1 AI Spearman defeats 2 riflemen

[Capt Dizle]

People are just not bothering to learn how the combat system works.

I still suspect streaky clumps of random numbers though.

[vmxa1]

A dozen games is not some random samples. I forgot about the samari that killed an elite modern tank last night, if that makes sense to you fine.532 vs 24 16 3 should never happen period, forget what the units really represent human with sword, who has no knowledge of the tanks workings.

[Sytass]

Well, I think a lot of these "odd" results can be avoided by following a simple rule that's even made it into NATO doctrine.

Do not attack unless you have three times the strength of the targeted unit. And I am talking about nominal strength, not strength in combat stats.

[Jason]

Samurai beat an elite (5hp) modern tank. 16 defence. Riiiiight.

I bet it did.


Remember, an elite unit with 2 hp is called "conscript"

[vmxa1]

Yes it did hapen. I have been playing at least 15 hours a day until yesterday (my PIV 1.7 blew a power supply, I was busy getting my amd 900 back in working order) and have seen literally every ground unit I have had beaten at one time or another in a battle that should have been a cake walk. I like to be at war non stop the whole game so I get scores of battles. Yes I see all kinds of people talk about not getting into fights with say a Calv against a weaker unit with out bombing or some such first. As if you have cannons or such with every unit in the game. As if you should let a spearmen take a worker and not attack with you riflemen for fear of losing. If you have not seen any rediculous outcomes I am astonished. You are either very fortune or a better player than me or too safe. I will attack with a superior unit, not marginally but far and away. Yes I would refrain if it was a close one, but if you have better attack and better defence rating and they have no extra bonus, you should not have to worry. If the samauri beats my elite calv fine, but it should not beat mobile infantry or any tanks modern or not and they do beat all three, not always but too often.

[player1]

case1) 2 Attack vs 1 defense losing (attacker) is happening not often.
case2) 3 Attack vs 1 defense losing (attacker) is happening sometimes.
case3) 4 Attack vs 1 defense losing (attacker) is happening rarely.

Case one:
Tank vs Mustemen in metropolis (not fortified)

Case two:
Tank vs Pikemen in metropolis (not fortified)

Case three:
Tank vs Spearmen in metropolis (not fortified)

This is all without considering training status (elite, veteran, etc...)


P.S.
This all is a little to random for my taste, but I'll survive.

[Venger]

Originally posted by Jason
Samurai beat an elite (5hp) modern tank. 16 defence. Riiiiight.

I bet it did.

Remember, an elite unit with 2 hp is called "conscript"

An elite samurai will defeat a regular modern tank 22% of the time assuming no modifiers. Unacceptable.

Even a regular samurai has a 1% chance against an elite modern tank.

Assuming both are elite, the chance is 4%.

There is no unit in the game with a positive integer attack value that doesn't have a chance of defeating any other unit.

Venger

[vmxa1]

I think us whinners would be happy it these where rare, I just started a game with Zulu and my in town/walls/forted vet impi got beat over and over by regular warriors four fight I lost all, I would say that is bogus. I might have not screamed if I won some of those, but none? I bet if I attacked with my warrior I would not win any of those fights, it almost seems if something if amiss here in the AI's favor.

[Jason]

It's like debating theology. If you don't want to have any remote possibility of ancient units damaging or destroying modern units, perhaps we need a "Cheiftan player patch" so that people's armies of modern tanks won't need to fear statistically aberational spearmen.

[Fidel]

[dweez]

Originally posted by Venger


An elite samurai will defeat a regular modern tank 22% of the time assuming no modifiers. Unacceptable.

Not at all! He sneaks in while they're sleeping and cuts their throats.

[Umgssda]

I think, that the combat problem is caused by the calculation not being radom enough. Good results seem to be followed by good results and really bad results often come in a row. That why it relatively often happens, that a overwhelmingly stronger unit might loose several hitpoints in a row.

You might argue, that those situations will only take place on low difficult levels, but that's no reason not to fix it.

The combat situation that annoyed me most, took place on sea: A frigate and a galleon vs one caravel. Both attackers sunk and the caravel hardly scratched.
Of course the odds for the caravel aren't bad, but they should be. Imagine, that the galley would fight as well...

Fighting values of sailing ships need adjustment. If someone needs Iron and Salpeter to build a Frigate he can expect it to outgun at least a galley.

[player1]

Caravels defense of 2
Galleon attack of 1
Frigate attack of 2

What is strage?

It covers 1.5 attack vs 1 defense = losing often, but more often winning

Nothing!

[Umgssda]

Well, if you define 'Caravel' to be a unit with defense 2 and 'Frigate' to be a unit with attack 2 everything is in order.

But if I think of a caravel I cannot help to think of a 15th century ship poorly armed, which main focus was exploration and trade.
The 19th century frigate was a full purpose warship.

What concerns me, is that you cannot build any proper warships, that can really rule the sea up to the iron clads.
Iron clads being heavily armored steam ships, which highly depended on calm water, very similar to galleys.

[player1]

Personnaly, I think that Caravel should have defense of 1 &
that Privateer should have attack of 2.