lol, I never get great leaders with militaristic civs

[Artifex]

My last 5 games as china I made it up until the mid- meideval era without one great leader and quit lol.

I guess I am too much of a builder and I don't attack enough.

I guess you need alot of elites running around during the ancient age to get great leaders.

If you don't warmonger enough I guess militaristic is a waste. Maybe I need to just play it safe and take Egypt from now on..

[Zanzin]

Hmm, thats interesting. Usually playing as a non-militaristic civ, I won't get a GL to around that time, after which I build an army, win with it, and then i can build the herioc epic, after which i seem to churn out GL's, meaning i get a heck of a lot of wonders.

[Artifex]

My playstyle favors a building civ. I like to be peaceful and fight a limited war or 2 tops by the medieval period. Case in point this time I am playing babylon and it seems to fit my playstyle much better. I love culture/religion and large borders. I also like to space my cities out at maximum range and build super cities.

The only civ I remember having fun with as a warmonger is Rome. I love those legions. They are really unstopable. I like them better than the immortals actually. The legion might be my favorite UU, Its devastating and it is the hippest looking. Next time I go militaristic it is gonna be Rome all the way.

[Solver]

Also being a builder, I don't get much leaders, and I've only once gotten one during the Ancient age.

Yes, you gotta have Elite units, of course. If you have like 3 Elite Units, don't think you will be generating much Leaders...

[kmill25]

I'm quite sure this doesn't apply to 99% of you on here but I have never seen a Great Leader on Cheiftan.

[Colonial Impact]

When I used to play Chieftan I have seen a couple Great Leaders on before (about three) but they arent very common. It seems that on higher difficulties, Great Leaders tend to be appear more often. This is proberly because they are needed against an AI on Diety in order to have some hope in completing a wonder or laying siege to a well developed city. But like Solver said, you need to have a few elite units in the field in order to generate Great Leaders.

[Solver]

Colonial, Kmill, from what the documentation says, odds of leaders are the same. Also, many threads with Firaxian comments, and also forumulas, indicate no difference whatsoever in leader apperance for difficulty levels.

My very first game of Civ 3, that I played on chieftain, I got 5 Leaders, while the first two games on Regent I didn't see a single one.

[The Pioneer]

I am playing the Chinese too and besides two leaders that I got (been on war for centuries, game time that is) not much more. In the previous game I was plaing the Greeks and I got many more than with the Chinese although they should be twice us likely with them.... hmmm....

Of course that might have to do with the change of game levels. I play on Regent for the firts time !

[DeepO]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that militaristic Civs had a greater chance of promotion from conscript to elite, but all civs had the same chance of getting leaders (1/16 without heroic epic, 1/12 with). If you need more leaders, make sure you fight a lot. That's why higher difficulties have more chance of having lots of leaders: there is a lot more fighting.

Oh, and try to use your elites smart: keep your elites to take on the easy targets, and soften up with all other units.

DeepO

[Velociryx]

Here's how I go about making sure I get at least one GL when I need him:

1) Build an army (and no, I don't mean the unit type!). Can't very well get a general without an army.

2) Use it. LOTS. Find a target, and start pounding on them. Take a city and ignore them when they beg for mercy. Shadow settler teams from your target and whack them too.

3) Love your Elites. They are the heart and soul of your army. Don't foolishly risk them. An Elite should NEVER lead the charge into a city. Elites should pick off the wounded. If you think there's a chance that you could lose a unit....don't attack with an Elite.

4) Be smart about your army. Some people love horsemen, some people love swordsmen...some others love Archers (and since we're talking about the Ancient Era, those three are really the only relevant choices), you'll find yourself building at least some of all, but bear in mind that your Horsemen, with their greater survivability, will probably be more likely to generate Elites for you. Bear this in mind when you use them, and be mindful of their vulnerability (1 defense).

5) Keep the pressure on. Simply don't relent till you get a leader....time is on your side. Attack often enough, and it WILL occur.

-=Vel=-

[Arrian]

I find that a large force of horsemen backed up by some swordsmen is the best GL generation machine early on (when GLs are most powerful). Archers have their place, but I would only use them with certain civs (China being the best example).

The key to all of this, like Vel said, is doing a lot of fighting. Just taking down 1 civ isn't gonna do it (it may, if the RNG smiles on you). I realized this when I first started playing the warmonger, and ever since I've been attempting to conquer my home continent in the ancient age/early middle ages. That, on standard/continents/8 civs, usually means that I have 2-4 AI civs to take down.

In other words... think BIG. You cannot warmonger and build all at once above Regent. You must commit to one and see it through. My building takes place in the middle ages, as my Samurai mop up the shattered remnants of my neighbors.

-Arrian

[Solver]

Vel, I played yesterday, and attacked two Spearmen in the field with Elite Immortals, hoping for a leader. Both times my Elite Immortals died, ending with me hitting the desk and screaming at my monitor. Random seed...

[Arrian]

Solver,

And that, my friend, is why I prefer horsemen. They too are subject to the RNG, and I sometimes lose elite horsemen to regular archers defending on flat ground, but at least the horsies have a shot at retreat.

The other thing this illustrates is that you must use lots of troops and generate lots of elite units. This is why militaristic is actually a very powerful civ trait. I've tried warmongering with non-militaristic civs and elites are harder to come by... and their loss really hurts. With a militaristic civ, you will have more elites, and thus the loss of two will hurt less. I'd still scream at the monitor, though.

My condolences, btw, on the loss of your Immortals. Bad RNG seed indeed.

-Arrian

[Theseus]

If you do not have MANY MANY elites, use them very wisely (even Immortals).

Got some leftover reg Swords (upgraded first Warriors)? Burn'em up on Spearmen in the field... yeah, they might get promoted, or the Spearmen might too, but, what you want if elite-shy is to go into battle 5-1, or 5-2.

General rule: Attack with the weakest units first, saving the damaged defenders for your vets and elites.

[Solver]

Arrian,

What's so good about Immortals, that Elite Immortals attacking Spearmen in field should win most of the time (4 against 2), while the Horsemen have it even odds, and the retreat chance isn't 100%. So, in fact, odds of losing an Elite Immortals vs. a Spearman are less than the odds of losing a Horseman. Immortals has a 66% chance to win every round, while the horse has 50%.