Conscript Defenders

[Shadow_Cougar]

I noticed that my land neighbor seemed to be building up his military and would not enter into a trade agreement, so I expanded my land forces. I owned a line of cities (formerly English) straight through his territory that I considered most vulnerable (out of 5 shared borders). I built those cities up, but in the least valuable (size 10), I used 3 Conscripted MI as the primary defenders.

Because I denied him oil (Germany) I faced calvary (mix of vet and elite mainly).
Result, city taken with 17 losses.
1 MI rose to regular, I to veteran and one to elite during the fighting.

Intrigued, I shuffled my forces and left the city with 3 vet. MI.

Result, city taken with 14 losses, no promotions.

I played this with several different options, but each time the conscripts did as well or better than the vets, mainly due to promotions.

Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon?
Are conscripts better defenders?

I used this in the field, I left the draftees in the cities and took the vets out to conquer. It seemed to work well.

All scenarios resulted in a city razed:
3 Vet Inf:
12 wounded, 6 killed
3 Con. Inf
6 wounded, 9 killed - 1 vet, 1 reg with prom.
3 Vet. Riflemen
8 wounded, 3 killed
3 Con. Riflemen
4 wounded, 7 killed - 1 vet with prom.

[Spec]

What I noticed is that a veteran unit is at 90% of the time a winner vs an elite of the same kind. I hate Elites, there a waste of time. And it also seems that's the lower the rank of a unit, the longer it resists. I know it seems weird but it's always like that for me....I always play monarch by the way...


Spec.

[Aeson]

It may be because the the check for promotion uses a random number. A failed promotion would most likely be a "bad" number, which would have been used as your defense for the next fight. Since the conscripts have more checks for promotions, they could use up more of these bad numbers during the course of several fights. The number of hp's that the units have to use is the same, as long as both units are upgraded to the same level at some time in the defense. A conscript has 2 initial hitpoints, and a chance at gaining 3 more. An elite would start with 5, with no chance of gaining any more.

Also, using conscript infantry (or any 1 movement troop), the fact that they have more chances to defend at 1 hp means they will have more chances to kill mobile troops, instead of just wounding them.

In my last game I lost a conscript MI defending in a city on a hill to a regular Longbowman, so they definitely aren't supermen in any case

As far as Elites being worthless, tell that to the army, forbidden palace, and 5 wonders I was able to build with great leaders in my current game (up to 500AD now). Even if they fight worse, which I dont think they do, the chance for great leaders more than makes up for it. If you save before a battle, you can reload and see whether using an elite or a veteran of the same unit type makes any difference. The battle will still go the same way, up to the point where you as the attacker have taken your fourth hit.

[Arrian]

I never use conscripts myself, but you may be on to something. One thing is for certain: I HATE fighting against concript riflemen with Cavalry. I lose a LOT more Cav to conscript rifles than to regulars, because the Cav won't run away if the defender has 1hp left, which is quite often when facing conscripts. A frequent result:

Cavarly attacks, takes one hp off the conscript, then loses 4 straight and dies. If this were against a regular, the rifleman would have 2hp left, and my Cav would escape. Then I would hit with a fresh Cav.

I've seen similar results attacking with Tanks/Modern Armor v. Infantry, although the odds are better there and I don't lose very many units.

-Arrian

[ShuShu]

I bow to the wisdom that is Aeson...

First a 450 unit army and then identifying an unintended proceedural combat bias that actually argues against building barracks for defensive unit construction!!!!

I'm off to get pen and paper to do the math on this...

[ShuShu]

... just let me finish bushing off my knees...

The first point ot make is that since none of us really knows how combat works, anything's possible.

Second point: since the promotion roll only occurs after a successful combat there is one condition that makes the observations suspect.

THE DEFENDER MUST BE SIGNIFICANTLY BETTER THAN THE ATTACKER.

If the defender is on a par with the attacker, the defender is likely to die before even the first promotion roll occurs. In fact, if we check the example given to us, it turns out the veteran forces WON more often than the Conscript. (29-26). The conscripts killed more because of the 1 hit point strategy of faster units.

There is no need to assign any unfair or unintended advantage to conscripts. They are more likely to die than veterans. They are, however, more likely to kill as well.

It is clear to me now that I am much better off with two untrained defenders than one trained one (CIV II knowledge - be gone), as I not only get a better chance of winning (6 hits vs. 4) but also a better chance of Killing (2 units with 1 hit vs 1). In the short run, it is even cheaper to build!


Interestingly, the contrapositive may also hold true: Your faster units may survive longer if the have less training because they are more likely to retreat before total engagement.

In the later stages when even the infantry is fast, barracks are a must.

[Aeson]

Shadow was the one who pointed this out, not I

I really don't know if the size of my army denotes wisdom, I'm starting to think it is an inverse relation The count is up to 500+, not counting the 200 or so captured workers which I've been using in hordes to distract the Aztecs armies, keeping their numbers down. My last pop rush was at 500AD, its 710AD now. I've gotten a great leader the last 5 turns that I didn't have one already active, but have run out of wonders to build. Maybe I'll just start using them to rush cathedrals

I've been learning a lot about Zulu culture at least, looking up online references and through books for city names. No "new" cities here! I have to make up for my earlier usage of horribly unoriginal city names... the last 1nationality# city has been disbanded finally

[Shadow_Cougar]

Re: ... just let me finish bushing off my knees...

Originally posted by ShuShu
Interestingly, the contrapositive may also hold true: Your faster units may survive longer if the have less training because they are more likely to retreat before total engagement.

Attacking with conscripts seems to be mainly a pointless exercise. The defender gains more in experience than you do in damage, unless you have a big tech advantage (MI vs. Spearmen).

It seems reasonable to me that winning conscripts gain experience easier than vets. I don't know if it is true, or that if a lesser troop beats a better one, then the odds are increased.

Against bombardments, most of the damage is wasted.

[Arrian]

Attacking with 2-move regular troops doesn't work well at all, IIRC. The defender seems to get one free shot at the start of combat, and often lands that shot. Thus, you start 1hp down a lot of times. 1 more hp loss, and a regular runs away. Ack! You're not gonna gain too much ground there. I always build veteran troops. I acknowledge that conscripts or even regular defenders might kill more attacking enemy troops, but - generally speaking - if your cities are under attack, you're in trouble. If I'm doing well, I'm doing the attacking.

-Arrian

[ShuShu]

Attacking with conscripts seems to be mainly a pointless exercise. The defender gains more in experience than you do in damage, unless you have a big tech advantage (MI vs. Spearmen).

Promotions don't occur when mobile units retreat.

I think of mobile units as highly mobile, multiple salvo artillery units.

Advantages:

They can move one or two squares and attack (regular artillery cannot walk and chew gum)

In their attack they get at least three shots (first three losses) and can potentially kill a unit.

Can defend themselves.

Disadvantages:

Takes turns to heal wounds (artillary does not get wounded)

Can be killed in attack if defender damaged down to one.


Buy reducing their training you reduce their offensive power (2 shots vs 3) and chance to destroy unit (fewer losses before retreat), but increases their chance of survival (by retreating sooner).

Interesting sideline: I think this is also an argument against healing your mobile units before they are down to 1 hit point.

Unit Life Cycle:
1) lean mean leader generating elite machine - final attacks
--- after some damage
2) mobile artillary to soften up defense before other elites
--- after all but one damage
3) return to barracks for some TLC
--- after fully healed
1) ...

[Harovan]

Wow, Aeson, that's a good one. What map size is that? Most amazing is the accurate grid you build your cities.

[Platypus]

Originally posted by ShuShu
By reducing their training you reduce their offensive power (2 shots vs 3) and chance to destroy unit (fewer losses before retreat), but increases their chance of survival (by retreating sooner).

I agree with this. I try to generally only attack with veteran and elite mobile troops, but when building a large assault force in many cities, I will occasionally accidently build a regular unit. I have found that it works well to have that regular unit be the first one to attack a well-defended city. Usually, it takes at least one HP from a defender and retreats. Then, the following veteran/elite unit has an easier time with that unit. I think of those regular units as another form of bombardment to soften up the city. And, sooner or later, they get a promotion up to veteran status.

[bogatir]

I feel all better just knowing my mighty Aztec cavalry army wasn't the only one to ever take a serious dinging at the hands of a bunch of conscript riflemen.

I lost huge numbers of veteran cavalry in attacks against medium-sized cities defended by (usually) two conscript riflemen. In one instance, I attacked a lone conscript rifleman unit in hill terrain with a veteran cavalry Army (of 3 units) and the conscript WIPED OUT the friggin army. That made me a bit grumbly, you can guess.

I also noticed that in this industrial age war against mainly conscript defenders, my forces were promoted at a much slower rate than had been the case in a middle age war (fought with knights) against mostly 'regular' and 'veteran' quality opponents.

In the middle age war, my Aztecs generated promotions that turned about a third of my knights into elites, and also generated 5 Great Leaders. In the industrial age war, I generated only 5 promotions to elite and no Great Leaders. In fact, 3 of my 5 elite cavalry units died in attacks against conscript riflemen.

I also noticed a similar oddity in the naval portion of the war. The frigates and galleys of my Greek and Egyptian opponents had remarkable success against my attacking fleet of ironclads. I lost a lot of ships -- in fact, I only 'broke' the enemy fleet when I resorted to attacking them with some very aged privateers I had kept hanging around to mess with their commerce before the war. In other words, the '1' strength privateers mopped up where the '4' strength ironclads got pretty much slaughtered.

Ouch!