What happened to combat?

**vmxa1** · January 11, 2006, 14:07

Ok, I admit I am out of touch in IV. I stopped playing soon after 1.09 came out. Not because I did not like the game, it just worked out that way.

Anyway I fired it up with 1.52 and got into a tussle with Cavs Vs Cossack. I knew they make a change to the way it was handled. I could not remember if it was to use the att values as if they were not damage each round.

Anyway I pasted a stack with cannons and then sent in calvs. One battle (of many) was typical. 10 calvs all die, but 1, one Cossack dies and not a one was as better than 10.8.

Another battle I send in 4 calvs beofre one kill a cossack that was 7.6 to start.

I had expected to see a calv or two win straight up with no bombardment, based on prior games. Now it seems it is nearly impossible to kill one with a Calv. I tried a few Rifles, but that did not go well either.

So my question is is this a better method than before the patch?

**Hauptman** · January 11, 2006, 15:02

Well cossaks DO get a bonus vs cavalry. But pounding one single cossak with 4 cavalry SHOULD kill it, expensive trade but it "should" work... However I've been frustrated by the way combat changed with 1.54 because now i loose many fights that i should have won. see a couple other threads that pertain to that.

**vmxa1** · January 11, 2006, 15:23

I have not had a chance to read the others, but I will. Yeah the bonus is huge and that is fine. I do not even have an issue if all full health cossacks win all battles against them. I just shake my head when even those with less than 7/18 win and more than one combat.

Something between full value regardless of damage and what they started with could be fair.

**TheHateMale** · January 11, 2006, 15:27

I wonder if the differing strength formats could be made optional, or put into a 'tenacious' promotion.

Sounds like a lot of hassle though.

**Axxaer** · January 11, 2006, 19:06

Originally posted by vmxa1
I had expected to see a calv or two win straight up with no bombardment

Does this mean the cossacks were fortified in a city? Because if so, this means they could be getting another 50% or more defence bonus on top of their bonus vs. cavalry. The difference a city can make is HUGE in CivIV (they specifically wanted to make conquering harder / more strategic) so you really should bombard cities before attacking unless you have significantly better units.

**Rhothaerill** · January 11, 2006, 19:44

Originally posted by Axxaer

Does this mean the cossacks were fortified in a city? Because if so, this means they could be getting another 50% or more defence bonus on top of their bonus vs. cavalry. The difference a city can make is HUGE in CivIV (they specifically wanted to make conquering harder / more strategic) so you really should bombard cities before attacking unless you have significantly better units.

Horse-based units (cossacks, cavalry, etc.) don't get defense bonuses from being fortified. Are you talking about a city bonus? I was under the impression that horse-based units don't get that bonus either. But I could be wrong. I haven't really studied that yet.

**Axxaer** · January 11, 2006, 20:22

I *think* this means that they get the city bonus:

**Rook** · January 11, 2006, 20:37

It would be cool if the game could make a "combat log" that you could look at to see what the numbers were in a battle. I have had some strange things happen, battles I fought where half dead units kill my full strenth units and I wonder why. Does the computer get that lucky? Or does it cheat?

**Axxaer** · January 11, 2006, 21:25

Check the thread "I believe combat is rigged in this game and it ruins it for me" for discussion on whether the computer cheats or gets lucky:

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...hreadid=146959

**Urban Ranger** · January 11, 2006, 21:57

Originally posted by vmxa1
Anyway I fired it up with 1.52 and got into a tussle with Cavs Vs Cossack. I knew they make a change to the way it was handled. I could not remember if it was to use the att values as if they were not damage each round.

Yes, the separate strength from health. The strength of a unit after patch 1.52 remains the same regardless of how damaged it is.

**Blake** · January 11, 2006, 22:41

you can now do a raw post-damage strength comparison. A calvary with 15 str (100% hp) should have equal odds vs a cossack with 10 str (15 with the bonus) - thats 55% hitpoints.

The solution is to either use aggressive rifles with Formation, or get reamed. Larger stacks can ofcourse be smashed with cannons, but pillaging cossacks will ream non-aggressive civs. In any case, Rifles are by far the better solution, in most cases two non-aggressive rifles should kill a cossack and you can heal the second one, so it's not TOO expensive to defend against, but it is going to be unpleasent.

**VetLegion** · January 11, 2006, 22:48

Originally posted by Rook
It would be cool if the game could make a "combat log" that you could look at to see what the numbers were in a battle.

You can use Ctrl+TAB to that effect.

**vmxa1** · January 11, 2006, 23:07

Originally posted by Axxaer

Does this mean the cossacks were fortified in a city? Because if so, this means they could be getting another 50% or more defence bonus on top of their bonus vs. cavalry. The difference a city can make is HUGE in CivIV (they specifically wanted to make conquering harder / more strategic) so you really should bombard cities before attacking unless you have significantly better units.

No I was not even talking about any combat in cities, just out in the open. In one case I left 4 calvs on a hill and they got chewed up, doing very little damage.

As to rifles and such or any better units, that is what I had to do. I was just not prepared for the massive impact the patch made, even though I had read the change.

I did not think they would implement such a radical change via a patch. That does not seem to be a reasonable plan, maybe it was not tested or maybe they think it is a good idea to make huge changes.

If you took 10 calvs and attack say 6 cossack that had been bombarded so all have lost at least 5 of their 18 and some a lot more, you would have at least killed all the cossacks.

Now you may be lucky to kill a couple and will lose all the calvs that do not retreat. I don't care which one players think is the proper out come, but I do think you should not go from one to the other in the span of a single patch.

**vmxa1** · January 11, 2006, 23:16

Originally posted by Blake
you can now do a raw post-damage strength comparison. A calvary with 15 str (100% hp) should have equal odds vs a cossack with 10 str (15 with the bonus) - thats 55% hitpoints.

That sounds good on paper, but does not seem to be the case. I admit a few hundred battles is not conclusive.

Like I said, I saw many 7-9 str cossack crush 15 str calvs. Those cossack where single promotion units and even thrice promoted calvs tanked.

More than once I attacked units with less than 10 str and lost two full str calvs, before I could kill them. If what I saw is the normal, it does bode well for Cathy.

My interest in posting this was just to see if that is way out of the norm or others are seeing more less the same impacts.

I don't really care out they decide to handle the mechanics, but I do care they they seem to want to make large changes to them.

I don't consider this type of a thing to be a game tweak. A tweak is a 10-20% change, not 180% turn around.

**Blake** · January 12, 2006, 00:39

Cossacks hit calvary VERY hard, and thus battles will be very streaky. A calvary probably only takes 3 hits to die. A streak of 5-6 rounds won in a row (at ~50% odds) is well within the realm of possibility.

One nice thing is that all the combat code is going to be exposed in the SDK. This should mean it will be fully moddable. I for one would prefer a system where units exchange blows making flawless victories (in fair fights) actually impossible (of course some unfair fights, ie Gunships vs Knights, should ALWAYS be flawless).