Attack Modifiers

[Charlie_B]

This is a pretty basic question, but something I just can't get my head around.

In my current game, I have a stack of axemen ready to attack a city - as you can see in the picture. The unit I'm attacking is an Archer, with CG II, 25% fortify, and is defending a hill city (). Given all that, I can understand why it has a strength of 7.35 according to the oddds calculator bottom left. However, my Axeman has CR II - a 45% boost to its attacking strength - but its strength is still listed as 5 instead of 7.25 What's going on?

 

[Desert-Fox]

There is nothing wrong... Total mods for AI is 2.90 it makes 8,70 total strength for Archer. Your CR2 is taken away from 2.90 so it makes 2.45 x 3 = 7.35. Remember every bonus what is tagged "vs" is taken away, not added. So if you have blank axeman 5 and enemy has blank swordsman 6 then you will see 5 vs 6/1.5 so it is 5 vs 4.

 

[Charlie_B]

Ah, that clears it up. Not a very clear way of doing things imo, but I guess i was foolish to assume that 7.35 was the full archer's strength. Thanks!

 

[Amask]

how does the 50 vs melee work then? I've never seen a 2.5 vs 2.5 axe vs axe battle
or 100 attack vs axes for chariots?

 

[GooglyBoogly]

the +100% bonuses like for spearmen and (perhaps) chariots, however do not subtract, but instead add. I have no idea why. So that a spearman vs a mounted has a value of 8 (ignoring mounted promotions)

 

[Jerrymander]

2.5 vs 2.5 would be if each Axe had a 100% bonus. with 50% bonus it's actually 3.75 vs 3.75. Which, I get all the time on Axeman vs Axeman on open ground.

 

[JujuLautre]

the +100% bonuses like for spearmen and (perhaps) chariots, however do not subtract, but instead add. I have no idea why. So that a spearman vs a mounted has a value of 8 (ignoring mounted promotions)

Wrong. Combat promotions of the attacker apply to his strength. All other bonus apply to the defender's strength.

2.5 vs 2.5 would be if each Axe had a 100% bonus. with 50% bonus it's actually 3.75 vs 3.75. Which, I get all the time on Axeman vs Axeman on open ground.

Also wrong. Bonus of the attacker and the defender nullify each-other. So 100% against 100% is the same as 0% against 0%.

 

[Jerrymander]

Also wrong. Bonus of the attacker and the defender nullify each-other. So 100% against 100% is the same as 0% against 0%.

No, I am not wrong. It is 3.75. I never said that the odds of winning changed. 1 vs 1 and 100 vs 100 are both 50% odds of winning. I was stating that his interpretation of the % bonus axemen get is wrong.

<snip>
Moderator Action: Warned for flaming.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Polobo]

Axe A (attacker)
Axe B (defender)

A = 5 + [0 * 5] (no combat promotions)
B = 5 + [(.50 - .50) * 5] (the +.50 is the bonus vs. melee from the defender; the -.50 is
the bonus vs. melee from the attacker)

Thus, the final combat ends up being 5 str vs 5 str.

All bonuses - except combat - get applied to the defender. Bonuses belonging to the defender add to the defenders strength while bonuses belonging to the attacker subtract from he defender's strength.

 

[Amask]

everyone so far says that GooglyBoy is wrong when he says that 100% bonuses get added to the attacker
well if he's wrong, what exactly happens?
a chariot vs an axe on open ground,
4 vs 0?
the 0 being 5 decreased by 100%
I've never seen that

 

[Polobo]

If the final result of the modifiers is negative then the following formula is used.

Modified Strength = Base Strength / [(1 - (Net Modifiers)) * Base Strength]

Set net modifiers are negative you end up dividing base strength by a number greater than base strength; thus reducing the modified strength. In the case of 100%, the effective strength is half of the base strength ( 1-(-1) == 2; S / 2S == .5 * S)

 

[GooglyBoogly]

Looks like I mistyped. In my example I meant to say mounted unit vs spearman, instead of spearman vs mounted unit. With the mounted unit attacking, this gives the spearman a str of 8. Which is correct as the spearman is defending. However, when on the offense the spearman reduces the mounted units defense, and does not boost its own.

This can lead to the unusual situation where a pikeman has better odds when attacking a combat upgraded knight than defending of open ground.
Say the knight has Combat II or higher (this effect is more pronounced the more promotions the knight has)
However when the pikeman attacks it is a combat of 6 vs 10 x0.555 = 5.55 or in the

So when pikeman defends (unfortified no tile bonus) it is 12 vs 12 giving 50-50 odds
But when it attacks it is 6 vs 5.55 giving higher odds.

 

[JujuLautre]

No, I am not wrong. It is 3.75. I never said that the odds of winning changed. 1 vs 1 and 100 vs 100 are both 50% odds of winning. I was stating that his interpretation of the % bonus axemen get is wrong.

I stand my point. The odds of winning stay the same, right, but the amount of damages of each round does not.

I advise you to read this article before calling other people "stupid". After you have done it, I'd like an apology.