A "real" AI cheat
- Thread starter The Snug
- Start date
Psyringe
Scout
Okay, I'm convinced now that you're not being serious. If you really don't know why a longbowman would defend a city, then you *seriously* need to read up about combat rules and unit specialties. Judging from the discussion so far, it seems that you're either incapable of understanding details of the combat system that have now been laid out several times in front of you already, or you're simply enjoying to play dumb. I'll choose the interpretation that's more favorable for you.
You know, the entire day I've looked on this forum, all I have seen were a bunch of trolls. At that situation the Pikeman at least LOOKED like he would have a much larger chance.
Funny, because the horse archer easily beat my Longbowman.
Funny, because the horse archer easily beat my Longbowman.
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
If they're both healthy, the pike would typically defend.
A city garrison III longbow would outdo the pike though, especially if the HA were given shock.
I've seen the game defend with suboptimal stuff though. Very common when I saw give a cavalry pinch, and it switches the top defender to a longbow rather than the CG musket. When I attack the musket a round or two later, with exactly the same combat pinch combo, the odds are lower than when I fought the lbow - this means that it should have defended against the first attacker, but did not unless I'm missing something.
Granted, I haven't read this entire thread, but I thought I'd share this - it's a relatively common (and to me virtually meaningless to date) quick in the defender picked mechanics.
Psyringe
Scout
Did you verify that the fortification levels of the musketman were identical in both situations?
TheMeInTeam
If A implies B...
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2008
- Messages
- 27,995
I wasn't paying it too much mind because no matter how you slice it, pinch cavs hitting a city that's choosing between muskets and longbows is going to be overwhelmingly favorable. I just tabled it as a "that's strange" and kept going.
It's very likely that the 5% fortification gained was enough to distort the odds. It wasn't like it was a huge odds change. In fact if I had to guess that would probably be the reason actually, so good point.
Generally speaking, first strikes could make the difference, but I think horse archers are immune to first strikes, so it shouldn't in this case, unless I'm just remembering wrong on the immunity issue. Was the city on a hill? Was there a fortification difference? Did the HA have shock? Were the LB and pike both at full strength? Any number of factors could give the longbow better odds.
No, cultural defense might have been at 105%, but fortification was somewhere between 0 and 25% for each unit, and each unit had its own fortification value. Also, the pike did not have City Defense II unless you're playing a mod, in which case other factors may be different that would have led to your observed result. That casts into doubt your recollection of other details, such as whether the city was on a hill or the HA had shock, or even, for that matter, whether the longbow was CGII or CGIII.
So you had 25% fortification on both units, flat ground, 105% cultural defense and the choice between a pikemen and a CGII longbow?
From what we know, the total bonus to the longbow should have been 200% (70% from being in a city plus 105% cultural plus 25% fortification), and the bonus to the pikeman should have been 230% (100% vs. mounted plus cultural and fortification). Since the HA can't have cover, and you said it didn't have shock, its promotions shouldn't make a difference, as they'll apply equally regardless of which unit defends. The only possible promotions relevant to the odds of winning for the HA are shock and the combat line. Since the base strength of the longbow and pikeman are the same, the bonuses should tell the story. My suspicion is that you've overlooked one or more factors that bring the longbow to at least parity in bonuses with the pikeman.
Your claim that the pikeman was promoted to CGII suggests that you aren't remembering the details accurately, so forgive me for making some suggestions contrary to what you've already told us about the situation.
1. If the unit was a horse archer-replacing Numidian Cavalry, its 50% melee bonus would reduce the pikeman's bonus to 180%, but leave the longbow's bonus at 200%.
2. A CGIII promotion for the longbow would bring both units to 230%. I have no idea of the algorithm for choosing between equal defenders, and would probably select the pikeman given the choice (assuming other attackers present that the longbow would probably be better suited to defend against), but the selection of the longbow is at least plausible here.
3. The presence of a hill under the city (not always obvious from the graphics) would bring the pikeman to 255% and the longbow to 250%. Similarly, a shock promotion on the HA would result in a net 25% for the longbow, reducing the pikeman to 205%. This doesn't get us all the way to longbow selection, but combined with some other factor, for instance the pikeman being only 20% fortified, or being a little bit dinged from an earlier fight, it could be the culprit.
If you have the save, go back and look for these things. An easy way would be to mouse over each unit and see what bonuses are listed for each. What strikes me as funny is that your longbow was easily beaten. Even as you describe the scenario, the longbow should have had between a 2:1 and 3:1 strength advantage (combat V HA yields 18.00 v. 9.00; unpromoted HA yields 18.00 v. 6.00). Your pikeman would have probably lost, too, if it was an easy win for the HA.
Similar threads
