Promotion question?

[Bjorn190]

Hi!

I was wondering.. there are many units that have "double this to that" features, like the trebs have 100% vs cities.. my question is, do the City raider promotion add to the base 4 or to the 100% boosted 8?

The same with numidian cavarly etc.. is it all just addition?

Because if it is, I would go with the higher base/lower hammer cost then.. for the ultra xp units

 

[drkodos]

Hi!

I was wondering.. there are many units that have "double this to that" features, like the trebs have 100% vs cities.. my question is, do the City raider promotion add to the base 4 or to the 100% boosted 8?

The same with numidian cavarly etc.. is it all just addition?

Because if it is, I would go with the higher base/lower hammer cost then.. for the ultra xp units

All modifiers are to the base.

 

[Bjorn190]

Cool thx then it is as I suspected.

So if you're running feudalism, a catapult with CR 2 gets 5+5x50%=7.5 attack vs a city defender.

A treb gets 4+4+4x50%=10 attack vs a city defender.

I would say the cat is way more bang for the buck, especially considering it can do severe damage to roaming armies too, especially if you keep it unpromoted and ready for barrage. And 3-4 cats do more collateral damange than 2 trebs.

What I'm saying is, you guys should build trebs and insist that they rock! Meanwhile I will build a cat zerg and fight you in the fields, and in the streets, and outside the cities, and then I come for you!!

 

[Antilogic]

Initially, i was going to post a "WTH?" against your mathematics, but now I kind of understand what you are doing. However, your trebutchet calculations are a little whacko...4 +4*150% would make more sense (and also show that the modifiers stack).

The thing is, trebutchets stand a good chance of surviving against cities, even against longbows (typically have a 50% to 65% chance of winning plus retreat chances). Therefore, against cities, it is a better idea to use trebutchets. I typically have a mix of them (some for anti-enemy-city duty, one or two catapults for anti-non-city-enemy-stack duty, and more catapults for homeland-defense duty).

Using the units in balance is by far the best combo. Ignoring the fact that city raider trebuchets can win against longbows will only cause you to spend even more production on suicide siege equipment throughout the game.

 

[Severus]

The way promotions which add a percentage work is that the precentage is subtracted from the defenders strength, not added to the attackers.
So for example a trebuchet with city raider 1 v a longbowman with city garrison 2 (+45% total bonus) means the longbowman would be fighting at +25% strength (not taking into account terrain bonuses or fortification bonuses), while your trebuchet would still have strength 8.
The only promotion which affects an attackers strength is the combat promotion, so a trebuchet with combat 1 would fight at strength 8.8 against a longbowman in a city.

 

[Thedrin]

The way promotions which add a percentage work is that the precentage is subtracted from the defenders strength, not added to the attackers.
So for example a trebuchet with city raider 1 v a longbowman with city garrison 2 (+45% total bonus) means the longbowman would be fighting at +25% strength (not taking into account terrain bonuses or fortification bonuses), while your trebuchet would still have strength 8.
The only promotion which affects an attackers strength is the combat promotion, so a trebuchet with combat 1 would fight at strength 8.8 against a longbowman in a city.

You quite sure you've got your figures right? I think the trebuchet works at strength 4 and the 100% city raiding bonus it gets is also subtracted from the longbowman.

 

[CivDude86]

That is correct. The 175% is subtracted from whatever defense bonuses the longbow has and if its negative the % is subtracted from its strength if positive its added. The only way to increase base strengh when attacking is with combat promos.

 

[Bjorn190]

Wow this is really interesting, That totally changes my plans

 

[Bjorn190]

So lets say an axeman is fighting a preatorian.. right off the bat this should be 5 vs 8-8x50%=4 ?

So combat promotions are good when you have the superior units, and the specifics promotions are better vs high base enemies? ^^

Cool!

 

[holy king]

combat promos just unspecifically strenghten your units....
if your going to face multiple types of units its th promo you'll want....

 

[JimT]

So lets say an axeman is fighting a preatorian.. right off the bat this should be 5 vs 8-8x50%=4 ?

So combat promotions are good when you have the superior units, and the specifics promotions are better vs high base enemies? ^^

Cool!

Nope It is still 5+(5*0.5) vs 8 => 7.5 vs 8.

It will not become a negative. If you have a 70% bonus and your opponent a 50% bonus it cancels them out arithmetically and gives you a 20% bonus. Also works vice versa - if your opponent has a 70% bonus and you have 50% then it gives them a 20%v bonus.

The exception is strength which works according to your base strength and doesn't cancel out. This means the bonus is greater than you would expect when fighting low base strength troops with high modifiers (City raider seige and fortified archery units).

So against mounted troops (high base few bonuses) you want specific promotions. Yet against archery units/ defending against seige units (low base many bonuses) the generic (and stackable) combat bonus is almost as good in the specific situation (sometimes slightly better) but works against any unit.

So a Praetorian with Combat 2 (20%) is more effective than one with CR2 (45%) against a fortified archer in a city with a 90% bonus. Ignore the below calculation if it bores you (it did me). This only works when you have a significant edge in base strength (trebuchets need not apply)

Combat promotions
8+(8*0.2) vs 3+(3*0.9) = 9.6:5.7 - 62.7% in each round
City Raider promotions
8 vs 3+[3*(0.9-0.25)] = 8:4.95 - 61.8% in each round

I suppose it may be academic as you have an almost guaranteed victory anyway. I will still post it because of the time I wasted writing it. The point is valid where you have troop specific promotions. Cover is not as good as combat for mounted/melee as a high base strength means you will find the bonus as useful. Plus cover sometimes means you end up fighting a spear/axeman instead wasting the promotion.

 

[Thedrin]

Nope It is still 5+(5*0.5) vs 8 => 7.5 vs 8.

Are you treating that 0.5 as a combat V promotion or as the 50% bonus axemen recieve against praetorians?

Bjorn190:
So lets say an axeman is fighting a preatorian.. right off the bat this should be 5 vs 8-8x50%=4 ?

No. The technique of subtracting attackers combat bonuses from the defender is an approximation. It's fairly accurate when the net modifier for the defender is positive. When the net modifier is negative it becomes less and less accurate. For example, a spearman attacking a horse archer will not have odds of 4 vs. 0. The odds will be 4 vs. 3. In the case of an axeman attacking a praetorian the odds will be 5 vs. 5.33. The praetorian only gets a -34.5% modifier*.

* Taken from the game. I don't know the actual calculation.

 

[JimT]

Are you treating that 0.5 as a combat V promotion or as the 50% bonus axemen recieve against praetorians?

I can't check, I'll delete my post at home if I'm wrong, but i am using the 50% against melee.

But a fully healed unit will never go below its base strength. A praetorian will always be at 8, any further bonuses to the axeman will apply to the axemans strength.

Sorry if I'm wrong.

hence your spearman vs horsearcher

4+(4*1) vs 6 => 8vs6 => 4vs3 57% per round
NOT
4 vs 6-(6*1) => 4vs0 100% per round

 

[Thedrin]

That makes sense. The axeman-praetorian 5 vs. 5.33 is identical to 7.5 vs. 8.

 

[JimT]

That makes sense. The axeman-praetorian 5 vs. 5.33 is identical to 7.5 vs. 8.

Thank god for that I began to really doubt myself.

Shame I couldn't of put it a bit more succintly