Poll: How many leaders do you get as a result of having Militaristic?

[Reichsmarshal]

?

 

[Mr Spice]

That question is very hard to answer, because no games are the same and I don´t make notes on "number of leaders/won fights win elit units". There is no way to give an even remotely accurate answer, all numbers mentioned will be nothing but wild guesses..

 

[Mapache]

33 % more promotions. Naturally a WAG.

 

[joycem10]

out of the last 4 games ive played i chose a militaristic civ 1 time, china. i played a relatively aggressive game and pulled in 4 leaders. i also recently played the americans in a very aggressive game and received 3 leaders. (btw georgians must hate sherman as a great leader). in both games i received my first leaders early, made an army and built the herioc epic.

the last 2 games i played were with the eqyptians and most recently the french. with the egyptians i fought 2 land wars, 1 against the germans to unify my continent and 1 against the english to take a nearby mini-continent/island. i received no leaders thru the game.

with the french i fought a minor early war against the persians to unify my continent and got nothing. i then took 2 small continents from the brits but got no leaders. I got to the point where i would harass civs on the main continent hoping for a war to try out my elites. i got in a couple of skirmishes but no leaders.

all in all, i think the heroic epic really helps out leader production.

 

[Barrius]

The number of leaders you get depends more on how much you go to war in a particular game. In my current game I am the Germans and I have gotten 7 leaders so far. (1700's) But that is mostly because I was at war with the zulus from the late ancient era until early industrial era when my calvary finally finished them off. Since then I have not gotten any more leaders since I have been at peace with the remaining 4 civs.
I built an army with the 1st leader to get the heroic epic. All the rest have been used to rush wonders.

 

[SirPleb]

I have wondered about the apparently very irregular production of leaders. In all games I've played in the last month, I've put a mark on a piece of paper for each win by an elite unit, then noted when I got a leader. It will take many months of this before I have statistically significant results. Results so far:

Non-militaristic: a bit less than 1 leader per 16 wins. Longest streak without a leader was over 40. Shortest was 1.

Militaristic: A bit better than 1 per 12 wins. Much better in the short times I've had while both Militaristic and had Heroic Epic. In that time they seemed to just jump out of the game.

Edit: BTW, I didn't vote in the poll because the answer which matches my understanding of the docs (33% more) and which is closest to my experience so far, isn't one of the choices.

 

[chiefpaco]

Cool, SirPleb. It's nice to know that the supposed numbers were right all along. I voted equal cause it doesn't seem like much of a difference if you don't count... But then again, maybe only people who count ought to be included in the poll. Unless the poll read, "How many leaders do you think you get..."

 

[Reichsmarshal]

Interesting, seems that the most commonly thought amount is 33% more. That would be a 1/3 more leaders, so the militaristic rating is often underestimated then.

 

[sealman]

Have no clue. current game fought a war with America. Units started at veteran and after I destroyed Americas and walked away with 2 GL (not at the same time). I then took that same army (all elite now) and invaded Chin - 0 GL.

I was Iroquois at them time which is not Militaristic.

 

[Aeson]

I voted 50% because 33% (1/12 to 1/16) doesn't account for Militaristic Civs other advantages in creating leaders. First, Militaristic Civs get unit promotions more quickly, units have more of their battles at elite status. Second, cheaper barracks now mean (1.17f) that you can get those veteran units out a few turns earlier, this amounts to added combat opportunities. I think this brings 33% up closer to 40%-45%.

 

[Richard III]

Playing as the Aztecs.

My current answer:


Not enough!