http://members.home.nl/thomasvanofferen/destroyer.JPG\

Hi, Last time I saw this: "while defending your Destroyer was destroyed by a[n?] Egyptian Frigate!"
And thought:
I really want to know how experianced that Frigate was. Would it be nice when you see the promotion-pictograms in the text lines up there?
Or see what the odds where before the Frigate attacked?

That little bit extra information can give you a thought like "oh, I was unlucky" instead of frustration of losing a[n?] unit.

Maybe just a thought for an expansion.

Just open the combat log: ALT + TAB => Combat

Civ utilizes a complex, completely realistic, realtime simulator in order to determine realistic combat outcomes. Obviously the game simulated that a wooden hulled ship, using the power of the wind was able to successfully ram the destroyer, piercing its flimsy steel hull, and then unleashed a barrage of plutonium-tipped, armor piercing cannon balls directly into the fuel cells.

:spear:

It's just like the army of spearmen, who using their super dense wooden shafts were able to overturn a tank, then pierce the fuel area using their plutonium spearheads.

Depleted-Uranium tipped spears ftw.

Here comes the old "spearman defeated tank" from the Civ 3 days :lol: maybe your destroyer wasn't at full stength. I can imagine a veteran frigate bringing down a crippled destroyer that couldn't shoot and couldn't move.

You didn't say what your combat odds were.

The RNG hates you. ;)

Though it's fun making up stories about why it went that way. "...since when do frigates carry torpedoes?!"

I do not care about the realism. I understand the depleted-uraniam tipped spears tactics. That is Civ-Universum logic :)

I just want to know, do you people think it would be better when you see the odds when your units are in defend?

Bello, can you explain the combat log? I thought Alt + Tab gets you back to windows.

You can view the combat odds by right-clicking on the square your target is in and it will show you the odds. For a destroyer vs frigate it should be at least 90% unless the frigate is very experienced or the destroyer had been taking heavy damage.... oh wait, in this case it was a frigate attacking the destroyer during the computer player's move so that isn't possible.

I also notice from the screenshot that there were some destroyer killed other ships while defending. If that was the same destroyer, and there were many more attacks that scrolled off the list (I think the limit is 4 messages on that part of the screen) then the previous attacks could have worn it down.

Same happened to me. Monty DW'd me. I had destroyers and he frigates. I had a single destroyer patrolling the battlefront. Monty sent in two frigates that wounded it, and then sent a third that sunk it. Also later, I sent a single destroyer into his territory. It attacked an ironclad and then fled. During its flight from Monty's "Lost World" two more ironclads attacked it, followed by two galleons; the second of which sank the destroyer.

The Spanish performed the same feat a turn later.

Hence, I have learned that destroyers should fear wooden ships and flee from them, remaining in port to attack only when it can flee and hide again after the attack.

You can view the combat odds by right-clicking on the square your target is in and it will show you the odds.

Sinapus,

I believe Totibbs was looking for the combat odds the enemy's freighter would have to overcome to kill his destroyer.

Here comes the old "spearman defeated tank" from the Civ 3 days

Try Civ1 !!!

I just want to know, do you people think it would be better when you see the odds when your units are in defend?

Not since there's a combat log.

Can you explain the combat log?

Why sure!

In the upper left corner of your screen (just under your :gold: coffers), there's a button that looks like a pencil and a notebook.

Click that icon; then select "combat log".

Enjoy. :goodjob:

I do not care about the realism. I understand the depleted-uraniam tipped spears tactics. That is Civ-Universum logic :)

I just want to know, do you people think it would be better when you see the odds when your units are in defend?

Bello, can you explain the combat log? I thought Alt + Tab gets you back to windows.
My fault, sorry :blush:

CTRL + TAB opens the log. There you will find a tab "combat" which will show you a detailled description of the fights.

Not since there's a combat log.



Why sure!

In the upper left corner of your screen (just under your :gold: coffers), there's a button that looks like a pencil and a notebook.

Click that icon; then select "combat log".

Enjoy. :goodjob:

you understand me. I was indeed looking for that notebook. It gives information about every strike/hit.

For the next patch I hope Sid M. himself adds the odds in the red/green lines.

You're Destroyer probably got pummelled by the mightest unit of it's time, the Airship, before the Frigate dealt the final blow.

Oh and try CTRL + L for the combat remodulator.

Every time I've seen a strong unit destroyed by a weaker one, it's been for one of two reasons. Usually the combat log shows that the weaker unit has made a string of successive hits, due to a streak in the RNG output; otherwise, the supposedly stronger unit has been weakened by previous attacks. The combat log explains just what happened.

There will not be another patch. Alas. I also dislike rummaging through the annals of the combat log.

On another note, however, remember the good old days of Return of the Jedi? Little furry bears carrying sticks do a good job defeating "an entire LEGION of my best troops", as the Emperor put it -- who happened to be armed to the teeth in future-tech nuclear weapons. So that is a realistic example for you. (Yes, too bad they forgot to do air recon or even put on their infrared goggles and hence kept getting surprised by the teddy bears hidden in the underbrush, but at least it wasnt the emperor's WORST troops, who kept shooting themselves in the crotch. Then again, most of the American casualities in the first Iraqi conflict 17 years ago were "accidents", friendly fire, or caused by being drunk or on speed behind the steering column of a diesel-powered armored vehicle.)
But all irony aside, it is really quite possible for poorly-prepared troops of a vastly technologically improved army to be seriously crippled by well-prepared members, especially in greater numbers, of a local defense system, certainly considering circumstances such as morale, recon, knowledge and ability to use local infrastructural advantages (be these merely the ability to hide in someone's cottage for an ambush or escape), moral considerations (e.g. the use of civilian meatshields, non-combattant injury, etc.), and so forth and so forth. Consider too that a lot of high-tech military weaponry is often worthless in the wrong contexts or just plain worthless in general (that is, someone got a big bribe to fund Tech Y, and it turns out that the laser-guided thingamabob cant hit the side of a barn, oops) or is just used suboptimally (e.g. poor military intelligence will make the most advanced armored units costing millions upon millions a sitting duck to a $10,000 LAW in the hands of a dimwit and his brother), etc. Examples of all of this include anything from Vietnam to Lebanon, but most especially Afghanistan -- in whose region, currently, the most advanced military alliance in the history of the planet has been searching for a single bearded lunatic with a kidney problem for years and years, so far without luck. Man on camel attached to dialysis machine beats tank any day. Tanks. Hundreds of tanks. With air and sattelite support. Sattelites who can read the time of day off a Pakistani's wristwatch on a clear day. Trillions and trillions and trillions of OUR dollars spent of research, troops, surveillance, bribes, etc. etc. get whipped by a hundred million Saudi dollars, consistently, year for year. Which is why we will NEVER ever win an asymmetrical war against terror, ever, the way we are trying to do it now. (In addition to the asymmetry in "war weariness": we lose 100 troops and cry, we lose 1000 troops and protest in the street, we lose 2 skyscrapers and go stark raving mad -- me too. But THEY lose 10,000 bearded lunatic martyrs and don't bat an eye, life is cheap.) You cant beat that. For every billion we spend, they need only spend a thousand.
Ah sorry /rant
Just wanted to say: Spearman beats tank, even today.

Just a couple decades ago, Afghanistan killed a fair amount of a pretty badass helicopters (MI-24 Hind) by throwing rocks..

A bunch of cannon-firing frigates beating a destroyer seems reasonable. Even the spear vs tank one is far-fetched but believable. Spearmen build pits, lure tank driver to drive into them, or any one of a near-unlimited number of ideas for basically unarmed men vs tanks. (this is why real armies tend to mix tanks and infantry together).

There will not be another patch.
An information you've got from where or whom?
(snipped the worthless attempt to explain something with a fictional movie)
But all irony aside, it is really quite possible for poorly-prepared troops of a vastly technologically improved army to be seriously crippled by well-prepared members, especially in greater numbers, of a local defense system, certainly considering circumstances such as morale, recon, knowledge and ability to use local infrastructural advantages (be these merely the ability to hide in someone's cottage for an ambush or escape), moral considerations (e.g. the use of civilian meatshields, non-combattant injury, etc.), and so forth and so forth. Consider too that a lot of high-tech military weaponry is often worthless in the wrong contexts or just plain worthless in general (that is, someone got a big bribe to fund Tech Y, and it turns out that the laser-guided thingamabob cant hit the side of a barn, oops) or is just used suboptimally (e.g. poor military intelligence will make the most advanced armored units costing millions upon millions a sitting duck to a $10,000 LAW in the hands of a dimwit and his brother), etc. [...]
Just wanted to say: Spearman beats tank, even today.
Unfortunately, all your examples are not valid, as they use concepts which are not implemented.
There is no morale of troops in Civ4. There is no weather system in Civ4. There is no numerical advantage in the Civ4 kind of 1vs1. And so on.

Spearman does not beat tank. It has never done.
Just a couple decades ago, Afghanistan killed a fair amount of a pretty badass helicopters (MI-24 Hind) by throwing rocks..
These rocks have been Stinger AA-rockets, right?

A bunch of cannon-firing frigates beating a destroyer seems reasonable. Even the spear vs tank one is far-fetched but believable. Spearmen build pits, lure tank driver to drive into them, or any one of a near-unlimited number of ideas for basically unarmed men vs tanks. (this is why real armies tend to mix tanks and infantry together).
That must be the reason why any army of the world equips their men with bazooka-like weapons and not with shovels? :mischief:

To both posters:
It is fine that you like the current combat system. You may still have fun with it, I do not complain about this fact.

But please, accept just the fact that it is a combat system being based on randomness, just being modified by some values.
It is nothing less, and nothing more.

Please save your and our time for something more useful than trying to find (or having to read) "reasons" for something, which is only to be explained by the given numbers and the working of a RNG.

Just a couple decades ago, Afghanistan killed a fair amount of a pretty badass helicopters (MI-24 Hind) by throwing rocks...

Well, I know that Rambo killed a helicopter with a rock in First Blood. :D

Just last night, my friend lost a battle with his CG2 drill4 combat1 marine in a hill city to a poorly promoted SAM infantry. We checked the combat odds, and it was 0.0% meaning the marine had a >99.9% chance to win. The turn before, he also lost a 0.5% battle, and earlier in the game he lost a 0.1% battle... flipping unbelievable.

(snipped the worthless attempt to explain something with a fictional movie)



I have never yet seen a person with your inability to grasp irony. In fact, I even specifically mentioned that the foregoing was an ironic joke. PERHAPS I NEED TO SHOUT?



Unfortunately, all your examples are not valid, as they use concepts which are not implemented.
There is no morale of troops in Civ4. There is no weather system in Civ4. There is no numerical advantage in the Civ4 kind of 1vs1. And so on.



Oh, paired with the inability to grasp a point whatsoever? I wasnt talking about such "systems" in Civ4, but rather in what people like you call the "real world".



Please save your and our time for something more useful than trying to find (or having to read) "reasons" for something, which is only to be explained by the given numbers and the working of a RNG.

Your time is yours to spend as you choose, but since you are obviously so much cleverer than everyone else, you can tell us how you manage to waste your time so industriously.

But ah, you have, with your thoughtful contribution, made my day so much better already -- thank you!

Well, I know that Rambo killed a helicopter with a rock in First Blood. :D


"Rambo" promoted units FTW! :crazyeye: