This is not a nice battle-result

[Dairuka]

I also question the calculations of Arathorn's combat calculator.

I think that the calculations provided in the link Roland had posted are more accurate. This comes from personal experience of having lost dozens if not hundreds of battles of 8 vs 4, or 8 vs 5.

 

[Wodan]

Here's a question... do the odds from the game take first strike into account? If not, then that would do it right there.

Wodan

 

[Kolyana]

I don't think that they do ... they just consider Offense Vs. Defense. The first strike ability though could effectively lower the attacking strength, so, like you said, that could so it.

Either way, losing an 8 V 5 battle is no big deal and if I partook in such an assault, I'd be crossing my fingers for sure. i think I would have been inclined to weaken the defender with a less experienced unit first, without a doubt.

 

[danbosko]

doubt they add first stirkes into the odds

 

[ThERat]

this battle result isn't that terrible. Play an AW game and you will see worse results. What I felt though, was that pretorians and keshiks seem to lose fights with very good odds, whereas pikes and crossbows are really good. There must be some underlying addition to the odds. Whether first strike or whatever else.
I also wonder whether the extra promotions are really all taken into account (like first strike etc.)

 

[spymonkey]

I once had a full strength modern armor lose to a cavalry that was more than half damaged, I think the "odds" given in-game were 40-7 or something. That one hurt .

 

[Chose]

I can tell you for sure that in a battle with 8.5 to 5.8, the 8.5 unit will not win 94% of the time.

i would not be so sure, calulators dont lie

 

[cckerberos]

Arathorns combat calculator says 94% to win.

The calculator gives me an 86.5% chance to win. Did you remember to take into account first strikes?

 

[Kolyana]

Man, you want a bad battle experience? How about 4 swordsmen with city attack bonus and 4 axemen with strength 1, attacking 3 archers with NO upgrades, NO city walls, on flat plains ... it doesn't get any easier than that.

I GOT WIPED OUT AND DIDN'T KILL ONE ARCHER.

I'm coming to the conclusion that battle odds are weighted in the computer's favor.

 

[parachute4u]

The calculator gives me an 86.5% chance to win. Did you remember to take into account first strikes?

Yes, you are right, 8,8 vs 5,8 is not the same as 8.8 vs 5.8
Good to know!

 

[Tactilus]

Oh look what I found.

Wow +195% bonus for Archer

Archer has attack strength of 3
3+(3 x 195%) = 3+(5.85) which should be 8.85. But it only displays 5.8 (places pinky next to mouth)

And the Praetorian

+75%+25%+10% = +110%

8 + (8 x 110%) = 8+(8.8) = 16.8 but only displays Battle odds of 8.8 (um thats a pretty nasty Bug.)

Instead of a 2:1 odds you are left with basically a 3:2 odds. Hmmm, needs a fix it looks like to me.

 

[karadoc]

Yeah, I'm always disappointed when one of my great military leaders (ie. high ranked units) bites it to some lesser foe. My only comfort is that my unit usually had some lucky wins to get that strong in the first place.

 

[Roland Ehnström]

Oh look what I found.

Wow +195% bonus for Archer

Archer has attack strength of 3
3+(3 x 195%) = 3+(5.85) which should be 8.85. But it only displays 5.8 (places pinky next to mouth)

And the Praetorian

+75%+25%+10% = +110%

8 + (8 x 110%) = 8+(8.8) = 16.8 but only displays Battle odds of 8.8 (um thats a pretty nasty Bug.)

Instead of a 2:1 odds you are left with basically a 3:2 odds. Hmmm, needs a fix it looks like to me.

Again, read this, it explains everything: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615

The 100% bonuses are zeroed out because both units have them, so in effect you have 8 + 10% = 8.8 vs. 3 + 95% = 5.85.

-- Roland

 

[narmox]

Again, read this, it explains everything: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=137615

The 100% bonuses are zeroed out because both units have them, so in effect you have 8 + 10% = 8.8 vs. 3 + 95% = 5.85.

-- Roland

!!?!? Are you saying that a strength 4 unit with 25% city defense vs a strength 6 unit with 25% city raider.. doesn't end up being a 5 defense vs 7.5 attack??? And the bonuses just cancel each other instead leaving it at 4 vs 6?

That's counter-intuitive... Or not really. lol. nevermind. Proportions are exactly the same.

 

[Silt]

Fights in this game are ridiculous. It's quite funny how the AI never loses a battle when the odds are in it's favor, yet time and again I lose several fights in a row where I have the advantage. My favorite one so far is a tank that was 35 versus another unit that was 18ish. Who'd a thunk 35 < 18 in this game.

 

[TheNiceOne]

Fights in this game are ridiculous. It's quite funny how the AI never loses a battle when the odds are in it's favor, yet time and again I lose several fights in a row where I have the advantage. My favorite one so far is a tank that was 35 versus another unit that was 18ish. Who'd a thunk 35 < 18 in this game.

This is just your imagination. There are absolutely no cheat involved in the combat calculation. The odds you see are the real odds. If you experience something else, it's either bad luck or (more likely) you forgetting the combat results where you fared better than expected from the odds.

 

[Quentin]

Definitely they're not skewed in the AI's favour. I remember this really tense moment in my last game when one cossack charged towards my city that only had one crossbowman and a warrior. It attacked the crossbowman (that's a unit thrice as powerful there) and loss, damaging my crossbowman to 0.x strength. So ya, **** happens, for both us and the AIs.

EDIT: I feel obligated to say this. Below this post there was originally a double post that I made by mistake, the first I remember making at CFC, and it disappeared just minutes after the post was made. I have to say this about the moderators: these guys are good

 

[Aks K]

@Rik Meleet: Why didn't you bring artillery? I know it should have been a victory, but why risk a unit this good (5 promotions unit vs unit with 1 promotion). Still this victory is not certain (I got 87.8% from the calculator).

Btw I have had losses. Due to the excessive loading times of this game I won't go back to recreate the events just to make screenshots. If I experience this kind of losses I will try to remember to take a screen.

@narmox: I agree with you. It is not intuitive at all. I first thought it was a bug before I found out how the promotions works.

Aks K

 

[Aussie_Lurker]

My advice to the OP would be-never underestimate the importance of siege weapons. As it was just one unit, there was no point sending a catapult in head to head, but a turn of bombarding his city defenses would have given you sufficient time to bring in the second centurion/legion (sorry, just CAN'T call them praetorians !) which you could have used to 'soften up' the archer prior to sending in your more experienced unit. Of course, that said, I almost never use effective strategy in taking enemy cities-and end up paying the price.

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

 

[Rik Meleet]

Aks: I'm not sure I had catapult-technology by then.
BTW this wasn't a very very serious game; I wanted to see if my PC could manage a Huge-Terra-18 civ game.