Combat odds cheats

This is a vent of frustration more than anything else.

First off, to the people who will reply along the lines of 'over the long run the combat odds are even' or 'you just were unlucky'... etc. etc. go DIAF you don't know what you are talking about.

Moderator Action: If you wish to post on this forum, please refrain from uncivil behavior. - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I am SO SICK of the combat odds cheating. Normally I ignore it and when I lose multiple 94%+ battles I just go into the world builder and fix it. But that gets old, very old.

This latest game I lost around 70% of my 90%+ combats. Firaxis please patch the game to allow us to turn off the rigged combat odds. A 60% chance is really like a 20% chance... a 85% chance is like 50/50. Oh and.. if you got a big stack vs. his stack.. the first combat is a 100% loss unless it is 99.99%. The computer no matter what makes you lose your first unit.

Been playing this game since it came out... hundreds of matches.. I almost never post here... but I'm so mad I can spit... I'm so GD sick of battles where I have an enourmous advantage I lose. Over and over and over and over and over.

ITS BROKEN... I ASSUME MORE PEOPLE DONT COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY ATTACK AN ENTIRE STACK AT A TIME VS. ONE UNIT AT A TIME SO THEY CANT SEE THE TOTAL BS THAT IS COMBAT ODDS.

If you disagree.. you dont play much or you are an idiot... or 'maybe' you just dont pay attention becaue you attack with a 20 stack at once vs. a 10 stack and lose 5 guys and dont even look that 2/3 of your 85% combats lose.

Ok... I solved nothing but vented frustration... I know nothing will change.. its an older game.. and the only people who will reply will disagree with me (that the way of internet forums). Its too bad Civ5 is horrible... WTB Civ4+

I overheard much the same in the bar at the United Nations last week:

Barack Obama: "Employment just never goes up, and if any of you disagree you either don't govern much or you're idiots"

Nicolas Sarkozy: "yes, zis is because zey lay off ze entire company at a time, and zey don't see ze TOTAL BS ZAT IS INCAPACITY BENEFIT"

David Cameron: "I have been governing this coalition since it came out, hundreds of policy anouncements, but I'm so goshdarned sick we always have to U turn even when we have such an enormous advantage"

Iran guy: "Great Allah you must patch life so everybody has jobs"

Bono: "OK guys you vented your frustration, now get back in there and make the world a better place"

Sarcastic answer
We always get the complaints when the RNG screws the player. We never get the complaints when people win a bunch of low odds battles in a row. Since unfair losses outnumber unfair wins the combat odds are unfair.

Short answer
Use more seige you wouldn't have this problem

Serious answer sort of
Yes most people attack with stacks. 1 unit vs 1 unit only has 2 outcomes. Lose everything or lose nothing. There is still a chance to lose even if the odds are 99.99%. Run 1000 tests and about 1 should lose. That is not to say that 2-3 or even 15 may lose.

2 battles failed at 90% odds have a probability of 1%. Now that would seem unfair. I think your problem is sample size. Please try to find 100 at least 90% battles. Proccede as normal. There should be about 90 wins. 10 successes. I can't be bothered with the exact figures but anything within 10 of those numbers should still be fair.

It's selective memory, and you are far likely to attack at 90% than 10%, so you remember the loss more than the low odds win.

Move along... nothing to see here...

If there's a cheat somewhere, I swear it has to be cavalry retreat odds (never mind the fact it shouldn't be allowed to retreat from something as fast)

nfw said:

If there's a cheat somewhere, I swear it has to be cavalry retreat odds (never mind the fact it shouldn't be allowed to retreat from something as fast)

Click to expand...

There is actually a cheat. On lower levels the human gets a few free wins against barbarians.

coopervegas said:

This is a vent of frustration more than anything else.

Click to expand...

Well, it's not really our fault, but you have the right to be frustrated. Just behave while doing so.

coopervegas said:

ITS BROKEN... I ASSUME MORE PEOPLE DONT COMPLAIN ABOUT IT BECAUSE THEY ATTACK AN ENTIRE STACK AT A TIME VS. ONE UNIT AT A TIME SO THEY CANT SEE THE TOTAL BS THAT IS COMBAT ODDS.

Click to expand...

Dude, take it easy. We can read your comments without Caps Lock on. Typing like that just makes you look bad, you should always avoid it, no matter how pissed off you are.

coopervegas said:

If you disagree.. you dont play much or you are an idiot...

Click to expand...

Now that's just unfortunate, this will probably get you an infraction and rightfully so. People can disagree and will disagree with you all throughout your life and telling them that they either don't know as much as you or that they're idiots is probably the stupidest thing to do. Other than acting like a douchebag, it will probably just make matters worse for you.

The least you could do is at least hear them out and think critically on the subject, and only then, if you still disagree, point that out and the reasons to do so. Acting like a stupid kid, well, it's just going to get more hate and mockery your way.

coopervegas said:

Ok... I solved nothing but vented frustration... I know nothing will change.. its an older game.. and the only people who will reply will disagree with me (that the way of internet forums). Its too bad Civ5 is horrible... WTB Civ4+

Click to expand...

Perhaps if you acted more civil with this people would be more inclined to help. You can't expect that people will ever try help and explain the game mechanics to you or even respect you if you talk like that.

I went through all this trouble of making a post instead of just reporting because, well, I'm certain that you already got reported, that post was really bad, and that in this case it's better to hold a mirror in front of you than just deleting and moving on.

I'm almost sure you aren't even 14 since your lack of maturity shows, but you should take this as a lesson. If you get bad responses, it's not everybody else's problem.


on-topic:

Yeah, the RNG Gods can be a real pain sometimes. Not as bad as it was in Civ3 (I raged so hard sometimes playing it - tanks vs spears, paratroopers vs archers, submarines vs galleons, you name it), but it still happens.

No, it doesn't cheat, it's selective memory. It has been tested, the game doesn't favor either the player or the AI and it doesn't lie about the combat odds. Just deal with it. Bring more and better troops. 5 dudes with 90% odds are much worse than 5 dudes with 98% odds because you first bombarded the city with siege units.

Combat odds have been tested by folks who accounted for criticism and explained discrepancies rather than suggesting that those who disagree "die in a fire."

The usual culprit in this situation seems to be reloading losses without enabling random seed on reload. This leads to "OMG, I just lost a 97% win battle 9001 times in a row!!!" If reloading to change combat outcomes, select random seed.

The sometimes culprit is observer bias. The possible culprit here is flat out troll? I do not know. Either way, if you want combat odds explained I am almost positive somebody here will bite despite the original post, should you actually desire the answer enough to come out from under the bridge.

If it were truly flawed, you'd be able to mount substantial evidence proving this.

Yep exactly what I expected... wrong replied defending what you dont understand.

But specifically to the genius who said 'use more catapults'... dude... if the combat odds are 95% i am supposed to have a 95% chance to win.. be it cavalry, infantry, or catapults. you point is mute.

Honestly guys... play 5 games vs. the computer... attack one unit at a time and look at the odds before every single comat... the odds you will see are no where near what you are supposed to get... its not 'what I pay attention to' or 'rng' or any of that other garbage... ive been playing since this game came out... literally thousands of combats.. 80% win chance is more like 50/50.. 95% win chance is more like 70%... and it is even more skewed if its the very first attack in the stack or a 1v1 attack. im not stating this as opinion.. its a FACT.. ive seen in over thousands of combats. i have a math minor and i took statistics I and II in college... you people who disagree... have you done combat the way I have described thousands of times and do you have a strong math background? if not... you are just spreading rumor and what you read on another post.. you have zero direct input. your opinion therefore is mute.


Moderator Action: Please refrain from trolling - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

I have seen no evidence in the 5+ years I've been playing Civ4 to suggest that there is a flaw in the odds. I'm also midway through a statistics degree at university, including HDs in Stats 1 and 2, so am I qualified enough to comment?

to uat2d.... most of your comments are crying about my harsh language... i was not talking directly to anyone specifically so the only people who it applies to are the people who read what i had to say and VOLUNTARILY responded... you didnt haveto reply.

What in my post suggest that I 'needed help' or that I had a question or that I something think its my opinion is not fact. Someone may disagree with me... but a smart person would have read what I had to say and concluded that I am set in my opinion stated that I am not fishing for answers.


Moderator Action: Please refrain from trolling - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Statistics is not an easy subject for most to grasp... most people walking around on this earth dont have any math background beyond basic algebra... i guess it shouldnt suprise me when people dont understand....

Example.. 95% win chance means I should lose 1 in 20 long term. Say I fight 5 of these battles and lose 3 of them... say I fight 5 more battles and lose 2 of them.. say I fight 5 more battles and lose another 2 of them.. say I fight 5 more battles and lose 1 of them say I fight 5 more battles and lose 1 of them.. say I fight 5 more battles and lose 3 of them.

How likely do you think that above example is going to happen. If you think that above example would happen more than once a decade of playing civ4 in a fair system... you dont understand statistics.

I have played hundreds and hundreds of games... I have seen over a very large range the combat odds not equal the stated odds. I do not attack as a stack like most of you do so I see with better clarity the individual combat odds... I am not typing asking an opinion.. I am stating facts. Period... the combat odds cheat... and they cheat more when its the first attack in the stack... period...

to the guy who said 'if what i say is true you could prove it'. please explain to me HOW I could prove it and I will go about doing it. As far as I know there is no mod that records combat odd results and can export it anywhere... obviously it would also have to provide encryption so I couldnt tweak the results.

To anyone who disagrees... play 10 games on prince of above (the mode where the computer tilts the odds in its favor)... attack with each individual unit at a time, not as a stack. On any combat odds 80% or above write down the exact odds and then write the results down. I GUARANTEE that over those 10 games you will see you got 'unlucky' because the odds DO cheat.

I would do the same... but of course if I posted it you people would think I made it up... so the only way to 'prove' it to people who dont already know it to be true is YOU have to do the experiment.

It absolutely baffles me how people dont see the obvious... in the same way people think Sarah Palin should be President of the United States.. in the same way high school dropout rates are 15-25% in many parts of the country... in the same way people think evolution is myth... in the same way people believe Noah had an ark filled with 2 of every animal... etc. etc. etc... many many people lack critical thinking skills to differenciate between facts and myths.

You cannot play civ4 for a long period of time and not notice they combat odds are not correct... if you turn off attacking with a stack. its just a fact... there is no discussion amoung logical people to deny this.

azzaman333... do you attack with each indivisual unit or do you attack as a stack?

If you're asking what I think you're asking, no I do not have the stack attack option turned on. I tell individual unit in the stack to attack, noting the odds before I do so.

farm boy.. you are exactly the type of expected replier I anticipated.

your arguement is summed up as 'i read on other posts guys tested it and said its true'.

my thread states it is not true.

by your level of thinking.. you see posts and pick one to be true... you dont find out for yourself.


Moderator Action: Please refrain from trolling - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

test it man.... turn off combat stack attack.. play a few games.. look at each fight's individual odds.. when its 80% or above write down the odds and write down the outcome. it wont take long... i guarantee you will see the odds dont match the stated odds.

and.. the the 'random seed'... i personally never go into the builder to reroll. what i WILL do is if i get RNGed too hard I will add the unit I lost.. so that point is mute to me.

I have YET to see anyone reply with 'I have played a lot of CIV4 games, I do not stack attack, I look at the odds of every single combat, and I have not noticed any rng anomolies.'

Of course one of you will type that soon because I just typed that.. but that doesnt mean its true... just like you dont beleive what Im typing because you dont 'beleive' it.. only YOU know if YOU really really tested it the way I'm saying or not. I KNOW that I HAVE and I KNOW (emphasis on KNOW) that it DOES cheat. Period.

Azzaman333 yes that is what I'm asking. Many/most people have stack attack on, so when they attack with 12 units it all goes at once so it would be very hard to notice the odds of each unit on unit fight.

So if you turn that off and fight with each individual unit at a time, you will see that 80% or 95% is nowhere close to reality. 95% means you lose 1 in 20 combats. It just doesnt happen.

Now you are suggesting you do all that and dont see what I see. I cant prove you wrong just like you cant prove me wrong. I know what I see. So I therefore conclude you either are not paying attention or you are fabricating what you are saying. From your perspective you have to think the same thing about me... unless you know you are just making stuff up. I know I'm not making anything up... and I know there is no way to prove you are not paying attention or making anything up... and from your side you know the same thing about me.

its why i stated in my original post that this is just a vent of frustration.. i know zero can come from this thread... i know what i know and i know it to be true... others will agree, disagree, or not be informed enough to have a valid opinion.. knowing what i know about the world most fit into the 'not be informed enough to ahve a valid opinion'... as you can see most are basically saying ' i read another post by a guy who said he tested it and its not cheating... so thats why i believe its not cheating'... these people dont know a thing.. they just read something and believe it.. they didnt test it... i did.. i know its cheating..

thanks for the venting.

test stuff yourself.. only you can know if you did or not.

play a few games.. 10 would be great.. turn stack attack off.. turn on prince or higher.. for each combat 80% or better to win, write down teh odds, write down the result.... i GUARANTEE that you will get 'unlucky'.

coopervegas said:

I have YET to see anyone reply with 'I have played a lot of CIV4 games, I do not stack attack, I look at the odds of every single combat, and I have not noticed any rng anomolies.'

Click to expand...

Did I not just say that?

EDIT:

coopervegas said:

<snip>

Now you are suggesting you do all that and dont see what I see. I cant prove you wrong just like you cant prove me wrong. I know what I see. So I therefore conclude you either are not paying attention or you are fabricating what you are saying. From your perspective you have to think the same thing about me... unless you know you are just making stuff up. I know I'm not making anything up... and I know there is no way to prove you are not paying attention or making anything up... and from your side you know the same thing about me.

<snip>

Click to expand...

The most recent game I played, purely from memory;
Probably had about 10 battles around 20-30%, won around 5.
Had about 15 battles 40-60%, won around 5.
Had about 7 battles 66-75%, won around 5.
Had about 10 battles 80-98%, won around 9.
Don't remember losing any battles over 96%.

This is pretty easy to actually test.
- Turn on stack attack (for convenience, it doesn't change mechanics, battles are still 1on1)
- Go into worldbuilder and give yourself 500 units. Pick a unit without withdrawal chance or first strikes.
- Give the AI 500 units.
- Attack
- Look at how many of your units which survived.

With 500 units you should be very close to truth about the combat odds.

One EASY EASY test to do is to only pay attention to odds that are ~95%.

Odds of losing a 95% battle is 1 in 20, 5%
Odds of losing two 95% battles in a row is 1 in 400 0.25%

So.. only keep track of battles that are 95%+. When you lose one, note it... 5% happens quite a bit... if you lose the very next battle of 95%+.. you hit your 1 in 400 chance... thats pretty low but not imposible by any means. See how many times you hit that 1 in 400 chance... its gonna happen a lot than 1 in 400.

Of course these odds are for 95% exactly.. if you track 95%+ the odds should be much much lower.. big statistical difference between 95% and 98%.

Ignore all attacks that are '> 99.9%' these are autowins. Just use 95%+ to 99.7%

If you actually DO the experiemnts... really DO them... youll see it cheats... period.

Billions of people think their religion is factually correct and think billions others are factually wrong... billions of kids beleive in santa claus.. millions of people think obama is a muslim born outside the US... just cause large volumes of people beleive something doesnt make it true.

logically people who believe what i beleive would more likely not post here.. they would have given up on this game... logically the vast majority of people who would reply to my posts would have the opposite opinion.. so the volume of replies disagreeing with me means zero.

the ONLY THING that you can know is what YOU do. Experiment... get a paper and pencil and keep track.. if YOU DO I guarantee you will see it cheats.

windsor that may be a good test, I have not done it.. but I am hesitant of because my suspision is that the AI cheated based on score.. my guess is the more powerful the human the more likely it is to cheat to 'level the playing field'... so your test would not factor in my suspicison.

you can easily just play a normal game and write down the odds when it is 80%+ and write down the outcome and look at it.

azzman333 if you didnt lose a single battle 95% plus... you dont remember well, you are lying, or you played a fast duel game. Statistically you ARE going to lose some 95% combat in any decently large game. Your last post is enough proof to me you dont know what you are talking about.. if you dont understand that in a game where hundreds of combats are going on that you will HAVE to lose some 95% battles... sigh...

Moderator Action: Please post in a civil[ized] manner. Trolling like in this post is not being civil. - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

Why it seems like bad odds is because you don't attack when you see the odds are 10% or 20%, sometimes you win those. You are only on the other side of the spectrum attacking when you have 80 or 90% so you expect to win.

I attack sometimes when I feel like I'm going to get creamed with a 30% chance and often pull it off and get some decent XP (think you get more the less likely you were to actually win the fight).

I reread your post azzman333.. your memory says you played 42 battles.. i hope you understand thats not statistically relevant... with 42 battles most any outcome is likely.

azzman333 actually i am pretty convinced you are a troll so im gonna be done with you... your last post you are just making up numbers... everyone think about your last civ4 game... ask yourself if you could tabulate all your combats like he did or if its more likely hejust pulled from his azz...

50th time stating this... ONLY YOU KNOW IF YOU DID REAL TESTS OR NOT...the interwebz cant prove anything... if you dont self experiment and have an opinion.. you have to know you are just picking beliefs out of a pool of what 'feels right'... the only way you can know for use is to test it.

again test a real game.. dont make 500 units in the world builder.. my guess is the ai cheats based on scores so this wouldnt show up in that sort of test. think about it.. if the ai cheats to level the playing field.. this test wouldnt work.. my test tests both possibilities, that world builder test doesnt.

Scottr... your logic is flawed

if i only attack when i have a 95% chance to win... i still have a 95% chance to win.. period. just because i dont attack when i have a 20% chance to win doesnt change my odds when i have a 95% chance to win.

95% should be 1 in 20 over the long run.. its not.

Moderator Action: Calling other users idiots or trolls or other names or insinuating that they are lying or making things up etc. is unacceptable posting behavior here. If you wish to discuss a topic, do so civilly, please. - ori
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

OK im going to play a dual on prince with 2 AI players and write down all combats 80% and the results. I'm going to post my results. Turn stack attack off.

Everyone who disagrees with me I urge you to do the same. Lets see those results.. ok off to play.