Getting a Great Leader?

[VetteroX]

Ok.... Im a good civ 3 player, been plaing on and off since the game came out. I play on monarch or emperor, depending on mood. Im playing a game of civ 3 ptw, and Im just not getting a great leader eventhough its been constant war. Im getting very frustrated.

1) I know an elite needs to win a battle for a great leader
2) I now its random, and I know its a low chance.

But this is crazy... it 900ad, ive been fighting non stop since like 100 bc. Non stop war. Best tech currently is knights and musket men, In all games I play I make it 2X the cost for every tech, like having a long time to use each era of units. Anyway, my elite knights have been getting plenty of wins. I have one elite musket men hold off 3 chinese riders in on turn (killed them they didnt restreat) and still no great leader. My elites have miniumum 100 wins combined. Is there something im missing to get a great leader or is my luck just sucking?

In other games, many using the carthraginians, I have gotten great leaders fast and easily... this was after my UU had won a battle and id gotten a golden age... does this need to happen to get a leader? I could have sworn id gotten leaders early before using the americans (who im using in this game.)

So is there something I need to do, or does my luck just suck atm? Any tricks for getting a great leader besides fighting a lot with elite units?

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

I think the problem, as you said, is your luck really, 'cause I allways get a leader after a few centuries of non-stop war (emperor level). I use the germans or chinese most of the time but I never had to wait to much.

anyway, i know is more likely to get a leader if you are fighting with the UU or/and if you are in Golden Age.

[Kuciwalker]

anyway, i know is more likely to get a leader if you are fighting with the UU or/and if you are in Golden Age.

I've never seen this before. Where'd you find it?

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

I was playing with the french and I attacked german horseman with my musketeer and I get a leader just at the end of the fight.
I was fighting a long turn war against the germans and I didn't get before a leader, but after I entered in the Golden Age I received one (after the fight).

With the Chinese I got the same experience. Fighting in a long turn war against the Aztecs I attacked for the first time with my raiders and get a leader.
Anyway I was in golden age too... maybe is more likely to get a leader if you are in GA and attack with the UU, but I'm not 100% sure.

However, I didn't get any trouble to get leaders without having GA, I think it only make everything a bit faster.

[johncmcleod]

Ok.... Im a good civ 3 player

Oh, don't be modest!

Anyway, I think it has to do with luck. When an elite unit wins a battle, it has a 1/16 chance of getting a great leader.

[ChrisiusMaximus]

Its just down to sheer luck, Ive had games with total war and got 1 or 2 the whole game, sometimes none. However on one particular game I played a while back I got busloads of them, yes busloads on two turns I got seven leaders had a rest on the third turn then got four more on the fouth consectutive turn. I was at war with the Aztecs and they threw huge stacks of Infantry at the beachhead city I had planted on their coast, rushbuilt an airport and filled the city with loads of MA and MI and bombers, it was a massacre


I posted a save in a thread at the time you might want to take a look at it but youll have to look for it cause I dont know how to link sorry.The thread title was:

"Great Leaders do they grow on trees?"


If I get time Ill search for it and bump it.

EDIT Managed to find it and Ive bumped it up. The last post was 12/12/02 my word how time flies.

[Brundlefly]

I have a very difficult time getting GLs when using civ that is not milatiristic. In my current Emperor game as Ottomans, I have won several battles with elite knights and gotten nothing. I;ve defended successfully with elite pikemen. Nothing. To get GLs, do you have to have the largest army in the world and fight battles every turn if you are not militaristic?

[FrustratedPoet]

Originally posted by Feephi
To get GLs, do you have to have the largest army in the world and fight battles every turn if you are not militaristic?

You don't have to, but it would help.

By the way, being Militaristic does not effect the chances for an Elite unit victory producing a Great Leader. The probability of that is constant unless you have the Heroic Epic.

[Muad'Dib]

You want more leaders. Save before you attack, then reload when you don't get the outcome you want.

[Greetings]

Chilean President, I could be wrong, but I don't think fighting with your UU or being in your GA has anything to do with producing GLs. I know that you're an Emperor, and I'm just a Settler, but I've been to this forum for a loooooong time and have never seen something posted like this before. In my own experience, my UUs hardly ever produce GLs. That's just me, and I can be totally wrong. I think that your discovery is based mainly on your own gameplay.

[FrustratedPoet]

Chilean President is wrong. UU's and GA's do not effect the likelihood of getting a GL. Those two examples were simply coincidences.

[Mad Bomber]

Some quick facts about leader generation:

1) You can only have one GL active at a time
2) An elite may only generate one GL (it may be upgraded, promoted and produce a second leader)
3) The odds off creating a GL is 1/16, 1/12 if you have built Heroic Epic. 1/32:1/24 when defending.
4) Militaristic civs increase the rate of promotion, not the rates of getting a GL.


There are two basic ways of increasing chances of getting a gL. The first is to build the Heroic Epic . The second is to protect your elites and to make maximum use of them. By this I mean that your elietes should only take on targets they are likely to win against and they should also be protected by two good defenders if possible.

[nbarclay]

Militaristic does not directly increase the odds of getting leaders, but it does increase the odds indirectly. In a war where you have plenty of enemy units to attack, chances of getting great leaders are roughly proportionate to the number of elite units you have. So if Militaristic can come close to doubling the number of elite units you have trying to generate leaders, it can come close to doubling the number of leaders you produce. (This is mitigated somewhat by the facts that attacks by the extra elites displace opportunities for veterans to get promoted to elite and that with larger numbers of elites, a higher percentage are likely to be killed attacking relatively strong defenders instead of being saved to pick off weak ones.)

Of course tanks and especially MAs change the situation dramatically. Their potential for multiple attacks per turn provides an alternate path to promotion - winning two fights in a single turn - that is just as effective for non-militaristic civs as for militaristic ones. With modern armor against seriously backward opponents, the leader-generating advantage of militaristic civs all but disappears.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by nbarclay
Militaristic does not directly increase the odds of getting leaders, but it does increase the odds indirectly. In a war where you have plenty of enemy units to attack, chances of getting great leaders are roughly proportionate to the number of elite units you have. So if Militaristic can come close to doubling the number of elite units you have trying to generate leaders, it can come close to doubling the number of leaders you produce. (This is mitigated somewhat by the facts that attacks by the extra elites displace opportunities for veterans to get promoted to elite and that with larger numbers of elites, a higher percentage are likely to be killed attacking relatively strong defenders instead of being saved to pick off weak ones.)

Of course tanks and especially MAs change the situation dramatically. Their potential for multiple attacks per turn provides an alternate path to promotion - winning two fights in a single turn - that is just as effective for non-militaristic civs as for militaristic ones. With modern armor against seriously backward opponents, the leader-generating advantage of militaristic civs all but disappears.

Quite true. However I was simply pointing out that Militaristic CIV's affect the rate of promotion and only Indirectly affect the rate of leader generation which is a common misconception among those who are not aware of the rules governing leader generation.

[Chilean Presidentâ„¢]

Originally posted by FrustratedPoet
Those two examples were simply coincidences.

Damn
well I said that I find that was more "faster" to get a leader on those conditions, but there wasn't a 'cientific fact' to proove it, only my own gameplay experience.

Greetings, Greetings, you're right

On the other hand, fighting with UU can produce a GA more likely right? or it was also only a coincidence