 |
|
Jaybe
|
|
 |
|
Emperor
Henderson, NV USA
|
Sep 2001
time: 20:53
| |
|
|
Assets/XML/GameInfo/CIV4HandicapInfo.xml
I recommend that you make a chart (or spreadsheet, whatever) to list the variables that seem relevant in a column; then have different columns be the difficulty levels.
I have made a word doc. of the stuff (and my alterations) in the past, but it is not current to v3.17.
EDIT: had left out a folder in the file path.
Last edited by Jaybe on 21-07-2008 at 16:44
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
Blaupanzer, if you make a spreadsheet, post it so the rest of use can have the info the easy way.
Mike
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
You know, the one percentage that I really want to know doesn't seem to be there. Does anyone know the AI combat bonuses for each level, or what it's called in that file?
Mike
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
No I meant across the board. I am pretty sure Solver said it was different in IV and instead of ramping up, it stayed constant from Monarch up, but I can't find that post, that's why I'm asking.
Mike
|
|
| |
|
|
Technical Assistant
Of the Peanuts Gallery
|
Apr 2004
time: 22:53
| |
|
|
I believe that was against Barbs.
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
There is definately a combat bonus in later levels. It's simple enough to see. The AIs armies win much higher percentages than the player armies. Take the catapults as an easy comparison. My cats come up to a city, take down the defense bonus and then go to do some collateral damage before I throw in the troops. My retreat odds for the first cat is usually 2-3%. The AI in the same set of circumstances rarely loss a cat and the collateral damage is higher also. I use three cats and barely knock down the enemy. They use three cats and small children are killing my archers/spearman. Which brings me to another beef, where do I get small children?
Or, if cats are too complicated, take any unit in the field against the same unit for the AI. Your % will be about 50%, but the AI wins that battle 80% of the time when he attacks.
Mike
Mike
|
|
| |
|
|
King
Saskatoon, SK, CA
|
Oct 1999
time: 22:53
| |
|
|
For future Civs they need combat stats. All you'd need for this discussion is a difference number. So if you win at 50% it would add .5 to your difference. If you lose it would subtract .5. If you win at 90% it would add 0.1, and so on. Take that difference number and divide by number of combats to get a combat number for a game. Hell, you could keep track of that for every game and keep the grand total in the options screen. Maybe that would finally put all these discussions to rest.
|
|
| |
|
Blaupanzer
|
|
|
|
King
Fairfax, VA
|
Oct 2000
time: 23:53
| |
|
|
I haven't seen this. Where's Wodan11 when we need him. He regularly plays on higher levels, and could tell us if the AI "combat advantage is real. Note that AI units will have more promotions at higher levels, and that would affect combat.
However, as I understand it, for the proverbial 10,000 combats, the defender is favored in head-on, unit-to-unit, all-else-being-equal combat. It won't feel that way watching each individual fight, but that really is supposed to be the ground truth. 
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
As a CIO, I question anyone who says they've gone through every line of code of a multi-million line program. If any of Firaxisis's programmers want to weigh in, I'll believe I've read the code arguement. Until then, I'll postulate a challenge for anyone who wishes to take the time. Start a duel, go to war. Open worldbuilder and put down two of the exact same armies on the same terrain. Check the % for your attack, log it, let the AI attack you and check the log for it's percentage. I've always maintained that the %s are correct and posted a pretty convincing statistical proof when IV came out. if these %s are the same, I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong.
Mike
|
|
| |
|
|
Warlord
|
Jan 2006
time: 04:53
| |
|
|
OK, that's a tougher test than I thought. You can't get the AI to attack you when it is fairly even odds. However, I did finally get a knight to attack my knight (no terrain bonus) The AI knight had Flanking 1 & 2 so I gave it to my knight. My attack % was 27.2. The AI's when it attacked me was also 27.20, but it had an extra +20% bonus in the combat log. Unless someone can explain that 20% bonus, I maintain that it was an AI bonus.
Yes, I know 1 test is not conclusive, but it is a start.
Mike
|
|
| |
|
Blaupanzer
|
|
|
|
King
Fairfax, VA
|
Oct 2000
time: 23:53
| |
|
|
Evaluated the recommended file. It distinctly provides for advantages related to barbarian animals and soldiers. For the player, the advantages go down as the level goes up. For the AI, these advantages go up as the game level rises.
At the higher levels (monarch up) the AI also gets free units, lower maintenance costs (distance and # of cities), substantially lower upgrade costs and other things. Nothing is explicitly noted relating to AI vs player combat.
As to mkorin's example, note that certain promotions only apply to the defense or attack. Thus, if both had charge or city raider only the attacker would gain it. Also note that some "bonuses" to unit 1 only show up in degradation of unit 2's base number. If the attack %was 27.2 in both cases, then obviously both units got the same bonuses in the attack/defense.
Most designers, developers, and coders do pretty rigorous testing to assure that the game does what they say it does in actual performance. The AI may be programmed not to attack below a certain attack percentage, but, if it did, that percentage would hold true over the 10,000 mythical repetitions of those exact conditions. If the AI gains combat advantages at the higher levels, regular players at that level would see it, and this has not been reported. Also, the coders, et al. would tell everyone how they created such a "great improvement" -- not try and "sneak" it into the game.  
Paranoia is a terrible burden. Firaxis is not out to "get" you. 
Last edited by Blaupanzer on 23-07-2008 at 18:30
|
|
| |
|
|
Deity
Santa Barbara, CA
|
Feb 2001
time: 23:53
| |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mkorin
As a CIO, I question anyone who says they've gone through every line of code of a multi-million line program. If any of Firaxisis's programmers want to weigh in, I'll believe I've read the code arguement. Until then, I'll postulate a challenge for anyone who wishes to take the time. Start a duel, go to war. Open worldbuilder and put down two of the exact same armies on the same terrain. Check the % for your attack, log it, let the AI attack you and check the log for it's percentage. I've always maintained that the %s are correct and posted a pretty convincing statistical proof when IV came out. if these %s are the same, I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong.
Mike |
PEOPLE HAVE DONE THAT.
The answer was - surprise! - the AI does not get an advantage.
Moreover, it's NOT HARD to go through the lines of code
that deal with combat, and see that the AI gets NO BONUS.
Idiot.
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Owner/ Administrator (Reasonable One)
Lord of the Ferrets
|
Nov 1999
time: 22:53
| |
|
|
As long as we mentioned the odds posted, is a true thing that first strike and such is not used in calcing the displayed odds. If yes, is anything else not considered?
|
|
| |
|
|
Co-Administrator
Latvia, Riga
|
Sep 2000
time: 06:53
| |
|
|
Look, Kuci, I know you have suffered severe moral trauma in the course of your life, but will you ever learn to behave, for Hoffman's sake?
|
|
| |
|
