First Strike Chance

[Ringo Kid]

How valuable are first strikes. I really dont think I clearly understand how they affect combat odds.

For example with Cho Ko Nu , Chinese crossbows, with one settled Great General + Barracks you can promote them to Drill 3, I believe, which gives two extra strike chances.

Do first strikes affect defense or only attack? Does it increase odds more or less than other promotions?

Is there a good article or discussion you know of on this topic?

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

Short summary of first strike chances: before combat begins, a die roll determines how many first strike chances become first strikes. These get added to the number of first strikes you already had.

So a Drill IV archer has 4 first strikes, plus three more first strike chances. A roll of the die will covert those 3 chances into 0/1/2/3 first strikes. These get added to the original 4, so you end up with 4-7 first strikes when combat begins.

Combat outcome is determined by evaluating rounds. What each first strike really gives you is a round at the beginning of combat during which you are invulnerable.

So if my archer has 5 first strikes and the barbarian archer has 3 first strikes, combat looks like: three rounds where neither of us can damage the other, 2 rounds where I can damage the barbarian but the barbarian cannot damage me, and finally "normal" rounds until the combat is complete.

First strikes count for both attack and defense.

Like other combat buffs, first strikes are most effective when the units are otherwise nearly equal.

Unlike other combat buffs, first strikes don't change the XP calculations. Which means that, other things being equal, units with first strikes can earn more XP than units with the equivalent alternatives.

 

[bhavv]

Unlike other combat buffs, first strikes don't change the XP calculations. Which means that, other things being equal, units with first strikes can earn more XP than units with the equivalent alternatives.

Can you explain this in a bit more detail please?

 

[Kid R]

Combat explained:

http://www.civfanatics.com/civ4/strategy/combat_explained.php

(Section on "Experience Points"). I don't know whether the calculations given there are exactly up-to-date with all patches but it gives the general gist.

So VoU's point is stronger units don't get so much experience for fighting weak ones and vice versa. A combat-promoted unit (being as a result "stronger") is reducing its chances of getting more XP from each fight.

It's something I'd personally never considered in connection with drill promotions before. Usually I consider it just a bit too "kooky" a promotion to use, that is, its operation is not so easy to get straight in the mind and think clearly about one's battle tactics. I only tend to use it in untypical situations when it's reasonable to expect to get large numbers of drill 3 or 4 units, and at those levels even a dummy like me can see the benefit - the results speak for themselves!

 

[Habitus]

If you are going to face alot of combat First Strikes are very important, as it basically lets you win more fights without getting damaged to win the later fights. Always war games are when this is best shown (Killing 5 or more times the units you have without a loss on hill cities with archers )

 

[OneLeggedRhino]

Like other combat buffs, first strikes are most effective when the units are otherwise nearly equal.

Everything else was spot on, but this isn't entirely correct. If you are in an even matchup (like 2 longbows fighting on open ground), a combat 1 promotion will help more than first strikes, because it pushes you over a threshold of how many hits it takes to win.

First strikes really shine when you're in an uneven combat, fighting an injured unit, because you have a good chance of defeating it before it even gets a round to hit you with. Most often, that's after you've damaged a stack with siege, as you can often defeat units without taking damage, and get a ton of exp to boot.

First strikes also shine when defending siege, as a drill 4 longbow can often defeat a catapult before it can do any damage to the rest of your stack (which presumably doesn't have drill promotions to protect it).

In a dis-advantageous matchup, where you're sacrificing a unit at 5% odds to do some damage? First strikes pretty much suck, because they don't actually help you win rounds, they just make you not take damage for a few of them. If you can't win rounds, first strike does zilch. You're better off with combat strength promos to increase your odds each round.

 

[VoiceOfUnreason]

First strikes also shine when defending siege, as a drill 4 longbow can often defeat a catapult before it can do any damage to the rest of your stack (which presumably doesn't have drill promotions to protect it).

This is entirely incorrect. Drill IV offers no special benefit to the unit defending against siege

1) As the defending unit, the unit itself is already collateral immune - the "suffers less collateral damage" benefit doesn't apply

2) Collateral damage is delivered before the combat rounds begin; the only way to prevent the catapult from damaging the rest of your stack is to attack it before it attacks you.

 

[Ringo Kid]

Seems like drill 4 is very good , then, for Cho Ko Nu stacks, as the defenders take collateral damage with each attack , so that as the odds tilt in the Cho Ku Nu's favor, their first strikes are more and more effective?

Am I understanding that right?

Thanks for all the info.

 

[barbertje]

In a dis-advantageous matchup, where you're sacrificing a unit at 5% odds to do some damage? First strikes pretty much suck, because they don't actually help you win rounds, they just make you not take damage for a few of them. If you can't win rounds, first strike does zilch. You're better off with combat strength promos to increase your odds each round.

This is wrong most of the time. Combat I is often weaker than drill I. (and drill I by itself certainly sucks)
Suppose the defender is twice as strong. It will kill you in 4 rounds, and you get 4 chances to hit it with a probability of 1/3. The probability of no hits is 19.8%. The defender has to win 4 times in a row to not get damaged

With 1 first strike, this probability becomes 13.2%, because the defender has to win 5 times in a row. With Drill I and 50% chance of a first strike it will be a 16.5% chance of doing no damage.
If you add C1, the win probability becomes 2.2/6.2 for each round, and the probability of no hits becomes 17.3%, worse than with drill I. The damage done for each hit is 14 in both cases. Combat I might be a tiny bit better than drill I, if if will make you do one more damage/combat round.
The only exception occurs when a combat promotion makes you so much stronger that it will take more rounds to kill you (this happens most often with a 1.59 strength ratio) If combat I will get you past that, it's hugely better than drill I.

 

[Ataxerxes]

Seems like drill 4 is very good , then, for Cho Ko Nu stacks, as the defenders take collateral damage with each attack , so that as the odds tilt in the Cho Ku Nu's favor, their first strikes are more and more effective?

Am I understanding that right?

Thanks for all the info.

I don't understand the question entirely. It's true that Drill IV is a very good promo, with reducing collateral damage and giving 2 first strikes (unlike Drill I, which is awful). Drill is nice for Cho-Ko-Nu because China is Protective and gives you a head start up the Drill line. But it doesn't help the Cho Ko Nu deal out additional collateral damage with Drill Promos. Drill IV Promotions would probably be nice defending from Cho stacks, but even there it's usually better to get the initiative.

My general rule for Drill is that it's a good promo if you have a significant edge in the strength of your units (great for Privateers because you only use them while you have tech advantage). If the units are close to even in strength, go with Combat. It's surprising what a difference in odds it is if you're 8.8 vs. 8 or 8 vs. 8.

 

[Archon_Wing]

Is drill worth putting on siege units? Or is it CR III all the way?

 

[TheMeInTeam]

This is entirely incorrect. Drill IV offers no special benefit to the unit defending against siege

1) As the defending unit, the unit itself is already collateral immune - the "suffers less collateral damage" benefit doesn't apply

2) Collateral damage is delivered before the combat rounds begin; the only way to prevent the catapult from damaging the rest of your stack is to attack it before it attacks you.

Sorta. Drill line does provide some collateral resistance so if the drill IV longbow isn't attacked directly but is chosen for collateral damage the amount is reduced. Still usually better to attack the cata but this is significant especially in longbow era...I've seen a handful of longbows slaughter 20+ units in the right circumstances.

Also, IMO drill does not shine at otherwise even strengths (where combat beats it), but rather when you already have a str lead or defensive bonuses adding to the effect, making attacking units less likely to damage your unit much/at all...or are attacking damaged unit.

Drill line badly needed to be able to take the same special promos as combat (march, amphibious, etc) as that would have helped protective considerably.

 

[Ringo Kid]

I don't understand the question entirely. ...it doesn't help the Cho Ko Nu deal out additional collateral damage with Drill Promos. Drill IV Promotions would probably be nice defending from Cho stacks, but even there it's usually better to get the initiative.

.

I mean when a stack of ckn's attacks a town, the strength of the remaining defenders gets lower and lower due to the repeated collateral damage. So in each succesive attack the defender is a bit weaker - and the first strikes are best used against a weaker defender.

Is that right?


... I just noticed my signature relates to SMAC .... I guess I havent updated that in a spell, like maybe 5 or 6 years.. lol have to come up with a new one, I reckon

 

[strijder20]

I mean when a stack of ckn's attacks a town, the strength of the remaining defenders gets lower and lower due to the repeated collateral damage. So in each succesive attack the defender is a bit weaker - and the first strikes are best used against a weaker defender.

Is that right?

Yes, I think you have a point there.
Long live the drill CKN's!

 

[bhavv]

Is drill worth putting on siege units? Or is it CR III all the way?

I'd keep them with CR as it makes them more likely to survive, and also deal more damage to the strongest defenders.

 

[strijder20]

I'd keep them with CR as it makes them more likely to survive, and also deal more damage to the strongest defenders.

Barrage is nice too, as it might damage the top defender less, but it'll damage all the other defenders more.

 

[Kid R]

IMO in the most common situation of suicide seige the idea of slightly increasing survival doesn't come into it. The whole point is to do collateral damage, basically getting the most HP-eroding bang for your buck. CR does that best when attacking cities, barrage when attacking the enemy SOD in the open field.

 

[bhavv]

Maybe mix them together, not on the same unit but on different ones.

Open the attack with your CR siege weapon which will have more chance of surviving, and then when the rest of the defenders are weakened, use the Barrage.

CR does that best when attacking cities, barrage when attacking the enemy SOD in the open field.

CR does more collateral to a city? I thought people used it to weaken the top defenders the most, and the increased survival chance is just another less important, but useful bonus to have too (if it withdraws a lot, it gets more XP).

 

[Kid R]

Hmm, I need to study the numbers properly - too much speaking out of ingrained habit here

I must admit I'd always assumed collateral was based on modified strengths of the units, which would make CR a no-brainer for suicide city softeners, but it seems only the base strengths of both units are used for the collateral calculation.

So CR adds nothing to collateral and as you say the benefit is to slightly increase its (usally tiny) chance of winning the fight with the top defender, and in any case to do a little bit more damage to it. On the other hand the collateral damage effect, by going in "under the radar" of all the fortify and city garrison etc. bonuses seems more powerful.

Anyway it certainly seems like it's more situational than I thought (and people always make out). I'll be reconsidering barrage as a promo line next time rather than just clicking CR automatically!

However back on topic I think we can agree drill on siege is a bad choice??

 

[bhavv]

Collateral damage is capped so that lets say 5 catapults with Barrage enhancements wont actually do any better than 5 with CR, but the CR ones will inflict more damage against their defender and have a higher withdrawal chance.

CR1 alone raises a Catapults attack strength to 6 against cities, and a treb gets boosted up to 8.8 attack against cities, which is very useful to soften those Archers / Longbows. Whereas a Barrage siege weapon may inflict more collateral, but barely do any damage to a bunch of drill promoted archery units.