Thread Tools
Old August 9, 2002, 21:44   #1
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
I can't believe this..
I played civ3 today for 3 hours. That's more playing time in 1 day than the past 9 months since its release. I decided to try out the patch and I was really impressed with some of the new features. However for all the fixes one of the biggest problems still exists...the battle model. Is it that difficult to fix? How can you call a game strategy when the greatest strategy feature is based, as far as I can tell, on random numbers. For three hours I played and everything was going great and then I declared war on the Russians. All they had was regular archers and spearmen, nothing special. Yet my veteran and alot of times elite knights would seemingly randomly die to them. Even attacking an archer with a defense of 1 would sometimes kill my knights. I attacked a warrior, just a regular warrior, with my elite knight and it DIED! But that's not even the worst case. The final stunt was when I attacked just a regular old spearman on a size 3 city and it took my army of 3 elite knights down to red without losing a single hitpoint. How ridiculous is that? And is the defense of 3 for knights correct or is that a typo? Every time an archer with an attack of 2 attacks a veteran knight, the knight loses majority of the time. Civilization 3 isn't a difficult game, the AI isn't any harder than it was in civ2. The simple fact is that the biggest part of the game has a major flaw in it. No game can survive in MP if it doesn't have some sort of consistency to its play, nor can it be called strategy when the outcome of battles are random. Is this going to be fixed in PTW?
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 9, 2002, 21:50   #2
Lord Merciless
Warlord
 
Lord Merciless's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:50
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 249
Well, I say that's purely bad luck. We warmongers usually overcome this kind of bad luck by using overwhelming forces. The more battles you fight, the more reasonable the random number generator. But I haven't seen anything like you described.
Lord Merciless is offline  
Old August 9, 2002, 21:55   #3
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
Winning fights through sheer numbers is not a strategy game. When you're dealing with a small number of units early on it takes real planning to win...at least it did in civ2. I'm not really concerned about single player, I'm concerned about MP. In MP games aren't decided by mass wars with massive amounts of units. They're decided early by fewer amounts of units. If the early game is going to be determined randomly then in a higher skill level MP game the games will come down to who has the best early battle outcomes. Trust me, I know. I was a very skilled player in the MP world for civ2. Civ3 has come a long long way since it was released, and aside from my numerous complaints against the game it has a few really glaring flaws that have to fixed in order for MP to be successful. I'm not the only one that has these off the wall results with the combat system.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 9, 2002, 22:57   #4
Jaybe
Mac
Emperor
 
Jaybe's Avatar
 
Local Time: 22:50
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Henderson, NV USA
Posts: 4,168
1. This is NOT Civ2.
2. Just imagine how it might have been in MP and YOU were the Russians against those mighty Knights. What a relief it would have been. OTOH, in the end, you still 'won' your war against the Russians, didn't you?
__________________
JB
I play BtS (3.19) -- Noble or Prince, Rome, marathon speed, huge hemispheres (2 of them), aggressive AI, no tech brokering. I enjoy the Hephmod Beyond mod. For all non-civ computer uses, including internet, I use a Mac.
Jaybe is offline  
Old August 9, 2002, 23:22   #5
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
Quote:
1. This is NOT Civ2.
Thankyou for pointing that out. I think it's pretty obvious that civ3 is not civ2 just by comparing the amount of units sold.

Quote:
2. Just imagine how it might have been in MP and YOU were the Russians against those mighty Knights. What a relief it would have been. OTOH, in the end, you still 'won' your war against the Russians, didn't you?
That has got to be the most ridiculous argument I have ever heard. Obviously you have never played MP before. Saying that the flaw works both ways does not change the fact that it is a flaw. If there existed a bug that randomly gave someone 9999 gold you would still call it a bug and ask for it to be fixed even though the bug works for both players.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 00:46   #6
asleepathewheel
C3C IDG: Apolyton TeamInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG Gathering StormC4DG Gathering Storm
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: listening too long to one song
Posts: 7,395
Why play the game if you know the outcome of every battle before you engage? Why not just have a game where numerical/strength superiority would cause the enemy to capitulate?

So you have some bad luck. Tell that to the Spanish Armada.
sh*t happens in real life, as in the game. Why should there be consistency in a game when in real life dumb luck plays such a major role in every aspect of existence?
asleepathewheel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 02:29   #7
Bleyn
Warlord
 
Local Time: 22:50
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 254
Quote:
Originally posted by asleepathewheel
Why play the game if you know the outcome of every battle before you engage? Why not just have a game where numerical/strength superiority would cause the enemy to capitulate?

So you have some bad luck. Tell that to the Spanish Armada.
sh*t happens in real life, as in the game. Why should there be consistency in a game when in real life dumb luck plays such a major role in every aspect of existence?
Don't forget that a LOT of people around here seem to forget that numerical and/or technological superiority do not always mean winning the battle or the war.

You're right. Things happen. That is why SNAFU and FUBAR are now long standing military axioms. And it didn't just happen to the Spanish Armada. There are numerous examples from history of the "wrong" side winning battles and wars.

In fact, as Sun Tzu pointed out thousands of years ago, and people are still ignoring today, the real victory most of the time is not to win the physical battle, its to win the information battle that preceeds the physical battle. Win that, and often the physical battle will follow. Lose the information battle and you are in real trouble.

And the only way to simulate that is random numbers.
Bleyn is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 02:29   #8
DrFell
Civilization II Multiplayer
King
 
Local Time: 06:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,131
Freak results happened in civ2 you know. Just at a more predictable frequency.

Anyway, there is a simple option which could be added which would satisfy everyone. Like accelerted production, adding an option to double units hitpoints at the start would pretty much solve the problem. I think it's time the MP community started pressing this issue, we want this in the expansion pack (it's so simple to add).
DrFell is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 02:51   #9
notyoueither
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization III PBEMInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamC3C IDG: Apolyton TeamApolytoners Hall of FameCiv4 InterSite DG: Apolyton TeamPolyCast TeamPtWDG Gathering StormC4DG Gathering Storm
Deity
 
notyoueither's Avatar
 
Local Time: 23:50
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: of naught
Posts: 21,300
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine


Thankyou for pointing that out. I think it's pretty obvious that civ3 is not civ2 just by comparing the amount of units sold.
Yes. And if you do compare you may find that 3 is ahead of 2 by a long way in the same time frame. Thanks for bringing that up.
__________________
(\__/)
(='.'=)
(")_(") This is Bunny. Copy and paste bunny into your signature to help him gain world domination.
notyoueither is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 05:32   #10
Coracle
Prince
 
Coracle's Avatar
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 915
No, Civ 3 is not Civ 2. That is pretty obvious by comparing the FUN factor of each, and how much LEGS each will have. Civ 2 wins hands down. Save the references to sales for a stockholders' meeting; I could care less.

As for combat. . .

We needed STACK combat with Realtime tactics. This was discussed online years ago after Civ 2 came out. But we still get this individual vs individual unit stuff.

The combat values in the game make very little sense, are highly unrealistic, and cause very weird things to happen. Knights should be 5.2.2.

That would force an attacker to bring up pikemen to hold ground, as would have been the case in reality, rather than just have a giant stack of 4.3. knights.

Yes, the '3' defense factor is RIDICULOUS. It is the same defense factor as rifle-armed Cavalry!! The defense factor in the game of Longbowmen (a '1') is even more absurd.

So, if you don't mod it you will have very strange and frustrating results that are antithetical to history and kill a lot of the fun of game-playing.
Coracle is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 05:41   #11
Robert Plomp
admin
DiploGamesBtS Tri-LeaguePolyCast TeamC4WDG Team Apolyton
Administrator
 
Robert Plomp's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Delft, The Netherlands
Posts: 11,635
- stack comabat sucks. Look at CtP. It's just big armies vs big armies. It adds nothing.

- of course your units die now and then. There's no perfect war in which none of your units die. Most of the time, and for sure in ancient wars, there were MUUUCH death people.
__________________
Formerly known as "CyberShy"
Carpe Diem tamen Memento Mori
Robert Plomp is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 10:40   #12
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
The spanish armada lost to the English fleet in the same way that the Persians lost to the greeks. Smaller ships in a small channel beat larger slower ships. Is this some freak stroke of luck that will randomly change if we were to recreate it? No, it's strategy. Military genius. There is no such thing in real life as a lucky war.

Quote:
Freak results happened in civ2 you know. Just at a more predictable frequency.
Freak results were just that, freak results. In civ3 they aren't freak results, they're a common event.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 11:30   #13
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine
Freak results were just that, freak results. In civ3 they aren't freak results, they're a common event.
I find combat in Civ3 to be reasonable and predictable. The outcome of any single combat may be uncertain, but the outcome of a coordinated campaign does not have to be. I find the combat system comprehensible and very fun to play. If I can do it, you can too.

Soldiers die in war, and even the victor must pay a price in blood.
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 11:42   #14
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine There is no such thing in real life as a lucky war.
"Luck" refers to those factors beyond our control. How did John Paul Jones beat and capture the British frigate Serapis with a refitted merchant vessel, the Bonhomme Richard? Pluck. But from the strategic planner's point of view, it was simply "luck."



From Navy.Mil
http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/...l/jpjones.html
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 12:09   #15
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
Obviously luck plays a small part, but strategic planning is what is the main factor. In civ3 luck of the roll is what determines the battles. And you really shouldn't be comparing civ3 to real life nor any computer game for that matter. If computer games were like real life then they wouldn't be very fun. This has nothing to do with realism, and even if you wanted to get started on realism the idea of ancient archers beating knights 50% of the time is pretty ludicrous. The fact is the combat model is flawed and I don't see any arguments other than simply luck is a part of life to refute that.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 12:28   #16
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine
Obviously luck plays a small part, but strategic planning is what is the main factor.
Absolutely right! In the example of John Paul Jones, luck won that battle, but strategic considerations won the war. First, the poor skills of the British in keeping the colonialists happy resulted in an unwanted revolution. Then, the poor evaluation of the capabilities of the Americans resulted in too small a garrison being assigned by the British. Washington's strategy of fielding a regular army but always keeping it just out of reach of the British was crucial. And finally, Ben Franklin's diplomatic efforts resulted in the French entering the war on the American side, the fruits of which were evident with some finality at Yorktown.



So when you move your frigate and it loses to a merchant vessel, that's "luck." But when you convince the French to enter on your side with their high-tech weapons, that's strategy. Both are a part of war.

Last edited by Zachriel; August 10, 2002 at 12:41.
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 12:48   #17
sabrewolf
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization III PBEMApolyton UniversityIron CiversCivilization IV CreatorsC3CDG Desolation RowCivilization IV PBEMCivilization IV: Multiplayer
Emperor
 
sabrewolf's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: turicum, helvetistan
Posts: 9,852
i know there are statistical values (someone did an extensive test and proved it right).

but i do have the feeling, that hitpoint-wins and -losses are not totally random, but grouped a bit.

you can lose with 2 elite cavalry against one spearman, but then sometimes your 2 regular warriors beat the 2 fortified regular hoplites...

as the second poster said: use overwhelming forces... or otherwise use artillery...
__________________
- Artificial Intelligence usually beats real stupidity
- Atheism is a nonprophet organization.
sabrewolf is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 13:17   #18
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
The fact that the only way to win is to use overwhelming force says something about the depth of the game and just how much strategy is in it.

Quote:
So when you move your frigate and it loses to a merchant vessel, that's "luck."
When I continually get those results that's no longer luck, that's an intended game design that is obviously flawed. I think it shows the incompetence of Firaxis.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 14:17   #19
player1
Emperor
 
player1's Avatar
 
Local Time: 07:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Belgrade, Serbia
Posts: 3,218
It's not all about random factor.

Sometimes there are things, which people somtimes forget.

Units have 3-5HPs, units have attack and defense values.

Winning the battle depends from both attack, defense AND BONUS factors.

And that's all.

Higher attack vaule doesn't mean that you'll ALWAYS win battle against lower enemy defense value (on the other way something like that happns in Civ2 way to often, exept if you attack with wounded unit).



Bonus factors are various DEFENSE bonuses.

Terrains bonus: from 10% to 100%
Fortyfy: +25%
Walls: +50%
7+ pop: +50%
13+pop: +100%

Things like Knight losing from Spearmen are pretty possbile.
Fortified spearmen on defense wuill have at least +35% defense bonus (10% terrain, 25% fortify)

That makes it defense of 2.7

4 vs 2.7 gives much room for victory of defender.
It won't happen to often, but it's possbile.

When cities start getting 7 or more pop, defensive bonuses become even more drastic (and some poeple forget that).


P.S.
Now 4 vs 1 result is RARE, but can happen.
It happend to me just several times, and I played Civ3 for months.
On the other hand, 4vs2.5 or more are much more common.

And you need to make STRATEGY to combat that difficulty.

STRATEGY, not TACTIC.
player1 is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 14:25   #20
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine
When I continually get those results that's no longer luck, that's an intended game design that is obviously flawed. I think it shows the incompetence of Firaxis.
A Veteran Frigate will beat an Elite Galley three-fourths of the time -- on average. That means an Elite Galley will win sometimes. You cannot predict which time, though. Most importantly, by knowing this exact percentage, it is possible to plan strategically. Indeed, we have much more information than real strategic planners have. We know the exact percentages. They don't.

The mistake the Serapis made was letting the Bonhomme Richard get close. If they had used their superior mobility, they could have bombarded from a safer distance. However, they were down wind, so they would have had to break off and try to outmanuever the Bonhomme Richard. The British didn't want to be bothered with such cowardly nuances, trusting to their superior firepower, and not realizing that the Americans weren't about to enter an artillery battle, but were prepared to lash and board.

Bombard from a safe distance before allowing the battle to close. A Veteran Frigate v. a damaged 3hp Elite Galley has a 90% chance of success.

Last edited by Zachriel; August 10, 2002 at 14:30.
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 14:27   #21
asleepathewheel
C3C IDG: Apolyton TeamInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG Gathering StormC4DG Gathering Storm
Emperor
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: listening too long to one song
Posts: 7,395
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine
The fact that the only way to win is to use overwhelming force says something about the depth of the game and just how much strategy is in it.
1. there are other victories than military vicotories. RTFM.

2. you don't need overwhelming force to win. I often use smaller forces to take wonder cities or resources. Sure, if you want guaranteed victories while destroying an entire civ in one turn, you might want an overwhelming force, but that is too boring for me, and has less challenge. Maybe that says something about the depth of your strategic thinking if all you can do is use mass strikes to win.
asleepathewheel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 14:28   #22
reefer addict
Warlord
 
reefer addict's Avatar
 
Local Time: 21:50
Local Date: October 31, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: oregon
Posts: 109
ive seen the combat engine spit out unreal results almost every game i play. it seems to me that the ai gets a bonus on emperror and diety when fighting. if i attack a spearman, no defense bonuses, with 5 vet archers i probally lose,whereas the ai has no problem taking out my fortified,behind walls musketman with an archer and not even suffer damage( with hp increased to 3/6/9/12 ).
if it happened once i right it off as luck, but it happens so often that ive come to expect it
reefer addict is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 15:08   #23
Jon Shafer
PtWDG RoleplayPtWDG Gathering StormPtWDG Neu DemogypticaInterSite Democracy Game: Apolyton TeamPtWDG LegolandPtWDG Vox ControliPtWDG Glory of WarPtWDG2 SunshineApolyton UniversityC3CDG Desolation RowApolytoners Hall of FameCivilization IV CreatorsC4DG SarantiumApolyCon 06 ParticipantsPtWDG Lux Invicta
Firaxis Games Programmer/Designer
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 9,567
Increase the HP. I find the default HP values far too low IMO.
Jon Shafer is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 16:07   #24
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by Trip
Increase the HP. I find the default HP values far too low IMO.
Absolutely. Increasing the hitpoints means that sword will much more often destroy spearmen, tanks will nearly always beat muskets, and terrain advantages are much more pronounced.

If you don't like the current combat values, please feel free to modify them, or download one of many great mods. Please.
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 18:14   #25
DrFell
Civilization II Multiplayer
King
 
Local Time: 06:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 1,131
Happy is thinking of MP, where a ton of mods cause havok. There needs to be an option to double the hitpoints of units (regular=6hp, veteran=8hp, elite=10hp) for MP, similar to the accelerated production option.
DrFell is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 18:45   #26
HappySunShine
Civilization III MultiplayerCivilization II Multiplayer
Warlord
 
Local Time: 00:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Sunshine State, where else?
Posts: 223
Wow player1, thanks for quoting the manual for me. You have an amazing knack for pointing out the obvious. I'm well aware of what the defense values are, but next time I need an update I'll look you up.
HappySunShine is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 19:19   #27
spy14
Prince
 
spy14's Avatar
 
Local Time: 05:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 521
Yes, some "freak" results happen in real life, such as the HMS Serapis incident that was mentioned. But that was one incident of a frigate beaten by a merchant vessel, how many more can be named? Very few. OTOH, how many merchant vessels were beaten by frigates in this period? Hundreds. In the game the frigate will lose 50 - 60% of the time. Unless its a AI frigate, then it will win....
__________________
"Bite my shiny metal ass" - Bender B. Rodriguez
spy14 is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 20:23   #28
MOHonor
Chieftain
 
Local Time: 05:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 89
Quote:
Originally posted by HappySunShine
Wow player1, thanks for quoting the manual for me. You have an amazing knack for pointing out the obvious. I'm well aware of what the defense values are, but next time I need an update I'll look you up.
Wow...zero to jerk in 7 posts.
MOHonor is offline  
Old August 10, 2002, 20:40   #29
Zachriel
King
 
Zachriel's Avatar
 
Local Time: 01:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,194
Quote:
Originally posted by spy14
Yes, some "freak" results happen in real life, such as the HMS Serapis incident that was mentioned. But that was one incident of a frigate beaten by a merchant vessel, how many more can be named? Very few. OTOH, how many merchant vessels were beaten by frigates in this period? Hundreds. In the game the frigate will lose 50 - 60% of the time. Unless its a AI frigate, then it will win....
A Veteran Frigate will beat a Veteran Galley 82.67% of the time -- better than four out of five on average.

Civulator
http://207.191.20.18/civ3/lwc-civulator.html
Zachriel is offline  
Old August 11, 2002, 05:43   #30
lockstep
Apolyton University
King
 
lockstep's Avatar
 
Local Time: 06:50
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 1,529
Quote:
Originally posted by DrFell
Happy is thinking of MP, where a ton of mods cause havok. There needs to be an option to double the hitpoints of units (regular=6hp, veteran=8hp, elite=10hp) for MP, similar to the accelerated production option.
In that case, you also have to adjust (double) all RoF values, and the defense bonus of citizens/improvements. Still should be feasable.

BTW, if the majority of players thinks that the current hitpoint model is insufficient, I'd rather like to see a change in the standard game than an additional setup option.
__________________
"As far as general advice on mod-making: Go slow as far as adding new things to the game until you have the basic game all smoothed out ... Make sure the things you change are really imbalances and not just something that doesn't fit with your particular style of play." - WesW
lockstep is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:50.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team