Agree with HM; every calculation is a compromise on reality, and we're just modelling rather than simulating. This isn't Rome Total War (nor its successors), and for good reason: the Illy servers would simply choke if they were expected to process detailed simulations.

I'm one of those analyst/coder types, and I agree that fairly workable combat systems could be written on a napkin. However, I wonder what proportion of those business analysts could then refine the variables and 'run the numbers' to ensure good game balance while getting 95% of cases correct-ish, and code it to run in a few milliseconds in a safe transaction on a busy server.

Ideas can be expressed in a few minutes. Fitting those ideas into a game can take 10000 times longer.

Illy combat mechanics tend to be less responsive to "gimmicks" than those of many other MMORTS I've played (such as zerging with spears in Evony).  When a gimmick is discovered, as with the 10-10-10 armies seen in the last tournament, the developers are proactive about closing the loophole.

There is no one "guaranteed" strategy that will always win in Illy, and that makes the game far more interesting than many of those with the allegedly complex battle mechanics you profess to admire.

You are a relatively new player whose main understanding of battle mechanics seems to come from reading the wiki rather than from actual experience.  Perhaps you should build your cities and create armies, then employ them in a variety of tactical and strategic situations; this might allow you to come up with a more intelligent and articulate critique of the battle system.

I've met some of the devs, and they are pretty sharp people.  I'm pretty sure they can handle anything you might choose to dish out, although your motivation for doing so would be murky at best.

I think using battle calculators is great for many people, although it's not to my personal taste.  My comment was more in reference to the complexity of planning a campaign in Illy with regard to coordination of forces, choice of troop types to build in the first place and then deploy, use of Raid vs. Attack stratagem, decision to reinforce a city to Sally Forth vs. a siege rather than using repeated Raids, that sort of thing.  I think that these are the situations that can't really be captured by a battle calculator that reveal the depth of Illyriad gameplay.

My point was to encourage Gasterix to experiment with some of the complexities of actual troop use so that he could gain an appreciation for these factors, which in my mind outweigh the question of whether combat is all-at-once or round-based.  My intention was to encourage engagement with and enjoyment of the game as a gestalt, the whole being more than the sum of its parts.

And Gasterix, I do hope that you will stick around and do so.

Nope.  

And my initial reaction was that it was alliteration rather than rhyme.  However, I looked up the definition of rhyme, and it can include various kinds of phonetic similarity, including alliteration, so that shows me.

I actually like the fact that even small forces can damage huge amount of troops, which is by the way totally realistic.

Gasterix when you will gather some experience, you might change your mind about combat mechanic. No offence, but attacking with such small forces is really not relevant to large battles and especially not to alliance versus alliance battles...

 

Nicely put.

HonoredMule wrote: You need to understand the difference between simulating battle and modelling the results.

What is the difference between these two things?  Anyone?  Preferably without using math that will make my eyeballs bleed? 

- Drydenn

It's really a sliding scale, rather than being one or the other:

| REALITY --- SIMULATION --- GENERAL MODEL --- (no resemblance) |

i dont mind the current combat system, but i would like a longer combat system where you can reinforce a ongoing battle to help your friends. but thats a huge update which im sure wont come soon :P

I second that statement! 

Simulation was when you took a "model" (or models) and used it to represent a physical process (you add the time element).

Similar to the difference between a 'noun' and a 'verb'.

You model an airplane, you simulate flight.  You model soldiers, weapons, terrain, weather, emotions, strength, endurance, training, etc... you simulate battle.  Etc...

The detail of the simulation (ie. how many levels of models used, the complexity of the equations or the number of iterations required to obtain results) was irrelevant to the definition of a simulation.  Sometimes a simple model will give very accurate simulation results (example, the mathematical model F = G * m1 * m2 / r^2 works near perfectly and is used to simulate gravity very well despite it's simplicity).  Then there are things like global warming where we have many, many very detailed models that when put together do not simulate weather as perfectly.

I realize this definition doesn't help to explain what HM was trying to convey so it really won't help anyone in the context of this thread.  I believed that people felt they were learning something bigger in this thread and that didn't seem to be so.  Just because Illyriad uses a simple model that can simulate battle in one calculation doesn't mean it's not a simulation.

First: I think the combat mechanics are very simple. This is a choice by the devs. They could have made it more complex, but then it would require a lot more effort to code and require more server resources. It would also be harder to balance.

Second: Combat in Illy is deterministic. If you know all the factors (troop numbers, commander stats and terrain) there can always be only 1 result. There is no randomness. Many people like to be surprised. A bit of thrill here and there is good. For most Illy players, the lack of understanding is enough thrill. You can't really predict the outcome if you don't know how it works. If you do know how it works, then I suppose it might be boring to already know you're going to win or lose beforehand.

Personally I think there are many things that can be improved (and by improved I mean expanded) about the combat system, but I feel it should come after:

-magic being made useful

-trade v2

-faction AI

-pathfinding

-several annoying bugs that still aren't fixed (tavern for example still doesn't work!!!)

It's all about the priorities!

With the minor exception of the case where one is performing a sally forth from a besieged city from which one just got an accurate scout report on the encampment, the non-terrain variables in Illy PvP can be predicted but not known.