Spearman and the Battleship

Meridio · Nov 29, 2005

I have played Civ from the original and it would seem I am back at Civ I with the entrenched Spearman killing the battleship scenario (amusing as it was

). The new Unit experiance seems too powerful (particularily first strike), having seen:
1. a Caravel kill a Destroyer
2. a Maceman kill a Machine Gunner
3. a Conquistador kill a Tank
My own view is that regardless of skill and luck there is no way a 1000 men with iron sticks (Macemen) could kill three men with machineguns! Is there no way to eliminate this as it skews the game towards low tech units and introduces nonsensical battles?
Anyone agree/disagree?

Also, as an aside - if a low tech enemy sends 30 low tech units such as macemen, to take out your tanks and machinegunners, surely it should be possible to kill these units in bulk on the attack?

snepp · Nov 29, 2005

Oops, missed one!

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=143503

mother superior · Nov 29, 2005

lol snepp thanks for the amusing read

snepp · Nov 29, 2005

Doh, forgot Spearman vs. Tank: Part Duex! (It's an epic)

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=139756

jeremiahrounds · Nov 29, 2005

i dont think civ4 is skewed to low tech units i think the older civs were normal and civ4 is skewed to high tech units.

Gufnork · Nov 30, 2005

My own view is that regardless of skill and luck there is no way a 1000 men with iron sticks (Macemen) could kill three men with machineguns!

You're kidding, right? One guy with an iron stick could do that if he was skilled enough. Sneak up behind them and bash their skulls in. Easy. But realism isn't the issue, you have to make some sacrifices to have a fun game.

picus · Nov 30, 2005

I wonder about this whole unbalanced combat thing. It's actually pretty simple - it's just current strength+modiferers vs current strength+moderifers. The actual units types are not important outside their initial strength rating. So is a modern armor that is wounded to 10 str fights a longbowman in a city on a hill with city defender3, then ya, it might lose.

In the scenario you mention, 30 macemen versus tanks - if the tank is in a city the odds are pretty good it will take out quite a few macemen before it is finally defeated.

madmaven · Nov 30, 2005

This is, obviously, an often criticized part of the game. I wonder why it can't/hasn't be eliminated?

When two units face off the game must determine the odds the introduce a random number variable when calculating the outcome so that the unit with the better odds doesn't win every single time.

The odds are never zero. One unit always has at least a chance of winning. And so if the random number comes up just right a spearman can beat a tank.

You can't just automatically beat a unit with lower odds, no matter how low the odds are. But I would think that any time a unit faces off with unit that is three or more ages older the older unit should just always lose. Would a full strengh group of knights (10 rating) ever beat a decimated tank unit (strength of 1)? I'd say probably never.

mrspank · Nov 30, 2005

Gufnork said:
You're kidding, right? One guy with an iron stick could do that if he was skilled enough. Sneak up behind them and bash their skulls in. Easy. But realism isn't the issue, you have to make some sacrifices to have a fun game.

Why are you assuming that only the macemen are sneaky? If the machinegunners were sneaky, they'd let the macemen enter the city, then gun them down from fortified positions.

In any case, if everything else was equal, a machinegunner unit would never lose to a macemen unit.

Dragonlor · Nov 30, 2005

2. a Maceman kill a Machine Gunner

The Maceman pulled a Matrix and dodged all of the bullets.

Gargoyle · Nov 30, 2005

madmaven said:
Would a full strengh group of knights (10 rating) ever beat a decimated tank unit (strength of 1)? I'd say probably never.

The knight should win 9 out of 10. A 1 strength tank must be wrecks with just a few crewmen wandering about.

anton_z1 · Dec 1, 2005

I dont knwo why all of you ppl Complain. I love when my ******** logbowmen kills a tank. I find it is justice to my superior intelligence

.

Joh · Dec 1, 2005

Meridio said:
My own view is that regardless of skill and luck there is no way a 1000 men with iron sticks (Macemen) could kill three men with machineguns!

Sharp sticks don't have the problem of jamming, overheating, breaking down, or running out of ammo.

bobrath · Dec 1, 2005

From my POV, these "battles" take place over a year (or so) and in that long drawn out period, it can be possible for backwards/ugly technology to pull a win out. I mean afterall, you're talking about a unit that has managed to survive for 1000s of years. You'd think they'd have picked up some tricks along the way. Is it enough to win consistently? Of course not.

If I wanted a game with surety, I'd be playing diplomacy.

DarkTori · Dec 1, 2005

bobrath said:
From my POV, these "battles" take place over a year (or so) and in that long drawn out period, it can be possible for backwards/ugly technology to pull a win out. I mean afterall, you're talking about a unit that has managed to survive for 1000s of years. You'd think they'd have picked up some tricks along the way.

I also see this as an example of old units using some modern technology. Will a battleship be able to be taken out by a spearman unit? Usually no, but after a year those spearmen form a resistance cell and float out on boats with homemade explosives they could do it. Possible but unlikely.

The time frame is one year, not one battle.

I once had five tanks and a Navy seal taken out by a rifleman entrenched in a city on a hill. I thought it possible that the rifleman unit did a year of guerilla warfare to wipe out my tanks with homemade bonds and stolen weapons on the narrow streets of their city (which was Baghdad).

Shillen · Dec 1, 2005

jeremiahrounds said:
i dont think civ4 is skewed to low tech units i think the older civs were normal and civ4 is skewed to high tech units.

I completely agree with this. If anything having the tech lead is too much of an advantage in civ4.

Excelsior · Dec 1, 2005

Gargoyle said:
The knight should win 9 out of 10. A 1 strength tank must be wrecks with just a few crewmen wandering about.

Assuming we were talking about a modern tank unit, with normal strength 40, then we would take the unit to be operating at 1/40th strength. If we assume simply that this reflects the proportion of men in fighting condition, a 12,000 man division would thus have 300 men in fighting condition. I would argue that 300 men with modern arms and a handful of operational tanks (strength 1 modern armor) would have an at least *reasonable* chance against even 12,000 circa-15th century armored knights (even ignoring the fact that units can be assumed to increase in manpower across years, as12,000 knights would be a *lot* of knights to be one 'unit').

However, in the Civ4 system, as I understand it, a strength 1 modern tank has the same combat value as a scout. And because of the way damage is inflicted the drop-off in win-probability is exponential as you get further from a fair fight. Thus, a strength 1 tank has next to no chance against (and probably wouldn't even damage) a healthy knight. Personally, I think current strength should just serve as hitpoints, not be used in combat probabilities. A strength 6 tank should *not* be the same strength as a longbowman, IMO...

ChiefMatt · Dec 1, 2005

Meridio said:
My own view is that regardless of skill and luck there is no way a 1000 men with iron sticks (Macemen) could kill three men with machineguns!

Unless these 1000 men were lining up one at a time the 3 machinegunners wouldn't stand a chance. Just by sheer numbers even unarmed, 1000 men would completely overwhelm 3 men with even the best small arms weapons.

Frewfrux · Dec 1, 2005

mrspank said:
Why are you assuming that only the macemen are sneaky? If the machinegunners were sneaky, they'd let the macemen enter the city, then gun them down from fortified positions.

In any case, if everything else was equal, a machinegunner unit would never lose to a macemen unit.

If all things are equal *in civ IV*, machine gunners *never* do loose to macemen units.

All things being equal means all health being equal, and niether unit having any promotions.

However, Machine Gunners do often loose to multiple macemen or when their health is really low.

CivCorpse · Dec 1, 2005

bobrath said:
. I mean afterall, you're talking about a unit that has managed to survive for 1000s of years.

And why didn't they die from old age? That being the case, when you join a GP to a city as a Super specialist, why doesn't he ever retire or pass away from natural causes? And why after a couple thousand years are those fishing nets still good? shouldn't you need to send a new work boat every so often? And roads...they last forever, where i come from after about 15 minutes a new pothole always appears and there are always road crews at work when I am late for work

Spearman and the Battleship

Chieftain

King

Chieftain

King

Prince

Prince

Chieftain

Warlord

Chieftain

Warlord

Warlord

Warlord

Warlord

Emperor

Chieftain

Deity

Chieftain

Chieftain

Warlord

Supreme Overlord of All

Similar threads