combat result: 95% win

[Cartouche Bee]

I'm thinking about allowing maybe 3 types of attacker and defenders, then checking the results when you apply different types of units in the battle at different times.The defender would always defend with the strongest unit first but there may be times when attacking with a weaker retreatable unit might aid in you battle odds (maybe other combinations will produce interesting results), also adding in the ability to add bombarding units to the stack could be interesting. I can see generals taking to the field of battle, with their abacus under arm; war by mathematics.

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

Originally posted by Cartouche Bee
I'm thinking about allowing maybe 3 types of attacker and defenders, then checking the results when you apply different types of units in the battle at different times.

That would be cool. One of the things I always wonder about is when to attack with my Elite units versus Veteran units.

Should I attack with my Elite units first? Assuming they have a decent chance of winning, that would minimize the chance that a Veteran is going to kill something and "steal" a victory, reducing my chances for a GL.

On the other hand, if the defenders have a significant enough advantage, I might be better off softening them up with my Veterans first, letting the Elites take on weakened defenders.

Some examples are obvious. Modern Armor versus Spearmen you send in the Elites. Swordsmen versus Mech. Infantry you go with the Veterans (and perhaps a prayer ). But at some point in the middle, which is more realistic anyway, there's a point where the numbers swing from one choice to the other. I'm never sure where that point lies.

 

[Yndy]

I made home a calculation to see how many regular warriors I need to take a city defended by a reg warrior or reg spear (promotions and everything included). I considered a minimum 75% confidence and the result was 3 to one against warrior and 5 to one against spearman. Zachariel’s ‘civulator’ says 90% confidence in first case and 85% in second case. When I tested this in real Civ it worked but other things failed and I am yet to conclude on the ultra-early war strat on emperor/deity levels.
But Zachariel’s calculator will make the job easier.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Originally posted by Dr Elmer Jiggle



Should I attack with my Elite units first? Assuming they have a decent chance of winning, that would minimize the chance that a Veteran is going to kill something and "steal" a victory, reducing my chances for a GL.

Good question!

The answer may not be as obvious as it seems. I think I'm just going to allow myself a chance to edit the array of attackers and defenders, then see what sorts of effects this has on the battles. Hopefully I will get a chance to try this out this weekend. I want to program out the recursion also, so that larger samples can be evaluated.

 

[Dr Elmer Jiggle]

It occurred to me that a couple more options to add to the "Civulator" are Civil Defense (50% defensive bonus) and Radar Tower (undetermined bonuses to defense and attack).

As an aside (I should probably start a new thread), does anyone know what the actual bonuses are from Radio Towers? I can't find the numbers in the editor, and the documentation is vague.

And can you get the bonuses while you're in enemy territory? It's clear that you can't actually build a tower inside enemy territory, but if you're just across the border you can still be within range of one of your own towers.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

If I recall correctly it's 25% for radar towers. And as far as I know you do get the bonus even if you are in enemy territory, it's the range of 2 that's important. It's an important factor in stack warfare!

 

[DaveMcW]

Originally posted by Cartouche Bee
I want to program out the recursion also, so that larger samples can be evaluated.

Zachriel fixed the quadratic complexity, it is now linear. A faster computer will help more than optimizing code.

 

[Cartouche Bee]

Originally posted by DaveMcW

A faster computer will help more than optimizing code.

I think converting it off javascript will do more than even a faster (affordable) computer could.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by Cartouche Bee
I can see generals taking to the field of battle, with their abacus under arm; war by mathematics.

Since at least Archimedes, mathematics and warfare have gone together.


http://www.mcs.drexel.edu/~crorres/Archimedes/contents.html

Originally posted by Dr Elmer Jiggle
It occurred to me that a couple more options to add to the "Civulator" are Civil Defense (50% defensive bonus) and Radar Tower (undetermined bonuses to defense and attack).

Good idea. Until the feature is added, you can directly set the Defense Modifier by entering the desired value.

 

[DaveMcW]

If the calculator is finished, you should email Thunderfall so he can put a link on the front page.

 

[wargasm23]

All these formulas and intervals and it's STILL wrong.

I love this game but don't get it twisted, It should not take like 10 swordmen to take down 4 veteran spearmen whom are defending a city with no walls.

how do you guys feel about it?

 

[Pembroke]

Since Ancient Times the military rule-of-thumb has been that when you attack a defending position you ought to have at least a 3:1 advantage.

So I think this is just right.

It doesn't work so that the swordman issues his challenge and the spearman steps forward and out in the open for a sportmanly duel.

No, if the swordmen want the town they have to come and get it. Even without any walls the defenders will use the terrain to their advantage because they can prepare it at leisure building make-do fortifications, roadblocks, etc. and will use every trick they have to make it hard for the attackers.

If they don't then their CO ought to be hanged for not doing his job.

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by wargasm23
All these formulas and intervals and it's STILL wrong.

I love this game but don't get it twisted, It should not take like 10 swordmen to take down 4 veteran spearmen whom are defending a city with no walls.

how do you guys feel about it?

And even then, you might still lose (1/20)
On the other hand, you will probably win and have plenty of forces to continue the attack (average 7 survivors with an average of 2.5 hitpoints).

War is Hell

 

[Zachriel]

Originally posted by DaveMcW
If the calculator is finished, you should email Thunderfall so he can put a link on the front page.

Took your advice.

I think we have made very good progress in answering smalltalk's original 95% question. For further discussion of the Battle Civulation, there is a new thread under Utility Programs, here:


http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=47146

 

[smalltalk]

Originally posted by Smalltalk
I guess, by intuition, we are all using estimates like this. Say I want to take a town with three defenders, then I bring, well, about 8 attackers to have an almost certain win.

Battle Civulation says about 90%.

I am really amazed by the people of this place. Thanks for answering.

Smalltalk

 

[Beanzy]

If you want a simple non-mathematical answer, then just have 5 attackers for every one of their attackers. This only works if your attacker is more advanced than their defender (Knight v. Spearmen... Modern Armor v. Riflemen... etc.)

I use that method and it works, plus I don't have to use any math... yay!