Fighting the same troop types

[Okie]

I find that when ever there is a battle with the same troop types on both sides that the computer will pick one to be better then the other instead of the fights being really random. Has anyone else knoticed this and how would we get a fix for this BUG?? Okie

[TheGrayMouser]

I find that when ever there is a battle with the same troop types on both sides that the computer will pick one to be better then the other instead of the fights being really random. Has anyone else knoticed this and how would we get a fix for this BUG?? Okie

If the troops are truly equal ie same net POA, same quality then the ramdom odds are reeally more noticable: 36% chance to win and a 36% to lose !

[Okie]

I'm talking 60-75% more likely for one side to win fights! At least thats what I've found, sometimes me sometime the other guy. Just doesn't seem right?? Not random enough!

[Turk1964]

Now i will wade in with my 2 bobs worth here and agree with Okie.With same side armies the dice generation definetly favours one side over another. You can have turn after turn of absaloute rubbish dice while your opponent will have very good dice indeed. I will say that eventually it will turn to favour the other player but usually to late.Ive played over 2000 games and i have noticed there is definetly favour shown by dice generation. Personally i think the games engine just makes the results to random one way or the other.Okie i really think nothing will change even in the new FOG,not at first anyway.So really we just have to grin and bear it.

[Okie]

Thanks for the reply, I was hoping there could be a fix. But o-well. Okie

[TheGrayMouser]

There no fix because theres nothing to "fix" when combat odds are 36% to win 36% to lose and 28% to tie.... in any given combat by equal troops

The best way to see this is to create a scenario in the editor , line up 20 troops vs 20 enemy (all eactly the same) and engage in impact combat

Study how many combats fall in to wins losses and draws ( please note YOUR NOT looking for mal effects of losing like being disrupted etc as those are contingient on additional dice rolls) Simply note how many wins and losses and ties each side took ( the def of winning is rolling more hits than the opponent etc.) You generally will see results fall within the 36 36 28 bracket. And thats with only a small sampling ie 20 BG's vs 20

If you are suggesting the random # generator algorithms are wrong, youd better be prepared to provide slitherine with 10's of thousands of samples to prove it

[Turk1964]

Yep thats the response i thought someone would come up with and sorry but it does favour one side over the other simply because thats the way its generated.Yes i know it wont be fixed as it isnt seen as a problem. We are looking at new players here who havent got a grasp on whats going on and they will see itas one sided and lose interest in same side battles.There is nothing even about this game and its all about deployment to take advantage away.The luck factor is more in some games than others and that is a fact.Yes it may even out but usually to late. Good players deploy accordingly to take luck out of the game and it takes awhile to get good at this game and some players simply lose interest after losing time after time due to dodgy dice generation. Ofcoarse you arnt going to sit down and record every game and yes players tend to remember bad dice more than good,but it does happen and thats a fact.

[TheGrayMouser]

Yep thats the response i thought someone would come up with and sorry but it does favour one side over the other simply because thats the way its generated.Yes i know it wont be fixed as it isnt seen as a problem. We are looking at new players here who havent got a grasp on whats going on and they will see itas one sided and lose interest in same side battles.There is nothing even about this game and its all about deployment to take advantage away.The luck factor is more in some games than others and that is a fact.Yes it may even out but usually to late. Good players deploy accordingly to take luck out of the game and it takes awhile to get good at this game and some players simply lose interest after losing time after time due to dodgy dice generation. Ofcoarse you arnt going to sit down and record every game and yes players tend to remember bad dice more than good,but it does happen and thats a fact.

I guess I dont get what you mean, if the game is truly rolling random it cant "favour a side". Are you suggesting the program choses side A over side B at the beginning of a battle and rolls better accordingly thru-out that game?
Obvioulsy you cant be suggesting the latter , so you must be suggesting the former
What do you offer as a suggestion to change this(the truly random dice rolls)? Make it random with a bias to even it out ? That paradoxically changes it back to the latter....

BTW I believe many players dont pay attention to the die rolls NEARLY as much as they think they do, they see the results. I have been playing long enough I really dont care if I "won" a combat 3-2 or lost 1-3 . All I care about is: did I cause a cohesion hit or NOT suffer one ( or take really high % casualties) This is how I judge if a combat was good or bad. I think players not getting the results they think they should get(cohesion loss inflicted or recieved, which are additional dice rolls with a ton of additional modifiers) maybe are blinded that the actual combat dice do average out even in a single game..
When is it ever a good Idea to bet you favouite body part on 36% win or lose odds !

We are discussing average troops vs the SAME type of average troop. I have heard others express how much they feel AVERAGE knights suck! They dont really but they tend to have very volatile combats where one side collapses quite rapidly( and thus I suppose perpetuate the argument the game is too random?) . The reason why is if you lose to another average Knight(36 % chance to lose!) you suffer a cohesion test penalty for losing to lancers! Same thing with Impact vs Impact troops. The apparent "wildenesss' of the dice is really the effects of losing with cohesion test modifier penalties.

"Good players deploy accordingly to take luck out of the game and it takes awhile to get good at this game "
Hmm isnt that how Alexander won at Gaugemela, his deployment? Also Hannibal at Cannae?

[Turk1964]

Gday TGM.
Is luck a factor or not?Can dice appear more one sided or not? The answer is yes. Can it be fixed ,probably not.To the average player there appears to be bias toward one side in same side armies. Ive seen it enough to recognise it and if i were to sit down and write every single combat it would no doubt show this. But as i have said it will change to suit the other side at some point.Im not imagining it and admit there is no easy solution but i feel it does happen.The average player doesnt understand cohesion tests as it is another dice roll that you dont see unless you bring up the required screen which is very annoying to leave there.This can be a problem aswell as ive seen Troops out of command radius not lose cohesion or anarchy charge and those within command radius do the opposite.There is a problem and surely im not the only one to see it. Dont get me wrong i love this game but the results can be very very bias . Sorry TGM i disagree with you,but thats just my opinion.