Combat probability- How do you propose to resolve this? especially with terrain, unit experience, unit type (and counter), and several other factors that I'm probably missing.
Terrain, unit experience, unit types and counters, and many other combat factors are not even slightly random (maybe xp is random in V? I forget). The main random outcome is the actual combat. Even with minimal testing I can see how a deterministic model is workable, but that's true even more so in Civ V where both units can survive a combat. If damage were fixed based on strength variance, I'm willing to bet most casual players and even some very experienced ones would take a while to notice it. RNG combat is less of a factor in V anyway. It matters, but far less so due to the consistency of unit survival with a str and positioning advantage.
RNG combat is like RNG growth, RNG building costs per city, RNG ability to declare war this turn, RNG diplo disposition, RNG tech cost. I still find it really silly that the majority of the community would balk at their city randomly shrinking for 5 turns straight, but has no problem with RNG combat outcomes in civ. Virtually every non-player-choice aspect in civ games outside of combat and map generation is deterministic, and for good reason.
What hasn't been demonstrated is a good reason combat and other random factors must be in the game, or what precisely they add. There is an important reason I made up the rules for events earlier in this thread; precisely to tie them into strategy and thus execute them well. Events should have little-to-no chance of determining who wins the map, unless someone routinely reacts better to them than the opposition. Lumping outcomes on a one or very few random rolls is a travesty that flies in the face of a "strategy" tag.
That is just part of Civ, and while I can certainly understand the frustration part (Been there sooo many times ), and wouldn't mind it being cleaned up a bit, Taking it away entirely would make the game boring.
Not a fair assumption to make. Virtually nobody has played a civ game without them. The status quo is all that is typically pictured. Unexpected opponent choices and different terrains/situations/civs would do plenty to create a dynamic model. Some of the most difficult and in-game rewarding behavior in civ is micro optimization. Civ V actually nerfed that down considerably (making it "easier" from a calculation standpoint, though one could argue whether heavy mathematical planning is fun), and as such it falls back on the old civ favorite that applies to all games: AI abuse
.
On the CP; Ok, so if a unit does 28pts of dam no matter what, then why bother having terrain mods, unit exp, promo's, etc
More or less damage. If the target is on a hill, maybe you do 20 points of damage, or whatever as multipliers are applied. It wouldn't surprise me if damage were already calculated this way, with the random modifier applied afterwards. After all, combat damage is already capped to some extent; you don't have a full health spear 1-shotting a full health tank these days
. Combat has already trended away from RNG to a degree.
Mines; Ok, so early game and your surrounded by warmonger civs and have no iron. You get dowed and are on the defensive. Your telling me you wouldn't be happy that your miners discovered a new source iron as Monty is about ready to sacrifice your population for his alters?
Relying on your opponent to be awful and not either capture your city before you can build/buy a unit or pillage you to death isn't exactly a good application of RNG
. There's always that "balanced resources" option, amirite
? I'm still butthurt that Civ IV didn't make it mandatory, and instead went in the wrong direction and banned it, but that's a story for another time.
Indeed.
Let`s use renting a flat as an example of strategy (really more logistics, but whatever). You have enough money for your food and bills and miscellaneous wants. But are you prepared for the random event?
...Your days goes by with your perfect plan working perfectly... Suddenly, the lights go out due to a power failure at the powerplant. A reasonable strategist will have some candles ready or go get some means for light, heat etc, a bad strategist will whine and sit in the dark until day-light.
Still waiting on any answer at all for my earlier *strategy* gameplay arguments
.
Thanx for linking me to the list, many of them I remember, some of them I think I never saw.
)
), and wouldn't mind it being cleaned up a bit, Taking it away entirely would make the game boring.
