Armies DO Have Combat Bonus!

Catt · November 14, 2003, 14:49

I decided to quickly test whether or not C3C armies enjoy any combat bonuses, as mentioned in the strategy guide on the Bonus CD and also referenced by a few beta testers.

Short answer: They do!

Longer answer: I only tested armies on offense, and only tested whether or not they enjoy the base 1/6 bonus refenced, not the 1/4 bonus with the construction of the Military Academy.

How does the 1/6 base bonus work? You add the raw attack values of all the constituent units. You divide the total attack values by 6, and round down the result (or so it has been stated elsewhere). The rounded result is added to the army's attack value for purposes of combat resolution. For example, an army composed of 3 knights would have an effective "attack value" of 6 rather than the knights' normal 4. (3 units with 4 attack = 12 combined attack; 12/6 = 2; 2 added to knight attack of 4 = 6). So that 3 knight army becomes a 12HP, 3-move, 6 attack, 4 defense, blitz-enabled, pillage-without-cost war machine.

As alexman said in a related thread, think about an immortal army early in the ancient age

Again, I haven't tested defense, nor have I tested the effects of building the military academy (nor do I plan to).

In the interests of "civ scholarship" the following quote describes the test parameters I used so others can verify I haven't overlooked anything or made a mistake, and I'll post the .biq test scenario if anyone wants it.

Quote:

I established a small landmass where both Rome (human) and Egypt (AI) have one city. The land is RR'd. All unit experience levels have 10 HPs in order to eliminate the effects of promotions and in order to generate more separate combat results from each monotonous attack than 4 HPs provide. Longbows are modded to have an attack value of 22 and 2 moves (revenge of the longbows

); Infantry are modded to have a defense of 20. The Egyptian AI has a stack of ~40 infantry, unfortified on grassland -- with the grassland bonus, the infantry have an effective defense of 22. The Roman human has 30 longbows and 10 armies -- these are combined into 10 armies of 3 longbows each. Then it is just a matter of launching repeated attacks against the infantry stack with longbow armies, and keeping track of how many HPs are lost by each side.

If there were no army combat bonus, we should expect (with sufficient trials) a roughly 50 - 50 win - loss ratio between an army attacking at 22 offense against a defender with an effective 22 defense. If the 1/6 base bonus is present, we should expect the longbow armies to win about 60% of the time (3 longbows at 22 offense = 66 attack points; 66/6 = 11; 11 added to the attack of 22 means an effective atack of 33; 33 attack versus 22 defense = 33/55 = 60% win expected).

Out of 977 total individual combat die rolls (HPs), the armies lost 393 HPs while the infantries lost 584 HPs, meaning the infantries lost, and the longbows won, 59.775% of the combats - pretty darn close to the expected 60 - 40 split.

Let the "armies too strong" debates begin

Catt

Shogun Gunner · November 14, 2003, 14:57

WOW

I must have missed the info about the increase in attack factor of armies... That's incredible.

I must say that I will be adjusting my strategy to get three of four elite units by:

building attack units early; attacking barbs; achieving elite status; attacking a weak neighbor; getting a military GL; building an army; populating with my elite attack units; and then picking a war with another nearby weak civ for land, luxuries and resources.

To get an army early seems to have too many benefits to ignore -- even for the peaceful builder. Remember, strength allows peace!

Catt, this thread has the potential to be a great discussion!

Edit: reorganized thoughts...hard to do at work!

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:04

Excellent, somebody got around to testing it.

So my 3x Cavalry armies are actually:

3*6 = 18/6 = 3 + 6 = 9 attack
3*3 = 9/6 = 1.5, round down to 1 + 3 = 4 defense

But wait, there's (possibly) more...

I have the Military Academy. As Catt noted, he hasn't tested this yet, but *IF* it really increases the bonus to 1/4, my Cav armies look like this:

3*6 = 18/4 = 4.5, round down to 4 + 6 = 10 attack

3*3 = 9/4 = 2.25, round down to 2 + 3 = 5 defense

So I might have two 10/5/4's with blitz running around in my current game. That might help explain their prowess.

-Arrian

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:07

Quote:

Remember, strength allows peace!

You are grown wise, grasshopper. (we need a "nods sagely" smiley)

-Arrian

Stuie · November 14, 2003, 15:10

Nice work, Catt.

Good to have you hanging around the forums again.

Personally, I like the new armies. They actually seem worthwhile now, and don't penalize the player for building them (beyond the "no upgrade" feature). My only problem is the random factor that is involved; I have not generated a single MGL in three C3C games played, so no army, and no Military Academy to build additional armies.

My solution is to unflag "requires victorious army" for the Military Academy, thus allowing any Civ to build them eventually. That helps level the playing field. While Military Civs still have the better chance of early armies, now non-Military Civs have a chance to build some too later in the game.

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:10

Hmm, I also have the Pentagon, but haven't yet added a 4th cav to my armies, because I don't have transports yet. But when I get around to doing that...

4*6 = 24/6 = 4
or
4*6 = 24/4 = 6!!

So my Cav armies could, if the Mil Acad does increase the bonus, end up with 100% attack & defense bonuses (12/6/4).

Um, like, wow.

-Arrian

RobC · November 14, 2003, 15:10

It would be nice if the stats in the lower right info window reflected these army bonuses (e.g. your cavalry in your army would show 10/5/4 instead of 6/3/3) -- I think it would be clearer this way, perhaps have it in italics or red font or something to indicate it's an army bonus...

Stuie · November 14, 2003, 15:19

Assuming the "1/4" is correct, put four Modern Armor into an army with the Military Academy:

24*4 = 96/4 = 24 + 24 = 48 Attack.

OUCH.

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:24

Oh, I agree. It definitely should display.

More possibilities, ancient era:

3x legionary: 4/4/2. Basically, the equivalent to a Samurai army in PTW.
3x immortal: 6/3/2.

Almost an old cav army... just a tad slower.
3x Mounted Warrior: 4/1/3. Meh.
3x Gallic Swordsman: 4/3/3. PTW Rider army equivalent.
3x Numidian Merc: 3/4/2. Now quite the Legionary, but doesn't need iron.
3x normal Swords: 4/3/2. As good as PTW knights.

Medieval:

Riders: 6/4/4
Samurai: 6/6/3 Now THAT's hardcore. No need to slow down your Cav now - we've now got a 12+hp 3-move rifleman that can hit too!
Musketeers: 3/7/2. We fart in your general direction! Your pathetic kkkkknnnnniggots stand no chance!
Merc Pikeman: 1/6/2. Silly Frenchies, you paid 180shields for the units you put in your army. We used half that. So we had enough left over to build a Cavalry unit too.

Ok, that's enough outta me.

-Arrian

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:27

What would a Mech Inf army's defense be, then? Base is 20?

4*20 = 80/4 = 20. Defends at 40.

40*.25 (fortification) = 10
40*1 (metro bonus) = 40

40+10+40 = 90 defense. How's that 48 lookin' now?

-Arrian

Catt · November 14, 2003, 15:31

Quote:

Originally posted by RobC
It would be nice if the stats in the lower right info window reflected these army bonuses (e.g. your cavalry in your army would show 10/5/4 instead of 6/3/3) -- I think it would be clearer this way, perhaps have it in italics or red font or something to indicate it's an army bonus...

It would be nice, but the stats have never worked correctly anyway. If you mix different units in an army, the stats show as an average of the constituent units' stats, but the army actually attacks and defends with individual unit stats (depending on which unit is the "active" unit).

Catt

alexman · November 14, 2003, 15:31

I guess military Great Leaders (and the militaristic trait) didn't get shafted by Conquests after all.

Without more time playing, it's hard to say if it's unbalancing or not.

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 15:38

Hmm, mixed unit armies...

Let's take an example from a recent game of mine. My first army was 1x mounted warrior, 2x knight.

3.1.2
4.3.2 unit stats

I attacked a city with that army, and ended up losing it to a pikeman (I think I hit it twice... I got greedy). All the way down to the last hp, a knight was showing as my attacker. So how, exactly, does the "mixing" work?

-Arrian

asleepathewheel · November 14, 2003, 15:41

great thread.

My 3 jav army in my current game was shredding spears and swords (and enslaving) like mad, this would help to explain that.

Arrian · November 14, 2003, 16:02

3/3/2 with enslavement. Nice toy.

-Arrian

Inverse Icarus · November 14, 2003, 16:06

oh christ, a jav army would rock.

Traelin · November 14, 2003, 18:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
Hmm, mixed unit armies...

Let's take an example from a recent game of mine. My first army was 1x mounted warrior, 2x knight.

3.1.2
4.3.2 unit stats

I attacked a city with that army, and ended up losing it to a pikeman (I think I hit it twice... I got greedy). All the way down to the last hp, a knight was showing as my attacker. So how, exactly, does the "mixing" work?

-Arrian

Ahh, now finally I can flex my Militaristic/Religious muscles!

Man I thought I was imagining things when my 3x Cav army was rolling through Riflemen. Not to mention how much quicker they heal, very nice.

vmxa1 · November 14, 2003, 18:24

Armies have gotten many boost now. Extra movement and fast healing are very very strong, especially early in the game.

It is an evil sight, you have Sun Tsu and an army of Sipahi. You capture cities and get an instant barracks. The army is is healed in two more turns and off to the races.

Catt, I am not able to say anything about the defense boost, since the AI is loathed to attack any armies.

Not to mention that you are more likely to get the Pentagon now. This is because you have lost the option to use the MGL for great wonders and will be more likely to make armies.

Traelin · November 14, 2003, 18:38

Right now I'm playing as the Dutch, since I've been dying to play them and I wanted to give a non-Mil. Civ a fair shake. Very early on I got a MGL, so I was off to my typical Militaristic ways. Man, if you're a warmongerer at heart and get a MGL with this Civ, it is REALLY REALLY nice. The Agr./Sea. kick arse for me when I have access to Armies. Expand expand expand.

Thoth · November 14, 2003, 18:40

Very nice work Catt. I thought my armies were doing better than the displayed stats indicated, this explains it nicely.

BTW: Crusader armies work wonders against swiss pikemen.

Not much else does.

WarpStorm · November 14, 2003, 18:49

Sipahi armies are just plain evil. Must wipe out Ottomans on sight.

asleepathewheel · November 14, 2003, 19:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Arrian
3/3/2 with enslavement. Nice toy.

-Arrian

Quote:

Originally posted by Uber KruX
oh christ, a jav army would rock.

Indeed. Quite a beast. I think it probably enslaved about 10 workers itself, the ai seems to garrison a lot better now, at least on emperor, 4-5 units each city, more workers for me

dexters · November 14, 2003, 19:11

Nice work

I like this.

Armies too strong? They are rare to begin with and by the time you can build them with military academy, it's in the late game.

G'Kar · November 14, 2003, 20:17

Thanks for the work Catt, Arrian et al.

Armies aren't too strong in MP because the humans will usually be sure to get them and will know how to use them. But against the AI a human army is very useful (to say the least). Unlike humans, the AI doesn't know how to offensively use arty to knock down the army's HPs and destroy it. Also, the AI can't predict as well where the human will attack and preemptively defend the target with its own army. I don't know... we'll see.

Kuciwalker · November 14, 2003, 20:32

In the next patch, I hope they make the bonus to armies not apply during bombardment (maybe even make a penalty). If you think about it, wouldn't an army be MORE vulnerable to artillery?

Kuciwalker · November 14, 2003, 20:38

3x Berserk Army: 9/3/1 amphib - better than marines! (for attacking, at least)
3x Marine Army: 12/9/1 amphib - very, very nice
(with Military Academy) 14/10/1 amphib - almost an amphibious Tank!
(with Pentagon) 16/12/1 amphib 16 HP - this IS an amphibious Tank!

EDIT: oh, and I like the sound of a 12/16/1 paratrooper army too. great defense

Inverse Icarus · November 14, 2003, 20:50

are amphib armies amphib now? they werent in PTW...

would paratrooper armies paradrop?

Kuciwalker · November 14, 2003, 20:50

IIRC, amphib armies are amphib

I don't remember whether or not paratroopers armies can airdrop, though

Tacit_Exit · November 15, 2003, 01:49

Quote:

Originally posted by Uber KruX are amphib armies amphib now? they werent in PTW...

Entirely Marine Armies WERE amphibious in PTW. Just mixed Marine/Berserker weren't.

Quote:

Originally posted by Uber KruX would paratrooper armies paradrop?

This definately wasn't possible in PTW (cross fingers for C3C).

Donegeal · November 15, 2003, 04:17

Quote:

Originally posted by skywalker
3x Berserk Army: 9/3/1 amphib - better than marines! (for attacking, at least)
3x Marine Army: 12/9/1 amphib - very, very nice
(with Military Academy) 14/10/1 amphib - almost an amphibious Tank!
(with Pentagon) 16/12/1 amphib 16 HP - this IS an amphibious Tank!

EDIT: oh, and I like the sound of a 12/16/1 paratrooper army too. great defense

You seemed to have missed something Skywalker. Armies get a bonus move point also.

So that 3x Berzerk army is a 9/3/2 amphibious blitzer (that comes in the early midevel age (ok, so there is nothing that could carry this army that early, but the thought is still there).