New leaders for RtR

[Charriu]

Do you think that one of the proposed leaders could be Otto I? If not I would need a good looking leaderhead to add that also fits in with the style of the rest of the leaders.

[DaveV]

I agree that adding more female leaders is a worthy goal, but I couldn't bring myself to vote for either of the "old lady face photoshopped onto a Playboy bunny body" alternatives.

[Charriu]

I totally understand your point DaveV. So far I didn't find any better, but I only looked into mods I know. Reason for that is that I know those mods and therefore I know the leaders have all necessary files.

[Charriu]

One idea that popped into my head this morning:

Add the leaders without adding them to a civ.

I'm not sure if this works, so I have to check this. My reasoning for this is as followed:

• Some of the leaders I presented don't really fit to any particular civ
  
• For the most part, we always play with unrestricted leader option
  
• Players, who only want to play with the original roster, can do so at least without "unrestricted leaders"
  

[chumchu]

I like GKCs suggestions.

[Charriu]

None of the images work for me.

NVM, overzealous ad-blocker.

If we're looking to fill all of the above criteria,
https://forums.civfanatics.com/threads/l...-2.270476/
Queen Dido of Carthage for Cha/Cre.

Menelik II for Org/Pro (or we could do Haile Selassie)
https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources...-ii.13082/
https://forums.civfanatics.com/resources...sie.21486/

And do Abd-ar-Rahman for the moors as Ind/Phi

Thanks for your comment chumchu. I totally missed that GKC edited his message after I read and replied to his original post.

Just looking at the graphical quality of the leaders:

- Dido looks good enough
- Menelik looks a bit cheap, but you could argue the same for some leaders that I posted.
- Haile Selassie has some clipping issues if you look at the green thing on his shoulder

[Cornflakes]

You could create a "dummy" civ with blank UU/UB and attach the new leaders to it, rather than putting the leaders on existing civs or trying to come up with new balanced civs for them.

[GeneralKilCavalry]

Yeah, the menelik I posted looks pretty mediocre, but Dido's fine, satisfies all the criteria and makes sense with Cha/Cre

also, i am very against dummy civs, I sometimes use the mod to play online with friends and we have always done random/random.
Having the option to play a mod with random/random and expect relative balance in most games is pretty great.

[RefSteel]

In RtR, as it stands right now, Agg/Cre would have enough anti-synergy to be an issue, Ind/Phi would railroad toward a single gameplan, and Org/Pro might be stronger than any existing trait combination on most maps. I'd be inclined to recommend against adding any of them. I also haven't tried downloading any leaderheads, so I can't judge how good these are except in stills, but maybe one or two of these will be of use:

Lieu Ye of Cambodia = Org/Pro of Khmer?

Mandukhai Khatun = Agg/Cre (or Cha/Cre if reverting Kublai) of Mongolia?

Rani Mangammal = Ind/Phi of India?

Another possibility:

Mavia = Agg/Cre of Arabia?

[Charriu]

I looked at the screenshots you provided, RefSteel and I have to say I really do like them. Would need to see them in action for any further evaluation. I'm more and more thinking that should have asked you for any more input before making a poll.

Regarding your other point, if we should add those trait combos at all. I asked Krill about this some time ago and he said this:

Part of the issue is the art stuff, which we don't have, but out of those 3 only IND/PHI shouldn't really be included IMO. The rest can be.

Regarding IND, we do need the game to finish to go over it, but sufficed to say, I don't think IND actually works in any of the variations. I'm thinking that for this mod version, it might actually be best to just revert to the base version, and run a new model for IND in a future test game.

Note at this time AGG, PRO, ORG, CRE and PHI were pretty much the same as they are now, only IND changed quite a lot.

Regarding the specific combos:

AGG/CRE: I agree with you it does have anti-synergy, but why should anti-synergy be a reason to not include it. Somebody may want to play it and anti-synergy is not in itself game breaking.
IND/PHI: I assume with a single gameplan you mean the Pyramid, right? But IND does not apply to Pyramid. Or do you mean Universities/Oxford? Yes that is a strong combo, but even then you do need to survive until universities in the first place. I would also argue that there are other combos like AGG/CHM that also push you in a hard direction in case military action.
ORG/PRO: I agree that this is a strong combo in the current implementation, but is it the strongest and is it so strong that people would like it to be banned. I'm curious what others think about it.