How do Armies handle damage?

[Theseus]

We've got a subtle point about damage to Armies in Strategy that needs to be resolved.

How do they act when damaged, and is there any difference given the cause of the damage?

I'm pretty sure that in straight -forward combat, on multiple engagements in a turn, the strongest unit for the application (attack or defense), will use its proportionate share of all remaining hps.

Example: 1x Infantry + 2x Riflemen, all vet, on defense. Say it gets attacked 3 times in a single turn, and on each attack loses 3 hps, with no promotions. I believe that in each case, the Infantry will be the defending unit, with respectively 4, 3, and 2 hps at the start of each defense, and that in the 2nd and 3rd cases, a Rifleman will step in to complete the defense.

I am fairly (very?) certain that this is the case.

DeepO has evidently seen a different mechanism, (under 1.21...just hasn't seen it since 1.29), in that when an Army is bombarded, it hits the the strongest defender, and damages it differently... using the above example, if you bombarded the Infantry down to 1 hp, and then attacked it, it would hand off to a Rifleman after losing just the 1 hp.

Anybody know the details?

[miccofl]

You think that situation is confusing? I made it even more so.

I’m working on a mod, late industrial early modern times. The current Army unit is fine for all around play, but as an exclusively modern unit it’s lacking. So I create a new army type unit, it can blitz, has a movement of six, can airlift, has all terrain as roads and +5 hp. In other words, made for huge maxed-out maps and tanks (MA.) The unit works fine, a GL cannot build one but the military academy can (very, very expensive.) That part is understandable given the way programs are written and run. The strange thing was; this unit (4 elite* MA) attacked this heavily defended city and reduced itself into the yellow, but the power band still ran to the top of the bar. The next turn it had to defeat four more infantry units, one of which was elite. It did but the bar never dropped below full (still yellow.) Before this happened I thought I might understand how the army combat matrix works, but to defeat five mech. infantry and four infantry with only an extra 5 hp blew that theory.

I previously would have agreed with your theory (DeepO’s wouldn’t apply as all units were offensive and the unit was only used offensively.) Unfortunately I finished the game before the unit healed (8 turns) or did I need to return it to the Military Academy to heal?

[DeepO]

Hmmm, nearly what I meant. At least, it is what I said, but you gave it a new twist, which makes my example a little unclear.

What the difference is between what I said in the other thread is that I don't think that the best defence unit (as given by their defense value, i.e. 10 for a infantry) will defend, but the unit with the best defence (i.e. in this case a rifleman, with 6*4HP = 20 defense points, where the infantry would have10*1HP = 10 defense points). My example was with a MI and a longbowman, as there it would be 1 HP with a defense of 24 against 4 HP with a defense of 1 (MI would still defend on the first turn).

But, the question of the thread is whether if you manage to hit an army down 3 HPs (with a first attack), will these hits be averaged out over the 3 units inside the army on the second attack, or has the infantry taken all damage, and are the riflemen still fresh (at full health)? This has some percussions on gameplay.

The main reason I think I'm right (apart from observing it, even if I can't recall it 100% sure) is that otherwise there would be an uneven advantage to mixed armies. Suppose the hits get averaged out. This would always mean the hardest unit is defending. So, it would be a good tactic to stuff an MI with two longbowmen: the MI takes the damage, but is likely to survive e.g. a tank attack taking 3 hits. The next turn, the MI is the best defender again, and can take an additional 3 hits before the longbowmen step in. This would mean that for the cost of 1 MI and 2 longbowmen, you get the strength of over 2 MIs, and some hps on a longbowman (depending on situation). This doesn't feel right...

DeepO

[Theseus]

[SIZE=1]or did I need to return it to the Military Academy to heal?

Not as far as I know. That is one WACKED OUT Army!!! I have no idea what was going on with... sounds buggy.

[DeepO]

Miccolf, HPs to armies is probably asking for update problems

Seriously, I think that might be the reason why armies now have ADM stats. If you add HPs, those will most likely count as the averaged out ADM values of what's inside... But still, I don't know how it will work with stuff like promotion.

But, your example doesn't say anything on ours, or you should have noted when the MAs retreated, and how much everyone of them was damaged. The problem is that with the blitzing, you're not sure which MA attacks... and on top of that, the 5 HPs the army has are not really helping.

As to where to heal them: I thought a barracks was best to heal them, and thought that they were healed by just staying there for one complete turn. But Theseus will be a better source on that. If it is not like it should be, you're better advised not to mod the army unit too much (giving it extra HPs)...

DeepO

[Theseus]

Originally posted by DeepO
What the difference is between what I said in the other thread is that I don't think that the best defence unit (as given by their defense value, i.e. 10 for a infantry) will defend, but the unit with the best defence (i.e. in this case a rifleman, with 6*4HP = 20 defense points, where the infantry would have10*1HP = 10 defense points). My example was with a MI and a longbowman, as there it would be 1 HP with a defense of 24 against 4 HP with a defense of 1 (MI would still defend on the first turn).

But, the question of the thread is whether if you manage to hit an army down 3 HPs (with a first attack), will these hits be averaged out over the 3 units inside the army on the second attack, or has the infantry taken all damage, and are the riflemen still fresh (at full health)? This has some percussions on gameplay.

I didn't understand the distinction before... got it. So there are actually two questions: 1) Are hps shared, and 2) if not, what determines the strongest unit for the application?

I'm pretty sure hps are shared... I thought the question was is there any differentiation for bombardment damage.

Originally posted by DeepO
The main reason I think I'm right (apart from observing it, even if I can't recall it 100% sure) is that otherwise there would be an uneven advantage to mixed armies. Suppose the hits get averaged out. This would always mean the hardest unit is defending. So, it would be a good tactic to stuff an MI with two longbowmen: the MI takes the damage, but is likely to survive e.g. a tank attack taking 3 hits. The next turn, the MI is the best defender again, and can take an additional 3 hits before the longbowmen step in. This would mean that for the cost of 1 MI and 2 longbowmen, you get the strength of over 2 MIs, and some hps on a longbowman (depending on situation). This doesn't feel right...

Well assuming it IS right, this is what I've been saying about M-U Armies FOREVER!!! You are salvaging the hps of obsolete units!!

Not that I'd do that with an MI and 2 Longbowmen... too dangerous. But all the others I espouse, and that others have done as well, work great.

Still, assuming I'm not wrong about direct attacks, maybe there's something special about bombardment?

(Sorry, can;t playtest myself tonight... wasting too much time here when I should be working... god that's pitiful, I'm a 'poly addict.)

[DeepO]

Sorry to have confused you, it is a hard thing to explain. But as to number 2) : for this I am pretty sure... it will be the defense points as in my calculations, and not just the D from the ADM stats.

This makes me think a bit more on the subject, I think one of the latest mixed armies I've seen (in Alamo) was an army with a MI and a MA in it. On the outside, an MI was displayed, yet when I attacked it, the MA came to the front, and got the first punch. Now I am very sure this is what happened, however I'm not so sure about the rest of the circumstances. Most likely, I would have bombed them quite a bit (as I did that with every army in Alamo before attacking), but I don't know whether the MA was a vet, and the MI a regular...

Suppose that both of them were vets, is there any other way of explaining this sighting than to assume the MI has taken a lot of damage due to artillery fire, leaving the MA with for instance 2 HP, where the MI has 1? On an attack, the MA has 16*2 defense, where the MI has 24*1... the MA is the hardest defender, and is used first. I don't see any other possibility otherwise, if the HPs would have been averaged out, the MI should have gotten equal or more HPs then the MA, so would always be the first defender! So, am I right in thinking that this example would solve both mysteries: defense goes to that unit who has the highest combination of HPs and Defense stat (like it does in a stack of units, elite riflemen will take priorirty over conscript or 2 HP infantry), and HPs are counted on the units in an army, instead of on the army as a whole...

Well assuming it IS right, this is what I've been saying about M-U Armies FOREVER!!! You are salvaging the hps of obsolete units!!

Now I finally get it. Sorry, but I haven't seen you explain it in so many words, I always assumed that you meant that a 1 vet rifleman + 2 elite sword army was good on both attack and defense, and once the rifleman got to much damaged, you'd retreat it to heal... I never thought that you meant to say the swords would get virtually 6 defense as well... no wonder you like mixed armies. I surely hope this thread will not shock you in your trust in mixed armies

(Sorry, can;t playtest myself tonight... wasting too much time here when I should be working... god that's pitiful, I'm a 'poly addict.)

Now where do I know this feeling from... it's 3 am here, and I need to get up early tomorrow. This 'poly addict is going to force himself away from the monitor, and into his bed

DeepO

[miccofl]

Originally posted by DeepO
If you add HPs, those will most likely count as the averaged out ADM values of what's inside...

Sorry, but I have to disagree. I think the +5hp went to the army. (I named it “Mechanized Brigade”) The reason for that statement is this; all of the MA’s were elite when they entered the “MB,” none of those units were ever defeated in combat while in the “MB” and with a perpetually full bar I hadn’t the slightest freaking clue as to how much damage was done to the unit, the city I was trying to heal-up in had a barracks, I have never, ever had a unit take that long to heal and still be yellow (but a full bar?) I believe that the units inside the MB were at full strength, but the MB itself was damaged and while I don’t completely agree with your reasons I must agree that adding the hp to the army created more problems than it could ever solve. It is unfortunate that we cannot check the status of individual units inside the army or better yet, to be able to toggle between active units within the army and bombard. (My kingdom for a working MA-MA-MI-RA army!)

[DeepO]

miccofl, no need to be sorry, debate is what a forum is all about

Well, as I haven't done it myself, that was the best solution I could came up with, which is mostly based on what I would have done with the 5 extra HP... If it isn't like that, it could very well be a bug, as it never was foreseen that people would mod it that way. Another idea: could it be that the army correctly healed after the first turn, but it didn't display properly? No way of knowing, of course, unless you'd use it again.

DeepO

[Theseus]

OK, I finally had some time for a test.

I used MT V: The Alamo, 'cause that's set up with both an empty Army, and units with highly divergent attack values.

(I did forget that the first turn is 15 minutes of Spielberg like artistry!! If you haven;t seen this you must!)

So, I created a M-U Army of 1 elite MA and 1 elite MI.

There was conveniently a stack of German MI at the gates...

I attacked the first, MA does the fighting, lost 3 hp.

I attacked again with 5 hp... the MA fought for 3, handed off to the MI, which lost the remaining 2, and the Army crumbled.

I am pretty firmly convinced that hps are not tied to individual attack values... they are divided between all units at the start of each battle event.

I still don;t know if there's anything special about bombardment, but I doubt it.

Here's the SAV, cued up for the Army to attack.

[DeepO]

Thanks for testing this, Theseus! It sounds like I'll have to change my views on armies completely (well, not completely, but still). And this would explain the MA-MI-longbowman army the AIs were using in Alamo.

I'll check your save tonight, and also try to go through my notes to have the save of a longbowman army to bomb...

I don't fully understand how an army consisting of 2 elites can crumble after losing 3 and 5 HPs, but I'll see it, no need to explain.

DeepO

[Catt]

I had no intention of testing after seeing Theseus' test results last night, but spent a good deal of the early AM hours awake with crying / restless infants -- which means of course available computer time.

I constructed a test scenario for the army damage question, including whether or not bombardment is treated any differently. My (limited) tests would seem to confirm Theseus' observations - HPs are shared among the constituent units (so an MI in an army of cavarly, for example, can actually use 9 or 10 HPs rather than its own, individual 4 or 5). I should note that I am relying on the game graphics in reaching this conclusion -- if I see the MI defending past HP number 4, I am assuming that it is actually a 18-defense unit (MI) that is doing the defending, not a cavalry at 3 defense with an MI graphic -- I should also note that I saw no repeated, unusual RNG strings that would suggest that although an MI graphic was displayed the defneding army was defending withg a value of anything other than 18.

The scenario consists of just Rome (player) and Egypt (AI) on a single small island. Both are through the tech tree and both start with a bunch of units. Rome has a lot of RA and a lot of CMs for bombardment. Egypt has two armies, both of which the AI used to construct mixed armies in my tests.

For any interested in doing more extensive testing / experimentation, the zip file below contains: (1) the scenario bic; (2) a saved game at 4000 BC using the scenario bic at Regent level (with "Preserve Random Seed OFF"); and (3) a saved game at 3950 BC using the scenario bic with Random Seed OFF - in this save, all units have been fortified, a turn was allowed to pass so that Cleopatra could build her armies, an embassy was established in Thebes to look at the garrisoned troops, war was declared, and the Roman army was moved within striking distance. No CMs or RA have yet been fired, and thus you're able to play with variables to your heart's content.

(The advantage of a simple scenario like this is it is easy and fast to reload repeatedly to test - real games with lots of units, players, etc. take a long time to reload on my older laptop).

Catt

[DeepO]

Catt, you've done what I had in mind with the Alamo things, so allow me to not test it
Actually, the display is about the only thing to go on, there is no need to start extensive testing just because we don't believe how things are drawn. When you see a unit retreating, or one defending, you can assume it is actually that unit that does the fighting.

Even if I can understand this mechanic from a 'let's keep things simple' kind of approach, it does raises my eyebrows a little of the exploit like way in which the game handles mixed armies. Congrats go out to Theseus for knowing it all along, and sharing this tactic with us, and shame on me for not realizing what exactly was at work here. I will definately use mixed armies more often now!

DeepO

[Theseus]

HURRAY FOR MIXED-UNIT ARMIES!!!!

DeepO, first, sorry, I left out an attack in my description above (MA wins using up two hp, which didn't tell me anything, so I didn't include it... doh!).

Catt, good testing... how did you know Egypt would build mixed-unit Armies though?

[Theseus]

Also, DeepO, I don;t think of it as an exploit at all. It's a well-balanced answer to the problem of not being able to upgrade units in Armies.

If you could, Armies would be far too powerful.

Adding progressively stronger and / or attack/defense balancing units over time, and giving them the benefit of salvaging the older units' hps, maintains the high value of Armies just enough.

[Theseus]

Last point:

And again, that's why I am such a fan of starting Armies of with 2 Swordsmen*, and later bolstering with a Musket or Rifle, and finally an Infantry. The Swordsmen* are useless and non-upgradeable anyway, and they're only worth 5 (?) shields each if disbanded... this way, their 10 hps go to a VERY worthwhile cause.

Same thing with Cavalry*... put 2 in an Army, bolster with an MA, and then later another Cav if I have any left, or an MA.

Hmmm, just thought of another good one... 2 Cav* + 1 MI... you give up the 3 move capability of the Cavs, but you get one helluva escort for a Tank attack force.

[Catt]

Originally posted by Theseus
... how did you know Egypt would build mixed-unit Armies though?

I didn't know for certain until I tried it. But in order to increase the odds of it occuring, I let Cleo start with: 1 army, 1 MI, 1 tank, 1 cavalry, and 1 longbowman, all on one tile; a similar mix of units plus an army on another tile; and a city with a coupla musketmen as defenders. Sure enough, Cleo used those empty armies to build mixed-unit armies at her first opportunity! (Although, even though I gave her the Pentagon (I think) she only loaded 3 units into her armies -- probably waiting to produce more longbowmen to add ).

And I agree that the HP-sharing is a nice compromise on the upgrade / no-upgrade army units issue.

Catt

[DeepO]

Oh, it is no exploit, as the AI seems to be using it a lot, that was not what I wanted to say (sorry 'bout that). But it isn't really intuitive, I hope you'll agree to that. And the mechanic gives some strange results which you'll have to be very observant for to spot...

DeepO

[DeepO]

Theseus, would you think that the best use of mixed armies is to use formerly offensive ones as modern defensives ones? Or is it just a way of using things you can't upgrade anyhow?

I mean, it would be possible to have a 2 rifleman, later 'upgraded' with an extra MI army, but none of the examples you're using come to this. Is this coincidence?

DeepO

[Theseus]

LOL... something in Civ3 not intuitive?? I don;t mind really... it's fun to figure things out.

In terms of uses and configurations of units and Armies:

* I like to use non-upgradeable units this way.

* I like to keep units of the same speed together.

Thus, Swords with Longbows, Muskets, Rifles, and Infantry. No Marines thus far, because Armies can't do amhibious assaults, and I otherwise haven't use them much for land attacks. (also, as a Marine, I can't put one my bro's in the ARMY!)

Cavs with Tanks, although preferably MAs. As noted above, MIs for a fastmover offensive defense.

The one exception would be a possible addition of an MI to a defensive M-U Army, even a slowmover, as you note.

Lately, though, my play style has been heavily dependent on Swords, so I almost always end up with Swords as the base of my slowmover Armies, and without the Musket / Rifle addition there's a long period when the 2 Swords Army is too weak, which is repeated if I try to wait for MIs instead of poppin in an Infantry.

When I next play a predominantly fastmover style, I can envision starting Armies with 2 Rifles, and later adding an Infantry, then an MI... that's mofo defense. Probably only 1-2, though, as, duh, that's in fastmover games. I like the Cavs/MI combo idea... can;t wait to try it.

[Ekanata]

If the damage taken isn't spreaded to all army member, then practically they're fighting one by one. Therefor it's possible when the army start losing, the fast member can hold the enemy letting the slower member to retret, and later retreating themself.

Therefor, in scenario full army of Tank attacking army of 2x Infantry + Cavalry, both Infantry will fight first and later the Cavalry. Since Cavalry has higher movement than Tank, will the defending army be able to retreat ?

And in scenario army of 2x Tank + Cavalry attacking single Modern Armor, will the presence of Cavalry nullify MA's ability to retreat ?

[DeepO]

Originally posted by Ekanata
And in scenario army of 2x Tank + Cavalry attacking single Modern Armor, will the presence of Cavalry nullify MA's ability to retreat ?

Well, you make a valid point, but might want to choose another example: a MA will not retreat from any other fastmover, so it won't retreat from a tank.

A better example would be if a horsemen makes retreat for impis impossible in an army consisting of 2 immortals...

DeepO