A Bitter Protest

but still there are quite a few issues remaining that just cannot get the 'game bias' view out of my mind. Especially when enemy units attack a stack of my own. (Enemy Cuirassiers wiping out my Cavalry on first assault? Hmmm again!)

I'd like to remind you of the little notice in the unit info about horse units of all types .. 'Does not recieve defensive bonuses'. Your walls and cultural bonuses will do nothing to even the odds with horse units defending. Cavalry are not for defending cities. They can, but most effectively by making pre-emptive attacks at stacks next to cities.

Next time you engage in combat, and just draw a 'go to' arrow from your unit to the unit you'd like to attack. A little pop up will appear at the bottom left of the screen showing the odds and all factors affecting the combat.
 
@Popmaniac

If you have any kind of problem with assumed ( but not proven ) combat bias ,just get BUG mod ( i think that HoF mod allows it as well, but not sure ) that prints on a .txt file the log of the game and read carefully the combat entries.... Humans can really have selective memory and you can easily forget the unit that wins @ 5-10% and remember bitterly the unit that dies @ 90-95 %. Reading a detailed info can be enlightning...

For a example.....

From a SG I'm playing:
Spoiler :
Logging by BUG Mod 2.11 (BtS 3.13)
------------------------------------------------
Turn 95/460 (500 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:39:33]
Spearman 2 of St. Petersburg (Spearman) promoted: Combat I
DMI VII(Russia) declares war on Hatshepsut(Egypt)
While attacking in the wild near St. Petersburg, Spearman 2 of St. Petersburg (Spearman) defeats (2.80/4): Egyptian War Chariot (Prob Victory: 96.2%)
Axeman 5 of Moscow (Axeman) promoted: Combat I
While attacking in the wild near St. Petersburg, Axeman 5 of Moscow (Axeman) defeats (2.15/5): Egyptian War Chariot (Prob Victory: 68.1%)
Axeman 1 of Moscow (Axeman) promoted: Combat II
St. Petersburg finishes: Axeman

IBT:
Attitude Change: Hatshepsut(Egypt) towards DMI VII(Russia), from 'Cautious' to 'Annoyed'

Turn 96/460 (475 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:46:32]
Axeman 5 of Moscow (Axeman) promoted: City Raider I

IBT:
Attitude Change: Kublai Khan(Mongolia) towards Hatshepsut(Egypt), from 'Annoyed' to 'Cautious'
Attitude Change: Kublai Khan(Mongolia) towards Washington(America), from 'Cautious' to 'Annoyed'
Attitude Change: Washington(America) towards Kublai Khan(Mongolia), from 'Cautious' to 'Annoyed'

Turn 97/460 (450 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:47:56]
While attacking in Egyptian territory at Alexandria, Axeman 5 of Moscow (Axeman) defeats (1.45/5): Egyptian Archer (Prob Victory: 9.6%)
Spearman 2 of St. Petersburg (Spearman) promoted: Combat II
While attacking in Egyptian territory at Alexandria, Spearman 2 of St. Petersburg (Spearman) defeats (2.80/4): Egyptian War Chariot (Prob Victory: 92.2%)
Captured Alexandria (Hatshepsut)
Alexandria begins: Monument (31 turns)
Whip anger has decreased in St. Petersburg
Moscow finishes: Axeman
St. Petersburg grows: 4

IBT:

Turn 98/460 (425 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:50:07]
Moscow begins: Axeman (5 turns)
While attacking in Russian territory near St. Petersburg, Axeman 2 of St. Petersburg (Axeman) defeats (4.45/5): Barbarian Warrior (Prob Victory: 100.0%)

IBT:
Confucianism founded in a distant land
Attitude Change: Kublai Khan(Mongolia) towards Hatshepsut(Egypt), from 'Cautious' to 'Annoyed'

Turn 99/460 (400 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:51:37]
A Mine was built near St. Petersburg
Axeman 5 of Moscow (Axeman) promoted: City Raider II
St. Petersburg finishes: Spearman

IBT:

Turn 100/460 (375 BC) [20-Dec-2007 19:52:34]
St. Petersburg begins: Axeman (5 turns)
While attacking in Russian territory at Moscow, Axeman 7 of Moscow (Axeman) loses to: Barbarian Archer (0.75/3) (Prob Victory: 94.8%)
While attacking in Russian territory at Moscow, Warrior 2 of Moscow (Warrior) defeats (1.62/2): Barbarian Archer (Prob Victory: 99.6%)


As you can see, in 5 turns I lost a axe @ 95% and won a battle with a wounded axe @ +/- 10 % ( that I only used to wound a garrison archer ). You win, you lose.....

About the Cavalry being eaten alive by cuiraseers..... probably your cavalry was wounded , and ,as posted before , they don't have defensive bonuses. And BTW, if you have cavalry you can build rifles as well... that have a bonus against mounted units ( and gain defensive bonuses ). As you were being attacked by War phants and cuirraseers you should had thought of that.....

I think that you are being fooled by your previous experience with Civ series ( like it happened to a lot of people ,including me ( until I saw my wounded preats being eaten alive by swarms of shock axes :p ) ) : the counter nature of Civ IV combat and the collateral damage doesn't allow you to be as confident as you were in " 1 unit type superior SoD" because a skilled foe ( and BtS AI is quite skilled compared with previous versions ) can find a way of decimate you with the counter unit and siege. That forces you to put a little of everything in the stacks to take advantage of the best defender rule ( that you should already know from civ III ).

@Coast

Not all mounted units don't receive defensive bonuses... Some UU, like the persian and the Spanish one, can fortify and receive them... But that is a liitle off-topic ;)
 
don't listen to all that nonsense. i would quit and put the game away forever.
BTS is unfair and is too challenging for most intellects.

I would go back to Civ versions where your play goes as planned.

Trying to figure out "city crosses" and "combat odds" ect is to much for many to bare. I suggest a simple game that you can win and not get all worked up.:borg:
 
This reminds my of my favorite phrase: Shift happens. It's from a Dilbert and really sums things up.
 
don't listen to all that nonsense. i would quit and put the game away forever.
BTS is unfair and is too challenging for most intellects.

I would go back to Civ versions where your play goes as planned.

Trying to figure out "city crosses" and "combat odds" ect is to much for many to bare. I suggest a simple game that you can win and not get all worked up.:borg:

Tic Tac toe, maybe? :lol:

Seriously, BtS IMHO is not more complicated than chess .... but for people that comes from civ II/III (like me ;) ) it implies to learn a whole new set of habits and to drop out a lot of the old ones ( a personal note... the thing that irked me more when I played Civ IV what the grid.... I was so used to the icoseadral grid that it took quite some games to stop sending units to the wrong places with the Numpad :lol: ). And one of the more resilient habits ( IMHO again ) is the all cavalry ( or something else ... ) stacks, that worked so well in civ III.... :D
 
After amassing approximately 8 Cuirassiers, 10 melee and ranged units (musketmen, macemen, pikemen ) plus 5 trebuchets...

I actually think this is the problem you're encountering. The force you describe is not "amassing" in any sense of the word, especially if you're fighting Monte; he builds a lot of units, and so should you.

If I were in your situation, I would build at least as many Macemen as your entire army combined, some two dozen. I'd probably build as many siege. Fighting wars isn't about being able to take just one city, it's about being able to counter your enemy's entire military force. He's going to throw it all at you, as you have just found out. This doesn't always mean having the larger military, but you do need an army that's large enough.
 
The AI's just plain better, to the point where you should in all due respects pretend that you're playing human players. If you think the AI's just build massive militaries, turn on the Always Peace option and watch them blast ahead in tech. The bonuses are severely reduced too. It's awesome to have a fun game on Monarch or Emperor, and not resort to deity.

I'm not flaming, but...

After amassing approximately 8 Cuirassiers, 10 melee and ranged units (musketmen, macemen, pikemen ) plus 5 trebuchets...

Let's do some math:
A pacifist AI like Ghandi, in my experience, has on average have 5 state-of-the-art units per city they own, usually with a wall each. It takes about 33 catapult shots to take that down, which is ridiculous, so I'm assuming you're using spies to support city revolt instead, and only use catapults for collateral damage. Say Ghandi has 12 cities in early renaissance; to completely take him down and keep all his (now well placed) cities, you'll need about, for each city:

- 2 suicide trebuchets
- 4-6 cuirassiers/CR maceman to assult, before musketman march in
- 3 (injured) musketman holding the city against a counter-attack stack, probably whipped and drafted too (do you whip and draft yourself?)

To completely take down a pacifist civ, you therefore need on average (what I do at least):
24 trebuchets
60 assult units
24 musketman

Rules of thumb of course, but we're talking a little over 100 units before you assult a civilization. If you're facing Shaka, that's what you need to BARELY DEFEND your civilization.

I'm not doubting your skill or the fact that you have bad luck, I'm just saying that everyone, including myself, was shocked at how awesome the AI is. The AI is, in my opinion, the single and best reason to keep playing. In fact, it plays better than most humans I meet online.
 
Now, maybe that was the original intent of BtS - i.e. to make it a more combat-oriented version of Civ4, but I still fail to see the logic with many battles.
As far as I know, the only changes in the battle mechanics have been to siege. (and the introduction of new units / tweaking of old units) If everybody had those units in a vanilla Civ4 game, the results of individual combats would be exactly the same.

As I understand it, the only relevant difference between vanilla and BtS is increased AI competence; they are simply less stupid at war. They, for example, will build lots of counter-units, such as making lots of elephants if they notice that their neighbor has huge piles of mounted units.



On the other hand, you can still play this game without ever going to war, and some experts can do it without ever building a military unit! In fact, the AI is no longer so obnoxious with its early settlers, so even on the highest difficulty levels you can still acquire a good chunk of land without having to conquer it or clear-cut your entire empire.
 
Having written all that, I must stress that I never encountered such difficulties with other versions of Civ4 (or obviously older versions).

In the orginal Civ you could lose anything to a phalanx forified behind city walls, battleships, planes, tanks, etc.
 
Curassiers tend to get overrated, it happened to me too. I thought my technical advantage was so huge that I would win the war even though my army was much smaller than my neighbour's. Curassiers are not the units that make a huge difference, in fact they are a marginal improvement over knights. Cannons, bombers, tanks and sometimes cavalry are the units that really make a difference when you have a tech advantage. Oh and elephants can rule the early wars.
 
omg another probabilities thread. Give us a break thanks !
 
If you want to see the exact results of a recent battle....all you have to do is take a look at the Events Log. It pretty much shows a blow-by-blow account.
My question is a really bad newbie one: What keys do you press to find combat odds? I've always been weighing the relative strengths of the units in question and trying to factor in all the bonuses for the attackers and defenders in my head! :crazyeye: I couldn't find how to do this anywhere in the game manuals or on this site.

~Benford's Law
 
Hm... Well, we see odds, but not results. Not exactly "transparent".

Actually, you can see each round of combat in the events log in the upper left corner. As was mentioned before, completely transparent. Also, this lets you see the odds the AI attacked at and the results it experienced. (So, in a way, it shows you the defensive odds after you have experienced the result.)

Also, using siege equipment to soften up a stack can allow inferior units a good chance (over 60%) of killing your more modern units. Especially if they have the right promotion like Formation, in the case of the mounted units above. I've had it happen. Use mixed stacks to prevent this.


To the original poster: you had a run of bad luck. Every civ game has it...whether it was the tank army against the spearman in Civ3 (that happened to me), or just bad odds this time around, it happens. I'd say BtS and the more recent Civ4, with religions and how specialists work, is also the most involved in terms of economy and empire management that Civilization has ever experienced. War is but one facet of the game.
 
First of all let me thank you all indeed for your comments and participation..

Secondly, allow me to take some time off to reply as I am now sitting at airport and my flight is called (laptop is on me though and it is probably payback time to Montezuma until we land! ;-))
 
The ai no matter who they are favor horse units,pikes, elephants with a few siege weapons. Generally all AI leaders make stacks of doom (SoD's), even at peace time.

If they don't have an SoD when you war-dec them, they will build one fairly fast. The AI is not smart with using its stacks(generally). But it makes up for it by committing all its city's to the war effort by building units. So it just looks likes its producing stacks out of thin air.


If your going for a calvary offensive stack. Don't slow it down with 1movement units. You just lost the advantage of using calvary if you do.

- Build A 20ish (in the very least) stack of corsairs/calvary to start with. make sure you can produce them at a fairly fast pace. Typically if I am calvary focused civ. I have in the very least 5 city's poping calvary every 4-5 turns (some city's faster, some city's slower). I play epic game speed. Generally its quite a few more city's producing than that tho for me. If thats the way I am tech focused. :)

-Have a medic III in at least one of the stacks. fast healing after a city raid = less time for the AI to catch up to your mounted units which have no defense bonuses other than terrain.

-Always try to end your stacks turn using a defensive terrain. Such as forests,hills, or even better forested hills when on route to wherever. You will be amazed at how much of a difference this alone will help with survival of said stack. Again- you should never park your horses on a bare tile unless you absolutely have too. (no defense bonus applies to terrain as well? I have not done any testing or really payed attention. But it seemed to help, altho I changed a few other bad habits of mine around the same time frame. /shrug)

-use spies to put city's in revolt before attacking them. They move fairly well make sure you have the points and a decent number of spies before you start the war. Another thing its a good idea to move and use your spies in groups of 2. Having a failed attempt at sending a city into revolt only slows you down. And its not uncommon to have failed attempts.

-Build city defense units if you plan on keeping city's. Don't move these in your main stacks. it only slows them down. Again loosing the obvious advantage of using mounted units.

Of course it helps to specialize your research. If you plan on using Calvary as offensive units. Its a good idea to really focus your researching to maximize their window of opportunity.

On a good note the AI does not beeline rifling normally. And if your fast enough by the time they do. They simply can't produce enough to stop ya.

I know some of this is fairly common knowledge. This is just stuff from my personal experience. Or how I perceive the Ai's habits. Hope some of it might help with some of your game/games.

Edit: I generally play on Noble, Epic speed. Anything else just becomes to much to keep my attention for long. To much micro-managing. And I noticed you were complaining about your mounted units. So thats why I focused my reply towards using them.


And like the poster below me and a few others have noted. If your just starting the war and you don't have SoD of calvary while your enemy has riflemen. Then forget it. the window of opportunity closed.

Reasons for edits today. Just fixing a typo or 2 that I happened to notice.
 
You are probably right...

On the other hand, 4 Cavalry Units against a city with 0% defense and one rifleman and at the end of the day only one cav unit remaining is a little excessive in my - one of 'those' as you like to call it - way of thinking...

Well considering that Riflemen get a bonus against Cavalry, and I believe that Cavalry get a penalty for attacking cities, your losses are really not all that surprising. You should just pay more attention to what types of units you attack with. If the city is being guarded by a Rifleman, use a Grenadier as they get bonuses against Riflemen. It's all a question of using the right unit for the right situation. Mounted units are best for pillaging and removing any units that might show up to reinforce the defenders. They aren't really all that great at a frontal assault on a city.
 
Well considering that Riflemen get a bonus against Cavalry, and I believe that Cavalry get a penalty for attacking cities, your losses are really not all that surprising. You should just pay more attention to what types of units you attack with. If the city is being guarded by a Rifleman, use a Grenadier as they get bonuses against Riflemen. It's all a question of using the right unit for the right situation. Mounted units are best for pillaging and removing any units that might show up to reinforce the defenders. They aren't really all that great at a frontal assault on a city.

Unless your opponent was relying on some First Strikes and you just happen to have promoted them with flanking . . . :)
 
On a good note the AI does not beeline rifling normally. And if your fast enough by the time they do. They simply can't produce enough to stop ya.

You're not kidding... I recently went to Mansa Musa in one of my games. I was pretty happy because he didn't have riflemen yet - then I realized that the first city of his I captured had a factory and coal plant in it. I couldn't see what he was researching, and boy was I terrified for most of that war... He had railroad and assembly line before researching rifling.
 
Back
Top Bottom