# Combat suggestions... (for patches?)

#### V. Soma

##### long time civ fan

I find it to be too general...

I mean, say I have a 25 str rifleman and adj. to it a 6 str warrior:
should I get +15% more str. for the rifleman? That means 25*0,15=3,75 str help for a 6 str unit...

My suggestion is a formula to calculate the bonus:

EDITED:

bonus = active u str * ((adj u str / active u. str) * 0.15),

which is simplifed down to:
bonus = adj u str * 0.15

so a warrior gets lots of help from a rifleman: 25*0.15=3.75, so warrior figths with 6+3.75 = 9.75
but a rifleman gets only a bit from a warrior: 6*0.15=0.9, so rifleman figths with 25+0.9 = 25.9

Conclusion:
I see the role of the flanking unit as an active fighting support in the battle, and therefore
the bonus that the (main) active figthing unit gets should the taken fron the strength of the flanking unit,
not of the active unit itself...

so this is the same what Mercade, Babri, bernlin200 said in their replies below...
I take that as support of my case

I assume you mean +15% in the first sentence, but yeah, I fully agree something should be done about the value of adjecent units.

Not sure I agree with your formula. By factoring in the relative strength of the units, in your example it would be 6 / 25 * 1.15 = 0.276 extra strength for the rifleman, which is just over 1% of the rifleman. Hardly worth it.

An alternative could be something like +15% of the adjecent unit itself without considering the relative strength. That'd mean the rifleman gets 0.9 from being near a warrior and the warrior would get 3.75 from the rifleman. Maybe that should be capped at max 25% of the original strength of the unit, or something like that.

A better idea would be that adjacent units provide aid with respect to their strength. For example 1 longsword man will provide the same aid as 3 warriors. Aid could have different levels like Aid 1, aid 2 & aid 3. The more powerful units you have around the unit, the more aid will that unit get.

It should be a 30percent bonus most times. It's 1upt as we know, so see your line of battle should hit theirs so with hexes every other attacker has a 30percent and the next guy none....remember defensive bonuses are strong so this is like a counter to those. If a unit gets surrounded it deserves the pain. Keep your defending line together and it shouldn't be a problem, unless they punch holes in good spots, which they should be trying to do.

Probably why many reviewers praised defensive choke points for strategic value.

One of those things we will just have to play through. I read it as 15 percent of the original attackers strength, not the flanker, didn't think of it that way. Sorry about the knee-jerk reaction to an adjacent tile str post.

I've just polished my idea, see OP edited

The way I see it, the point of flanking isn't the quality of the other units but that the defender can't put all of its attention in one direction.

The way I see it, the point of flanking isn't the quality of the other units but that the defender can't put all of its attention in one direction.

well, this is one way of looking at this and can a valid opinion
- so it supports the simple 15% bonus strength addition...

*

in the meantime I realizd that my idea in the OP is simply boils down to that
the active and attacking unit gets 15% str of the adjacent flaning unit as bonus...

This theoretically takes the adjacent unit as an active support in the action of attack...

Would certainly need a tooltip or some sort of explanation: definitely makes things more complicated than they would be. I guess your fear is that someone could move 5 warriors next to a more powerful unit to make him super powerful. That's a scenario that could certainly happen. How about the 15% bonus is based off the str of the adjacent units: i.e the 18 str unit would get 15% of 6 (from the warrior), for each. You could see this buff when you mouse over the unit you wanted to attack.

Edit: probably should have read your entire post (since you concluded the same thing...), but formulas tend to make me lose focus

I assume you mean +15% in the first sentence, but yeah, I fully agree something should be done about the value of adjecent units.

Not sure I agree with your formula. By factoring in the relative strength of the units, in your example it would be 6 / 25 * 1.15 = 0.276 extra strength for the rifleman, which is just over 1% of the rifleman. Hardly worth it.

An alternative could be something like +15% of the adjecent unit itself without considering the relative strength. That'd mean the rifleman gets 0.9 from being near a warrior and the warrior would get 3.75 from the rifleman. Maybe that should be capped at max 25% of the original strength of the unit, or something like that.

I think the math was wrong there, it's simply
bonus = adj u str * 0.15, so it doesn't depend on the unit you're attacking with.
In this case the benefit would be 0.9 str, a low amount compared to the big bad rifleman, but the idea being that the warrior can only support with the ability he has, which is limited. A flaking rifleman would give 25 * 0.15 = 3.75, which is more significant. If it's not implemented like this in the game, it should be: I'm 100% in favor of the OP's proposal

<...>
Conclusion:
I see the role of the flanking unit as an active fighting support in the battle, and therefore
the bonus that the (main) active figthing unit gets should the taken fron the strength of the flanking unit,
not of the active unit itself...

So this is the same what Mercade and Babri said in the reply below... if I get it correctly
Yes, exactly. My only addition to this is that maybe the flanking bonus should be capped. I first said 25%, but now I'm thinking of 50%. Think of a warrior next to a Modern armour. Then then warrior (6) would get a flanking bonus of (15% x 80 = ) 12 strength. Otoh, if your warrior lives to the modern age, he deserves all the help he can get

the thing is that mathematically the
active u str * ((adj u str / active u. str) * 0.15)
formula is exactly the same as the

I don't see the problem, but then, I haven't played yet.

I think the scenario you outlined is unlikely. The range/siege of the opponent would be cleaning up the trash for easy xp.

I don't see the problem, but then, I haven't played yet.

I think the scenario you outlined is unlikely. The range/siege of the opponent would be cleaning up the trash for easy xp.

Maybe unlikely, but this is gameplay rule we talk about here

Yes, if the flanking unit is about the same strength as the active attacking unit,
then it is not a real problem what you take as base for the 15%,
but then other setups are quite often will happen, as I see it,
and then rules can be important...

Quite frankly, I think this situation is so fringe that it's not really worth tweaking. If you can somehow keep a profoundly weaker unit around, not bother upgrading it, and put it on the front line, you deserve the full 15% for your audacity.

I interpreted the flanking bonus as the effect a nearby army has on the enemy's options. If there's a battalion over that hill, it limits a general's options, regardless of if the battalion is GDRs or cavemen. There are a number of realism arguments against basing the bonus on the supporting unit, but for gameplay, it's easier just to have a fixed 15% for everyone.

If a weaker unit is being used to give flanking bonuses, attack the weaker unit. That will then (probably?) break their line, leaving its adjacent units that much weaker (i.e., without the flanking bonus from the weaker unit).

If a weaker unit is being used to give flanking bonuses, attack the weaker unit. That will then (probably?) break their line, leaving its adjacent units that much weaker (i.e., without the flanking bonus from the weaker unit).

yes, but first you suffer the attack... this clever move can only come after that... is that OK?

Do you think that developers added some hidden rules to combat maths?
I suspect that there is some rules doesn&#8217;t explain in manual e.g. unit for ancient unit can&#8217;t win with modern unit, random factor in combat maths ect&#8230;
If you remember Sid&#8217;s speech about psychology aspect of the game you know what I&#8217;m taking about.

I find it to be too general...

I mean, say I have a 25 str rifleman and adj. to it a 6 str warrior:
should I get +15% more str. for the rifleman? That means 25*0,15=3,75 str help for a 6 str unit...

My suggestion is a formula to calculate the bonus:

EDITED:

bonus = active u str * ((adj u str / active u. str) * 0.15),

which is simplifed down to:
bonus = adj u str * 0.15

so a warrior gets lots of help from a rifleman: 25*0.15=3.75, so warrior figths with 6+3.75 = 9.75
but a rifleman gets only a bit from a warrior: 6*0.15=0.9, so rifleman figths with 25+0.9 = 25.9

Conclusion:
I see the role of the flanking unit as an active fighting support in the battle, and therefore
the bonus that the (main) active figthing unit gets should the taken fron the strength of the flanking unit,
not of the active unit itself...

so this is the same what Mercade, Babri, bernlin200 said in their replies below...
I take that as support of my case

I believe this would be better than the flat 15% that is currently being used.

For the purposes of a flanking bonus, it doesn't matter who is next to you. You simply have the knowledge that the enemy cannot approach you from that direction without losing the element of surprise. It's a tactical bonus, not a strength bonus.

For the purposes of a flanking bonus, it doesn't matter who is next to you. You simply have the knowledge that the enemy cannot approach you from that direction without losing the element of surprise. It's a tactical bonus, not a strength bonus.

So you are sure these panzers won't come from the right, because your hoplites will stay alive long enough to even tell you what happened? ;x

It's just not only unbalanced to help flanking with outdated units, it's just unrealistc too ^^
Strength should matter somehow.

While I like this in theory, I do not want to have to use a calculator/spreadsheet to workout the Strength of every unit in my defensive lines each turn.

Being able to tell at a glance what the relative strengths of units are is HUGELY important to me.

[Vote] (8-02) Arabia
Replies
0
Views
236
Replies
0
Views
233
Replies
23
Views
1K
[Vote] (8-18) Greece
Replies
0
Views
236
Replies
14
Views
850