RNG - Civ's Detractor?
- Thread starter CivCube
- Start date
wilbill
That Old Time Religion
I thnk a game called Civilization without a RNG would be about the same challenge as building a city with Legos
Actually I must agree with his friend here. I personally don't like the fact that the game decides so much in combat for you. I think there should be many factors that the player must decide and do to determine the overall outcome of most battles.
For starters I think there should be a fair amount of experience gained through "training," not just through combat. I think that you should be able to drill your army units harshly, severely, moderately, anything you want(perhap a slider bar). This will affect how much experience the troops have, but will also affect how disciplined they are. Each side having there own limits, for instance lets say you drag the bar all the way to harsh then the troops are extremely experienced and are VERY good, but then they also have a much higher chance of mutiny. On the other hand if you drill your troops moderately they are not that experienced but will listen to the commands you give them. And finally if you drill them lightly they will not have any experience and will be more likely to just walk off because there is no discipline.
For starters I think there should be a fair amount of experience gained through "training," not just through combat. I think that you should be able to drill your army units harshly, severely, moderately, anything you want(perhap a slider bar). This will affect how much experience the troops have, but will also affect how disciplined they are. Each side having there own limits, for instance lets say you drag the bar all the way to harsh then the troops are extremely experienced and are VERY good, but then they also have a much higher chance of mutiny. On the other hand if you drill your troops moderately they are not that experienced but will listen to the commands you give them. And finally if you drill them lightly they will not have any experience and will be more likely to just walk off because there is no discipline.
I would say that this is one of my favorite aspects of the game, if not THE favorite. I think it's genious. Just like real life battles, you don't necessarily know who's going to win or lose. An exceptionally skilled or motivated spearmen may be able take out a cavalry.
Take sports for example. Who thought the ducks were going to take out detroit last year in the playoffs? It was an upset, the determined and underrated ducks managed to knock off the hockey collossus know as detroit.
This is one of the things about civ that I find so addictive, and that keeps me coming back to play it. Sure, it may be frustrating sometimes (I had a similar experience to your friend when I first started playing, I got erally frustrated that I couldn't take an enemy city down, and I had a huge stack of units. I said to my roommate which actually got me into this game, "If I don't take this city on this turn i'm never playing this damn game again." Well, obviously I took the city.
) I often find myself retiring or renaming a unit that seemed to defeat opponents against all odds. I think its great. What I think would be detracting is if you actually KNEW that your unit is going to win or lose a particular battle that you are going into.
Take sports for example. Who thought the ducks were going to take out detroit last year in the playoffs? It was an upset, the determined and underrated ducks managed to knock off the hockey collossus know as detroit.
This is one of the things about civ that I find so addictive, and that keeps me coming back to play it. Sure, it may be frustrating sometimes (I had a similar experience to your friend when I first started playing, I got erally frustrated that I couldn't take an enemy city down, and I had a huge stack of units. I said to my roommate which actually got me into this game, "If I don't take this city on this turn i'm never playing this damn game again." Well, obviously I took the city.
) I often find myself retiring or renaming a unit that seemed to defeat opponents against all odds. I think its great. What I think would be detracting is if you actually KNEW that your unit is going to win or lose a particular battle that you are going into.
Gengis Khan
Deity
Thats not random. Its perfectly predictable for a spear to defeat 4 attacking spears. It's just a matter of your friend not knowing the difference between an attack & defense stat.
If Civ didn't have a RNG I probably would've played it once then used the CD for a frisbe. Without the RNG we wouldn't have crushing losses & unexpected wins, Leaders or promotions, assimilating population, resources disapearing, CFing, variable goody huts, and about a thousand other things I'm forgetting that depend on a RNG.
Bamspeedy
CheeseBob
CTP may be what you are looking for. In CTP the 'experience' (actually it was just hit points I think) was determined by how much unit support costs you wanted to pay. There was of course different 'terms' for this. Like if you wanted to be on the setting that was called something like 'high alert' then you pay more for your units, but they are fully healed. If you put them in 'peaceful' mode, then you paid less, but they had half as many hit points. And there was a mid-range setting too. And I believe there was a turn or two delay when you wanted to change the settings (especially if going from peaceful to war-time, you need time for your troops to mobilize).
I like Civ 3's system better though.
your friend got frustrated pretty fast, i think. but it might not be "his" kind of game, so it might be o.k. with him not to try civ once more.
there's a lot of things to do to deal with the rng, e.g. get used to it with the combat calculator here: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3combatcalc.html, from this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8068.
you can download it and use it while playing or it is even useful to test some "token" battles to get a feel for civ3 combat.
at least there are so many things out of your control or that would require so much micro management that they are compressed into some random events. you can guess a probability but you cannot control everything, and that's simulated by rng.
there's a lot of things to do to deal with the rng, e.g. get used to it with the combat calculator here: http://www.civfanatics.com/civ3combatcalc.html, from this thread: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=8068.
you can download it and use it while playing or it is even useful to test some "token" battles to get a feel for civ3 combat.
at least there are so many things out of your control or that would require so much micro management that they are compressed into some random events. you can guess a probability but you cannot control everything, and that's simulated by rng.
4 spearmen often die when attacking one spearman fortified (depend of the terrain too), especially if the spearman become an elite one (vs normal or even veteran)
If it's your friend that attack you with spearmen, I think you didn't tell him some basic rules
If it's your friend that attack you with spearmen, I think you didn't tell him some basic rules
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
If he was attacking you, each of his spearmen only has about a 12% chance of winning assuming that you are fortified.
LouLong
In love with Rei Ayanami
No RNG, either it would just become buiding waves and attacking a la Command & Conquer but even there odds can vary a bit (movement,...) or he can play chess ? 
This is not good example to say "It's too random". If you carefully count attack and defense values and defense bonuses, you can predict the results of all battles with more than 70% precision. Sometimes it happens that much stronger unit loose battle while attacking the weak one, but events like this are very rare. Anyway, something like this have happened occasionaly in real life. Example: once in 19th century, a few thousands of Impi warriors defeated English forces armed with guns and cannons. I think there was an element of surprise, too. 
CellarDweller22
Alive And Kickin'
Random numbers are what makes the game fun! People used to complain about the dice with the Axis and Allies software online (I played a LOT of those in my time....). Does anyone really REALIZE how many random numbers are generated?
If you have 10,000 battles during a game, then you can expect a 1% result to happen 100 times! How many times do we remember that spearman taking out our tank? EVERY time!
But I can't remember how many times my tanks have mowed down spearmen.....
The great Axis and Allies players won consistently, both with good and bad "dice". The great Civ players do the same. The key is dice management. If you have a 90% of winning a battle, but losing the battle means virtually losing the game (resources, etc.), most great players won't take that battle unless desperate. Instead, they plan for that "what if" 10% chance, just in case.
Wars are unpredictable. Just read the section titled "Waterloo" in the 2nd volume (Cosette) of Les Miserables to gain a truly interesting perspective from Hugo. Without a little rain a few hours before, the entire battle would have gone differently (along with about 50 other "random" factors). Then there's the Spanish Armada with the wind change. And so on.....
-- From The Cellar
If you have 10,000 battles during a game, then you can expect a 1% result to happen 100 times! How many times do we remember that spearman taking out our tank? EVERY time!
But I can't remember how many times my tanks have mowed down spearmen.....The great Axis and Allies players won consistently, both with good and bad "dice". The great Civ players do the same. The key is dice management. If you have a 90% of winning a battle, but losing the battle means virtually losing the game (resources, etc.), most great players won't take that battle unless desperate. Instead, they plan for that "what if" 10% chance, just in case.
Wars are unpredictable. Just read the section titled "Waterloo" in the 2nd volume (Cosette) of Les Miserables to gain a truly interesting perspective from Hugo. Without a little rain a few hours before, the entire battle would have gone differently (along with about 50 other "random" factors). Then there's the Spanish Armada with the wind change. And so on.....
-- From The Cellar
Life is random, full stop (or period to be fully international), many people rise to the top or fail through a stroke of luck, i could go on but there is a book 'Fooled by Randomness' which has a fairly good angle on this, worth reading
Waterloo, it is the history of the Strawberries of Grouchy also...
The general Grouchy commanded a good part of the Napoleonian army . He take some strawberries in the dessert before going to meet Napoleon with the army and of the blow arrived too late (the rain also played a role effectively; à)
(true known story here in France)
The general Grouchy commanded a good part of the Napoleonian army . He take some strawberries in the dessert before going to meet Napoleon with the army and of the blow arrived too late (the rain also played a role effectively; à)
(true known story here in France)
Santiago
Chieftain
Luck is as important to life as anything else. Personally, a life without luck would be about as exciting as a lecture on the pancreas. Tell your friend that if he had stuck with the game, he would see luck goes both ways. But we as people naturally notice only the bad luck, not the good.
kryszcztov
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 2,423
Originally posted by CellarDweller22
If you have 10,000 battles during a game, then you can expect a 1% result to happen 100 times! How many times do we remember that spearman taking out our tank? EVERY time!
That's why I definitely don't believe in ghosts, but it's another story...
One thing about the RNG is that, in order to have a FAIR chance to win a battle, you must engage more troops than should be required. This makes war a matter of a real investment, though it could be more detailed, and it could ask fore more energy... On the opposite, with the RNG you can make suicide attacks with little chance of success, thus allowing you to risk a little for a bigger reward with low chance of success. Overall, the RNG is a fair thing, as it is a random function.
Don't zoom too much and don't emphasize on what can be seen as surprising outcomes.BTW, ghosts don't exist.
Santiago
Chieftain
kryszcztov: Do you believe in time? Or gravity? These are evidence of higher dimensional work in our world. Every time people dream at night (which IS real), they are experiencing something of a higher dimension (aka it doesn't exist in the 3 dimensional world) they see, touch, feel, and experience many other sensational activities attributed to our 3D world. Then isn't it possible they are interacting with another dimension, one where dreams ARE reality? If the mind can temporarily exist outside our dimensions during sleep, why is it not possible our minds can exist there permanantly after death, even with some bodily form, as in a dream? And, like time and gravity, can't these higher dimensional forces interact and affect our 3 dimensions? Hence, ghosts. Sorry for the rushed off-topic Quantum Physics post, but I couldn't help myself.
No, randomness makes the battles fun. It's entirely another matter if battle system as a whole is not as good as Civ 2's system, or if the units are a little unbalanced. As often stated, life isn't predictable, war even less. Even if you have superb technology and overwhelming numbers, you can never be sure about winning, just have better chances. And when you lose a battle you can still win the next one, while it might be unlikely.
Actually I think there's too little randomness in game. Where are the natural disasters? Or spontaneous rebellions?
Actually I think there's too little randomness in game. Where are the natural disasters? Or spontaneous rebellions?
Similar threads
