Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Last rant about mixed up priorities

Expand Messages
  • barryem
    ... I didn t really notice any difference in infantry v infantry battles except when one is defending a city. I wonder if it might be possible that some other
    Message 1 of 56 , Dec 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In empire-deluxe@yahoogroups.com, "generalerror404"
      <gyoung1@r...> wrote:
      >
      > I am 98% certain that the pseudo random number generator and odds
      > generator match 50:50 odds for infantry verses infantry battles. I
      > am reasonably sure that the battle tests that I ran during beta
      > testing still apply and that EDIE odds are identical to those in
      > ED3.12.

      I didn't really notice any difference in infantry v infantry battles
      except when one is defending a city.

      I wonder if it might be possible that some other factor is at play
      here. For example, could the loss of comabat efficiency be greater
      in the new version after losing a battle or two. That does seem to
      be the case although I'm not confident about that. I've had games in
      ED where a whole transport full of infantry couldn't defeat a city
      attacking directly from the transport but those aren't common. It
      does seem much more common in EDIE.

      That wouldn't account for defenders of a city having less chance of
      success but could there be other differences of that kind that
      could? In that case, even though the code doing the calculations is
      the same the data it's using might be different. This is just
      speculation on my part. It occurred to me as I was writing the
      paragraph above.

      Barry
    • Arnold Larson
      The two garrison units save the city 7 out of 8 because 6 out of 8 they kill the potential attacker and of the remaining 2, 1 does not succeed in taking the
      Message 56 of 56 , Dec 9, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        The two garrison units 'save' the city 7 out of 8 because 6 out of 8 they
        kill the potential attacker and of the remaining 2, 1 does not succeed in
        taking the city in its turn.

        3.11b is installed from my original floppy disks and patched to the latest.

        The battle odds seem the same between 3.11 and EDIE to me. I will admit
        that my comments on the garrison situation are theoretical because I would
        not typically leave that many units in a city. Better to use them on the
        offensive.

        Arne

        PS. I am an engineer well trained in statistical analysis, but if the
        situation being analyzed is not clearly understood, you can not get the
        right result.

        >From: "barryem" <barryem@...>
        >Reply-To: empire-deluxe@yahoogroups.com
        >To: empire-deluxe@yahoogroups.com
        >Subject: [empire-deluxe] Re: Last rant about mixed up priorities
        >Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2004 04:07:11 -0000
        >
        >
        >
        >--- In empire-deluxe@yahoogroups.com, "Arnold Larson"
        ><adastra1960@h...> wrote:
        > > It was clear enough to me. Obviously you 'defend' the city by
        >attacking the
        > > unit next to the city before it gets to attack you. My test with
        >version
        > > 3.11b was 36 infantry in cities attacking infantry when they were
        >moved next
        > > to the city. It turned out exactly 50%. Your results should vary
        >only
        > > slightly.
        >
        >Well, that is the scenario I was talking about. Were you actually
        >using 3.11b itself or EDIE in 3.1 mode?
        >
        > > Having more than one unit in the city as you suggested you actually
        >did will
        > > significantly change the odds of saving the city. Two garrison
        >units should
        > > 'save' the city 7 times out of 8.
        >
        >It isn't enough protection in EDIE. And where do you get those
        >odds? It seems to me (and I admit I'm no statistician) that if
        >having one defender gives 1:1 odds, having two would give 3:1. What
        >am I missing?
        >
        >Barry
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.