Re: [empire-deluxe] Patch 3.512 (was: some Great Graphics)
- On 10 Sep 2003 , Steven Woodcock wrote about Re: [empire-deluxe]
Patch 3.512 (wa:
>> I think you're taking what I said out of context.I personally have no idea what the "combat attack ratio" is for any
>> I said the better general won't lose as many units, and I stand by
>> If you are ruthlessly sacrificing your units into
>> out-of-range airplane attacks and futile attacks against battleships
>> you're not playing very well, frankly. Same goes if you let your
>> trannies get caught loaded a lot.
>You already get a bad combat attackratio when you're attacking land
>units with aircraft (exceptofr BO-AR, obviously), and that is exactly
>the kind of confrontation you could get into in the situation I
>described. I don't see how that makes one a bad general.
having not bothered to study it as deeply as some have. What's a BO-AR?
>> I think the better player balances his production efficiency withorganizer was trying to measure.
>> his unit production and unit loss--and that's what the event
>That's not what you measure with # of units lost. This dependsPlease pay attention to what I said was measured, a VARIETY of DIFFERENT
>entirely on the random generator and the chances you have when
>entering combat - if you enter lots of combats with good odds (such
>as attacking TR), you'll lose less units as if you accept worse odds.
statistics. You're focusing
on one of many.
Over time the RNG is balanced (hard to believe much of the time, I'll
grant), so that's not really a factor. I guess
it is important that it be balanced when there is a major confrontation--the
"battle that decides the war"--but those
are hard to predict.
>Now I agree in the real world this is certainly the mark of a goodI'm astonished by how many players do this.
>general, but it doesn't necessarily help you win empire games if you
>already need to retire cities to keep up your prod. eff.
>If you have a choice of either not producing a unit, or producing a unitthat
>comes up quickly to the the front and is lost quickly there, it makesThat's actually what I do. While this will increase your unit losses it
>sense to maybe produce fighters and smash them against enemy cities.
>It'll hurt the enemy more than producing nothing.
will ALSO decrease his unit production and
overall efficiency--two of the other factors measured in the Tacticon
tourneys. It works out to the benefit overall
of the better general.
>What does count is repairing units, but I repair far less units thanI forget--is there a stat for number of units repaired in the new
>I lose, because I incur most losses on land units and aircraft, which
>can rarely be repaired, so repairing is not a big factor re: unit
Empire? That could be interesting (though I tend to run
my units into the ground, I must admit).
- I have been playing with different styles of maintaining production.
I have tried keeping my production up by turning off production is
backwater cities. Consider the situation.
City Count 128, Units 451, Cities producing 37 [8+7+16+3+1+1+1],
Overall Production Efficiency 379%
By observation I see that I'm producing about 10 units per turn.
Turning on the production in ten cities will increase the cities
producing by 25% but will reduce overall production efficiency by
only 15% to 323%. The result is a net increase in production of 10%.
Turning on the production in all cities will increase the cities
producing by 3.45 times but will reduce overall production efficiency
by about 1/3 to 133%. The result is a net increase in production of
You can tweak this further.
Turning the production to 100 cities will increase the cities
producing to 2.7 times the original but will reduce overall
production efficiency by about 1/2 to 174%. The result is a net
increase in production of 24%.
I applied these calculations to other games that I played and the
results vary greatly. Sometimes you can maximumize production by
keeping production at 400%, sometimes you need to turn all cities on.
ED remains a great game with subtleties beyond comprehension.