Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 06MAR12 - Gaming the Combat Casualty Algorithm
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Topic Closed06MAR12 - Gaming the Combat Casualty Algorithm

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 8>
Author
SugarFree View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 09 Feb 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 350
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 00:04
lost battle (= 75% defenders dead/ death of commander?) rest heads home in shame? 
new battle command like "massacre"?  ( exactly like today's attack? 
Back to Top
Mandarins31 View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 00:20
I suppose that you are talking about a spot in plains that has been attacked by some T2 cavalry.
If yes, massacre is normal there, that's the consequence of defending on plains, you expose yourself to the great hazard of being attacked by cavalry. Plains really arent a place to defend on.
Back to Top
Aurordan View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar
Player Council - Ambassador

Joined: 21 Sep 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 982
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 02:20
Originally posted by Miklabjarnir Miklabjarnir wrote:

I am really sceptical about fiddling with the combat system in a live game. Such things should happen only after a reasonably long notice period, like any important game change.

In principle, bugs should be fixed. However, if there is no documentation to the user of how the combat system works the the way it actually works is the specification.

I have many issues with the entire combat system in Illyriad, but that does not mean I think it is buggy and must be fixed. It means I think it should be improved in a planned and predictable way.

I kind of like the lack of specification for the combat system. It means there is a challenge for the players to explore it and find out for themselves. If somebody discovers that it does not work the way they believed, they should not be bailed out by a quick change. Lazy or sloppy players should not be rewarded at the cost of those who actually test their tactics and do some research.

For me this is merely a statement of principle. I do not take part in the tournament, so I have no personal interest in this case and do not have big enough armies to see any large-scale combat effects.

My biggest gripe with the combat system is that outcomes are way too binary. It is highly unrealistic in any kind of warfare, and pre-gunpowder in particular, to have large numbers of casualties. Losers should not be annihilated except in unusual circumstances. 10% casualties due to battle is heavy. More than 50% is a historical disaster, like end of the German Order as a power after Grünefeld.

I've always taken the casualties to include troops that may have survived but are no longer under your functional control, like a routed army would be.  Makes sense to me.
Back to Top
abstractdream View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 02 Oct 2011
Location: Oarnamly
Status: Offline
Points: 1843
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 03:02
It's a game, with game like limitations. Combat is good enough that it doesn't need to be a SOON(tm) item. If the DEVs focused on and released pathfinding, who would care about this, really?
Bonfyr Verboo
Back to Top
Brids17 View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 07:37
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

It's a game, with game like limitations. Combat is good enough that it doesn't need to be a SOON(tm) item. If the DEVs focused on and released pathfinding, who would care about this, really?

Sometimes it's the small stuff that matters the most. 
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 14:39
Originally posted by Brids17 Brids17 wrote:

Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

It's a game, with game like limitations. Combat is good enough that it doesn't need to be a SOON(tm) item. If the DEVs focused on and released pathfinding, who would care about this, really?

Sometimes it's the small stuff that matters the most. 
+1

I am sure this was an easy fix...and I am sure it has not set path-finding behind at all.  Plus, there is that unfounded rumor Rill started that new features wont be released until we figure out the Heart of Corruption (aka Audrey II).  *though I wonder if Ryelle put her up to that*


http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/heart-of-corruption_topic2004_post39774.html#39774

"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR

Back to Top
geofrey View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 31 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1013
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 14:45
Originally posted by SunStorm SunStorm wrote:

Originally posted by Brids17 Brids17 wrote:

Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

It's a game, with game like limitations. Combat is good enough that it doesn't need to be a SOON(tm) item. If the DEVs focused on and released pathfinding, who would care about this, really?

Sometimes it's the small stuff that matters the most. 
+1

I am sure this was an easy fix...and I am sure it has not set path-finding behind at all.  Plus, there is that unfounded rumor Rill started that new features wont be released until we figure out the Heart of Corruption (aka Audrey II).  *though I wonder if Ryelle put her up to that*


http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/heart-of-corruption_topic2004_post39774.html#39774


Rumor? I thought it was well known that solving the mystery of the Heart of Corruption will allow your troops to find paths...
Back to Top
SunStorm View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Apr 2011
Location: "Look Up"
Status: Offline
Points: 979
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08 Mar 2012 at 16:37
lol Wink
"Side? I am on nobody's side because nobody is on my side" ~LoTR

Back to Top
JimJams View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 01:27
Originally posted by Mandarins31 Mandarins31 wrote:

 
To come back to the subject, JimJams, the thing about the roundings down really had to be updated. And about the critical hit chance, it depends on def stack, but Also on attacking power. The higher the both are, the higher the critical hit chance is... that also means that it will rarely aply to "casual attacks" even if def stack is big. So this change here doesnt change anything for usual use of armies, so from what you are talking about, i see your problem is much about the already present unbalance def/attk and not something brought by this update.
 

Yes, you are right, it is not the changes, it was already present...
Back to Top
Bonaparta View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09 Mar 2012 at 04:20
This update gave cavalry it's reigning status again. The casualty reports after this update changed significantly. On some tourney squares there were combats that favored the defender in 2:1 ratio over many many battles . That is now gone and we again see that attackers have huge advantages over defenders and cavalry is the reason. 
To restore some kind of balance I propose that production times for units change. The game should reflect exact EXP values of the units. Basic spear unit should take 4 times less time to train as advanced cavalry. Even so the attacker would still have advantage but much less.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 8>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.