 |
|  |
 |
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002 time: 05:17
|
|
I was thinking, This is probably a very talked over stratagy already, but a war, even for a peaceful empire, could be beneficial for purposes of Leader Creation.
If you have a weak neighbour, who does not have any potentially damagine alliegences, Then it seems a war could be very beneficial, If you fight the war by defending the bordering cities with a Few Veteran Strong Defensive units, it's unlikely you'll use Units or Cities, and just get a nice Stream of Leaders When the Computer attacks your well defended units in vain...
On the Mathmatical side, a decent Wonder can take , say, 750 Sheilds, whilst a few pikemen (early days) and a Barracks will cost a fraction of that, and could yield several leaders..
Any thoughts on this stratagy..?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Willem
|
 |
Canada
Dec 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Rothy
I was thinking, This is probably a very talked over stratagy already, but a war, even for a peaceful empire, could be beneficial for purposes of Leader Creation.
If you have a weak neighbour, who does not have any potentially damagine alliegences, Then it seems a war could be very beneficial, If you fight the war by defending the bordering cities with a Few Veteran Strong Defensive units, it's unlikely you'll use Units or Cities, and just get a nice Stream of Leaders When the Computer attacks your well defended units in vain...
On the Mathmatical side, a decent Wonder can take , say, 750 Sheilds, whilst a few pikemen (early days) and a Barracks will cost a fraction of that, and could yield several leaders..
Any thoughts on this stratagy..? |
Leaders are extremely rare, even if you're a Militaristic civ, so it's not that simple to "get a nice stream of Leaders" as you say. By the sounds of it, even those whose style of play is sheer war mongering might expect to get 5 or 6 throughout the whole game. Nice idea in theory, but it doesn't quite work out as easily as you're thinking, though it would increase your odds of getting one. BTW, you need Elite units to create a leader, not Veterans.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002 time: 05:17
|
|
I'm aware they come from Veterans, I simply siad create Veterans because they are 2 or 3 battles closer to Elite than Regulars...
The probability is 1/16 to gain a leader, but I can 16 battles in any one turn when at war!!!, Sometimes 30 or 40 battles, inlvolving many Elite Units.
But still, lets say war only yields 6 Leaders in a game, Presuming you can use them all, thats 6 good wonders. If they average 750 shields per wonder (cos you're gonna want to chose the best wonders!) then thats 4500 Shields, Which is nothing to Sneer at.
I guess, that there is no way to quantify this stratagy thought, unlike food velocity in despotism. It is very circumstancial, but in one of my games, where i have many Elite Units, and can produce decent Veteran Units, I seems beneficial to me to continue my war with the french for the leaders it may help me achieve.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Willem
|
 |
Canada
Dec 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Rothy
I'm aware they come from Veterans, I simply siad create Veterans because they are 2 or 3 battles closer to Elite than Regulars...
The probability is 1/16 to gain a leader, but I can 16 battles in any one turn when at war!!!, Sometimes 30 or 40 battles, inlvolving many Elite Units.
But still, lets say war only yields 6 Leaders in a game, Presuming you can use them all, thats 6 good wonders. If they average 750 shields per wonder (cos you're gonna want to chose the best wonders!) then thats 4500 Shields, Which is nothing to Sneer at.
I guess, that there is no way to quantify this stratagy thought, unlike food velocity in despotism. It is very circumstancial, but in one of my games, where i have many Elite Units, and can produce decent Veteran Units, I seems beneficial to me to continue my war with the french for the leaders it may help me achieve. |
Until you decide to become a Republic or a Democracy, then waging war might not be worth it because of the war weariness. Certainly it's worth considering waging war for Leaders, but to me it's not enough of a motivation. For the amount you get, it might be more beneficial running a nice, peaceful Democracy that tries not to bother anyone.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ironikinit
|
|
If your war weariness isn't bad and you aren't losing, why end the war? Offensive troops become obsolete until you get tanks, so use your elites while you can. May as well wipe out the French.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ironikinit
|
|
Well, I mean offensive troops like swordsmen and longbowmen. Even horsemen/knights/cavalry eventually become obsolete and cannot be upgraded. Further, elite troops become vets when upgraded. Sorry I was unclear. All I really meant was, if you can, may as well extend a war to increase the chance of getting a leader with your existing elites.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Worthingtons
|
|
Pride Park,Derby
Jan 2002 time: 05:17
|
|
Hmm, The War Wearyness is certainly an Issue here, But I am rarely Democracy or Republic.
BUT, can someone clarify this for me -
If you are at constant war with One civilisation, will the war wearyness differ to if you were at war with 6??
and if so, by how much??
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Hoboken, NJ, USA
Jun 1999 time: 00:17
|
|
I was able to generate a couple of early leaders by provoking the Aztecs (tough job, right?). I didn't end the war (despotism), but they seemed to give up. "Boo-hoo! They wouldn't come out to PLAY!" So I ended the war and got almost all their cities. Now I'm kinda hoping the furious French (only other civ on my continent) actually attack, so I can get another leader.
A couple of questions:
1. Has it been determined whether you can have more than one GL "alive" at one time? I've heard both yes and no. In my limited experience, when I've had one, I didn't generate another, and as soon as I used the first, I generated a second.
2. Any opinions on using a GL to build FP? Feels like a waste, compared to building Great Wonders, but I knew I wouldn't have any GWs to build for 20-odd turns, and I wanted the FP, and I wasn't generating any leaders while the one was alive.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bautou
|
|
quote: Any opinions on using a GL to build FP? Feels like a waste, compared to building Great Wonders, but I knew I wouldn't have any GWs to build for 20-odd turns, and I wanted the FP, and I wasn't generating any leaders while the one was alive. |
Actually, I think that using a leader to build the FP is one of the better uses you can put a leader towards.
Normally, the place where you want to build the FP is so hobbled by corruption that it'll take hundreds of turns to complete. A leader can bypass all this waiting and get that city, and all the surrounding ones, running in no time flat. You can then use the increased production from these cities take pressure off your core cities so that the core cities can quickly build Great Wonders later.
That way, if you get the advance necessary for building your future wonder at the same time as the AI, you should be able to beat the AI to completion as it tends to waste a turn or two before focusing on building the wonder, whereas you can start up right away due to your excess capacity.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ironikinit
|
|
Elements of chance aren't popular with many players of Civ 1, 2 or 3. For example, random events were removed from Civ 3, I believe because people didn't like the prospect of unexpected setbacks. I'm surprised that leaders are at all popular.
I understand what you're saying about the reward being too big for a random event. It could be like drawing a card in Monopoly that read, "A winner is you!"
However, once a player gets used manipulating armies so that elites fight as much as possible, generating a leader isn't so much an if but a when. At least that's my experience. Even with a non militaristic civ, if I keep fighting long enough, I feel pretty sure that I will get a leader.
But, and this is the cool part, that isn't assured. I know that it's possible that I won't get one at all. What that means is that I'm forced to make room for the possibility that any strategy I devise that hinges on getting a leader could fail. I'm forced to look for alternatives, just in case that part fails. Basically, it keeps me from playing the same strategy every game.
It seems apparent that the leader was made as he is in order to allow rushing not only wonders, but wonders or improvements in corrupt areas. While typically players rush one of the two palace types in these cities, other possibilities exist, such as rushing the Sun Tzu wonder in a city on a continent one plans to conquer, but apart from the player's starting continent.
I would like to see more civ specific abilities, tho. For instance, I think it could be cool if each civ had an associated wonder that they received a bonus for building, or required fewer shields for them to build. Also, it would diversify the wonders as so many of them, esp. the modern ones, are American or Western European.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dodgy Geezer
|
|
Sydney, Australia
Jan 2002 time: 15:17
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Hermann the Lombard
A couple of questions:
1. Has it been determined whether you can have more than one GL "alive" at one time? I've heard both yes and no. In my limited experience, when I've had one, I didn't generate another, and as soon as I used the first, I generated a second.
2. Any opinions on using a GL to build FP? Feels like a waste, compared to building Great Wonders, but I knew I wouldn't have any GWs to build for 20-odd turns, and I wanted the FP, and I wasn't generating any leaders while the one was alive. |
Hermann,
Q1I [posted some of the details below to another thread, but it is more appropriate here:]
Because I have battle animations off most of the time, I have only been monitoring attacking elite troops.
Apart from the 47 elite attacks while I discovered you couldn't get two leaders, my results were:
9 attacks (and 29 successful defends) -> GL
1 attack -> GL
10 attacks -> GL and built Heroic Epic
(47 attacks while I had GL sitting there - doh!)
11 attacks -> GL
6 attacks -> GL
7 attacks -> GL
1 attack -> GL
9 attacks -> GL
2 attacks -> GL
2 attacks -> GL
20 attacks, got a GL on a successful defense.
I am playing the Militaristic Aztecs, and have been purposefully used elite horse units (and later tanks) in the better chances of surviving.
I am also assuming that a successful attack is one in which the target unit is killed, even if the elite unit has to retreat because it is attacking a stack.
Incidentally I am playing a standard Pangea 60% land map. With the Aztecs I dominated early, and now have a few high tech neighbours to subjegate. There has been *plenty* of war.
It is possible I missed the odd one, but it looks like an average of around 1/7 before the Heroic Epic, and around 1/8 afterwards. I've been done!!!
So I am pretty sure you can't have two leaders. This would seem to be confirmed by the box on the Army screen showing 'available leader'.
Q2 1st for a forbidden palace?
My FB seems to always take 100 turns, so using a GL to rush is always a priority. But now I know you don't get a second, if I am playing a militaristic game I will use it asap rushing a Wonder if I don't require the FB yet.
Last edited by Dodgy Geezer on 22-01-2002 at 20:52
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Hermann the Lombard
|
|
Hoboken, NJ, USA
Jun 1999 time: 00:17
|
|
Thanks, Dodgy! And thanks for all the other replies.
Now one more question: how many of you use up a GL to generate an army to in turn be able to build Heroic Epic?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SirSchwa
|
|
Scottsdale, AZ
Jan 2002 time: 22:17
|
|
I always use my first 3 GLs to build armies so I get the Heroic Epic. That way I don't have to worry about getting GLs in the future to generate an army. When I get another GL after building the HE, I always use it to complete a Wonder.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
SirSchwa
|
|
Scottsdale, AZ
Jan 2002 time: 22:17
|
|
I've noticed that GLs will spawn more often when you’re up against a more powerful civilization as opposed to a more powerful unit. Also, I notice that unit status will escalate up the ranks faster if it is defending an attack.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Platypus
|
|
Lexington MA, USA
Nov 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
quote: Aeson: You can reload from before when a non-elite unit gets promoted, attack with an elite unit to win on that same event, and get a leader. |
I haven't found that to be quite the case. I done some experimenting with reloading, and I've found that when a veteran got promoted to elite, reloading and attacking with an elite (of the same type of unit) sometimes did and sometimes did not produce a leader. Anytime a battle produced a leader, reloading and fighting with a veteran resulted in a promotion to elite. My theory is that there is a greater set of random numbers that produce a veteren to elite promotion than produce a great leader leader (and that the great leader set of numbers is a subset entirely within the set of veteran promotion numbers). However, I have only tested with the German, a militaristic civilization, so it could be that Aeson's observation is true for non-milaristic civs.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Platypus
|
|
Lexington MA, USA
Nov 2001 time: 00:17
|
|
Aeson,
I only did a small set of tests. I got two leaders as results of the tests, and had at least two cases where I could get a veteran to elite promotion but could not get a leader from an elite unit fighting the same battle. I did not have the heroic epic built. If I can get a leader or two in my next round of expansion, I may finally build my first army and then the heroic epic and try another set of experiments.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17. Apolyton Time is 00:17. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|