Unit Ratings

[overcome]

How does one interpret the unit ratings? I understand the basics 12/5/8 equates to

12 firepower
5 armor
8 movement

But, what does it mean when there are things like
"5^2"? There seems to be modifiers of some sort. I can't find any documentation that describes it. I have the gamespot guide and users manual and can't figure it out.

[overcome]

I understand the reactor part. I don't understand the caret "^". There is sometimes a number, then a caret, then another number, hence "5^2". Are you saying, that in this case the armor is 5 and the reactor is 2, standing for fusion, therefore a 10 in armor total????

Another way of looking at this is when in the design workshop. It stands to reason that armor is in sequential order, synthmetal 2 - silksteel 4 and so on. But building a unit in the design workshop, you will see other armor on the 3rd tier, like plasma or neutronium that have a lower number rating than that of photon. Why would a more advanced technology have a lower number? My guess, is that even though the number is lower, it has a modifier of some sort which gives it more power. I know my explanation is not clear, but I don't know a better way to articulate it.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Hmm....

I'm not sure I follow you on the 5^2 especially on the armor number. I always thought that the ^ followed the movement number then followed by reactor rating. Maybe I just don't remember clearly all the specifics.

There are a number of modifiers that you can see that describe a unit other than the raw numbers. Most get applied on the weapon and or armor numbers.

As examples (all fission reactor examples):

A chaos speeder equipped with nerve gas capabiity (not armored)

8X-1-2 where X designates nerve gas capable

A Chaos speeder with nerve and Amphibious ability

8x~-1-2 where ~ means amphibious capable (i.e. can attack from or toward sea squares)

A trance plasma infantry unit w/ hand weapons

1-3t-1 where t means trance capable i.e. +50% vs. psi defense

A chaos speeder with SAM capability

<8>-1-2 where < > means able to attack air units

etc.

AS for the armor types being listed nonsequentially, this is a consequence of the SMACX modifications. In SMAC they were sequential. However with SMACX, special armor types were added to the choices each of these armor types allows special bonuses when defending against special attackers.

Added were Resonance and Pulse modifed armor types

So now there are
3P - basically plasma armor with +25% defense 'gainst speeders and hovertanks
3R - basically plasma armor with +25% defense 'gainst psi combat
8P - 8 armor +25% vs. speeders/tanks
8R - 8 armor +25% vs. psi combat

etc.

Finally, with respect to armor of 5 and then being modified by a higher reactor. I don't like to think of this as merely an armor of 10. Instead, I liken this to hit points and armor of Dungeons and Dragons. A fission unit with 10 hitpoints and a 5 armor is more likely to be killed then a fusionunit with say 20 hit points and 5 armor. The effect however may or may not be the same.


Hope I helped and didn't make this anymore confusing then it already is.

Og

[overcome]

The knowledge which can be spouted off extemporanously is truly amazing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Since I generated this post without having the game in front of me, my examples were probably off. However, Ogie addressed the intent of my question. My game is rigged to provide battle odds before commencing combat. When looking at the opposing unit versus mine, it doesn't always seem to make sense how the odds are calculated. I have seen scouts with armor of 8 win against an interceptor. That is why I am trying to gain a deeper level of knowledge. Is there a formula for calculating combat stats??

[Chowlett]

IIRC, ^ indicates the drop ability, but usually sits after the attck rating. I've never seen it after armour, so can't help with that.

[WhiteElephants]

Overcome -- I'm somewhat confused by your last example. You stated, "When looking at the opposing unit versus mine, it doesn't always seem to make sense how the odds are calculated. I have seen scouts with armor of 8 win against an interceptor." In this example, and any example, the platform (scout, interceptor, rover, etc.) doesn't effect the outcome as much as the actual weapon and armor ratings. Sure, some units such as rovers get a bonus when a unit is out in the open, but by and large it is actually the armor and weapon that make the most difference. So scouts with armor of 8 have a pretty good potential to win in combat versus several other combat platforms as long as the attackers weapon rating, the interceptor in your example, doesn't greatly exceed the defenders armor rating. So a 1-8-1 scout, from your example, is going to have decent odds against any other unit with a weapon rating of 8 like an interceptor which would be 8-1-16(?).

[RedFred]

As an aside, you will have a combat penalty if you go after scouts with your interceptor. They are only good at intercepting needlejets and copters. You will have less negative modifiers with a needlejet, less still with infantry.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Overcome,

I believe the unit you described is in actuality a unit using a fusion reactor. Higher reactors are incredibly important as they translate to twice as many hits(damage) required to destroy the unit. So the unit you described as a 12/5/8 unit would be twice as durable vs a fission reacotr powered unit.

Reactors are fission - 1
fusion - 2 times the damage and increased range for air units
quantum - 3 times and even further range
Singularity - 4 times and maximum range

Og

[cbn]

The interceptor would have a negative 50% modifier on any groundstrike so it would be a very poor choice to go against an 8 armour ground unit. There are a ton of modifiers (AAA armour, sensor, in base to name just a couple )but you can see them in the little combat window and judge for yourself.

Combat odds seem to combine all the factors. If I have a damaged chopper with only one hit point left and an attack of 20 taking on a unit with a defense of 2 but 10 hit points my odds on any given calculation is 10-1 BUT since I have to win 10 times in a row the probability of ultimate victory is probably the probability of winning a single resolution to the power of 10. Even if the odds on a one shot deal are 90 % for victory if this is repeated 10 times your ultimate odds of victory over the unit is 1 in 3 or so (a stats person could calculate it better). So my attack chopper will run away to fight another day

Hope this helps

[overcome]

All good feedback. I have picked up a few nuances that answer my question. However, check out what happened in my game last night. I sent a Shard Tactical;

<13> - 4 - 12*2 Elite +50% (Strength 9.75; Power 20)

against a AAA Probability Garrison

1 - <6> - 5*2 Hardened +12% (Strength 2.25; Power 20)

The odds were 13 to 18; and as the odds played out, I lost the battle. Even though, I understand much more about the modifiers/bonuses/penalties, this still bugs me a bit. My Shard Tactical had double the firepower of the Garrison's armor (and he was in the open). Also, my strength was triple his. How did SMACX calculate those odds?

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Calcs for the above example

Attacker

Shard - 13
Elite + 50% bonus
Penalty - Air superiority 'gainst land unit -50%

Total = 13 *1.5 *.5 = 9.75

Defender
Probability - 6
Hardened +12%
AAA bonus vs. Air unit +100%

Total = 6 * 1.12* 2 = 13.44

Ratio attacker/defender is 9.75/13.44 or .72
ratio of power reported by you is 13/18 or .72

How the game actually came up with 13 vs. 18 I'll never know but the attacker/defender ratio (assuming same reactor type and undamaged units) is the real measure, as ratios over 1 favor the attacker. Of course the higher the ratio the better chance for a win with minimal damage to your attacking units.

Likewise in this instance since the ratio was less than 1 the defender has the advantage and the results ended up bearing that out.

I believe in this instance you thought that the armor was only 2. In reality it was 6 from probability armor. The 2 you referred to was actually fusion reactor designation for the AAA probability unit.


[This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited December 20, 2000).]

[cbn]

Thanks OO


I was in the middle of the same calculation when I saw your post. It only goes to show the weakness of an interceptor (1/2 strength ) against ground targets. A regular needlejet with the same attributes should have great odds of winning the same battle.

(Off topic but here goes) Do many people build interceptors once choppers are available? I tend to try to build a few good defenders but mainly go for air superiority choppers for the counterstrike for their abilities to take out a whole bunch of needles. I haven't found the scrambling interceptor to be much use unless I had a huge weapon advantage (in which case, why the heck would I ever be defending my bases rather than pounding his??)

Back on topic, I generally trust the combat calculations except for native life units. Those never seem quite right. However no matter what the odds, you will eventually witness something improbable. Occassionally you get some unit that just seems to stubbornly refuse to die against the most daunting odds. Thats just the element of luck in the game.

[Aredhran]

The native life odds will only be accurate if the regular unit has fission (*1) reactor.

The problem is that the odds calculation formula factors in the unit's hit points, which are ignored in psi combat (ie. your wonderful singularity unit only has 10 hp when fighting a miserable pre-boil worm). Damage is inflicted in multiples of the reactor power.

Aredhran

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Red H,

You are correct sir. Remember when the singularity reactor was actually penalized in psi combat. In pre-patch days the singulairity units were rated at 30 hps and damage was inflicted upon them as if they were a 40 hp unit by natives. Made you not want to build singularity powered units.

Og

PS Cbn,

Yeah I still build tactical jets. Once I get choppers I never build bomber jets though only chopper ground pounders. I'll build a tactical chopper as well for the reasons you mentioned to wipe out opposing enemy air craft.

Reason I build the tacticals is not so much for ability to wipe out an opposing air force but simply to provide cover for either ground or sea units, thus rendering them safe from counterattack. Beleive nothing pisses me off then moving a probe team finally into position and having it attacked and destroyed when all I needed to do was cover it with an air unit.

The tactical choppers don't remain aloft and as a consequence are ripe for attack by gorund units. Covering the ground units allows my speeders, probe teams, foils, etc. to remain untouched.
[This message has been edited by Ogie Oglethorpe (edited December 20, 2000).]

[Aredhran]

Cheap jets or interceptors can also be used for bombing runs on enemy terraforming. Choppers are bad for that because they take 30% damage each time.