Quick Answers / 'Newbie' Questions

I don't believe in any such complex algorithms, because of two reasons:
a) The "laziness" of the Firaxis team ("make the largest amount of money with the least amount of effort")
b) Ockham's Razor: "Among competing hypotheses that predict equally well, the one with the fewest assumptions should be selected. Other, more complicated solutions may ultimately prove to provide better predictions, but—in the absence of differences in predictive ability—the fewer assumptions that are made, the better."

So as long as there is no significant evidence that the current theory is wrong, there is no need to replace it by a more complex theory (involving hardy, normal and soft types of units). In order to prove that theory, you would have to somehow create 3 stacks consisting of only units of one "type", run 1000 combats with each stack and show that the outcome is indeed significantly different, I guess. (Or ask the NSA to steal the source code for us...)
 
Lol, there's no evidence it's right. They could be just working off a 30 (or whatever) sided dice for all we know, lol. But anyway, the problem (or advantage with if you want to keep secrets) with total-random is that there are no definites to pin-down and use as guides. No matter what observation you make, it can be dismissed with Perception Bias. Because anything can happen, nothing can be argued to be happening other than the pure random.

But just for fun, here's some of my regular, but not pin-downable, observations:

1. If you send, say, three Knights to city defended by two Spearmen and an Archer just as an isolated assault, then they are less likely to be able to take the city than if you sent, say, 8 Knights, with back-up close-by - even though, with the 8 Knights, it still only takes 3 Knights to take the city. This also depends at what point you're at in your invasion and the extent to which the result is somewhat important for whatever reason. (Could relate to no.3).

2. Quite often one of my Units will get red-lined almost instantly, quite noticeably more disappointingly than my other Units. I'll then heal the Unit fully and in their next battle they again get instantly red-lined. Whereas that guy that just defeated the Pikeman without loss and a promotion goes on to do the same thing to the next Pikeman it faces. So that, by the time you're finishing off a rival civ, you're pretty much just left with the quality, and so to my next point:

3. The more 'resigned' an enemy civ is, the easier their Units fall.

4. When you've just created a whole new batch of newly advanced Units and quickly peacock the first one into battle, full of excitement, that first one seems destined to die or red-line really easily.

A random example (not related to the above examples, but kinda) from my battles today:

My Cavalry are busy hosing down Musketman/Pikeman/Spearman combo'ed cities, getting the usual results of one dead, two red-lined and one at 2 hp and one at 1 hp lost, and two uninjured, and everything seems fine and predictable. That's them ol' stats doing their stat thing. Then, all of a sudden, one of my Cavalry is told to attack a 3 hp left Veteran Longbowman that's straggling around the conquered city. After killing Pikemen on Hills, behind Rivers, Fortified inside cities and the like, a full health Veteran Cavalry is red-lined by this non-fortified, on normal Grassland, 3 HP Longbowman that has a defence of virtually the lowest in the game. And it's just plain weird. You know what I mean. As if there was some kind of reason for what's taking place.


But, yeah... Random = Perception Bias... etc etc
 
The randomness of battle encourages to always have few more units than one has at the moment. As that logic applies to all parties that can become quite an arms race. :)
 
Buttercup said:
4. When you've just created a whole new batch of newly advanced Units and quickly peacock the first one into battle, full of excitement, that first one seems destined to die or red-line really easily.
Click to expand...

I can confirm this one. Whenever I slug my way through the Industrial Age and then finally send out my first long-awaited tank, it surely dies against a regular pike or something... :cry:
 
Its weird isn't it, lol. Even if it's not true, and it is purely random, how you develop these sort of unconscious micro-patterns. :lol:
 
Buttercup said:
Lol, there's no evidence it's right
Click to expand...
:huh: I thought we'd already established that there's plenty of evidence that it's right? Be careful, you're starting to sound like one of those lunatic-fringe evolution-deniers... ("But it's only a theory!" :rolleyes: )

But if you insist on your Hardass/Wimp hidden-code hypothesis, then I propose the following test, to be done and documented in-game: track your individual fast-attack units' combat-records vs. foot-units (since loss = death for foot-units vs. everyone, and fast vs. fast, these would need to be excluded). This would require renaming each fast-unit—e.g. appending 'WonXXRanYY', and updating the XX and YY values—after every attack you initiate, and also every defence vs. an AI slow-unit. This way, you can see if some of those units do actually seem to win significantly more (let's say, twice as often?) than they run (=Hardasses), or vice versa (=Wimps). The 'Normals' should have a roughly even balance of wins vs. retreats.

Assuming that you build enough of them, and that you select the next unit to fight based on the 'least number of combats to date' (so that each unit fights roughly the same number of times, against varied enemies), you should eventually end up with a collection of unit-names reflecting the frequencies of occurrence for the Hardass, Normal and Wimp-genes (NB as you note, your hypothesis also requires that the Hardass-gene frequency = Wimp-gene frequency, so that their effects cancel each other out to produce 'Normal' averages). And if you're right, then natural selection being what it is ;) once you rule the world, you could also expect significantly more Hardasses than Wimps among your surviving troops...
My Cavalry are busy hosing down Musketman/Pikeman/Spearman combo'ed cities, getting the usual results of one dead, two red-lined and one at 2 hp and one at 1 hp lost, and two uninjured, and everything seems fine and predictable. That's them ol' stats doing their stat thing.
Click to expand...
So, 6 Cavs left alive per 7 attacks against inferior units. Sounds about right... ;)
Then, all of a sudden, one of my Cavalry is told to attack a 3 hp left Veteran Longbowman that's straggling around the conquered city. After killing Pikemen on Hills, behind Rivers, Fortified inside cities and the like, a full health Veteran Cavalry is red-lined by this non-fortified, on normal Grassland, 3 HP Longbowman that has a defence of virtually the lowest in the game.
Click to expand...
So what you're saying here is, your previously victorious Hardass suddenly turned into a Wimp...? :lol:
 
tjs282 said:
So what you're saying here is, your previously victorious Hardass suddenly turned into a Wimp...? :lol:
Click to expand...

No, I didn't say that at all. That would be your own perception bias reading into the paragraph. :p I have no idea whether that was a previously used Unit or not, as it's incredibly difficult to keep track of such things amongst huge stacks.
 
While milking a game on standard map which is the better approach - fast initial expansion with spaced cities that'll later be settler disbanded to gain points for territory or going ics all the way to the end after the first ring?
 
Balance reasons. Someone has to.
 
If there were historical reasons I wouldn't currently be leading Ansar Warriors and Templar Knights against Aztec spearmen and archers, and the Inca wouldn't be besieging Washington.
 
Hello all. Newb question:
Is there any way to add resources icons in Civ 3 1.29f ? No PTW; no C3C.
I ask that because i have the idea of make a new luxury resource, "mate" (a kind of tea in South America), required for one UU.
This way the civ who finds that resource in early age will have some kind of advantage with this UU.

I know by now how to add resources in the editor, i just want to know if i can make a new icon with paint or something like that, and where to save it, so i can relate in the editor with my new luxury resource.

Thanks all in advance. I just sign up but i follow this page since years and i learned a lot with you guys.
 
Vodianoi said:
Hello all. Newb question:
Is there any way to add resources icons in Civ 3 1.29f ? No PTW; no C3C.
I ask that because i have the idea of make a new luxury resource, "mate" (a kind of tea in South America), required for one UU.
This way the civ who finds that resource in early age will have some kind of advantage with this UU.

I know by now how to add resources in the editor, i just want to know if i can make a new icon with paint or something like that, and where to save it, so i can relate in the editor with my new luxury resource.

Thanks all in advance. I just sign up but i follow this page since years and i learned a lot with you guys.
Click to expand...

I consider myself an expert on the game, after a recent burst of tuition on this forum. And yet, I never know the answers to 'newbie' questions! Yours is no exception. Sorry. A real expert will be along in a minute :)
 
My only units are two workers and an SGL. Can my SGL roam around popping huts for a few turns without the fear of popping barbs?
 
Donny Brook said:
My only units are two workers and an SGL. Can my SGL roam around popping huts for a few turns without the fear of popping barbs?
Click to expand...

You gave me an idea. I wonder whether it's possible to form an army made of GLs. How pointless would that be?

Sorry I can't answer your interesting question.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
Recommended Mods/AI Improvements/Other Q's
2
Replies
22
Views
2K
Spoonwood
S
V
  • Sticky
TSG 242 Opening Actions Thread
Replies
11
Views
510
Bufnitza
B
V
TSG 240 Opening Actions Thread
Replies
10
Views
813
Valasynthia
V
Nizef
TSG 241 Announcement
Replies
9
Views
767
sebtanic
S
V
TSG 238 Opening Actions Thread
Replies
7
Views
638
lerrocco
L
Top Bottom