[Vilk]

Moreover about this "no leadership" during 13 levels, it isn't only a weaker choice than another method during 28 levels but also it takes a quite huge approximation that only attack care.

If you don't take Leadership during 12 levels and starts only at 14 this will be
60*(2+4+6+8+10+12) = 60*14*3 = 2520 Leadership you don't have at the end.

So that's 10.1% less units if you use 25k as a final base, 10.1% lower life or 10.1% higher command cost for anything but attack.

Well that's a quite huge approximation. If a good player never get hit then I wonder why he couldn't manage quite well the alternative.

I don't say that the no leadership during 13 levels choice isn't ok, just that it has also negative points and that alternative like always Leadership certainly worth roughly the same.

EDIT: And even "worse" in fact the "take always Leadership" method offers 11.2% more of anything but attack than the "don't take Leadership during 13 levels" method. In fact with a minus of 2520, the Leadership base becomes 22480 giving in fact 11.2%. Yeah the same than 10.1% less but still it's in fact 11.2% more.

EDIT2: All of that also don't consider low level units use. When attack < defense the minus is quickly cap ie at -10. That means that -17 or -10 is the same and in this case the additional +7 in attack is worthless. Sure it's not the majority of the case but still quite significant if you enjoy low level units. One more point in favor of the "take always Leadership" method.