Spawn or convert? The Great Leader debacle

Sarxis · October 19, 2001, 02:16

I was just reading somewhere about GLs being 'spawned', as opposed to elite units being converted into GLs. I guess this means that instead of losing your elite unit and getting a GL instead (which, IMO, would suck if you were in the middle of an offensive and all of a sudden your Elite Panzer brigade got turned into a panzy [0.0.3] GL) a Great Leader is spawned and placed on the map.

Any confirmations on this?

Blake · October 19, 2001, 02:45

That makes ALOT of sense... after all a great leader is only one man... no need to send the whole unit home. In fact spawning makes so much sense I'd say it's almost certaintely done that way.

Another thing with great leaders... I was wondering if they expired, it is known Civ3 is divided into several distinct ages... prehaps a great leader can only be used during the age he is created in?
(I cant imagine a 2000 year old leader to be much use in rushing the Hoover dam, or leading a squad of marines.... - I mean aside from the fact he'll be dead)

KrazyHorse · October 19, 2001, 03:02

It's been confirmed that a GL splits off an Elite unit by Firaxis (Dan said it a while ago).

Faboba · October 19, 2001, 05:16

Which means that if you're insanely lucky you can create MORE great leaders from that same elite panzer brigade.

Grumbold · October 19, 2001, 06:19

Understanding exactly how to maximise your chances of getting great leaders is certainly going to be one of the important parts of a winning strategy.

tniem · October 20, 2001, 00:10

And can great leaders only come from military units? That could be an important part of how you play. I mean they say you don't have to fight and it appears they have done a lot to make that so but if I am losing because my warmongering enemy gets the great leaders, that ain't going to make me too happy.

Skanky Burns · October 20, 2001, 08:39

Quote:

Originally posted by tniem
And can great leaders only come from military units? That could be an important part of how you play. I mean they say you don't have to fight and it appears they have done a lot to make that so but if I am losing because my warmongering enemy gets the great leaders, that ain't going to make me too happy.

Chances are that if are losing because of an enemy warmonger, then you will be having battles. If you are having battles, then therefore you have a change to get a great leader, and therefore a chance to get your own army

Obviously, it wont be easy, but if your losing a war, things shouldnt be easy

tniem · October 20, 2001, 13:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Skanky Burns
Chances are that if are losing because of an enemy warmonger, then you will be having battles. If you are having battles, then therefore you have a change to get a great leader, and therefore a chance to get your own army

Obviously, it wont be easy, but if your losing a war, things shouldnt be easy

But what if my enemy/rival is fighting a different nation and I have bribed them into peace. So then they take their great leaders and build all the wonders before I can. So the peace option doesn't work. That again is why it would seem that a peaceful great leader is needed.

Chowlett · October 20, 2001, 14:15

As an aside, it appears from the editor screenshot that you will be able to change what happens when a Great Leader is produced - in particular, you change the unit that results so that isn't a great leader. I'm guessing you can choose any unit you like.

Think of the possibilities! You could simulate occasional capture by replacing the Leader-spawn with a worker! You could defeat the enemy, and form a cannon from their bodies, weapons and armour!

And yes, this does seem to be one of the more pointless things to do with the editor - but hey, more customisability is always good.

Sabre2th · October 20, 2001, 14:19

Maybe the elite unit loses some of its experience when a leader is spawned. That would seem like the best way to avoid getting multiple leaders from the same unit.

Jaybe · October 20, 2001, 14:58

Quote:

Originally posted by Blake
...
(I cant imagine a 2000 year old leader to be much use in rushing the Hoover dam, or leading a squad of marines.... - I mean aside from the fact he'll be dead)

What about YOU! Here you are, a 6000 year old 'god', leading a whole civilization!

Crouchback · October 20, 2001, 16:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybe
What about YOU! Here you are, a 6000 year old 'god', leading a whole civilization!

And that first worker you started off with who's now 6000 years old and still labouring away building railways over those roads he laid down all those years ago...

David

Faboba · October 20, 2001, 16:33

Or maybe it's just that group of worker's descendants in a carefully ordered way so as not to increase the number of the group. Maybe their a very small working class slave race offshoot of your society. A true benevolent would never make workers....

Ironwood · October 20, 2001, 16:44

Or maybe that 4000 year old worker unit is actually a team of engineers and workers that trace their organization back thousands of years, priding themselves on their long history, knowing the name of their founders, having records of great heroes that bridged the gap or developed new techniques. After all, all it is is a "unit." People get hired, people get fired, people retire, people die when a construction crane collapses and crushes the entire team... whoops! The unit remains, though.

I wonder if workers will gain experience as the years go by. It would make sense that a group of workers that remain in existance for a long time would get better at working. Maybe they could produce great leaders themselves.

Crouchback · October 20, 2001, 17:49

This thread has been hijacked by the great worker debacle.

But it seems perfectly reasonable to me that the commander of a top elite unit that has just won a tough battle should be detached to head up a new army. Think of it as a field promotion. But if it was so hard to get a great leader once then it would be unlikely you'll get a second from the same unit before it has to be upgraded and loses the elite status.

David

Blake · October 20, 2001, 18:15

You are more an abstraction of the leadership of your civilastion. While great leaders are supposed to be 'real' people.

And right about the units.... kinda like grandads axe, all the original workers are long dead and have been replaced, all their equipment has broken a hundred times over and has been replaced... so it's not really the same unit, but good to know that support you've been spending on them has been put to good use.

But anyway, you cant just replace a great leader when the old one dies

.
Dont you agree using a 2000 year old great leader to rushbuy the manhatten project is just a little too odd...

Skanky Burns · October 20, 2001, 21:08

Quote:

Originally posted by tniem
But what if my enemy/rival is fighting a different nation and I have bribed them into peace. So then they take their great leaders and build all the wonders before I can. So the peace option doesn't work. That again is why it would seem that a peaceful great leader is needed.

Probably if the enemy warmonger is getting great leaders, all of them will be going towards making armies, as they are in the middle of a war, and chances are also militaristic...

Christantine The Great · October 20, 2001, 21:19

It's been said that leaders die after a while. That's why a perfectionist would rush it to their wonder-building city and finish it up and a militaristic civ would quickly use it to create their knight army and sweep down on others.