Unit attack and defense numbers...

[Redking]

what happens if you alter these unit numbers (for attack and defense) to base tens? Base fives? Double?

The obvious reason to do so is to alot space for additional units and fine tune. Just wondering what considerations must be made for a modification such as this.

Thanks.

 

[Tacit_Exit]

Off the top of my head, as defense stat gets larger,the % defense bonus' will contribute more to final defense rating.

I think this would increase disparity between equal attack/defense values as n increases.

IMO why the MI has defense 18 not 20 as the general pattern of Civ3 units would suggest.

(Indeed the MI is listed in Civ3 manual as 12/20/2;double Infantry stats)

 

[Procifica]

Attack 5, Defense 5, defense bonus 50%= Attack 5, Defense 7.5, Difference in Attack vs. Defense: 50% Chance of Attack winning: 5/12.5

Attack 50, Defense 50, defense bonus 50%= Attack 50, Defense 75, Difference in Attack vs. Defense: 50% Chance of Attack winning: 50/125

the % defense bonus, doesn't reflect on size of numbers, only on the difference in the attack/defense values.

Larger numbers, would seem to make the odds of winning/losing more dependent upon the actual numbers difference, and while giving a larger random factor, this would be negated by the sheer amount of numbers.

 

[Tacit_Exit]

Yeah, you're right Proc.

I guess i thought about it in terms of 1 to 2 to 4 where I assumed rounding might be a factor.

Maybe the MI=18 thing is just to allow MA better odds in the usual MI fortified in Metropolis scenario.

I'll try to use all of my brain next time

 

[Illustrious]

One of the most important issues is the effect on bombardment.

If you double the A/D of units, you make it more resistant to bombardment - which means you need to adjust the bombardment factors of catapults, cannon, bombers, ships etc in order to restore game balance.

And that, in turn, means that improvements and buildings become more vulnerable to bombardment - so you need to adjust their bombardment defence factors.

As they say, everything connects...

 

[Procifica]

Agreed there illustrious, magnifying one thing by a factor of 5 or 10 means to keep game balance everything else must be multiplied by the same factor.

 

[bhiita]

I think that bombard should be looked at in a new perspective when multiplying total values. this could be a better way to incorporate leathal bobmbardment. It's hard to balance unit and city bombardment factors so that you still have a chance of escape from a bombardment attack and can inflict some considerable damage to a city. By multiplying all values you should be able to have a high rate of fire and low bombard streangth to equal this out and be more realistic. I think

 

[Procifica]

I've already done something like that in my scenario, increasing the rate of fire on all of my artillery units.

 

[bhiita]

By what kind of rate? and what are the reults?
I have most of mine high too. but it gets boring if your bombard is
too effective. what would be the point of building ofensive units?
My problem is the miises to hit ratio there should be a lower miss ratio but not have the bombard soo strong it's unreallistic.

 

[Procifica]

Well I originally had my artillery a bit like this:

Union Artillery: 0(8)/2/1 (0 attack (8 bombard), 2 range, 1 rof)
Confederate Artillery: 0(7)/2/1
12 Pounder: 0(8)/2/2
Napoleon: 0(12)/2/2
Rail Gun: 0(12)/3/1
Union Rifle Cannon: 0(12)/2/3
Confederate Rifle Cannon: 0(10)/2/3
Horse Artillery: 0(6)/2/1

Now it is like this:

Union Artillery: 1(9)/2/2
Confederate Artillery: 1(8)/2/2
12 Pounder: 1(12)/2/3
Napoleon: 1(14)/2/3
Rail Gun: 1(12)/3/2
Union Rifle Cannon: 1(16)/2/4
Confederate Rifle Cannon: 1(14)/2/4
Horse Artillery: 1(7)/2/2

Horse Artillery in both instances has a movement of 2.

Napoleon is Union, Rail Gun is Confederate.

Seems to be giving the desired results against units without any fortifications, but haven't tested against fortificiations yet.

My Union Artillery missed roughly 50% of the time against mostly 6/7 units (Confederate Volunteers), not fortified in any way (except 10% town bonus/5% terrain bonus).

 

[thestonesfan]

I find it best to keep things on the lower side. I use things like blitz and more moves to make a unit more effective, rather than ratcheting up the attack/defense values.

 

[bhiita]

I like the longer animations from higher values
Except the battleship it's loud and annoying when blitzed

 

[Procifica]

Originally posted by thestonesfan
I find it best to keep things on the lower side. I use things like blitz and more moves to make a unit more effective, rather than ratcheting up the attack/defense values.

Well, if I increased movement, then I am losing the realism based on my map being to scale. (roughly 15 to 20 miles per adjacent square)

The additional rate of fire helps compensate the artillery numbers, and also is realistic in the fact that during the Civil War, rate of fire was greatly increased as time went on (from about 5 times/minute with 1861 rifles to 20+ with spencer carbines).

 

[Procifica]

And I did a small change to the Artillery, the 12 pounder is now a Napoleon (which I believe was a 12 pounder), and the old Napoleon is now a Parrott (a 30 pounder), with 16 bombard instead of 14.

 

[Procifica]

By the way, I did incorporate the blitz concept, lowering the RoF on my skirmisher and carbine cavalry units and adding blitz.