Make Maq's combat the default option

[EPW]

Maquiladora recently added a "New Combat" option to the Source Code Project which changes the combat calculations to how they were in CTP1. Basically, an attacking unit uses ONLY its attack value and a defending unit uses ONLY its defending value. In the current combat system they use both.

The main effect, of course, is that units with higher defensive values are better at defending and units with higher attack values are better at attacking. With the current system, it doesn't really matter.

[Maquiladora]

I think it's better too, and I've found no problems using it with Cradle II yet. Just leave the rules window button, or perhaps just the userprofile.txt entry to change it back.

[Maquiladora]

Hopefully Martin will see this resounding victory to make new combat the default option in the next AE.

[EPW]

Bots never say no.

[Maquiladora]

Then you and I are bots *head explodes*

I would like to know who voted no, and wring his/her neck

[EPW]

You got another bot vote.

[mapfi]

You got another bot vote.

Nope, that was me ;-)

[Maquiladora]

Take that

[Martin Gühmann]

Then you and I are bots *head explodes*

I would like to know who voted no, and wring his/her neck

That reminds me of that Bavarian village wondering who was the lonely one who voted for the SPD instead of the CSU, as everyone else.

I think doing this is a bad idea, I mean what should all the newbies and lurkers think of you?

And what's so wrong with saying No? As far as I understood it, city conquest is more difficult, so as a builder it is easier than to defend the cities and grow and build until the empire is so powerful that no-one else has a chance. So makes life much easier.

And on the other hand the AI needs then some tweaks, too. For instance reducing AI cit garrison. And here we are starting modding.

And one thing I don't know is whether you modified AI force matching, too? So that the AI knows how many units it needs for an attack.

-Martin

[Maquiladora]

I think doing this is a bad idea, I mean what should all the newbies and lurkers think of you?

It was only a joke I would never attack a newbie.

And what's so wrong with saying No?

Well the main idea of the new combat is to make it more interesting, by making units more specialised. For example, a Hoplite in old combat is just as useful used as an attacker as he is a defender. Whereas with new combat you should only use him for defence.

So this then introduces another interesting choice for the player. Do you build a defensive unit that can only be useful in defence, or an attacking one? This choice doesn't exist with the old combat, there you just build the best unit you can.

As far as I understood it, city conquest is more difficult, so as a builder it is easier than to defend the cities and grow and build until the empire is so powerful that no-one else has a chance. So makes life much easier.

In CtP2 I think it's far too easy to attack anyway. If you can have a maximum of 12 units defending a tile or inside a city, but an attacker can bring a maximum of 96 units to attack that tile or city, I think defending should generally be easier. In tactical war games this is quite common too, to stop someone with a numerical advantage winning every time.

Also being aggressive and attacking cities has obvious benefits if you succeed (you gain more cities, and take them from another), whereas being a peaceful builder doesn't have those benefits. So it should be hard to capture a city, just like it should be hard for the peaceful builder to gain a technology lead.

And on the other hand the AI needs then some tweaks, too. For instance reducing AI cit garrison. And here we are starting modding.

And one thing I don't know is whether you modified AI force matching, too? So that the AI knows how many units it needs for an attack.

I didn't make any AI changes in the text files, or in the source code, I was too afraid to break anything there.

I see what you're saying by having to modify the original files, I just think the new combat is a lot better than the old it's worth it.

[Maquiladora]

That reminds me of that Bavarian village wondering who was the lonely one who voted for the SPD instead of the CSU, as everyone else.

I'm guessing it was you then (in both polls?)

[Martin Gühmann]

I didn't make any AI changes in the text files, or in the source code, I was too afraid to break anything there.

I see what you're saying by having to modify the original files, I just think the new combat is a lot better than the old it's worth it.

There is something about the force matches, actually I don't know whether this is right as it is for now, if the AI matches its forces it uses the defense value of the target to match it to the attack value of its armies, or something like this. I don't know whether this is right for the new system.

I'm guessing it was you then (in both polls?)

I don't live in rural Bavaria, to many loonies with an invisible magic man spooking in their head which makes them to vote for the Christian Social Union, the Bavarian de facto state party. But nevertheless the story is funny, a journalist game to that village and wanted to figure out who it was, and the local CSU chieftains wanted to know that, too. So they were asking around, and found some people with a big grin, but nobody wanted to say anything.

-Martin

[mapfi]

Take that

Hey, I voted yes - i.e. the additional yes vote wasn't a bot

Have played through to a republic on hard, wiped out one of the AI's who was sharing the continent with me - seemed too easy. However, working it out with the others now may be more of a challenge

[Maquiladora]

There is something about the force matches, actually I don't know whether this is right as it is for now, if the AI matches its forces it uses the defense value of the target to match it to the attack value of its armies, or something like this. I don't know whether this is right for the new system.

Doesn't the AI match all the values: attack, defence, ranged, bombard and value of the army for each goal? But a different minimum ratio for each depending on the type of goal? Like a special attack requires a ratio of 0 for all of those.

They will need to be changed a little bit for sure anyway. Old combat requires that attack AND defence are good enough to beat the attack AND defence of a defending army, or at least that's how it should work.

Whereas new combat only needs the attacking army's attack to be better than the defending army's defence (perhaps plus defensive bonuses).

Ranged, bombard and value ratios would apply to old and new combat the same I think.

Hey, I voted yes - i.e. the additional yes vote wasn't a bot

I was saying it to EPW, just to show he was wrong... as always

[EPW]

I was saying it to EPW, just to show he was wrong... as always