You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Rome: Total War Discussion
Moderated by Terikel Grayhair, General Sajaru, Awesome Eagle

Hop to:    
Welcome! You are not logged in. Please Login or Register.6 replies
Total War Heaven » Forums » Rome: Total War Discussion » How exactly is it decided who dies?
Bottom
Topic Subject:How exactly is it decided who dies?
Oolon Colluphid
Legionary
posted 19 June 2008 12:48 EDT (US)         
I mean, if the attack of one unit is higher than the defense of another, it may not kill someone with every blow. Also, a unit with an attack lower than another units defense, might still kill a number of men in this unit. How does that really work?

Also, in order for the shield not to count, do you need to attack straight from the left, or say at a certain angle of 45 or more...or something.

And how does the auntomically resolve battle thing work? Does it matter what type of units are pitted againt eachother or how well balanced the army is, or do all units just have a certain number defining for how much they count in automatic battle?
I'm kind of thinking it's the latter. I once attacked a Roman army in ym seleucid campaign. It had a number of urbans, but it was mostly an infantry army, slightly smaller in numbers than mine. My slightly bigger army, that was filled with something like 5 pikeman units, three of which silver shields, two unit cataphracts, to companion cavalries, one or two armoured elephants, some archers, possibly cretan etc.
Yet the game decided the ratio was 6:7 to my disadvantage.
I mean, what?
AuthorReplies:
mikecz
Legionary
posted 19 June 2008 20:53 EDT (US)     1 / 6       
I suspect you can thank Gary Gygax for the man-to-man battle resolution scheme. I think just about all combat games use something like the D&D rules, where the attacker "rolls" a D20 (or D30, 50, 100, whatever), adds it to his base attack, &, if the result equals or exceeds the defender's armor class, he's been hit. In RTW, it's not at all clear to me how many times the defender has to be successfully hit to die, since the average combatant only has 1 hit point (tho some elite units have 2 & family members can get up to around, what?, 10 hit points?)

Auto resolve is totally weird, especially in sea battles. I've lost battles where I had maybe a 5:3 advantage, & have won them with similar odds against me. The game does seem to put great faith "bonus vs. ..." idea. It's really obvious with, say horse archers vs. basic phalanx. If you have around equal number of UNITS of HA's vs. phalanx (the AI has quite a few more total men), the battle odds will be pretty skewed against you - but you should easily win the battle - probably even a heroic victory - maybe a man of the hour. ???? Doesn't make a lot of sense to me, either.
Oolon Colluphid
Legionary
posted 19 June 2008 21:14 EDT (US)     2 / 6       
Yeah. I was thinking in an ideal world..or well, game, it would make an estimate of the result of an automatic battle, based on the results of your previous manual battles.

Anyway, what's up with man of the Hour? I got two or so of them in my Julii campaign, right after I updated to 1.5. Since that I've played very nearly (short of the move from Capua to Rome) an entire Seleucid campaign, and I'm going for a while now with my German campaign, but I haven't had a single Man of the Hour since...
Smackus Maximus
Legionary
posted 20 June 2008 03:21 EDT (US)     3 / 6       
Man of the Hour is largely down to the ratio of family members to settlements owned.

For example;
If you have 10 settlements and only 2 family members, you are far more likely to get a man of the hour than if you have 10 settlements and 6 family members. How impressive your victory is also seems to have an impact on your chances, the more impressive you win the better your chances.

[This message has been edited by Smackus Maximus (edited 06-20-2008 @ 03:22 AM).]

Bones40
Legionary
posted 20 June 2008 03:55 EDT (US)     4 / 6       
This might be obvious, but just in case it's not, to get a Man of the Hour you need to be using an army with no general, just a captain.
Andalus
Legionary
posted 20 June 2008 07:11 EDT (US)     5 / 6       
And there has to be no more than 19 units in the stack, so there is room for the generals bodyguard.
SrJamesTyrrel
Legionary
posted 20 June 2008 08:12 EDT (US)     6 / 6       
if it's not dnd it's by percentages, which work similarly. the weird with either is that they have to rely on pseudorandom number generation with up to several thousand attacks being calculated simultaneously. As even a single calculation like this can take a bit of memory just to make it it anywhere near random, you can imagine that even a good computer back in 2004 would demand that these calculations x10,000 per second be a little bit less than that (uniform distribution of chance, i.e. almost the opposite of random), resulting in gameplay that is actually really predictable.

Essentially, although it is sorta based on "die rolls", you can charge generals against peasants an infinite number of times and though the laws of chance say that one in a million units of peasants will kill or rout the enemy general without a single loss, the game says otherwise .
You must be logged in to post messages.
Please login or register

Hop to:    

Total War Heaven | HeavenGames