Does anyone like the way leaders work?

[Slax]

MoHonor - Too bad thats not the case here. Currently its 13 "Yes" vs 12 "No".

[MOHonor]

Originally posted by Dissident
have you graduated elementary school yet. Do you know why I put this poll here.

It is to find out how the people in civ3 general view leaders. I don't expect them to agree with me. In fact I believe most people would disagree with my theories about what makes a game fun.

Some people need to get some more forced schooling. They aren't intelligent enough for these boards.

Double post. 12 year old alert.

[MOHonor]

Originally posted by Slax
MoHonor - Too bad thats not the case here. Currently its 13 "Yes" vs 12 "No".

You're counting Bananas as con? Fine. Good luck with that.

[Dis]

You don't get it.

I made the second post minutes after the other one. I realize many people like you have short attention spans, and would just disregard my original post if I had edited in the information.

I do that to get my point accross. I'm usually ignored. Why don't you do the same and put me on your ignore list.

goodbye

[MOHonor]

Originally posted by Dissident
You don't get it.

I made the second post minutes after the other one. I realize many people like you have short attention spans, and would just disregard my original post if I had edited in the information.

I do that to get my point accross. I'm usually ignored. Why don't you do the same and put me on your ignore list.

goodbye

Why? You're too easy to freak out. Anyways, I love sinking threads like this.

Congrats. You're my hobby till lib starts posting again.

[Dis]

sinking?

I'd say it's staying near the top


ole' lib. I don't know where he went off to. He'll be back

[Tingkai]

The leaders system is okay. It would be better if you could unload units from an army.

Yes, it forces you to fight a war if you want the benefits. But if you don't fight wars, why do you need an army?

[nato]

MOHonor, you never say anything on topic about Civ3.

Every post you have made is just an attack on someone.

You are the only person I have seen on Apolyton who doesn't at least occassionally say something worthwhile.

You are now also the only person on Apolyton on my ignore list.

Right where you belong.

[Worthingtons]

MO , THere has to be a Bananas option in a poll!

[Slax]

Originally posted by MOHonor


You're counting Bananas as con? Fine. Good luck with that.

No way, bananas are a great source of potassium.

But no, it seems the poll on my screen has 'No' as the 2nd and 3rd options. Hmmm....?

[kailhun]

Again I went for the bananas.
There are a couple of problems with leaders:
- the only way to get them is through combat. So peaceful players are penalised and need them just as badly for building wonders. But what peaceful action should trigger a leader?
- They don't show up often enough. Kidding. 3 or 4 leaders a game is good. I would like more, but that might be unbalancing.
- They die when 'captured'. Spies should be able to ferret them out and attempt to kidnap them.
- Can't think of another one. Leaders must work quite well for me then.

Robert

[Pius Popprasch]

They should give a combat bonus, e.g. +1 attack, + 1 defense. And there could be a rule for getting them(e.g. 6 fights won by an elite unit). And they should not hurry Wonders.

[notyoueither]

I voted *Yes: any feature in a game with Sid's name on it must be good.* Does that mean I'm hopeless? I'd vote for bananas again, but I'm full.

But seriously, Leaders for culture? I don't think so.

Leaders alow the military civs the chance to catch up with the Scientific and Industrious civs. You build, we make war. We used Maximus to rush the Great Library and steal it from you? Hah! The Peacenik life does not lead to all happiness.

Also think about what a civ does to make war. It gives up many, many turns of useful production of building up its cities to build up it's armies. The Leader system is one of the major things that keeps the military strat on track. IMO.

Salve

[SirPleb]

On smaller maps I find them somewhat imbalancing. Their impact (building wonders instantly) seems out of proportion for something with such a large luck element. Because of the low numbers involved (number of wins with elites, and per-win chance of a leader) it is not unlikely to get anywhere from 1 to 6 of them from the exact same number of elite wins. The range of normal results is too variable (too large) for something with this much impact.

On very large maps, especially with a militaristic Civ, leaders are easy to get. In a huge/militaristic game you can reach a state where you can be nearly certain of getting a new leader within 1 or 2 turns every time you want one. Just like that, any wonder you want, when you want it. Kind of fun when you do it, but it does feel a bit imbalanced/unintended.

[Grumbold]

Leaders are too random, too good at building wonders and useless at everything else.

I believe Lib is spending more of his time discussing EU2 these days since we persuaded him to give it a try. I recommend it as an alternative for anyone who thinks they need a change from Civ 3.