Battle System is SCREWED UP

[FrostyBoy]

Played 3 games so far.

Sorry if this has been said before but;


The 1st game I played, A LOT of my stronger men were losing to weak men, I just hmpfed and moved on.

However on my 3rd game, I am playing as English, I have the most powerful units (knights, musketmen,etc) in the game, and yet 1 out of 5 will actually win against their not-so-powerful units (warriors, swordsmen). They are not on mountains, infact, more often than not, I am the one on the mountain and attacking! AND LOSING! EVERY TIME!!

I might aswell invent nothing and just build frickin' warrior's to win wars!!!!!

wtf were they thinking at firaxis? what a load of bull****

I'm sickovit, someone release a patch PLEASE so I can actually play a decent game for once.

It gets so bad, that I just say screw this and stop the game half way, coz I seem to get no where with any of my unit's. It's just completely screwed.


Oh and btw, they kept rambling on about their new battle system, where the heck is it?

bastards

[FrostyBoy]

Oh and thank you Activision for giving the dumbasses at Firaxis out the idea:

"Oh, since defending is always better than attacking, if u attack, the unit will just simply move into that square"

wtf? so if a enemy unit is outside my city, I gotta let him pillage me? or run out and kill him and then just sit outside looking like a dork waiting to get beaten up?

Just couldn't get any dumber.

[dainbramaged13]

my battles have been going fine...

if you want to killl units outside youre city, get fast units, you can always move back inside the city after theyre done.

[cort]

Originally posted by Sn00py
Oh and thank you Activision for giving the dumbasses at Firaxis out the idea:

"Oh, since defending is always better than attacking, if u attack, the unit will just simply move into that square"

wtf? so if a enemy unit is outside my city, I gotta let him pillage me? or run out and kill him and then just sit outside looking like a dork waiting to get beaten up?

Just couldn't get any dumber.

cool down guys.. playing since released, combat can sometimes be weird but not that bad.. if you have stronger units, MOST of the time you win.. point is that; until late industrial units; stats are so close that it not that strange to lose a cavalary against a fortified warriror on top of a mountain (1+1+0.5)/6. and do not forget; this is civ not chess; there is always a chace for those poor bastard spearmen to make a shot on the spot; which makes the game more fun & realistic..

by the way; me too agree with the idea that advancing to a square after beating your foe should be optional...

[FrostyBoy]

I want fixes

while i'm at this, there's also this other thing i've noticed

about 6 times, and a few times this guy I know, has experienced the other civ completing a wonder right before u are about to complete it on the the next turn.

I've only played 3 times and he's only played once, sounds rigged to me...

[FrostyBoy]

cort, I'm sorry for going off,

I am not exaggerating here... I understand all that 'chance' stuff, I am saying that out of 1/5 battles I will actually win, and I am using far more powerful units

it doesnt add up

[Stuie]

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
my battles have been going fine...

if you want to killl units outside youre city, get fast units, you can always move back inside the city after theyre done.

Mine too. In my current game, I had a huge war in the Middle Ages and the Modern Age has pretty much been non-stop warfare. I can only think of two times in my entire game that combat results were somewhat ridiculous, and I chalk them up to the fortunes of war.

That said, combat definitely favors the defeneder. Being on a mountain isn't the only thing that increases defense value - units also gain advantage from being behind a river, being on hills, in forest, etc. etc. Also, the attack values of early units (up until you get cavalry) are relatively flat, so the swordsman retains its value well into the industrial era.

I've learned to appreciate the liberal use of artillery (catapults/cannon/etc.) to soften up enemy targets prior to obliterating them. Don't scoff at the artillery!

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Sn00py

I am not exaggerating here... I understand all that 'chance' stuff, I am saying that out of 1/5 battles I will actually win, and I am using far more powerful units

it doesnt add up

But the units aren't "far more powerful" (in Civ3, anyway....). A knight has an attack of "4", and a musketman only a "3". The swordsman's basic defense is a "2", and this can be enhanced by most terrains.

Like I said, soften up the targets with arty, then finish them with the knights/musketmen.

[Wexu]

Well, in real life if you attack other unit, you must go to "square" where they are? How on earth are you going to attack with swordsmen and still stand in the same place?

Sheesh... is using brains really so hard?

And the game would be good if knights always win swordsmen? There are many examples from the real world when much more powerful troops have lost to weaker troops. These "phalanx wins battleships!!" -situations are much more rare than people are saying.

[Sabre2th]

Originally posted by Wexu
Sheesh... is using brains really so hard?

[Kuciwalker]

Stop complaining about how if you attack, you move into the square. THIS IS CALLED REALISM . Of course you have to move your unit out of the city to attack the enemy. Haven't you heard of something known as a seige ? IMO, this change is a good thing. You can trap a city with high defensive modifiers. You box in a city with cheap units, and if the cities defenders try and drive them off, you move in with your attack force and capture the city. Meanwile, the enemy units are unfortified on what is likely a tile with a low defensive modifier. If the enemy decides to turtle, you starve him out.

[mbarloewen]

In my experience (A weekend of non stop addicive play) I think the combat system is great. I think a VERY important factor that doesn't get mentioned much when people are whineing about the system is whether or not your units are regular/veteran/elite. I find my regular units are always struggleing in battles I think they should win while veteran units do well. I always lead off my large offensives with my Elite units as they tend to get the upper hand.

Mike

[Mister Hand]

I agree with mbarloewen. I've found that that playing a Militaristic civiliazation really pays off when it comes to combat. An Elite unit will have a nice advantage over a regular one that's only a step or two more advanced. There are a lot of factors involved in every combat and if you think that just having the more advanced unit is enough to guarantee victory most of the time, you will find yourself on the losing end of the war.

[Valant]

In Civ3 there are many changes to the combat system compared to Civ2. For instance...

1) Removal of firepower value of units
During turns of battle, the losing side of the turn only losses 1 hp.
2) Removal of HP of unit depending on the units technology
Now units have 2-5 max HP depending on their skill level conscript, standard, vetran, elite. Furthermore the units skill level does not change their attack/defense power.
3) Removal of ALL attack bonus percentages
Zero, zip, zilch
4) Addition of MORE defensive bonus percentages

The people at Firaxis did the following to balance these changes:
1) Increased the attack power or more modern unts to compensate for them becoming weaker by removing firepower and extended HP

The problem with this approach is that Firaxis removed more power than they put back in....making more powerful/modern units less significantly powerful in Civ3.


Extra info:
Do you know how many possible bonuses that defenders can get?
1) Terrain the defending unit is on (even if the unit is in a city...the terrain under the city is used in the calculations) resulting in a defensive bonus of 10-100% always being applied
2) Is the defending unit fortified, 0% if no 25% if yes
3) Is the defending unit in a fortress, 0% if no 50% if yes
4) Is the attacking unit crossing a river to attack the defending unit, if no 0% if yes 25%
5) City defense
Pop under 7, no city walls, civ has great wall = 0%
Pop under 7, no city walls, civ does not have great wall = 0%
Pop under 7, city wall, civ has great wall = 100%
Pop under 7, city wall, civ does not have great wall = 50%
Pop 7-12, reguardless of city walls or great wall = 50%
Pop 12+, reguardless of city walls or great wall = 100%

So best case scenario your attacking an unfortified unit thats out in the open on grassland/plains/desert, the defending unit will get a +10% defensive bonus applied to its defensive power. So for example that spearman who has a base defensive power of 2, now becomes 2.2

In the worst case scenario your attacking a fortified unit stationed in a city that has a population of under 7, but has the great wall wonder and city walls. The city was also built on top of a mountain and the attacking unit has to cross a river to attack the city. The defending unit will get a +250% bonus to its defense power rating. So for example that spearman who has a base defensive power of 2, now becomes 7.

[Wexu]

Originally posted by Valant In the worst case scenario your attacking a fortified unit stationed in a city that has a population of under 7, but has the great wall wonder and city walls. The city was also built on top of a mountain and the attacking unit has to cross a river to attack the city. The defending unit will get a +250% bonus to its defense power rating. So for example that spearman who has a base defensive power of 2, now becomes 7.

Well, who'd need anything more than spearman defending THAT fortress in real life too?

Only key to that lock is a nuke.