2 veteran horse units against one regular jaguar unit. First attack, horse unit dead, jaguar unit undamaged. Second attack, same result. (This was on grassland.) Go ahead and explain to me how going through the tutorial or reading the manual will make me better understand this. This is not about difficulty of game, this is about ridiculous battle results. Please explain to me how this makes sense!
Oh come on!!!
- Thread starter chimera99
- Start date
Klash
Tyrant
Was he fortified?
Was he fortified in a city?
Was he fortified in a Jungle?
Was he fortified on a mountain?
Was he fortified in a city?
Was he fortified in a Jungle?
Was he fortified on a mountain?
TrailblazingScot
I was kittenOFchaos
After attacking with the first and getting kicked you were a smuck to attack again!
Johnny_Vegas
Chieftain
That's rare but not unlikely.
I guess your just unlucky.
Veteran Horsemen.. lets see
attack 2
Jaguar Warrior
Defense 1 + 10% defending on grassland for a total of 1.1
2+1.1=3.1
Horsemen's chance of winning a round is 1.1/3.1= 64.5%
Jaguar's chance is 35.5% per round.
Minimum Jaguar needs to win against 2 veteran horsemen is to win 8 rounds to 2. (if he loses 3 rounds he's dead). So he needs to win 8 of 10 "rounds".
8*35.5%= 2.84% chance of Jaguar winning 8 straight rounds..
But he's even allowed to lose 2 rounds and still win, so his chances are even higher than 2.84%. I forget how to do the match to determine it exactly.
Point is, shiat happens! haha
I guess your just unlucky.
Veteran Horsemen.. lets see
attack 2
Jaguar Warrior
Defense 1 + 10% defending on grassland for a total of 1.1
2+1.1=3.1
Horsemen's chance of winning a round is 1.1/3.1= 64.5%
Jaguar's chance is 35.5% per round.
Minimum Jaguar needs to win against 2 veteran horsemen is to win 8 rounds to 2. (if he loses 3 rounds he's dead). So he needs to win 8 of 10 "rounds".
8*35.5%= 2.84% chance of Jaguar winning 8 straight rounds..
But he's even allowed to lose 2 rounds and still win, so his chances are even higher than 2.84%. I forget how to do the match to determine it exactly.
Point is, shiat happens! haha
FortyJ
Deity
Were you crossing a river during the attack? Defenders do receive bonuses when the battle takes place across a river.
He stated that the battle did occur in a grassland and not in a city so there is 3 of your 4 questions. As for the last....even if the unit was fortified, its QUITE improbable that the jaguar would come out unscathed after 8 turns of battle.
The jag was not fortified. The chance that the 2 horsemen would die without the jag taking any damage is:
0.02 %
These numbers come from using the binomial formula where the following apply
1) There are n identical trials.
2) The trial only has 2 possible outcomes
3) The probabilities of the two outcomes remain constant
4) The trials are independant
P(x) = (n over x factorial) * p^x * q^(n-x)
n = number of trials
p = probability of success
q = probability of failure
x = number of successes in n trials
n-x = number of failures in n trials
Which yields these equation
P(x) = (8 over 0 factorial) * p^0 * q^8
The first 2 items convert to one so the equarion simplifies to
P(x) = 1 * 1 * q^8 = q^8
Now plug in the probility of failure percentage. Which I assume is .35. This is using the horseman attack power of 2 and the jag with the defensive power of 1.1 (+10% grassland). So.....
(1.1/3.1) = .35
.35^8 = .0002 = .02%
Jesus I need to find me a job....too much free time.
I think Firaxis needs to check their equations that determins win or lose per turn of battle. Oh and and also check the random number generator code as well. If neither of these are the culprits then maybe there is some other factor(s) that effect the per turn outcomes in a battle that Firaxis is not telling us. They did state that the equations are not adjusted depending on the difficult level of the game so thats not it.
The jag was not fortified. The chance that the 2 horsemen would die without the jag taking any damage is:
0.02 %
These numbers come from using the binomial formula where the following apply
1) There are n identical trials.
2) The trial only has 2 possible outcomes
3) The probabilities of the two outcomes remain constant
4) The trials are independant
P(x) = (n over x factorial) * p^x * q^(n-x)
n = number of trials
p = probability of success
q = probability of failure
x = number of successes in n trials
n-x = number of failures in n trials
Which yields these equation
P(x) = (8 over 0 factorial) * p^0 * q^8
The first 2 items convert to one so the equarion simplifies to
P(x) = 1 * 1 * q^8 = q^8
Now plug in the probility of failure percentage. Which I assume is .35. This is using the horseman attack power of 2 and the jag with the defensive power of 1.1 (+10% grassland). So.....
(1.1/3.1) = .35
.35^8 = .0002 = .02%
Jesus I need to find me a job....too much free time.
I think Firaxis needs to check their equations that determins win or lose per turn of battle. Oh and and also check the random number generator code as well. If neither of these are the culprits then maybe there is some other factor(s) that effect the per turn outcomes in a battle that Firaxis is not telling us. They did state that the equations are not adjusted depending on the difficult level of the game so thats not it.
Actually, I've encountered the exact same problems. Sometimes, the results of the battles make no sense at all. Frequently, my elite swordsmen (and even more often, my vetran swordsmen) get their arses beat down by regular swordsmen and even regular warriors! Sometimes, it is understandable
(attacking from a mountain, etc.), but other times, it makes no sense. Sometimes, it's my elite or vet units who are fortified on a mountain or in a city and they get beat by regular units.
Even more tricky is when you attack yourself. I launched 5 warriors on an enemy city once (that was just on flat ground all around) near the beginning once and every single warrior died leaving the single warrior in the enemy city unscathed. What's most bewildering about this, however, is that I'm only playing on chieftan mode. Maybe Firaxis inverted the difficulty levels or something.
(attacking from a mountain, etc.), but other times, it makes no sense. Sometimes, it's my elite or vet units who are fortified on a mountain or in a city and they get beat by regular units.
Even more tricky is when you attack yourself. I launched 5 warriors on an enemy city once (that was just on flat ground all around) near the beginning once and every single warrior died leaving the single warrior in the enemy city unscathed. What's most bewildering about this, however, is that I'm only playing on chieftan mode. Maybe Firaxis inverted the difficulty levels or something.
Terser
Anti-tank Spearman
I've been playing at least six hours a day since purchasing the game on Tuesday. I've got nothing but love for it--might go down in history as one of the great strat games of all time. I probably spent the equivalent of entire days of my life on CivI and CivII, and I would honestly love nothing more than to do the same with CivIII.
In my previous games I never saw much combat, as I fell so far behind in the tech race that I just threw in the towel after roughly an hour of play. Tonight, however, I finally came to realize the necessity of trading technology with other civs. And it payed dividends in my warlord level game. I was running equal to my two main competitors (the Babylonians and the Greeks) in military tech and ahead of them in the political field and wonder race(I had republic--they didn't. I had Pyramids, Hanging Gardens, Colossus). And so it was actually with great a sense of euphoria that I plunged headlong in to war after a Greek settler kept marching across my land. I was looking forward to a long, drawn out struggle, winning some and losing some, taking cities and maybe losing a few. Alliances and counter-alliances. All in all, a glorious campaign to serve as my baptismal conflict in CivIII.
Well.....
Greek spearman vs. my veteran horsemen unit(fortified in mountains)=My loss, with spearman unit's health barely edging into yellow.
Greek warrior vs. My elite spearman unit fortified in city with walls=My win. However, spearman unit has a tiny sliver of red left on health bar. Same enemy turn a horsemen unit destroys said spearman with no apparent loss of health.
At least two battles with horsemen vs. my veteran horsemen (and yes, one in which the Greeks did attack across a river. In both instances, my units were dispatched with virtually no health loss to the opposing units.
And so on and so on. Eight or nine seperate battles total, and I (the defender often fortified behind city walls with equivalent military techs) lost all but two of them. The thing that is so completely ridiculous is that most of these battles were not even close!
I have read a post by Soren Johnson on one of the boards (here or Apolyton) claiming that the A.I. doesn't cheat until regent level difficulty. Huh-uh. There is no other plausible explanation for these ridiculous outcomes save one--the combat algorithms are massively screwed up. Either way, the discrepancies in combat results coupled with the corruption mess make for an experience more frustrating than fun.
I'll have my life back for a while...because I'm not playing CivIII until this is fixed...
In my previous games I never saw much combat, as I fell so far behind in the tech race that I just threw in the towel after roughly an hour of play. Tonight, however, I finally came to realize the necessity of trading technology with other civs. And it payed dividends in my warlord level game. I was running equal to my two main competitors (the Babylonians and the Greeks) in military tech and ahead of them in the political field and wonder race(I had republic--they didn't. I had Pyramids, Hanging Gardens, Colossus). And so it was actually with great a sense of euphoria that I plunged headlong in to war after a Greek settler kept marching across my land. I was looking forward to a long, drawn out struggle, winning some and losing some, taking cities and maybe losing a few. Alliances and counter-alliances. All in all, a glorious campaign to serve as my baptismal conflict in CivIII.
Well.....
Greek spearman vs. my veteran horsemen unit(fortified in mountains)=My loss, with spearman unit's health barely edging into yellow.
Greek warrior vs. My elite spearman unit fortified in city with walls=My win. However, spearman unit has a tiny sliver of red left on health bar. Same enemy turn a horsemen unit destroys said spearman with no apparent loss of health.
At least two battles with horsemen vs. my veteran horsemen (and yes, one in which the Greeks did attack across a river. In both instances, my units were dispatched with virtually no health loss to the opposing units.
And so on and so on. Eight or nine seperate battles total, and I (the defender often fortified behind city walls with equivalent military techs) lost all but two of them. The thing that is so completely ridiculous is that most of these battles were not even close!
I have read a post by Soren Johnson on one of the boards (here or Apolyton) claiming that the A.I. doesn't cheat until regent level difficulty. Huh-uh. There is no other plausible explanation for these ridiculous outcomes save one--the combat algorithms are massively screwed up. Either way, the discrepancies in combat results coupled with the corruption mess make for an experience more frustrating than fun.
I'll have my life back for a while...because I'm not playing CivIII until this is fixed...
Not that I disagree with the overall point, which is that the AI seems to cheat in combat, but horsemen have a defense of 1, so it's not really surprising that they take a beating from just about anything. Being a veteran doesn't make him more likely to win, it just makes him take the same beating for longer. Also, keep in mind that you remember the battles you lose more vividly than the ones you win. Somebody should really keep a log of battle outcomes so that we can do decent statistics.
Xerxes
Xerxes
Xeres:
The horsemen are the attackers so their defense value does not have any effect on the outcome of the battle described by chimera99.
Secondly his horsemen being vertran units DOES make it more probable that his units will win the battle because it adds to the max number of failures that he can sustain in the battles. Doing so increases his probability to win the battle.
Consider hp as the number of coin flips. If the horsemen were standard it would make a total hp of 6, but they were vetrans so their total hp is 8.
What is more probable to happen?
A minimum of 3 successful coin flips (which would kill the jaguar's 3hp) in 8 flips (hp of 2 vetran horsemen)?
A minimum of 3 successful coin flips (which would kill the jaguar's 3hp) in 6 flips (hp of 2 regular horsemen)?
The 8 coin flip of course.
I am ProbabilityMan! Fear my statistics!
The horsemen are the attackers so their defense value does not have any effect on the outcome of the battle described by chimera99.
Secondly his horsemen being vertran units DOES make it more probable that his units will win the battle because it adds to the max number of failures that he can sustain in the battles. Doing so increases his probability to win the battle.
Consider hp as the number of coin flips. If the horsemen were standard it would make a total hp of 6, but they were vetrans so their total hp is 8.
What is more probable to happen?
A minimum of 3 successful coin flips (which would kill the jaguar's 3hp) in 8 flips (hp of 2 vetran horsemen)?
A minimum of 3 successful coin flips (which would kill the jaguar's 3hp) in 6 flips (hp of 2 regular horsemen)?
The 8 coin flip of course.
I am ProbabilityMan! Fear my statistics!
I agree that the overall result of the battle will depend on how many hps your unit has, but if an inferior veteran unit attacks a superior regular unit, it's still only likely to survive having taken severe damage. In fact, as your units get more experience, you should see inferior units lose more often (when attacking units with the same experience), since more rounds of combat means that exceptional results become less likely.
WRT horsemen attacking:
"my veteran horsemen unit(fortified in mountains)"
Xerxes
WRT horsemen attacking:
"my veteran horsemen unit(fortified in mountains)"
Xerxes
Once again Xeres....
Skill level of units only effect their HP. Nothing else.
In Chimeras example his horsemen ARE more superior than the jaguars NOT inferior. Horsemen are the attackers so we use their offense of 2. The jaguar is the defeder so we use their defense value of 1. The jaguar is NOT fortified but are being attacked (defending) on grassland so that receive a 10% defesnive bonus sooo....
Horsemen Attack Power: 2
Jaguar Defensive Power: 1.1
HP per horseman: 4
HP per jaguar: 3
Number of horsemen: 2
Number of jaguars: 1
The the horsemen in chimeras example are SUPERIOR on all counts. I do not know why you keep trying to use the horsemans defensive value with they are not defending...they are attacking.
Skill level of units only effect their HP. Nothing else.
In Chimeras example his horsemen ARE more superior than the jaguars NOT inferior. Horsemen are the attackers so we use their offense of 2. The jaguar is the defeder so we use their defense value of 1. The jaguar is NOT fortified but are being attacked (defending) on grassland so that receive a 10% defesnive bonus sooo....
Horsemen Attack Power: 2
Jaguar Defensive Power: 1.1
HP per horseman: 4
HP per jaguar: 3
Number of horsemen: 2
Number of jaguars: 1
The the horsemen in chimeras example are SUPERIOR on all counts. I do not know why you keep trying to use the horsemans defensive value with they are not defending...they are attacking.
Ranulf
Chieftain
Well, at least I'm not the only one who has seen odd combat results more often than not. Its definately all about numbers and swarming to win for the player yet the AI has it easy.
In my last game fighting the french I had surrounded Paris with 5 catapults, 4 horsemen, 4 bowmen and 2 spears to be defenders. Catapults over about 10 turns (150 years or so) did nothing but kill 2 pop points and damage the 2 spearmen defending down to yellow health. It took 2 elite bowmen and a horsemen unit to finally break through (I lost those 3).
Another game, I had a cav unit and infantry (are they 8 or 6 attack?, the manual/game differ on stats) attack a fortifed spearman in a city on grasslands. The cav pulled back after going red and did 1 point of damage. The infantry got the spear down to red before dying. The Chinese then moved in with Knights in one hit and took the city.
In my last game fighting the french I had surrounded Paris with 5 catapults, 4 horsemen, 4 bowmen and 2 spears to be defenders. Catapults over about 10 turns (150 years or so) did nothing but kill 2 pop points and damage the 2 spearmen defending down to yellow health. It took 2 elite bowmen and a horsemen unit to finally break through (I lost those 3).
Another game, I had a cav unit and infantry (are they 8 or 6 attack?, the manual/game differ on stats) attack a fortifed spearman in a city on grasslands. The cav pulled back after going red and did 1 point of damage. The infantry got the spear down to red before dying. The Chinese then moved in with Knights in one hit and took the city.
If you're referring to my post, my units were also superior (elite swordman with iron sword vs. regular stone-club warriors), yet I still lost on a fairly consistent basis.
The only time I seem to be able to win consistently is when I fight barbarians.
The only time I seem to be able to win consistently is when I fight barbarians.
Similar threads
