Attaching Great Generals to units

[histoire68]

So I am a less experienced player and I play on Noble, and the other day I had a game that was actually some really good war practice for me. I was Gandhi and Montezuma DoWed me and it was a stalemate for I don't know how many turns. The AI made surprisingly good use of terrain and I couldn't seem to get across a very inconveniently placed river. But I was figuring out how to counter his units and all and I had annihilated his stack (again) when the stupid Buddhists voted to end our war... anyway...

One of the things I tried was attaching one of my Great Generals to a unit. The unit promptly died half a dozen turns later (I couldn't figure out why it was even defending out of that particular stack) so it was an underwhelming experience on the whole. I don't completely understand the utility of doing this.

You get the 20 XP across the stack, of course. That's fine. But that just doesn't seem as awesome to me as it did at first (maybe this is just because my poor unit died.)

In general do people use their great generals this way or just settle them instead? What is the best thing to do with a great general in your opinion?

(If it matters, this was my second great general; I settled the first in my main military unit producing city, and I didn't have the tech you need for the military academy yet.)

 

[manu-fan]

People usually attach their first GG to a Chariot for a super Medic. The chariot in a stack won't get chosen as a defender. Make sure to protect and not expose those you have used a GG on. BTW: I always make sure the 20 points is on a single unit, not spread across a stack.

Cheers.

 

[semirami]

The warlord unit is stronger, that's why is choosen to deffend. The mechanic is simple. The unit with best odds will deffend and you can do nothing to change this.

Attaching is worth, only to make a medicIII unit. The trick is to choose weaker, but mobile unit, like chariot, or scout, so he will never deffend and he will not die. When you have your medic unit, settle your great generals. Academies arent worth and they come late.

 

[madscientist]

Attaching a GG to a unit can have some benfits if done right. Most of the time I settle the GG (+2 XP per unit for the entire game beats 20 XP at once).

Some times to use it

1) Attach them to a weak unit for the medic III promotion. Mostly a chariot, but Monty's Jags start with wwoodsman I and get to woodsman III and Medic III for a really super healer.

2) Getting a unit to level 6 so you can build West Point.

3) Getting a Super CRIII unit. This is great for demolishing cities, however it will lose eventually.

4) Keep a mix of units in a stack to protect the GG unit. Example a Pikeman will generally defend before a GG-attached Maceman when attacked by a mounted unit.

50 The leadership promotion can general ALOT of XP's towards another GG, especially if you are Imperialistic and/or fighting defensive with the Great Wall.

 

[Silverdawn]

When attaching the GG to a unit, do it on a tile that only has the unit you want to attach it to. Unless I'm doing it wrong, when I've done it on a tile with additional units, the XP doesn't seem to be available to spend on the GG unit.

 

[r_rolo1]

It there is more than one unit the XP is divided between the units in there. Only the GG atached unit will get acess to the warlord-only promotions, though.

 

[dermoth]

Nothing quite like a warlord Destroyer versus a fleet of Caravels, IMO.

Or the super medic. But that's dull.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I attach them sometimes as super city raiders or godly mounted troops from time to time. Generally I use the medic III only but experience has shown that sometimes the short-term benefit of a super sword (C3, CR 3 death!) worth it - the top stack defender (or 2nd) is often fought at 95% odds or better, saving you troops. It's actually quite hard to compare this benefit to +2 gamelong xp from a city. Do what feels right, try both and see what you prefer.

 

[mboettcher]

It can be fun to attach a general and perhaps the most rewarding for a military result but it requires the most micromanagment and risk. If I do attach a GG I usually do it away from a stac so that all 20 xp goes to one unit. It can be helpful to attach it to a mounted unit as the warlord has a unique trait of tactics for withdrawal rates in the 85-90%. plus the gg gets twice the xp so if you baby the unit for a while till you can get it close to 100xp/plus you'll have a back-breaking unit that can have combat odds in the 97% when your other best units got 25-30. It can make an excellant first attack unit for a city. Also matching the unit on melee units and getting leadership, tactics, guerilla III and CRIII is very effective for eliminating that one superstrong defender. I used to put them on artillery unitil they got rid of the combat line of promotionms because the unique traits made for some very effective artrillery and then my most lost unit type now had a durible leader to keep casulties way down.

 

[mboettcher]

PLus the magesty of 200+ xp units is quite a wonder. A stack of a couple GG with a super medic can march across an empire with only cats to reduce defense bonus' and no loss'. try this strat with praets and you;ve got an army and a half. It gives new meaning to SoD

 

[Virtual Alex]

I have totally abandoned the idea of making warlords. I always make academies and settle them. You usually get 4-5 great generals in a game. That is 2 academies in your best production cities and 2 settled leaders for an extra boost. Lets you make armies of 2-promo units right away. It's far more useful than a warlord in my opinion.

 

[Bostock]

I think spreading the XP across a stack is underrated. Why have 4-5 free promotions on a single unit when you can have up to 10 (though realistically more like 7) free promotions across multiple units? Attacking with a stack of CR2s instead of CR1s can really turn the tide in a war. The only only downside IMO is that you'll have to baby the GG longer to get anything special out of the unit with the attachment.

Regarding using the XP to create super attackers: try to create these out of garrison warriors if feasible, to take advantage of the free upgrade.

Regarding settled GGs' benefit throughout the game: certainly. But turning the tide in a war also has benefits throughout the game. (If you're winning handily, by all means settle.)

 

[Belisar]

Academies arent worth and they come late.

I have to disagree.
For military victories, production is the main limiting factor.
When my military cities can produce level-4 units (8 or 10 exp), adding additional GGs is not cost-effective in most cases, but academies raise my military production considerably.

 

[carl corey]

I've spread the XP over several units only three times: twice it was simply a matter of getting an additional promotion for a few already built units (10 * 2XP) in order to take advantage of my temporary military advantage, the other one was when I was in a prolonged war and I had to use the promotions to heal my units so that they could face the next wave of enemy units. Otherwise it's either super-medics (faster healing + unlocking West Point), military instructors or military academies (very much worth it for building ships for intercontinental invasions).

 

[Artichoker]

I attach them sometimes as super city raiders or godly mounted troops from time to time. Generally I use the medic III only but experience has shown that sometimes the short-term benefit of a super sword (C3, CR 3 death!) worth it - the top stack defender (or 2nd) is often fought at 95% odds or better, saving you troops. It's actually quite hard to compare this benefit to +2 gamelong xp from a city. Do what feels right, try both and see what you prefer.

If you plan on building West Point, then the Medic III warlord is a good way to guarantee that you'll have the necessary 6th level unit for West Point. This warlord will have high survivability, since you won't be sending him into combat.

With the super City Raider warlord, the risk of losing the unit in battle is greater...but if you don't plan on building West Point, then it won't matter. In this case, you're banking on the capability of the warlord unit to shift battle odds in your favor.

On maps where the game can be decided earlier than when West Point becomes available, it might be a good choice to use this kind of unit. Then you would give Medic II to a normal unit to provide for your healing needs, and make up for the lost healing by resting longer in between battles.

 

[mboettcher]

Also Combat 5+ units heal faster on their own. Plus you might consider using march on a Warlord unit. A combat 6 march unit heals pretty fast on its own. With a medic in the stack it can probably completely heal from the time it takes to march from one city to the next, especially considering the fact you probably won't be excessively dmged from combat considering the high odds in your favor.

One of the problems I face in early wars is speed. It takes a long time during early wars for me to rejuvenate my armies enough to prepare for an assault on the next city. Speed is key. The faster you can lay siege to a new city the less time the enemy has to adjust and the less the war will cost you in the long run. I've always personally considered speed the most important thing in warfare. Not kill/loss ratio. If it takes me two more units to take a city 2-4 turns earlier then why not? thats 2-4 turns of build time the enemy doesn't get and can't expand its garrison.

 

[IagoAlberto]

Personally I settle the first GG I get into my heroic epic city, and use the second one on a super medic. After that they're all settled until I can get military academies at which point I start building those in all my main military cities . If I'm playing as an imperialistic leader and warmongering like I recently did with Suleiman and get a stupid number of GG's, settling them and having a military city or two in this case, pumping out lvl4 units each turn is just like having a GG attached to a unit except, every unit is like that. I will occaisionally attach a GG for a non-medic unit but I'm more likely just to make another medic unit with an old unit I have hanging around.

 

[civvver]

Academies are worth it in some cases. Once on earth 18 civs I was rome, had paris with ironworks, levee, full factories and west point, crazy production, put an academy there and could crank out units with so much overflow I was netting 50g or more a turn.

 

[carl corey]

Well, I usually want my academies to help me with unit production, not gold. So no academy in Heroic Epic city, and no academy in Iron Works city, it's just overkill.

 

[Crighton]

My thoughts are to first produce as much as possible and then work on the quality of whats produced so I usually pop out the military acadamy then settle the gg for the xp. The 20 xp from the Warlord gets equalled out in a stack of ten units each having received the 2xp (I don't play well with others so I usually have a multifront war going).