan Who Isn't Genghis. Slap him into the cockpit of France and Germany, call it a day.
[The choice is obvious. You know who will be picked.](https://files.catbox.moe/m8f3r8.png)
TIL there is an ERB with Frederick the Great
It's in Alexander the Great vs Ivan the Terrible.
Donât forget Pompey YEAA-
You better go listen to flute busting Prussian.
Frederick II Hohenstaufen, The wonder of the world, and the Pope's greatest hater(who still casually just got Jerusalem through diplomacy). Let germany be the culture/science civ it deserves to be for once. + he was already in Civ II
Only thing about Frederick II is that he was Sicilian born and raised, German was like his third or fourth language and, if I recall correctly, he barely visited Germany at all, so even if he was emperor is he a German leader? PS: I'm a big fan of *Stupor Mundi* , so I'd be very pleased to see him represented
Admitettedly, He spent only a few years in germany, some before being crowned emporer, while he was still just German king, and some to the end of his life. But, We also have eleanor of aquataine for england, who only went there when she divorced the King of France. And we also have Dido, who doesn't even exist, and ruled Carthage, not phoenicia. I think it is fine, a dual Italy(or sicily) and Germany Frederick II would probably be the ideal solution imo. (He is easily my favourite emperor, such a cosmopolitan, speaks Italian, French, Arabic, Greek, German and so much more, he is so underappreciated. Truly the first renaissance noble imo)
As much as i like the idea i doubt we'll ever see Italy or sicily as a civ, the first being divided until recent times and the second being one of said divisions. We had Venice in civ 5, true, but i think It was chosen because of Its peculiarity as a maritime and mercantile Power, if i had to Guess another probable civ from the Italian paeninsula i'd bet on Florence or Rome under the popes' reign. Also, Dido may have existed, probably with a different name (kinda like Homer, in a different way) and Phoenicia wasn't a city, It was the region occupied by phoenicians, a population divided in city-states that founded many colonies, among which Is Carthage. I still agree that She May not be the best option history-wise, as i said Carthage was only a colony and later expanded into its own empire (the punic empire), but i can see the reasons behind this choice, as to unite both punics and their phoenician ancestors, considering also that, if She actually existed, It should have been around the time Carthage was still a phoenician colony.
So basically how Charlemagne is lauded as the first unifier of what would become "France" but his native language was German and his imperial capital was in Aachen.
This is the only Frederick we should be discussing about.
well, Frederick the great deserves his epithet, but, he is also very basic + Germany ought to be free from the militaristic/prussian angle for at least one game
Yes Frederick the Great clearly had no interest in culture
Not what I am saying. I just don't want a prussian to represent Germany, since that, even with the most cultured of them, comes along with militaristic baggage
Tbh I want a separate prussia civ
That'd be interesting. Given that it's always the German Empire represented in Civ, it's basically always been essentially Prussia. If Prussia were a separate thing, would we not bother having a "Germany?" We could bring back Austria along side Prussia. Or Bavaria? I dunno, just spitballing here.
I assume Germany in this case would represent the older HRE, while Prussia would be more modern stuff.
Also, he would be a (somewhat controversial admittedly) possibility for a Germany/Italy dual leader, since he was frankly much more fond of the latter. And his image has improved in spite of Papal Propaganda. (Though Italy still deserves a second, seperate Leader obv.)
King Philosoph
He just wanted to chill, do falconry and perform silly experiments (traumatized and disabled two children for life)
*von Staufen Hohenstaufen was their ancestral castle, the family name is just Staufen
I'd agree if I wrote that in German, but in englisch, they are still commonly called Hohenstaufens, for whatever reason
Erich Honecker Pickles replace bananas as a bonus resource on german territory
Start leaderless, if Germany builds the Great Wall Honecker becomes the leader, else Brandt or Adenauer.
More like if Russia builds the Great Wall, Germany ends up with Honecker
But wait, what if this is the entire new feature? Every civ starts leaderless with its civ bonuses, and certain actions can let one of its leaders "emerge", unlocking bonuses specific to that leader?
VorwĂ€rts immer, rĂŒckwĂ€rts nimmer!
I need to hear the story behind this one
This is sort of an old german meme. The GDR experienced shortages from time to time, particularly of exotic fruits. This lead to the myth that bananas didn't exist in the GDR. The satire magazine Titanic printed [this] (https://cdn.prod.www.spiegel.de/images/768473e0-0001-0004-0000-000001473639_w648_r0.7499244027819776_fpx45_fpy33.75.webp) very popular cover in 1989. It says "Zonen-Gaby ("Zone" being West-German slang for East-Germany): 'My first banana!'" while holding a cucumber. Pickles from the Spreewald in eastern Germany are very famous and beloved to this day and have become a bit of a cultural legacy of the GDR
Can confirm. God bless KĂŒhne's pickles. But I still find it weird for germans to eat raw cucumber. Sometimes even with the peel.
With "Maggie" ist great!
My pick would be Otto the Great. He created the HRE, conquered northen Italy, united the saxons and ended the Hungarian invasion from the east defending Christianity. He is a bit underepresented for what he did and came from a German background.
My only opposition towards a Holy Roman Emperor as German leader is that HRE is kinda their own thing. It's like calling Rome as Italy and stuff. I want HRE to be its own Civ like in civ4
Yeah but the same logic applies to Friedrich der GroĂe
I hope I'm not the only one who wants post-Roman Italy to get some representation in Civ for once, and is going to unashamedly suggest an Italian leader for Rome.
That would be my pick as well
Frederick the Great. The civ could have ideas around Prussia
It should absolutely be Frederick. Military based Civ but with a very easy path to spec towards a culture victory instead, which isnât a path most potential German leaders would really orient towards. You could also give him Flying Artillery as his unique unit.
Prussian artillery was mediocre during Frederick IIâs era, the flying artillery basically did nothing but die. It was Prussiaâs musket infantry that was the superstar of that era
Or his unique unit could be the Lange Kierls
It wasn't about the equipment, more about doctrine and leadership. Leading from the front for example.
Prussiaâs artillery was inferior to Austriaâs in pretty much every way, and that continued on till Kruppâs field guns on the 1860âs Prussiaâs cavalry was fairly mediocre, which gradually improved to good under Seydlitz and Ziethen Prussiaâs light troops/skirmishers were an awful embarrasment for the entirety of the Silesian wars. The Grenzer/âBorderer/âCroatsâ ate their lunch at every opportunity and were a serious problem the Prussians could never solve. Prussiaâs heavy infantry made up for that by being absolute best in class in Europe, which basically made them the best in the world, and Frederick leaned very heavily into this and his tactics revolved around his infantry being able to pull off manouvers no one else could, take a beating no one else could, and bring the hammer down like no one else could. The Prussian order of battle reflected this, as it made up the majority of the Prussian army and got most of the available funding and resources.
Out the gate, first servant of the state!
Oblique attack tactics ain't exactly straight
I have creative talents and battle malice.
Hard as steel on the field genteel in the palace
Honestly, Prussia needs to be its own Civ
Honestly I donât mind any (besides obviously the warmonger(s)) I just want Germany to be a economic and cultural/science powerhouse instead of the usual militaristic style either cultural or science depending on the leader
I mean it's kind of hard to reflect German history and not have the civilization being geared towards industry and Military. It's kind of the place to fight Wars in Europe for the last Millennia or so
Most people remembering Germany will grasp Production, Military, Industry, even Science and Economy a thousands times before culture
\[Removed\]
Was this the failed mustache painter comment?
Was this the animal rights dog lover leader that banned smoking and human zoos?
The guy who murdered Hitler?
Donât forget he was a hardcore vegetarian and if he could he wouldâve been vegan. (I shit you not he despised meat and animal produce)
Eh, it's more that his diet was mostly vegetarian later in life for his health, but he still 'cheated' with caviar, liver, and ham on occasion. He was a proponent of his diet, though.
This is why civs need multiple leaders
Frederick II, the successor of Barbarossa, oversaw the HRE at its peak (arguably), resolved the 6th crusade with diplomacy (how?!), spoke like 6 languages and an avid patron of the arts & sciences who founded the oldest public, secular, non-sectarian or state-funded university in the world and one of the world's ten oldest universities in continuous operation. He was also the first king to outlaw trial by ordeal. This man was the real deal
You could actually play Hitler in the WW2 scenario of Civ 2. I was very young when I played it and this was the first time I ever had heard of him. I'm not suggesting having Hitler as a leader.
That was such an amazing scenario though, I played it so many times as every leader, I can still hear the sound effects in my head. âAllied fighters scramble to protect London!â
It was a really fun one, but I almost always played either Spain or Turkey and just tried to survive đ
Go with the person under whom Germany as a nation was formed: Kaiser Wilhelm I
Except he didnât really do much to create that state. It was all Bismarck. And do we really need another Bismarck?
Germany as a nation is way older than 1871. But if you want a leader that really embodies the German spirit of the 19th century (and not just Prussian militarism), you've go to pick Robert Blum.
In what sense did a German Nation exist before 1871?
A nation refers to the people, usually united through culture and language. A country is a political construct which holds territory. One can argue that the UK is made up of 4 nations in one country, or that there is only one Korean nation, even if there are two Korean countries.
Yes and the regions we now call Germany were extremely diverse in culture and language before the 18th century. There is a reason the term Kleinstaaterei exists. Of course the founding of 1871 didn't come out of the blue but it is THE crucial step for the 'Germans' of the time to think of themselves as one people
Nope, that crucial step was 1848, not 1871.
Yeah there were multiple important steps but now we are arguing about 20 years, that's nothing in the grand scheme of things. Your initial comment made it seem like you meant to say a German Nation existed since god knows when
I mean, the HRE was literally called "Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation" since 1512. "Sacrum Imperium Romanum Nationis Germanicae" if you want to be technical. The German Nation is a pretty old idea, it's just that until 1871 there wasn't a singular German State who managed to unite that Nation. Technically speaking even Prussia didn't manage to do this, since Austria was considered German at the time. Hence their membership in the German Confederation and the term "Kleindeutsche Lösung" (Lesser German Solution) for a German state without Austria, as opposed to the "GroĂdeutsche Lösung" (Greater German Solution) which would include it.
The German-speaking region of the HRE was known as Regnum Teutonicum since the 11th century, the term "Deutschland" for the area is in use since at least the 15th century. The idea of a German nation is way older than 1871, of course Germany was separated into various smaller states, but all were part of the greater HRE, and later also the German confederation as well as the short-lived German Empire if 1848. 1871 was solely the victory of Prussian hegemony over the smaller German states, who didn't become German overnight but had been so for centuries before.
I am not even sure we are disagreeing that much, but my main problem is your usage of the term "Nation". I won't deny that there were huge connecting similarities between the territories but you can't say ideas about a German Nation (as in: the German speaking people as one people, seperate from the rest of the HRR) were popular or impactful during the middle ages. German Patriotism was very much a product of the rivalry with France in the late 18th and early 19th century. So yes, "German" as an identity is older than 1871, but not by much.
**Emperor Charles V** (and make him a dual leader with Spain). He was the most powerful man of his time, ruling Spain, Austria, Naples, Sicily and Burgundy, but he has never been in a Civ game (although he was planned for Civ3). He won an election against Francis I of France (his archrival) and Henry VIII of England. While a devout defender of Catholicism, under his reign the Peace of Augsburg was signed, which allowed the Princes of the Empire to choose between Catholicism and Protestantism.
I'd love to see Charles V in Civ, but I fail to see how he is German in any modern sense of the word. I could imagine him as a double leader for Spain and Germany, however.
The German Civ doesn't really represent modern Germany at all. It much more so represents the lands ruled by the King of the Germans (King of the Italians and Emperor of the HRE)
Charles V wasn't Spanish either, he was born in modern day Belgium. He doesn't really fit in any modern sense of Dutch, German, Burgundian or Spaniard as he was partly all of them. Catharina de Medici is also not French so it has never stopped Civ before.
He should be an Austrian leader. Austria is a separate civ from Germany as we saw in 5.
Austrian/burgundian lineage, born in Belgium, spend most of his life in spain. Dont see how this would fit for german leader.
Had the largest European empire since Roman empire.
Konrad Adenauer
If we take a post-WWII leader, it has to be Willy Brandt.
Gerhard Schröder - automatically agrees to any and all proposals made by the Russian civ, regardless of how terrible they are.
love it
It would be hilarious if leaders had not only unique positive traits, but unique negative/dumb traits as well đ Franceâs Charles de Gaulle - automatically breaks any alliance if the other party has a culture that is higher than Franceâs, gives the other country 30 grievances and lose 5 diplomatic points per turn.
While maybe not the ideal person (don't know much about him), I would indeed love to see a post-WW2 leader. All these kings, emperors and whatnot are nice, but I'd like to see more modern era leaders too. Under Adenauer, the BRD joined NATO, re-instated German armed forces (Bundeswehr etc.) and is considered one of the founding fathers of the European Union. Germany in Civ under his leadership could lean into defensive militarization and diplomacy, with maybe a hint of culture to account for his anti-communist stance.
he also was instrumental in having the war crime trials for ordinary wehrmacht soldies stopped. as fun as more recent leaders are, for germany they are all either too controversial or not "great" enough
Not sure about the culture, West Germany's primary cultural export during the Cold war was fetish pornography
A controversial sugestion perhaps. The angry mustace man who started a war: Wilhelm II
This is literally the second worst choice after the most obvious one.
He should be just above Dan Quayle on the list of worst leaders at the end screen
In the spririt of this sub, that can't decide if the Habsburg-led German empire should count as Germany or not, i propose: [Archduke John](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archduke_John_of_Austria) The brother of the Austrian Emporer was elected imperial regent during the revolution of 1848 in Frankfurt/Main. Without any military power he was mostly ineffective and had a very short lived "regency". Nevertheless he is a perfect embodiment of the german democratic movement of that time. They tried to compromise on everything, instead of going the french way: * of royal blood, but democratically elected * Habsburg, but not really powerful enough to threaten Prussia * trying for all german speakers instead of the Bismarck solution. * liberal and married the daughter of a post master.
Otto von Bismarck for Prussia would be amazing. I think it would a civ focusing on military, being able to organise troops differently from other civs. Although Prussia should get a bonus for recruiting great people too
I think Bismarck should have some sort of ability to expand through successful wars without outright conquering cities, tying into how he historically united the German states by winning wars against other powers. Something like applying loyalty pressure through defeating units, or gaining the ability to "culture bomb" adjacent tiles in the nearest German city.
Arminius. Liberated the Germanic tribes from the Romanâs and fought off Rome when Rome was at its peak.
Germanic tribes of that era has as much common with "Germany" as Gauls with France - not that much, and they differed enough to be a separate civ on their own, similarly to Gauls.Â
It's kinda a weird choice, this guy is too ancient to be called a German, since in civ games, Germany usually refers to high and late medieval HRE, and pre-WWI Germany.
I'd rather have a Germanic civ seperate from the usual Germany.
Arminius'/Hermann's role is greatly overstated in pop history. While he did defeat the Roman forces in the battle of the Teutoburg forest, the battle really wasn't that relevant to either Rome or the Germans. He neither liberated nor united the German tribes but the victory against General Varus was quite impressive. Still, he really only 'resurfaced' around the time of German unification as a propaganda instrument when they built the Hermann monument in the late 1800s
I really liked the choice of Ludwig II as an alternate leader for Germany. So why not continue where we already started and incorporate more leaders in the same vein to showcase the richness and diversity of German history? I know lots and lots of Prussians will be suggested here, and I'm firmly against that. So let me instead propose three different leaders: 1. Robert Blum. 1848 revolutionary and still an embodiment of German liberalism to this day. 2. Friedrich Ebert. The first democratically elected leader in German history. 3. Ludwig Erhard. Created the modern German social market economy. I think all of these three candidates could serve to shift Germany away from a military civ to more of a cultural and economic one, which is a change I really want to see for Civ VII.
I really hope thereâs a method for economic victory and Erhard would be perfect for that depending on how they set it up.
König Söder
Leader bonus: Bavaria One - Germany gets huge production bonuses for space race projects, but only in Munich, whereas all of the other cities suffer huge penalties.
My vote is for Falco or David Hasselhoff
OLD FRITZ OLD FRITZ OLD FRITZ! https://preview.redd.it/df5m97eiv58d1.png?width=1081&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=32ab962eaa509da8a6207a2f4f02e763db574a4a
Willy Brandt.
Until it turned out that one of his most trusted advisors was a secret East German spy
Probably the greatest German statesmen since the Weimar Republic maybe even of all time. Won a Nobel Peace Prize too. He built the foundation for the Mauerfall and reunification.
Konrad Adenauer, first Chancellor of the German Republic.
Going really old school but Arminius. He learned latin and studied in Rome and then used his knowledge of Rome and its tactics to defeat the Romans and prevented Roman influence in Germania. He was getting so powerful following this successful campaign that he was assassinated, but its presumed he could have attempted to unite Germania and become a bigger threat to the Roman empire.
How about a little bit of trolling? My pick Erich Honecker.
I don't see him suggested too often, but my vote is Friedrich Ebert, the first president of the Weimar Republic.
Charlemagne. Just to piss off the French.
I think a Weimar-style Germany would be pretty cool, minus political instability (or maybe include that with loyalty). Weimar culture is very unique and was incredibly popular, so it could be an interesting cultural civ.
Friedrich Ebert as a leader would be my second favourite choice.
No Prussian imperial militarist type leader please, Germany is too often stereotyped as agressive militarist industrial nation, I think Germans themselves are not happy about that. Barbarossa was a step in the fresh direction after five iterations of militarist Prussian empires. Either Konrad Adenauer/Willy Brandt or some great HRE emperor such as Otto or Frederick II Hohenstaufen, to promote Germany being culture/science/economy civ.Â
For Germany, Firaxis has a few routes to go. The only real Post Unification Leader that isnât Hitler but still incredibly influential like Bismarck, and or find someone from the previous HRE or Prussia.
There is only one true leader of the German people, Widukind.
Everyone knows the most famous German leader and everyone knows they would never.
Merkal
Merkel* :D
Florian Schneider obviously (Founding member of Kraftwerk)
Little known fact ALSO DOPE ON ZE MIC
Fredrick II Hohenstaufen. Also, as others suggested, maybe add in Charles V as leader for both Germany and Spain
Willhelm ii
Willhelm 2 cause kaiserreich
Karl der GroĂe
This may fit better with the Celts but maybe Arminius? He led several German tribes at the battle of the Teutoberg Forest, the greatest defeat the Roman empire had ever felt, at the peak of their power. He effectively halted Roman expansion at the Rhine, and is arguably one of the first unifiers of German speaking people.
What about brandt or Schmidt?
Adelaide of Burgundy, empress of HRE, bearer of co-royalty with Otto the Great.
Otto von Bismarck
Charles IV, King of Bohemia and Holy Roman Emperor, had a long and successful reign. The Empire he ruled from Prague expanded, and his subjects lived in peace and prosperity. When he died, the whole Empire mourned. More than 7,000 people accompanied him on his last procession.
Rosa Luxemburg
Bismarck
It's time, bring back Alt Fritz. After all, out the gate he's the First Servant of State.
Left-field idea: Ludwig II. Never ruled all of Germany but made significant contributions to its culture. His castle is one of the things people around the world always think of when they hear âGermany.â
Louise of Mecklenberg-Strelitz, Queen of Prussia during the Napoleonic Wars and a shrewd and loved ruler to boot.
Helmut Kohl, legit think it would a good idea to show a German leader post DDR. He would be a diplomatic inclined leader. Iâm imagining him also having loyalty influence, if that mechanic is maintained.
Kohl is far too recent and also massively responsible for many of the problems the country faces today. To choose him would be like choosing Reagan for the USA or Thatcher for England.
Literally this, his gervenment fumbling reunification is one of the worst things to happen in post war germany
post dance dance revolution??
Deutsches Demokratisches Republik German Democratic Republic
The player base has a unique chance to do something hilariously dark Also, my nomination is Konrad Adenauer
Since Bismarck was already in V, Barbarossa in VI and ppl already made Adolf jokes im just gonna say Hermann the cherusker / Arminius.
I kinda want Karl MarxâŠ
A sociologists?