One leader per elite unit!

[H Tower]

Originally posted by asleepathewheel

The problem is, when you have a stack attacking with multiple elite units. How do you know which one is the gl-producer?

I don't know since i'm just coming back to the game for a second try at it after saying it sucked


edit: check out my thread about coming back to civ3

edit:edit: you already did

[Grumbold]

I could swear blind that I had 3 leaders at one point playing one of the competition games. I'm not going to accuse Mike B. of not knowing his own game without hard proof though. I don't think I kept my save game directory when I uninstalled Civ but if I remember tonight I will fire up my old machine and take a peek.

[nato]

Grumbold - Maybe it was possible to have more than one leader at a time in previous patches?

[Grumbold]

There's nothing in that CivFanatics thread that says 'after 1.17' or anything. The Babylonian game I'm thinking of was one of the early Apolyton comps so that might be it.

[I-iZ-1337]

I will putz thiz in my stratz d00d. It willz makez me even more 1337 than I amz.

[geoffbland]

Huh? They are saying that an elite unit can only produce a Leader once. That does NOT mean you can't have more than one leader. I certainly have had a game where I've had GLs to spare and nothing to use them on.

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by geoffbland
Huh? They are saying that an elite unit can only produce a Leader once. That does NOT mean you can't have more than one leader. I certainly have had a game where I've had GLs to spare and nothing to use them on.

No, they say you can only possess one great leader at the same time. If there's a GL sitting on his ass, there will be no more GLs produced in battle. If you make him into an army, he is no longer a GL, but now, you have an army. You can have as many armies running around as you want, but only one GL.

What surprises the hell out of me is the fact that each elite unit can only produce one army, ever. I suspect people are reading this wrong, since it seems a bit too much for the game to keep track of which elite units have produced leaders (especially when there's no graphical information available to the player). There must be some mistake.

[nato]

What surprises the hell out of me is the fact that each elite unit can only produce one army, ever.

In his quote he said that if the unit was upgraded, it could again generate a leader, so its not quite just once ever.

[Ironwood]

Originally posted by nato


In his quote he said that if the unit was upgraded, it could again generate a leader, so its not quite just once ever.

Yes, that makes sense, if they're keeping track of it on a per-unit basis (and by that quote, it appears they are). When upgraded, they're demoted to veteran, so the way I think it would work is this: there are actually five ranks for units: green, regular, veteran, elite, elite + leader.

[nato]

Clever thinking Ironwood ... that would be an nice way to keep track of it.

[MiloMilo]

That's a very smart way to think about it, Ironwood. If you look at the military advisor screen, you'll see a box that says "available leader." Usually it's empty, but when you have a leader it will show your GL in it. when you use the leader for an army or to rush something, the box becomes empty again. Now there is not enough room in the box for more than one leader, so I pretty much always knew you could only have one at a time (Geoffbland, I suspect you hed multiple empty armies at once).

Anyway, it's good to know that each elite can only make one... it won't change my strategy much though, I haven't gotten a leader since installing 1.21f. What I have done more is fight off opposing armies with single units, which is a real pain.

[Arrian]

This is really important info... and like Theseus I can't believe it took this long for it to come out. Wow.

Ok, I want some sort of designation for those elites that have generated GLs. Otherwise, I may use them in a potential GL-producing situation and get jipped out of my leader. I can instead use those elites as nutcrackers, as opposed to finishers... or just pull them back entirely from the front. But as it is now, I will have no choice but to pull them back. If they stay on the front lines, they will get jumbled in with other elites.

I like the possibilities for increasing the # of GLs I generate, though.

Has anyone proved conclusively whether or not an elite unit in an army can produce a leader?

-Arrian

[Theseus]

Arrian, I've been asking that forever, and no one know.

My understanding of Ironwood's designations:

Elite: Has not generated a GL.
Elite+leader: Has generated a GL.

As to the distinction between elites and elite+leaders on the battlefield, I think that going forward I will divide attacking forces into two stacks... one for all the elites, and one for all the elite+leaders.

For slowmover attacks, I will distinguish the stacks by adding a defensive unit to the elite stack, and let the elite+leaders fend for themselves. This is pretty easy, and cheap.

For fastmover attacks? Anybody?

Also: Can we say elite+leader Cav Armies? I suggest that as the numbers of GLs created generally increase (which I predict will happen), there are going to be a lot more Armies floating around... fill'em up with Cavs and then add 1 elite+leader Tank or MA.

[Arrian]

Dividing into stacks is an option I suppose. Then again... I'm tempted to say that, outside of putting them in armies (my opinion is that armies don't spawn GLs), I may not want to use elite+leader units at all. Simply because they cannot be promoted further. I'd rather use my vets so I can get them to elite, or my elites so I can get a leader.

-Arrian

[nato]

Great idea Arrian! You're right, knowing this, veterans are now preferable to elite+leaders. I guess its garrison duty in some quiet city for the finest of the army ... ironic ...