 |
|  |
 |
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
I've been comtemplating this question for some time. Because my strategy is one of the perfectionist (especially early in the game), I rarely have a ton of units lying around, waiting to be upgraded. I cherish my vet Pikemen/Knights. Really, the only reason I like to get Leo is for the settler to engineer upgrade, but having only 6-8 cities, I really don't have that many setters to improve. Instead, I think I prefer building Sun Tzu to get the vets right out of the gate. That way, the few units I DO produce will remain vet until I feel the need to replace them with newer, veteran units. (ie. Pikemen - Musketeer - Alpine.) ST lasts quite a while before becoming obsolete, and by that time, you should be well on your way to victory. 
Another arguement against Leo might be the versatility of vet Knights. Wouldn't you rather have 10 vet Knights than 10 rookie Dragoons? Aren't vet Knights 6/3/2 vs 5/2/2? or am I missing something? The same goes for most other units. With the exception of a firepower/hitpoint upgrade, wouldn't you rather have the slightly-older vet unit?
------------------
Peace
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Aurelius
|
|
San Francisco
Dec 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
Leo's is great for defensive wars. You can ignore upgrading units and while pursuing city improvements. I always build fortresses on defensively enhanced terrain at strategic points, sometimes it take awhile to get a upgraded defensive unit to these fortresses...leo's does it for you.
Might not happen often, but seeing warriors and phalanx go to pikeman is nice in a world of full of four legged creatures regardless of vet status.
[This message has been edited by Aurelius (edited June 10, 2000).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jim W
|
|
Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada
Sep 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
Leo's is a crutch for the weaker player.
Ooops! Did someone already say that?
Actually, I go for Leo's as soon as it's available, just because if I don't have it, someone else will, and it's a great advantage.
I still figure, some day in the future, I will diaable Leo's, forcing myself to pay a cost to change my legions into musketeers and so on. At present, though, with my great skill, it's still too valuable to give up.
Jim W
|
|
|  |
 |
|
geofelt
|
|
Neptune Beach,Florida,USA
Jan 1970 time: 00:12
|
|
I say build leo's for the convenience, if nothing else. It saves a ton of management to keep your units updated. I like magellan's, and hoover's for the same reason.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Hawkx9
|
|
Moorhead, MN, US
Jun 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
The fact that you can't get Alpine troops from Leo is one big reason I think it may deserve a lower rung on my priority list. Alpine are sooo much better than Riflemen it's insane. I'm a big fan of vet Knights and, later, vet Cavalry/Alpine so my tastes are biased (because they're mine) . I hate it when all my lovely 6/3/2 Knights turn into the lowly 5/2/2 Dragoon. Although, I do have to note that Dragoons have 2HP compared to the Knight's 1HP; however, the Knights' higher attack rating will give it more survivability. Also, Knights are intended to be expendible to a certain extent. They are attackers, not defenders, so they don't rely on HP as say a defending unit. "But what about the Cavalry upgrade," you ask? Yes, having green Cavarly is better than having vet Knights, but Tactics is a far shot off from Chivalry.
Now, with that said, the converstion of Warriors and Phlanx to more modern units puts Leo's over the top. It's just plain nice to have those first few units turn into Riflemen, and a pain in the ass when the opponent's do the same.
------------------
Peace
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Genghis Al
|
|
of the Russian horde
Dec 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
Simply not to let the opponent have this is enough for me. I don't play very offensively so the lose of vet status doesn't effect me at all, I usuallt don't build barracks until tanks. Satisfy me and the gods, build Leo's.
Alex v4.6
------------------
See you in court.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sieve Too
|
|
New Hampshire, USA
Jan 1970 time: 05:12
|
|
I'll take non-vet Dragoons any day over vet Knights. Dragoons must lose 20 rounds of battle vs. 10 for the Knight before they are killed. This more than makes up for their slightly lower ADM value. Another thing to remember is the Pikeman bonus - it only applies to units with 1 HP. Knights are affected, Dragoons are not.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
cavebear
|
 |
of the Pleistocene
Oct 1999 time: 00:12
|
|
Having recently gained a more thorough understanding of Hit Points, Firepower, and the multiple round aspect of battle calculations, I can only say that my opinion of Leo's is enhanced.
Sure, there are specific situations where there is a temporary loss in basic Attack/Defense (knight to dragoon), but it is more than balanced by the Hit Points or Firepower of the newer unit.
As far as trying to guess *when* to get Leo's (based on when your opponent might attack with specific units), I'd say that, overall, it is best to just get Leo's and look at the big picture. Those pikesmen/phalanx can become marines some day (possible if you work at it), equal to the benefits of Mike's and Hoover's.
[This message has been edited by cavebear (edited June 12, 2000).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
jpk
|
|
Minneapolis
Feb 1999 time: 05:12
|
|
Leo upgrades diplomats to spies.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|