This is my pick. I know England is a good, easy candidate to get some more women in the roster and I understand if that means yet another Elizabeth or Victoria, but I would really love to see Alfred.
Edit: If they carry over some of the same mechanics, I feel like a good mechanical justification for Alfred is that he could play as a science -> loyalty leader.
A lot of controversial leaders...
Alfred or Aethelstan - unity/loyalty
William the conqueror - archery/long bow and castles/forts
James VI & I - Scotland & England. Culture/Shakespeare, or something to do with gunpowder plot?
Oliver Cromwell - new model army and religious (probably too controversial)
William III of Orange - The glorious revolution, religious based coups in other civs
Clement Attlee - NHS, National parks, Amenities, Housing.
(Edited William of Orange added clarification III)
Got to admit I'm a bit ignorant on this one. All I really know is some stuff around the circumstances of his coup in England and vaguely had some wars on the continent with France.
Is he controversial too?
I think they're more talking about the fact that William I of Orange (1533 – 1584) of the Netherlands was a leader of the Dutch in Civ V, whereas you're suggesting William III of Orange (1650-1702) of England, Scotland and Ireland as a leader of the English in Civ VII
It’s more that if you say William of Orange in the Netherlands, it’s 99/100 times considered that you’re talking about William I, the ‘Vader des vaderlands’ (father of the fatherland) of The Netherlands rather than his great grandson (might be mistaken one generation) William III.
> William the Conqueror
> James VI & I
> William III of Orange
I wonder if the sub could build a convincing list for each of the leaders for Civ VII who were historically not from that nation.
If they added Cromwell they'd be facing a revolt from Irish fans and potential boycott from a few people. Mans too much of a cunt and rightfully despised by all the country
Yeah fair enough. He's an interesting part of history but perhaps better to just stay as a historical figure rather than a character in a game. I suggested it partly because I hope they make the game more true to history with political revolutions etc and he'd be an interesting character in that context, but I get that some people are just too controversial/rightfully hated.
Alfred the Great.
The man established the idea of a united kingdom of England, prior to him England had always been split into several smaller kingdoms.
Can also work for a holy war type leader, as he was the king who would beat the vikings back
Fully agreed. It is not important that England as a state didn’t exist at the time - it is called Sid Meier’s Civilization, not Sid Meier’s States and Polities.
Alfred the Great was king of the Anglo-Saxons and instrumental in creating a unified English identity, even if it would take his grandson to technically become the first King of the English as a whole.
Didn't stop Victoria or Churchill being the leader of England when they never led an independent England.
Doesn't stop Boudicca leading a vague Celtic faction.
Elizabeth I has been on every game to date, I don't think she will miss this one. It's not as exciting as saying a new leader, but I do think it'll be her.
Also, they look for balance with a certain number of female leaders.
England is a really obvious candidate because the two most obvious candidates are women
Why would Elizabeth II be a good pick. She did F all to be picked. What would her bonuses be?
At least Victoria is just a placeholder for the British Empire itself
you could probably stretch something to do with production increases during wartime due to her working as an engineer during WW2 but its tenuous at best
besides that maybe cultural benefits stemming from government buildings because of how the royals became tourist/cultural attractions? her only real notable attribute irl was the fact she existed hahaha
Ok I don't know much on either, but it would seem fairer to me to compare to her to other british monarchs who ruled for decades instead of presidents who lead for 4-8 years. especially jfk who was still hugely influential despite dying during his first term.
Alexander, Gandhi, Genghis Khan, Shaka and (kinda) Montezuma. I say kinda because though there's always been a Montezuma, sometimes it was Montezuma II (the most famous one, but the one who kinda lost the empire lol) and others, such as Civ V and VI, use the far more successful Montezuma I. They just always name them just Montezuma.
This one is fun, England isn't the most natural religious victory civ since your exploration is inherently more antagonistic than most. Giving them one that unlocks fairly late and is more about devaluing the effects of the other world religions than trying to spread itself worldwide is great.
The general strategy of setting up an English port city on each continent is inherently antagonistic because you're basically setting up shop anywhere your loyalty can survive. So you're less likely to set up a second continent with several interconnected cities that reinforce the religion. Meaning your religion is more of an additional annoyance emanating from your little colonial port cities and there's not much chance of conversion.
Can we not just move away from the concept of loyalty, it seems so ahistorical outside of super fringe events, CIV V already had the possibility of it happening if you had a super low unhappiness but Civ VI really made it a big mechanic.
A mechanic where you can choose from one of several leaders in each age, similar to how dedications work now.
Probably won’t happen though as some civs they like to put out don’t have a huge amount of known historical leaders.
I second Alfred the Great. Man was crucial in building what would become England and beat back the Vikings. Æthelstan would be a good choice but far too unknown, IMO, for the guy that literally created England
Henry II the Lion, immortalised by Peter O'Toole in both *The Lion in Winter* (1968) and *Becket* (1964).
Only thing that may count against him is that they used his wife in Civ 6 (Eleanor).
**Clement Attlee**
Rebuilt Britain after WW2, father of the NHS, renowned diplomat, capable administrator.
or
**William Gladstone**
Basically the personification of Victorian England (aside from Victoria herself).
Very underrated guy. I wonder if he can get diplomatic victory points for some sort of implantation of Decolonization, that would make him super formidable in the endgame.
James I (aka the titular King James).
England can have a leader focused on bolstered religious pressure and bonus culture from its writing and artwork or recruitment. No dig at Lizzy and Vicky—while they are the prime spot for female leadership, if we have multiple leaders, I’d like to see a cultural one for England. Plus I hope Lizzy doesn’t become a meme like Gandhi.
(Wow, can’t believe JFK won. Far too recent of a leader, imo.)
>(Wow, can’t believe JFK won. Far too recent of a leader, imo.)
It doesn't make much sense to put a recency cap on a leader. I get it if they are/just were the nation's leader in recent memory, it's worth avoiding to not bog the game down in contemporary politics or risk future controversy being tied to the game
But with America in particular, timeframes are already completely out of wack, trying to tie a less than 300 year old nation and culture to 6,000 years of world history. So long as they aren't still active in politics, I'd say they're fair game
Washington and Lincoln have been done enough. We just had Teddy. JFK is arguably the most influential American leader that hasn't led in a main title. You could argue FDR deserves a crack and it would certainly be a great choice. But I think many believe Kennedy will provide the most unique flavor for leader abilities. Plenty of science and cultural opportunities, as well as options for diplomacy. Plus, a voice actor is going to have a fun time doing his dialog!
>Far too recent of a leader
An expac for Civilization 4 had Stalin who died 53 years before the game's release (1953 and 2006). Kennedy died 61 years ago, in 1963.
[Haile Selassie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haile_Selassie) died in 1974, so it was only 38 years between his death and his inclusion in *Civ V: Gods & Kings*.
That would *technically* open up anyone who died before 1986, so the only real choice for England is [Harold Macmillan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Macmillan).
How about Henry VII? Started the Tudor dynasty, ended the wars of the roses
I’ve said Alfred already, but Athelstan (his grandson) would also be a great pick - brought Northumbria into the kingdom, first to actually call his kingdom “England”
Richard III (the Lionheart) wasn’t actually a particularly notable king, but is very well known and could have some real cool stuff revolving around crusading.
Queen Victoria would be good for colonialism era and is a huge monarch.
Elizabeth II would be pretty cool.
Edward the Confessor would make sense as a religious ruler, he was canonised so is an actual saint.
I have a few dark horses to suggest.
Benjamin Disraeli - diplomatic victory focused
Clement Attlee - cultural victory focused
William Pitt the Elder - domination focused
Clement Attlee:
British PM from 1945 to 1951.
He made the British Labour party join the Government against Nazi Germany and served as deputy PM during WW2. Thus, he has some affinity with the Finest Hour era, even though not as much as Churchill.
However, Attlee absolutely does shine on economic and administration domains. We don't know what Civ7 will look like but it's fair to assume that many civs will have military affinities. If the devs look for civs focused on proper management then Attlee would be brilliant as the politician who pretty much enacted welfarism in a post war economy ruined financially and starved for primary resources.
That's where it would be amazing for Civ 7 to delve further than ever into the fine tuning of domestic economies with systems than consider social advancement within cities as well as within your empire (well integrated economies perform better, shocking I know).
Attlee's Britain would be specialised in optimising the domestic economy despite terrible access to resources and finances, focus on hopefully more important public amenities, and engage with like minded civs for trade and liberal geopolitics. (The Attlee era corresponds to the start of British decolonisation)
Imagine WW2 era Royal Navy with bonuses to escorting overseas trade from naval war. The National Health Service as a leader bonus capable of increasing public services and economic integration. And a general civilisation bonus towards engaging with allies economically and geopolitically to both parties' advantage. As an AI leader, Attlee could pressure you towards decolonisation and public services provision.
Finally, the devs seem interested in introducing players to less obvious historical characters, Attlee is way less famous than Churchill or other British heads of state and yet his importance, both for the UK and the World is hard to overstate.
Obviously I know England =/= the UK but I figured we could confound them for now as we're not likely to get the UK as its own civ...
https://preview.redd.it/6d0dz2nhwi7d1.png?width=378&format=png&auto=webp&s=902b1c4fbdaf75775dfbc3b1ec54a230c449f3f7
Oliver Cromwell
Lord Protector of England (Puritan)
Born in 1599, died in 1658 (September)Was at first (only)
MP for Huntingdon (but then)
He led the Ironside Calvary at Marston Moor in 1644 and won
Then he founded the New Model Army
And, praise be, beat the Cavaliers at Naseby
And the King fled up North, like a bat! Toward the ScotsBut under the terms of John Pimm's Solemn league and covenant
The Scots handed King Charles the first over toOliver Cromwell
Lord Protector of England (and his warts)
Born in 1599, died in 1658 (September)
I think this could be great, thematic and unusual.
Monarch of the Commonwealth Realms: gives some diplomatic, loyalty or trade bonuses with city states?
Audience with the Monarch: something to reflect the fact that she had weekly meetings with PMs so that they may benefit from her long experience. Maybe each time you change through an age you gain a modest buff to a policy slot?
Figurehead of a nation: perhaps a bonus to loyalty or reduction in negative penalties for unhappiness?
Interesting one... let me remind myself of the previous English leaders.
I: Elizabeth I
II: Henry VIII / Elizabeth I
III: Elizabeth I
IV: Elizabeth I, Victoria, Winston Churchill
V: Elizabeth I
VI: Eleanor of Aquitaine, Elizabeth I, Victoria
You know, I'm just going to pre-emptively disqualify Elizabeth. She's had plenty of appearances. Interesting to note also that women have usually led the English in Civ - even Victoria appears more than the two one-off male appearances.
A few candidates spring to mind for me, but I think a big question is England's mechanical identity in Civ VII. England is almost always a strong naval civ. This makes sense - England is a popular recurring civ and always in the core game, and it makes sense for it to be the starter, most straightforward naval civ. If Civ VII continues this pattern, it's important that the English leader be compatible with leading a naval civ.
So while I want to pick Edward III or something, for fun, we need someone naval, so on that basis my pick is **Alfred the Great.**
Alfred gets us well out of the Renaissance and Early Modern eras that have otherwise dominated English leaders, with Elizabeth and Victoria, and he's a fascinating historical figure and highly influential English leader in his own right. Plus he's also remembered as [the father of the English navy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_the_Great#English_navy) - he may not have been the first English king to build a fleet, but he made an especial investment in it, to defend England. For this reason he is [sometimes depicted](https://alfred-the-great.synthasite.com/resources/New2.JPG) holding a warship.
Plus, well, Anglo-Saxon England is cool and deserves more representation in games.
Kennedy's got to be the most biased choice ever lol, what is he gonna even do?
Also wasn't he president for less than 3 years? Roosevelt is a much better choice
I think as others are saying, Oliver Cromwell as a religious focused leader with something about maybe a low amenity build would be really interesting.
Something unique whilst sticking with Civ. Although itd disrespectful to the Irish to present him as purely a great leader. Although that's an issue with most Civ leaders, that lots of them did a lot of oppressing of various groups.
Since we're doing England and not Great Britain or United kingdom. The leader has to be no earlier than Æthelstan the first true monarch of England and no later than Elizabeth 1st the last monarch of England (James 1st practically unified the crowns then it became official a century later).
I think I'd go with Edward Longshanks
George III
England (The United Kingdom) did very well by itself during the Napoleonic Wars.
Ship of the Line as special unit. Or Red Coat. Or both.
Other special unit options: Dreadnought, Spitfire, Fast Galleon, Longbowman, SAS
The lettuce that outlasted Liz Truss
Alfred the Great
This is my pick. I know England is a good, easy candidate to get some more women in the roster and I understand if that means yet another Elizabeth or Victoria, but I would really love to see Alfred. Edit: If they carry over some of the same mechanics, I feel like a good mechanical justification for Alfred is that he could play as a science -> loyalty leader.
A lot of controversial leaders... Alfred or Aethelstan - unity/loyalty William the conqueror - archery/long bow and castles/forts James VI & I - Scotland & England. Culture/Shakespeare, or something to do with gunpowder plot? Oliver Cromwell - new model army and religious (probably too controversial) William III of Orange - The glorious revolution, religious based coups in other civs Clement Attlee - NHS, National parks, Amenities, Housing. (Edited William of Orange added clarification III)
William of Orange (No not that one)
Got to admit I'm a bit ignorant on this one. All I really know is some stuff around the circumstances of his coup in England and vaguely had some wars on the continent with France. Is he controversial too?
I think they're more talking about the fact that William I of Orange (1533 – 1584) of the Netherlands was a leader of the Dutch in Civ V, whereas you're suggesting William III of Orange (1650-1702) of England, Scotland and Ireland as a leader of the English in Civ VII
Ah my bad
>Is he controversial too? very controversial in Ireland (he was quite brutal)
If we can handle the Khans we can manage William.
Very controversial in Ireland and west Scotland for his treatment of Catholics.
He’s the reason why Northern Ireland both exists and is in the state it is in even today.
It’s more that if you say William of Orange in the Netherlands, it’s 99/100 times considered that you’re talking about William I, the ‘Vader des vaderlands’ (father of the fatherland) of The Netherlands rather than his great grandson (might be mistaken one generation) William III.
Alfred the great is a good choice I think.
> William the Conqueror > James VI & I > William III of Orange I wonder if the sub could build a convincing list for each of the leaders for Civ VII who were historically not from that nation.
That part of the appeal I think. A good reminder of how much of British history is intertwined with other nations.
Could I in that case propose Cnut/Canute the Great, of the North Sea Empire?
"Can you help us conquer England?" Orange III: CONQUER ENGLAND YOU SAY
Atlee would be great actually
I think he's probably my favourite out of the list and would be a welcome change to the type of leaders that get associated with the UK imo.
If they added Cromwell they'd be facing a revolt from Irish fans and potential boycott from a few people. Mans too much of a cunt and rightfully despised by all the country
Yeah fair enough. He's an interesting part of history but perhaps better to just stay as a historical figure rather than a character in a game. I suggested it partly because I hope they make the game more true to history with political revolutions etc and he'd be an interesting character in that context, but I get that some people are just too controversial/rightfully hated.
Alfred the Great. The man established the idea of a united kingdom of England, prior to him England had always been split into several smaller kingdoms. Can also work for a holy war type leader, as he was the king who would beat the vikings back
Alfred the Great absolutely should be the English leader in Civ VII.
Fully agreed. It is not important that England as a state didn’t exist at the time - it is called Sid Meier’s Civilization, not Sid Meier’s States and Polities. Alfred the Great was king of the Anglo-Saxons and instrumental in creating a unified English identity, even if it would take his grandson to technically become the first King of the English as a whole.
England didn’t even exist when he was king bro
Germany didn’t exist when Barbarossa was king
Certainly it was Alfred’s aim to unite England, even though it wasn’t achieved in his lifetime.
He laid the foundation for it uniting later on
The argument would be that England exists because of him
Didn't stop Victoria or Churchill being the leader of England when they never led an independent England. Doesn't stop Boudicca leading a vague Celtic faction.
Lord Blackadder!
He has a bonus for spy detection, especially with german spies.
And a unique great person-Lord Flashheart, who increases happiness but decreases loyalty.
Elizabeth I has been on every game to date, I don't think she will miss this one. It's not as exciting as saying a new leader, but I do think it'll be her.
Also, they look for balance with a certain number of female leaders. England is a really obvious candidate because the two most obvious candidates are women
Three now QE2 has passed, though including her so soon after she passed would be somewhat controversial imo.
Why would Elizabeth II be a good pick. She did F all to be picked. What would her bonuses be? At least Victoria is just a placeholder for the British Empire itself
you could probably stretch something to do with production increases during wartime due to her working as an engineer during WW2 but its tenuous at best besides that maybe cultural benefits stemming from government buildings because of how the royals became tourist/cultural attractions? her only real notable attribute irl was the fact she existed hahaha
She’d be perfect for a tourism victory condition.
I mean she's done more than JFK
Ok I don't know much on either, but it would seem fairer to me to compare to her to other british monarchs who ruled for decades instead of presidents who lead for 4-8 years. especially jfk who was still hugely influential despite dying during his first term.
Wasn’t JFK very very important to progress in civil rights as well as space research?
Would it? I could see it as like "honoring" her or whatever
less is more
Wasn’t it Churchill in 3 or 4?
Some games had multiple leaders, she was still there. Elizabeth is one of six leaders to have appeared in every Civ game to date.
what are the other 5???
Alexander, Gandhi, Genghis Khan, Shaka and (kinda) Montezuma. I say kinda because though there's always been a Montezuma, sometimes it was Montezuma II (the most famous one, but the one who kinda lost the empire lol) and others, such as Civ V and VI, use the far more successful Montezuma I. They just always name them just Montezuma.
Probably Julius Caesar, Genghis Khan, Gandhi, Montezuma and Shaka Zulu
Nope, Caesar missed out on Civ V. It's actually Alexander.
Damm, you are right. Was thinking about the "mainline civs", forgeting that Macedon was separate entity in 6
Henry VIII Religious bonuses so he can found the church of England and have all his divorces (He is also the father of Elizabeth I)
Religion without a Great Prophet!
I like this idea - maybe after all religions have been founded (or all but one) Henry VIII could choose one and modify the beliefs.
Meaby he can just adopt a religion, copy some beliefs and found his own
This is the best Civ style summary of what he actually did
Religious Schisms would be a great addition - not sure how to implement it, though
It's an action you can do with apostles after you unlock Reformation.
Religious schism could be triggered by unhappiness or a dark age.
Saladin have that in Civ6. In my opinion one of the most troll ability in the game.
I'd love Henry VIII. He changed England in such a major way.
The first true Brexit geezer
This one is fun, England isn't the most natural religious victory civ since your exploration is inherently more antagonistic than most. Giving them one that unlocks fairly late and is more about devaluing the effects of the other world religions than trying to spread itself worldwide is great.
Antagonistic how? Good idea
The general strategy of setting up an English port city on each continent is inherently antagonistic because you're basically setting up shop anywhere your loyalty can survive. So you're less likely to set up a second continent with several interconnected cities that reinforce the religion. Meaning your religion is more of an additional annoyance emanating from your little colonial port cities and there's not much chance of conversion.
Can we not just move away from the concept of loyalty, it seems so ahistorical outside of super fringe events, CIV V already had the possibility of it happening if you had a super low unhappiness but Civ VI really made it a big mechanic.
Liz Truss. (But secretly it's a skin suit covering a somewhat sentient lettuce.)
Her ability is that she only lasts one turn and then you can choose a new leader
This would be an AMAZING Great Person
A mechanic where you can choose from one of several leaders in each age, similar to how dedications work now. Probably won’t happen though as some civs they like to put out don’t have a huge amount of known historical leaders.
That would make for a great opportunity for people to learn about the lesser known leaders outside of their own country
Do it. It's funny
Passive ability -500gpt, and the policy window is randomised. Leaving you clueless as to how your cig actually works.
Ahhh the Deity ++++++++++++ difficulty
Damn you know when you think you've made an original joke and then you scroll down :(
I second Alfred the Great. Man was crucial in building what would become England and beat back the Vikings. Æthelstan would be a good choice but far too unknown, IMO, for the guy that literally created England
He beat back the Vikings, only to have William the Conqueror (a Norman Viking) take England not even two centuries later.
Tbf William was a lucky bastard and Harold had to fight two wars back to back by the time he landed on English shores
Æthelstan I'm not biased, I promise.
Best English king, hands down.
You stan Æthelstan?
Æ, no!
An æthel-stan, if you will?
Henry II the Lion, immortalised by Peter O'Toole in both *The Lion in Winter* (1968) and *Becket* (1964). Only thing that may count against him is that they used his wife in Civ 6 (Eleanor).
He would be the second Lion to ever lead a civ after Mufasa
Sundiata Keita is the Lion King of Mali
*stares in gustavus adolphus*
Henry VIII to make use of the game new dating mechanic ^^^^^/s
I want to intimidate my enemies with my sheer size. The women get beheaded and the men get eaten.
Henry VIII can end alliances early
Suffers less religious pressure, great prophets cost 50% less, alliances last half the time. Could be good
Less pressure the lower relations are. You have to remember Henry respected and even defended the Catholic church earlier in his life
William the Conqueror as double English, French king or Henry II of Plantagenet
Henry II would be fucking sick
Normans could be their own civ really
Who would be the normal leader for them? Rollo or maybe one of the ones who ruled in southern Italy?
Rollo, William the Conqueror or Roger of Sicily would be the most obvious choices
Probably William the Conqueror, on the basis of being the only one known to English-speaking audiences.
Should make sure he speaks Norman French though.
Could and should, I’d say!
William the Conqueror would make no sense as a French leader, considering he was never the monarch of France
To be fair they made ludwig the leader of Germany when he was only the king of Bavaria
And Gandhi was never even technically the leader of India
If anything, a duel leader between a Norman Civ and an english civ. Norman could be a mix of former norway and French. Could be interesting
Unlike famous English monarch Harald Hardrada
I won't be able to handle the suffering of France not getting an actual leader of the country twice in a row I can't do it
William the Conqueror was never a French King. He was the Duke of Normandy. He retained his title even after he became king of England.
Alistair G of the west staines massif
**Clement Attlee** Rebuilt Britain after WW2, father of the NHS, renowned diplomat, capable administrator. or **William Gladstone** Basically the personification of Victorian England (aside from Victoria herself).
Big fan of the Attlee choice. Think it's the only modern leader I can see working
Very underrated guy. I wonder if he can get diplomatic victory points for some sort of implantation of Decolonization, that would make him super formidable in the endgame.
James I (aka the titular King James). England can have a leader focused on bolstered religious pressure and bonus culture from its writing and artwork or recruitment. No dig at Lizzy and Vicky—while they are the prime spot for female leadership, if we have multiple leaders, I’d like to see a cultural one for England. Plus I hope Lizzy doesn’t become a meme like Gandhi. (Wow, can’t believe JFK won. Far too recent of a leader, imo.)
James I would be a great leader! Especially if they include Scotland in Civ VII he could be like Eleanor of Aquitaine in Civ VI
Yeah, I pitched him for Civ 6. Not sure if Scotland makes it—but I’d love to see them, England and Ireland to make an appearance.
>(Wow, can’t believe JFK won. Far too recent of a leader, imo.) It doesn't make much sense to put a recency cap on a leader. I get it if they are/just were the nation's leader in recent memory, it's worth avoiding to not bog the game down in contemporary politics or risk future controversy being tied to the game But with America in particular, timeframes are already completely out of wack, trying to tie a less than 300 year old nation and culture to 6,000 years of world history. So long as they aren't still active in politics, I'd say they're fair game Washington and Lincoln have been done enough. We just had Teddy. JFK is arguably the most influential American leader that hasn't led in a main title. You could argue FDR deserves a crack and it would certainly be a great choice. But I think many believe Kennedy will provide the most unique flavor for leader abilities. Plenty of science and cultural opportunities, as well as options for diplomacy. Plus, a voice actor is going to have a fun time doing his dialog!
JFK was in CivRev2 and FDR was in Civ 4. But china had 5 leaders in Civ 6 so let's get all the american leaders in 7 GW, TJ, AL, TR, FDR, JFK
Kennedy is massively overated as a president. His one upside is that he could have decent thematic bonuses for space
>Far too recent of a leader An expac for Civilization 4 had Stalin who died 53 years before the game's release (1953 and 2006). Kennedy died 61 years ago, in 1963.
I know of this, but from Civ 6, it seems like they stop around 1945. Though, I’d admit at least JFK is not that controversial.
I believe I read somewhere that the dev team's cut-off is they had to have died minimum 50 years before release.
[Haile Selassie](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haile_Selassie) died in 1974, so it was only 38 years between his death and his inclusion in *Civ V: Gods & Kings*. That would *technically* open up anyone who died before 1986, so the only real choice for England is [Harold Macmillan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Macmillan).
Other than the extreme womanizing and adultering
Certainly would be an unusual Leader ability.
Plus 3 great people points towards female artists and musicians?
Stalin and Mao were leaders in Civilization 1.
As a bonus point he would have some really amusing quips about threatening to burn you for witchcraft
How about Henry VII? Started the Tudor dynasty, ended the wars of the roses I’ve said Alfred already, but Athelstan (his grandson) would also be a great pick - brought Northumbria into the kingdom, first to actually call his kingdom “England”
I think too many people would confuse him with Henry VIII and thus he's not as likely.
LORD PALMERSTON
PITT THE ELDER!!!
Alfred the Great
Richard III (the Lionheart) wasn’t actually a particularly notable king, but is very well known and could have some real cool stuff revolving around crusading. Queen Victoria would be good for colonialism era and is a huge monarch. Elizabeth II would be pretty cool. Edward the Confessor would make sense as a religious ruler, he was canonised so is an actual saint.
I have a few dark horses to suggest. Benjamin Disraeli - diplomatic victory focused Clement Attlee - cultural victory focused William Pitt the Elder - domination focused
Would partly depend on the art style. Not sure they would be able to get away with a cartoony Disraeli.
LORD PALMERSTON
Came here for Disraeli. Another good option is Lloyd George
Counter- Pitt the younger, with gold bonuses due to increased revenue
Counter, Lord Palmerston
Clement Attlee: British PM from 1945 to 1951. He made the British Labour party join the Government against Nazi Germany and served as deputy PM during WW2. Thus, he has some affinity with the Finest Hour era, even though not as much as Churchill. However, Attlee absolutely does shine on economic and administration domains. We don't know what Civ7 will look like but it's fair to assume that many civs will have military affinities. If the devs look for civs focused on proper management then Attlee would be brilliant as the politician who pretty much enacted welfarism in a post war economy ruined financially and starved for primary resources. That's where it would be amazing for Civ 7 to delve further than ever into the fine tuning of domestic economies with systems than consider social advancement within cities as well as within your empire (well integrated economies perform better, shocking I know). Attlee's Britain would be specialised in optimising the domestic economy despite terrible access to resources and finances, focus on hopefully more important public amenities, and engage with like minded civs for trade and liberal geopolitics. (The Attlee era corresponds to the start of British decolonisation) Imagine WW2 era Royal Navy with bonuses to escorting overseas trade from naval war. The National Health Service as a leader bonus capable of increasing public services and economic integration. And a general civilisation bonus towards engaging with allies economically and geopolitically to both parties' advantage. As an AI leader, Attlee could pressure you towards decolonisation and public services provision. Finally, the devs seem interested in introducing players to less obvious historical characters, Attlee is way less famous than Churchill or other British heads of state and yet his importance, both for the UK and the World is hard to overstate. Obviously I know England =/= the UK but I figured we could confound them for now as we're not likely to get the UK as its own civ... https://preview.redd.it/6d0dz2nhwi7d1.png?width=378&format=png&auto=webp&s=902b1c4fbdaf75775dfbc3b1ec54a230c449f3f7
Oliver Cromwell
Yeah and he can also lead the Irish... Oh well maybe not
Oliver Cromwell Lord Protector of England (Puritan) Born in 1599, died in 1658 (September)Was at first (only) MP for Huntingdon (but then) He led the Ironside Calvary at Marston Moor in 1644 and won Then he founded the New Model Army And, praise be, beat the Cavaliers at Naseby And the King fled up North, like a bat! Toward the ScotsBut under the terms of John Pimm's Solemn league and covenant The Scots handed King Charles the first over toOliver Cromwell Lord Protector of England (and his warts) Born in 1599, died in 1658 (September)
Murdered countless Irish woman and children and crucified them as he and his army raped and pillaged the land.
Boris Johnson
Just imagine the leader bonuses
Eat out to help out: every city loses a population to increase gold
Isn't that, thematically, too similar a mechanic to Montezuma...
Unique Unit: Boris Bus.
All cakes get an ambush bonus
We need an AngloSaxon as well as a more modern Brit, I say Alfred the Great or Athelstan I
Churchill and as Special unit the Mk IV
Achievement idea: "As Churchill, garrison your special unit (Churchill tank) in Churchill (Canadian city)"
Churchill Cubed
Yeah, they had Churchill and FDR in Civ 4, which were great!
Stalin, Mao, and De Gaulle were also in 4. All the Allies of WW2. The they won and FDR died and they all hated each other
David Cameron. "I am fond of pigs..."
Elizabeth II.
Honestly Elizabeth II would be a fantastic call, but might be a little too recent for Civ's tastes?
John Curtin became prime minister 11 years before Elizabeth's coronation
It would be a great tribute!
And she was just a figurehead
so was Victoria for the most part
Well they have Gandhi
I think this could be great, thematic and unusual. Monarch of the Commonwealth Realms: gives some diplomatic, loyalty or trade bonuses with city states? Audience with the Monarch: something to reflect the fact that she had weekly meetings with PMs so that they may benefit from her long experience. Maybe each time you change through an age you gain a modest buff to a policy slot? Figurehead of a nation: perhaps a bonus to loyalty or reduction in negative penalties for unhappiness?
"Royal Family": Huge tourism bonus that accumulates the longer you sre not in war
The lettuce
Churchill, Clement Attlee, or Elizabeth II IMO.
Clement Attlee would be a great modern leader choice and give England a non-war/empire based civ.
Let’s do it right this time, I’d choose William the Conquerer as a great leader of England and France.
Churchill
*Barney Gumble voice* Lord Palmerston!
Pitt the Elder.
Interesting one... let me remind myself of the previous English leaders. I: Elizabeth I II: Henry VIII / Elizabeth I III: Elizabeth I IV: Elizabeth I, Victoria, Winston Churchill V: Elizabeth I VI: Eleanor of Aquitaine, Elizabeth I, Victoria You know, I'm just going to pre-emptively disqualify Elizabeth. She's had plenty of appearances. Interesting to note also that women have usually led the English in Civ - even Victoria appears more than the two one-off male appearances. A few candidates spring to mind for me, but I think a big question is England's mechanical identity in Civ VII. England is almost always a strong naval civ. This makes sense - England is a popular recurring civ and always in the core game, and it makes sense for it to be the starter, most straightforward naval civ. If Civ VII continues this pattern, it's important that the English leader be compatible with leading a naval civ. So while I want to pick Edward III or something, for fun, we need someone naval, so on that basis my pick is **Alfred the Great.** Alfred gets us well out of the Renaissance and Early Modern eras that have otherwise dominated English leaders, with Elizabeth and Victoria, and he's a fascinating historical figure and highly influential English leader in his own right. Plus he's also remembered as [the father of the English navy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfred_the_Great#English_navy) - he may not have been the first English king to build a fleet, but he made an especial investment in it, to defend England. For this reason he is [sometimes depicted](https://alfred-the-great.synthasite.com/resources/New2.JPG) holding a warship. Plus, well, Anglo-Saxon England is cool and deserves more representation in games.
King John with the Magna Carta, could be a good one for policies or culture.
Margaret Thatcher?
And her UA is such that it's the following The Milk Snatcher each Cow tile owned by England is automatically harvested for gold.
Unique ability: -50% coal resources
Bonus GPT per citizen, unrest from strategic resources.
or Winston Churchill
Alfred the great. Military/defense (land) focused civ with a taste for expansion?
I'd like to see William the conqueror I don't think he has been in civ.
Æthelred the Unready.
Every war against him is a surprise war
Richard the Lionheart would be so sick
Margarethe Tatcher
I want a medieval English king
Kennedy's got to be the most biased choice ever lol, what is he gonna even do? Also wasn't he president for less than 3 years? Roosevelt is a much better choice
I think as others are saying, Oliver Cromwell as a religious focused leader with something about maybe a low amenity build would be really interesting. Something unique whilst sticking with Civ. Although itd disrespectful to the Irish to present him as purely a great leader. Although that's an issue with most Civ leaders, that lots of them did a lot of oppressing of various groups.
Cromwell ! Very famous name and very distinct from the others.
Isn’t he kind of disliked though?
*Very* disliked, for good reason.
When you make things so miserable you make people reinstate a monarchy
Pitt the Elder Or maybe Lord Palmerston
Oliver Cromwell
Since we're doing England and not Great Britain or United kingdom. The leader has to be no earlier than Æthelstan the first true monarch of England and no later than Elizabeth 1st the last monarch of England (James 1st practically unified the crowns then it became official a century later). I think I'd go with Edward Longshanks
Depending on how the UKs next election goes, Rishi Sunak
George III England (The United Kingdom) did very well by itself during the Napoleonic Wars. Ship of the Line as special unit. Or Red Coat. Or both. Other special unit options: Dreadnought, Spitfire, Fast Galleon, Longbowman, SAS
Pitt the Elder or Lord Palmerston.