• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Imbalance between Military Strength

ChimaeraW

New Member
Hi, All Players,

Does anyone of you feel that your soldiers are not as powerful as the enemy's same-age soldiers, even when both have the same attack and defence bonuses?

I have been feeling so, based upon my own experience and observation, and I truly do not see the usefulness of attack and defence boosts, even when they are higher than the enemy's.

Is the game deliberately designed to be so? I truly want to know. Otherwise, fighting combats in the game would be very unfair.

It is just I. Or, does any of you have the same feeling or experience?
 
Last edited:

xivarmy

Well-Known Member
Things are calculated the same for both. And more boost does always help - but the stronger the target is the harder it is to simply outboost them for the win.

Some potential reasons for your impressions:

- you're basing it on autobattle, and AI is stupid on both sides but in different ways (including also different depending on where the fight is happening). If your attack AI is more stupid than their defense AI in a particular situation, it can lead to a bad result.
- the higher your boost gets the less relative difference more boost makes: if you have 100% boost vs an unboosted target you demolish them. If you have 800% boost vs a 700% boost target, it's still a relatively fair fight that will be determined by matchup moreso than boost.
- In space ages you can get wild swings in battle luck depending on number of Keen Eye procs.
- Your attack for attacking army is higher than your defense for attacking army resulting in you hitting them hard but them also hitting you hard with not as much boost.
 

ChimaeraW

New Member
Hi, xivarmy,

No, I have never used Autobattle.

My attack and defence boosts are always higher than the enemy's; but the enemy's soldiers can still do the same level of damage to my soldiers.

Another problem is: The enemy's soldiers tend to target a single one until they killed it.

Another problem: The enemy's soldiers, the selfsame ones, for instance the mounted ones, seem to be able to move more spaces than mine.

I truly sigh every time when I see the imbalance. I have never played a game that causes me so much anguish in mind and heart.
 

ChimaeraW

New Member
Things are calculated the same for both. And more boost does always help - but the stronger the target is the harder it is to simply outboost them for the win.

Some potential reasons for your impressions:

- you're basing it on autobattle, and AI is stupid on both sides but in different ways (including also different depending on where the fight is happening). If your attack AI is more stupid than their defense AI in a particular situation, it can lead to a bad result.
- the higher your boost gets the less relative difference more boost makes: if you have 100% boost vs an unboosted target you demolish them. If you have 800% boost vs a 700% boost target, it's still a relatively fair fight that will be determined by matchup moreso than boost.
- In space ages you can get wild swings in battle luck depending on number of Keen Eye procs.
- Your attack for attacking army is higher than your defense for attacking army resulting in you hitting them hard but them also hitting you hard with not as much boost.
I truly doubt whether they were calculated in the same way for both sides of the battle.
 

xivarmy

Well-Known Member
Hi, xivarmy,

No, I have never used Autobattle.

My attack and defence boosts are always higher than the enemy's; but the enemy's soldiers can still do the same level of damage to my soldiers.

Another problem is: The enemy's soldiers tend to target a single one until they killed it.

Another problem: The enemy's soldiers, the selfsame ones, for instance the mounted ones, seem to be able to move more spaces than mine.

I truly sigh every time when I see the imbalance. I have never played a game that causes me so much anguish in mind and heart.
Yes, they gang up on your troops, you should be doing the same to theirs. Focusing fire to remove attackers.

No, they cannot move more spaces than yours over the same terrain - but if your side of the battlefield has more rough terrain that may seem to be the case.

It takes a large difference in attack/defense to reliably survive extra hits - a small edge in boost is not likely to make a particularly noticeable difference (i.e. you might take 3-6 instead of 4-6; but that could still roll 5 twice and kill your unit in two hits - it just has a slightly higher chance to survive to a 3rd - but just a chance).

I assure you, everything is calculated the same :)

Damage Calculation if you're interested:

AttackFinal = BaseAttack * (1+Boost/100) + Bonus Attack (from terrain/unit matchups etc)
DefenseFinal = BaseDefense * (1+Boost/100) + Bonus Defense

ADratio = AttackFinal/DefenseFinal

Damage RangeMin AD RatioMax AD Ratio
01-010.00000.2515
01-020.25200.3454
01-030.34600.4550
01-040.45540.5100
02-040.51090.5966
02-050.59770.7032
03-050.70330.7989
03-060.80040.9216
04-060.92341.1093
04-071.11071.2105
05-071.21281.6160
06-071.62081.6592
06-081.66402.2448
07-082.24962.9395
07-092.94503.3600
08-093.36675.9431
09-095.95569.3164
09-109.331618.9156
10-1018.96899,999.0000

Some gaps in that lookup table because it's determined by empirical testing and I didn't have a test case between one range's high and the next range's low.
 

Ironrooster

Well-Known Member
Since you can see the enemy units beforehand, pick your units that have an advantage over theirs.

Since you are manual battling there some things to use to your advantage.
Try to always have all your units engaged.
Who hits first is very important. Try to move your units so that you get the first hits in. This may mean not moving on your first turn or moving sideways so that enemy units move closer to yours.
Learn to use artillery and how to take out the enemy artillery.

Once you get the hang of it, manual battling gives you an advantage over the computer AI.
 

Xenosaur

Well-Known Member
This is a fascinating topic. I am hoping for a great discussion. Thanks to the OP for a great question.

In short - yes, there are multiple warfare AI designs in use in the game, and they all handle your army and attack and your play strategy differently. It's sometimes subtle (which is what INNO has hoped for - gradual strangling...), and sometimes not.

The AI for: Continent Map, GbG, PvP, GE - etc - ALL react differently to your various strength's, matchups, injury, battle decision, and predatory nature. It's extremely complex behind the covers, and uses a lot of probability to decide things. As you get wounded, at least in GbG, Inno has "amped" up the AI to become much more predatory to your wounded soldiers over the last 2 years of GBG.

All quietly of course, and it fits within their theme to "slow you down" in GbG.

Inno has quietly and somewhat stealthily added lots of power to the defense in GbG, specifically. In a word, they are all freshly "adaptive". It would be a great intellectual exercise to test this - for example, if you could take your same army, against the same defense, on the same terrain, in each of the venues. But we can't.

You can get the "texture" of your contention from playing in each of these venues (GE, GBG, GvG, etc.) pretty much as you've done though, and your assessment is spot on, IMHO.

As mentioned, you add attack and defense % boosts via event buildings, or potions, or other game items, but INNO's defense algorithm matches what you add with quiet reductions. It's as if you take a few steps forward, but the AI recognizes that, and retards some of the power you've purchased or obtained for your city. If your army is @ 1000 % attack, adding 18% in an event building seems like you've made a decent gain for 20 squares of spaces, but in reality - you can't feel it.

Mathematically, you get value. Theoretically, you get value. But practically? You're going to say - I see no difference.

In fact, add an "on demand" 50% attack boost (tavern boost + inventory attack potion), and you can barely see that in your results either, especially in mid-range ages or senior game ages. Why?

The AI will adapt to that against you. Balance. The game will not give you the upper hand.

No one's gonna tell you that of course, but they have. With people changing their cities to be pure attack, if they left the AI "the way it was when we started GbG and made no changes to allow it to float adaptively to anything you'd try to be able to BEST the game experience, the true cyborg armies that people have created would easily overrun the game...

and we can't have that.

The war AI (especially in GbG) is much smarter intrinsically. It's more predatory, intrinsically and... it really battles adaptively - they study what you're sending against them, and react to give you an experience so that you can say - that SHOULDN'T be happening.

But it is.
 
Last edited:

Dursland

Well-Known Member
Rogues are key. 1 normal unit and 7 rogues means (usually) that you can take 7 free hits before you start taking damage. And untransformed rogues can do a lot of damage too!

I have 130% attack and 95% defense in HMA. I'm not struggling much, in fact doing better than I was in EMA with similar boost. If I had traz and rogues I would be demolishing everything lol.
 

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
As mentioned, you add attack and defense % boosts via event buildings, or potions, or other game items, but INNO's defense algorithm matches what you add with quiet reductions. It's as if you take a few steps forward, but the AI recognizes that, and retards some of the power you've purchased or obtained for your city.
This has been theorized many times over the years (usually by newer players, I'm surprised to see it stated by a more experienced (I think) player. If it were ever proven to be true, I would immediately stop playing this game. As far as I have seen in 7+ years of playing, it is not true. I think it's assumed by less knowledgeable players because they add a little boost and expect a big difference. Why a more experienced player would believe it, I have no idea.
In fact, add an "on demand" 50% attack boost (tavern boost + inventory attack potion), and you can barely see that in your results either, especially in mid-range ages or senior game ages. Why?

The AI will adapt to that against you. Balance. The game will not give you the upper hand.
No, it's not because the AI will adapt against you. It's because a 50% attack boost (on the base attack value, remember) isn't nearly as noticeable when added to 500% as it is when it's added to 10%.
No one's gonna tell you that of course, but they have.
No one's gonna tell you that because it isn't true.
With people changing their cities to be pure attack, if they left the AI "the way it was when we started GbG and made no changes to allow it to float adaptively to anything you'd try to be able to BEST the game experience, the true cyborg armies that people have created would easily overrun the game...
Ummm...have you seen the GBG discussions????? Lots of complaints about people easily overrunning the game there. Don't know how you could have missed that.
Maybe read @xivarmy's posts here, he's nailing the response to the OP.
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
As mentioned, you add attack and defense % boosts via event buildings, or potions, or other game items, but INNO's defense algorithm matches what you add with quiet reductions. It's as if you take a few steps forward, but the AI recognizes that, and retards some of the power you've purchased or obtained for your city. If your army is @ 1000 % attack, adding 18% in an event building seems like you've made a decent gain for 20 squares of spaces, but in reality - you can't feel it.

Mathematically, you get value. Theoretically, you get value. But practically? You're going to say - I see no difference.
Sorry, this is a bunch of malarkey to put it politely.

When my main city was in IA my attacking army A/D was 200%/100% give or take. At that time the best that I could do while autobattling in GBG was 20 attrition. Since that time my A/D has increased to 1800/1300, I'm in SAV, and autobattling to 100 is a piece of cake. You are looking at the impact of small increases in attack boost. Look at the bigger picture. There is no way that the INNO AI is "matching" these increases with "quiet reductions".
 

Ebeondi Asi

Well-Known Member
A problem to answer as the OP here is not stating what Era he is in nor his boost stats. (I'm in SAJM A2600% D2700% average across three Worlds and my AO is at 110 in all three)
One point I can make is when a player moves up an Era, his boost seems less effective. This happens every move up an era to some degree.
Also in general, with some exceptions, every era Troops are different. There are usually one great troop. one pretty good troop two so so and one that plain stinks. (this for a good reason, so the opponent army varies in quality. and one way Inno can 'adjust' what a player faces, by making the opponents have weaker or stronger majority a greater or lesser percent of the time.) (and I agree Inno does fool around with groups of players! Experimenting with fighting).

My next comment is about Rogues. If a player is using first to move troops with Rogues that is a mistake. Rogues do best with troops that move after the opponents scores hits. Using troops that move first usually is a total loss with autobattle.

And the final comment is for more advanced players: get your Arctic Orangery up.. up high, as high as you can. AO needs to be sky high to be happy camper. Like well over level 100 The Arctic Orangery is you best bet in Space ages vs Keen Eye
 
Last edited:

xivarmy

Well-Known Member
A problem to answer as the OP here is not stating what Era he is in nor his boost stats. (I'm in SAJM A2600% D2700% average across three Worlds and my AO is at 110 in all three)
One point I can make is when a player moves up an Era, his boost seems less effective. This happens every move up an era to some degree.
Also in general, with some exceptions, every era Troops are different. There are usually one great troop. one pretty good troop two so so and one that plain stinks. (this for a good reason, so the opponent army varies in quality. and one way Inno can 'adjust' what a player faces, by making the opponents have weaker or stronger majority a greater or lesser percent of the time.) (and I agree Inno does fool around with groups of players! Experimenting with fighting).

My next comment is about Rogues. If a player is using first to move troops with Rogues that is a mistake. Rogues do best with troops that move after the opponents scores hits. Using troops that move first usually is a total loss with autobattle.

And the final comment is for more advanced players: get your Arctic Orangery up.. up high, as high as you can. AO needs to be sky high to be happy camper. Like well over level 100 The Arctic Orangery is you best bet in Space ages vs Keen Eye

I'll have to disagree on each age-up being harder than the last. They each have their own character - sometimes it's harder in some respects, sometimes it's easier in some respects. Some of the ones people claim the easiest (FE) I don't even find particularly favorable to how I like to play - they're generally labelled easiest because there's the least to think about, not necessarily because of their limits or requirements.

When it comes to GE, each age up does mean you face more boost - so in that sense they're harder (though I still think Contemporary Era is easier than everything that comes before it with in-age troops, despite the increasing boosts you face - AAV + rogues is just that crazy-powerful).
 

ChimaeraW

New Member
This is a fascinating topic. I am hoping for a great discussion. Thanks to the OP for a great question.

In short - yes, there are multiple warfare AI designs in use in the game, and they all handle your army and attack and your play strategy differently. It's sometimes subtle (which is what INNO has hoped for - gradual strangling...), and sometimes not.

The AI for: Continent Map, GbG, PvP, GE - etc - ALL react differently to your various strength's, matchups, injury, battle decision, and predatory nature. It's extremely complex behind the covers, and uses a lot of probability to decide things. As you get wounded, at least in GbG, Inno has "amped" up the AI to become much more predatory to your wounded soldiers over the last 2 years of GBG.

All quietly of course, and it fits within their theme to "slow you down" in GbG.

Inno has quietly and somewhat stealthily added lots of power to the defense in GbG, specifically. In a word, they are all freshly "adaptive". It would be a great intellectual exercise to test this - for example, if you could take your same army, against the same defense, on the same terrain, in each of the venues. But we can't.

You can get the "texture" of your contention from playing in each of these venues (GE, GBG, GvG, etc.) pretty much as you've done though, and your assessment is spot on, IMHO.

As mentioned, you add attack and defense % boosts via event buildings, or potions, or other game items, but INNO's defense algorithm matches what you add with quiet reductions. It's as if you take a few steps forward, but the AI recognizes that, and retards some of the power you've purchased or obtained for your city. If your army is @ 1000 % attack, adding 18% in an event building seems like you've made a decent gain for 20 squares of spaces, but in reality - you can't feel it.

Mathematically, you get value. Theoretically, you get value. But practically? You're going to say - I see no difference.

In fact, add an "on demand" 50% attack boost (tavern boost + inventory attack potion), and you can barely see that in your results either, especially in mid-range ages or senior game ages. Why?

The AI will adapt to that against you. Balance. The game will not give you the upper hand.

No one's gonna tell you that of course, but they have. With people changing their cities to be pure attack, if they left the AI "the way it was when we started GbG and made no changes to allow it to float adaptively to anything you'd try to be able to BEST the game experience, the true cyborg armies that people have created would easily overrun the game...

and we can't have that.

The war AI (especially in GbG) is much smarter intrinsically. It's more predatory, intrinsically and... it really battles adaptively - they study what you're sending against them, and react to give you an experience so that you can say - that SHOULDN'T be happening.

But it is.
Hi, Xerosaur,

Thank you very much for the detailed insight.

I wonder how you know so much about the design of the game.

Yes, I knew that I was playing against AI; but have had never thought that machine learning was in place to learn of my strategies and tactics.
 

ChimaeraW

New Member
A problem to answer as the OP here is not stating what Era he is in nor his boost stats. (I'm in SAJM A2600% D2700% average across three Worlds and my AO is at 110 in all three)
One point I can make is when a player moves up an Era, his boost seems less effective. This happens every move up an era to some degree.
Also in general, with some exceptions, every era Troops are different. There are usually one great troop. one pretty good troop two so so and one that plain stinks. (this for a good reason, so the opponent army varies in quality. and one way Inno can 'adjust' what a player faces, by making the opponents have weaker or stronger majority a greater or lesser percent of the time.) (and I agree Inno does fool around with groups of players! Experimenting with fighting).

My next comment is about Rogues. If a player is using first to move troops with Rogues that is a mistake. Rogues do best with troops that move after the opponents scores hits. Using troops that move first usually is a total loss with autobattle.

And the final comment is for more advanced players: get your Arctic Orangery up.. up high, as high as you can. AO needs to be sky high to be happy camper. Like well over level 100 The Arctic Orangery is you best bet in Space ages vs Keen Eye
Hi, Asi,

In fact, I also feel the same that the boosts would become less effective as I move up an age.

I usually use Rogues to cancel off the first attacks by the enemy's ranged, artillery, or mounted units.

Yes, I also find the Orangery useful, although I still do not have constructed it yet.
 

ChimaeraW

New Member
Rogues are key. 1 normal unit and 7 rogues means (usually) that you can take 7 free hits before you start taking damage. And untransformed rogues can do a lot of damage too!

I have 130% attack and 95% defense in HMA. I'm not struggling much, in fact doing better than I was in EMA with similar boost. If I had traz and rogues I would be demolishing everything lol.
Hi, Dursland,

Yes, I agree with you on the power of the Rogues.

But the problem is that usually Rogues are unattacked, unless you have many Rogue Dens - otherwise, you will somehow keep losing them. This is not good.
 

xivarmy

Well-Known Member
Hi, Dursland,

Yes, I agree with you on the power of the Rogues.

But the problem is that usually Rogues are unattacked, unless you have many Rogue Dens - otherwise, you will somehow keep losing them. This is not good.
You can make many unattached rogues with the GB Alcatraz and a single rogue hideout/den. It chooses a barracks you have built in your city and makes units that that barracks produces. So if a hideout is your only barracks, traz makes all rogues.
 

Pericles the Lion

Well-Known Member
Hi, Xerosaur,

Thank you very much for the detailed insight.

I wonder how you know so much about the design of the game.

Yes, I knew that I was playing against AI; but have had never thought that machine learning was in place to learn of my strategies and tactics.
Hello C. My main city is on T so I paid your city a visit. If you are of the mind to put the theory of "AI Learning" to the test, it would be a snap for you considering your city's layout. The next time that you plan on doing some battling (it matters not where) simply remove the one section of road that connects your Town Hall to the rest of your city. This will deactivate all of your attack boosts. If the "Learning" theory is correct you should see no noticeable difference in your battle results. Your attack boosts will be zero and the AI should reduce its level of difficulty to compensate. I wager that the AI will not adjust and you will find it harder to battle. After you test, don't forget to replace the road section.

IMO, the reason that you have not seen an appreciable difference in battle success as you added boosts is because you have aged up to Modern Era with, and I am guessing here, boosts for your attacking army in the 200%/100% range (which is less than I have in any of my 4 Iron Age cities).
 

Sharmon the Impaler

Well-Known Member
I am in SAJM with 2701/1648 and it most definitely nerfs your attack a little each time. If I had my boost now back in FE I would have just parked there and fed off of GbG :)
 

xivarmy

Well-Known Member
I am in SAJM with 2701/1648 and it most definitely nerfs your attack a little each time. If I had my boost now back in FE I would have just parked there and fed off of GbG :)
SAJM is actually a bit of an oddity in that it slanted defensively more than every previous era (every unit has base attack < base defense).

Given that most people are built with attack >> defense, this would be a nerf to their peak attrition abilities as they're built to "kill before they hit me". If you had defense >> attack, then SAJM might actually be an upgrade in terms of how much attrition you handle :) (of course being built with defense >> attack might be a downgrade still over being built attack >> defense).

Personally I find it interesting :) And a minor upgrade over SAV because stats aside, flyers are great again without Power Shot to worry about.

Era changes where I find things get easier than the previous (ignoring above-age units, because duh):

Industrial - because units have more to differentiate them, it's easier to exploit matchups
Postmodern Era - because contact!
Contemporary Era - because the contact! unit no longer has to fear artillery
Oceanic Future - because you gain mortar, a proper flyer, a great contact! unit - you just have to pick which to use when
Virtual Future - because the mortar unit no longer needs to fear a flyer
Space Age Venus - because asteroid belt had no good answer for similarly-boosted nailstorms on defense

Not mentioned but some may feel:
Future Era - because hover tanks vs everything has got to be the most brainless battling in the game :p (ignore the problem of what to do with hover tanks on defense at similar boost)
 

Ebeondi Asi

Well-Known Member
The key to fighting Hover Tanks is to.... Wait.
Wait is the key. (If you move even one space forward, the Hovers can hit you)
If you go first.. Do not move at all. let the Hovers roll out. Half will become visible (usually) so you can attack those from a distance (and if you are using Troops that can move far, you will maybe get to hit a few that moved too close) . Now you got all yours left, and only half of the original enemy. Clean it up. Fight done.
If you used troops that cannot move/shoot far. this plan does not work
 
Top