1. Firaxis celebrates the "Asian American and Pacific Islander Heritage Month", and offers a give-away of a Civ6 anthology copy (5 in total)! For all the details, please check the thread here. .
    Dismiss Notice

The most annoying thing that happens in the game

Discussion in 'Civ4 - General Discussions' started by traius, Dec 9, 2021.

  1. Fippy

    Fippy Mycro Junkie Queen

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    12,538
    Gender:
    Female
    AI declares on me and now they are furious instead of cautious.
    Sure it's all my fault (not annoying but funny :))

    Same i like vassals for atmo etc.
    I don't mind peacevassals thou, anything that makes the game more difficult helps with keeping me interested in sp games.
     
  2. tramwajg

    tramwajg Warlord

    Joined:
    May 9, 2014
    Messages:
    192
    Location:
    Poland
    mechanized infantry loosing battle against stack of cavalry or even better knights:D or same situation with machine gun in city with high walls and castle when melee units are attacking
     
  3. AspiringScholar

    AspiringScholar Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    92
    Location:
    Oklahoma City
    I personally kind of love/hate the phenomenon of the kingmaking backward warmongering AI swarming modern battlefields with knights... It's annoying, yeah, but it's also somehow a kind of endearing feature of this series IMO.
     
    Kaiman and Lexicus like this.
  4. Pangaea

    Pangaea Rock N Roller

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    6,376
    I see... :D
     
    6K Man likes this.
  5. Lexicus

    Lexicus Deity

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2007
    Messages:
    27,167
    Location:
    Sovereign State of the Have-Nots
    Personally I love it. Gimme that xp pls
     
    Fish Man and AspiringScholar like this.
  6. traius

    traius His own worst enemy

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    946
    Ok, I got another one.

    The weird, asymmetric effects of +x% vs Y-type.

    In case you didn't know, if a unit has +x% vs Y (Axeman/Rifleman/etc bonuses), it behaves exactly as you'd expect on defense, giving a straight bonus percentage of whatever it states. But when attacking, it does NOT behave that way. The "bonus" is actually a malus applied to the defender. And it starts by first removing bonuses the defender has, and then, if there is any left over "bonus" in excess of the defender's bonuses, it takes the defender's base strength and divides it by (100% + [remaining bonus of attacker]).

    Example: City Raider 3 Treb vs fortified Longbow in a hill city with City Defender 2 but cultural defense of 0:
    Treb has +100% city attack on its own, which acts exactly like CR does, and gets an additional +75% from CR 3.
    The longbow has +25% due to the hill. It's own ability gives it an additional +25% on hills. It has the same but for cities as well, for another +25%. Fortify gives it +25% too. Finally, CD 2 gives it +45% in cities. Total: +145%

    So the Trebs first 145% of 175% of bonuses is used to remove the LB's 145% of defensive bonuses. That leaves 30% of attacker bonus, so the longbow strength is then divided by (100% + 30%, or 1.3) and is set to 4.61538.... (probably displayed as 4.62 but maybe 4.61).



    Example using one that has defense (as the CR promos and Treb ability don't actually do anything on defense, as they are attacking only
    ):

    Infantry vs Marine. Infantry gets +25% vs Gunpowder units, which Marine is. Assuming flat ground, no fortify in each case:

    Infantry attacks: 20 vs 19.2. Marine Attacks: 24 vs 25. The power ratio for both is 1.041666 in favour of the infantry, but the infantry has slightly different displayed odds for some reason (honestly, that just surprised me as I wrote this. That's a separate gripe entirely!) 65.0 is displayed for the infantry attack, 35.3 is displayed for the marine attack (This should have added to 100%? but out of this rabbit hole for now).

    Give them both combat 1 (where combat promos always adds to the unit's strength _unlike_ +x% vs y for some reason):

    Infantry attacks: 22 vs 20.86. Infantry has the advantage. Marine attacks: 26.4 vs 27. The power ratio is now different for the two combats. 1.05465.... vs 1.022727. As such I no longer expect the combat odds to add to 100% and they don't (though they didn't the first time either, when I did expect them to.....). 65.7% vs 36.5%

    Give them Combat 2:

    Infantry gets 24 vs 22.85 when it attacks and 65.5% odds. Marine gets 28.8 vs 29. Ratios: 1.0503 vs 1.006994 (less than 1% difference for the second one, which is still enough to have the marine down to 37.4%, worse than 3-2 against).

    Combat 3:

    Infantry gets 26 vs 25.2, Marine gets 31.2 vs 31. The odds are 64.3% for the Infantry attacking and 62.8% for the Marine attacking. Note, again, a greater than 3:2 advantage despite a less-than-1%-greater strength.




    Why is this system so needlessly counterintuitive?

    This is why the Vulture sucks, when, at first glance, it might seem that it should be equal to or better than an axeman in all situations (and is instead weak to axemen).
    Intuitively, you'd think it was 7.5 vs 7.5 in either case, but instead it's 6 vs 6.25 when the vulture attacks and 5 vs 4.8 when the axe attacks and the vulture loses both ways.

    If you want a take-away from all of this, it's as follows: when attacking, massive bonuses like that are at their best in terms of hanging the odds when you are "punching up" to a unit with higher base strength and lower bonuses. So your upgraded CR3 Maceman > Rifleman can-opener is affecting the odds the most when he is attacking blimp-damaged unpromoted infantry, not well promoted longbows. But then you don't want to risk losing him, hahaha (also, have to cross that strength differential! 30% difference right there, which is why the infantry in that last example needs to be blimp-damaged)
     
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2021
    Kaiman, Imp. Knoedel and lymond like this.
  7. Pangaea

    Pangaea Rock N Roller

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    6,376
    I'm sure that calculation could have been done in different ways, but there has to be some more advanced math than just subtracting bonuses between units. The Pike for example has +100% vs mounted, so against a HA or whatever, it would reduce the HA's strength to 0. That won't do.

    It can be counterintuitive, tho, I totally agree. And due to different units in defensive stacks, it tends to be 'safer' to just go with the combat line. Otherwise you typically get the situation of e.g. a shock cuir facing a longbow instead of the pike, or a pinch cuir facing a pike instead of the musket -- making those special promos sometimes utterly worthless.
     
  8. traius

    traius His own worst enemy

    Joined:
    May 27, 2012
    Messages:
    946
    I mean, the pike could just GET +100% (effectively being strength 12 when facing mounted). Like how the combat promos work. Like how it works if the pikeman is defending (when the game WILL show them as strength 12).

    Pike vs HA is 6 vs 3 pike attacking, 6 vs 12 HA attacking.
     
    Kaiman likes this.
  9. Fish Man

    Fish Man Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    I feel like the combat system was designed partly to give "low-strength or obsolete units that are highly promoted" a chance against a technologically superior foe, especially when on the offense. Because when attacking, modifiers take away from the enemy's bonuses and eventually base strength, the less the attacker's base strength is compared to the defender's, the more effective promotions will be. As an example, given CRIII cannon vs combat 2 marine - if it worked intuitively, the cannon would just be 22.2 strength against the marine's 28.8, and still lose by a fair margin. However, because the marine's double base strength is subtracted, you end up with 12 vs 14.55, which is still marginally losing, but a bit more even. It's the reason CRIII cannons can handily take on infantry, why trebs vs rifles is possible with enough numbers, and why in the late-game, you can still deal with 20-city runaway Rome on deity even with just tanks while they have gunships and modern armor.

    However, I think the devs mainly made it this way as an attempt to balance trebs. Trebs are meant for city attack but intended to be weak on the field, so they couldn't just make their strength somewhere between 5 and 12 and called it a day. However, the extremely low base strength of trebs meant that the "city attack" modifier and even any subsequent CR promotions on them would completely inconsequential if said bonus was just added to a paltry 4. Let's take the example of CRIII treb vs C2 grenadier in a city, a surprisingly common and feasible matchup. "Intuitively" the strengths would work out to be 11.4 vs 14.4...but under the current system, the calculations actually work out to be 4 vs 4.5, which is just about even. In the most extreme case, CRIII treb vs CGIII rifleman would be 11.4 vs 24.5 in normal circumstances, which is...abysmal odds. But with the current system, it is 4 vs 5.28, which is...surprisingly fair! So specific "vs" bonuses help cancel out an opposing much higher base strength.
     
  10. Fippy

    Fippy Mycro Junkie Queen

    Joined:
    Mar 17, 2013
    Messages:
    12,538
    Gender:
    Female
    Sounds too fair, should be higher than 5.28 ;)
     
  11. Pangaea

    Pangaea Rock N Roller

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2010
    Messages:
    6,376
    Haven't tried to double check those numbers, but worth to point out that with how combat odds work in Civ4, it's a huge difference if you get higher effective strength than the defender. That can swing the odds from 35% to 66% for example (or roughly like that, I take this from memory). 14 v 13.9 and 13.9 v 14 is a massive difference in survivability.
     
    Kaiman likes this.
  12. Imp. Knoedel

    Imp. Knoedel Simperator Knoedel

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2011
    Messages:
    8,832
    Location:
    The cooler Germany
    Does the math work out differently in the base game than BTS? Because Trebuchets were only added in one of the expansions, not Vanilla.
     
  13. Fish Man

    Fish Man Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    I don't think it was different. Even the older threads on the forums have people realizing they were confused about how combat worked (immortals being worse against archers than WCs, which led to understandable feelings of disappointment and betrayal). And besides, this calculation system still serves its (supposed) designed purpose of helping veteran but obsolete units have a fighting chance, even without trebs (i.e. CR maces vs combat rifles, cavs, etc.).

    Nice Entrapta btw! It seems we have the same (good) taste in shows :).
     
    Imp. Knoedel likes this.
  14. Fish Man

    Fish Man Emperor

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    1,503
    It's even better because mechs have free march, which means they just heal whatever minor damage they receive after killing hordes of knights/cavs, and get a boatload of free XP on top.
     
  15. Jivilov

    Jivilov Prince

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2011
    Messages:
    378
    It's exasperating how AIs that were recently at war with your target border AI no longer want to fight. So you build up your forces to invade and find maybe 20-30 turns later they're no longer interested. My last game saw Joao was now Survayarman's best friend, and Gandhi didn't like me enough. As a mainly Civ3 Conquests player this anti-warmongering feature can squelch any attempt to win a Domination or at least catch up by seizing more territory. You just sit there with soon-to-be obsolete units---they're way too expensive to upgrade---while trying to beat the AIs in a space race (at Emperor) while about 500 score points down. Ain't gonna happen.
     
  16. LEMD

    LEMD Chieftain

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2022
    Messages:
    5
    Gender:
    Male
    In my current game, I had just wiped out Joao. Asoka was his neighbor and a vassal to Huayna. After taking the city Asoka's culture temporarily took the land around the 5 Towns on grassland. I whipped a theatre and library due to starvation and was slowly gaining back the tiles with the 5 Towns to pay for my accomplishment and fund those cities taken from Joao and cover maintenance costs. Asoka's city was a Holy city and 6 tiles away so couldn't work them. I watched as a fast worker escorted by units come replace the town's with farms literally as I was about to gain them back. Even did it in the order I was going to gain them back. I ended up with one town out of five. I regained that tile 2 turns before it would've been changed to a farm. This was intentional. Asoka did not do this right after I got it. Asoka did it when it was obvious I was going to gain these tiles back. It was a denial operation. The AI is genius sometimes.
     
  17. PPQ_Purple

    PPQ_Purple Techpriest Engineer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,724
    Honestly the whole combat system is odd if you ask me. The way I would have done it is simply to subtract the numbers from one another and who ever still has HP left wins. So like if a unit with 4:strength: vs one with 3:strength: the end result would be the first unit wining with 1:strength: remaining. Easy to understand, easy to predict, no stupid dice rolls or probabilities or anything.
     
  18. sylvanllewelyn

    sylvanllewelyn Perma-newb

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2006
    Messages:
    1,521
    Start with hunting, settled capital on top of copper.
     
  19. PPQ_Purple

    PPQ_Purple Techpriest Engineer

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2008
    Messages:
    4,724
    I seriously wish there was a game option to make it impossible to settle on top of a resource.
     
  20. lymond

    lymond Rise Up! (Phoenix Style!) Moderator Hall of Fame Staff

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2008
    Messages:
    23,634
    Why?
     

Share This Page