I lost a CA 51 attk (GG, H Castle, inf, galleon fleet support) vs Arabs AA24.
What was your worst upest AI or MP?
What ratio will gurantee a win?
I've lost L 4.5 to an L 1.5, that's 3 to 1...
I've lost H 2 to barbs .5 that's 4 to 1...
I lost a CA 51 attk (GG, H Castle, inf, galleon fleet support) vs Arabs AA24.
What was your worst upest AI or MP?
What ratio will gurantee a win?
I've lost L 4.5 to an L 1.5, that's 3 to 1...
I've lost H 2 to barbs .5 that's 4 to 1...
I lost an injured horse army to an injured warrior unit before. It was something like 4.5 vs 0.67.
Yup I think I had that too fairly recently... vs Mawpawk i think..
I also failed to get over run on a vet HA (9) vs a warrior (1 on a hill) i think that was also a mawpawk game.. I guess he has some sort of psychic power..
You didn't have massively overwhelming odds there anyway, only slightly more than 3 to 1. Horses only have 2 hitpoints so I'm wary attacking weak stuff with thema anyway, especially if they're injured.Originally Posted by johnfeddersen
The only guaranteed win is overrun.
In my experience, cats are kinda flaky. I'm more of a dog guy anyway.
Lost inf tank army to a non vet pike army b4, 60 to 18 so it was a little over a 3-1. Ive lost pleny of 18 to 9's as well. Its usually not the fact you lose these battles its the timing of the loss. I usually lose them when Ive had a really bad start and the moron lets me stick around and I fight my way all the way back to get something to attack him with and then bam I lose a rediculous battle killing any hopes of winning that game.
So with intent to win Domination, is the Oracle the only Wonder for a GB (if you don't need him for an emergency)?
This levels the unpredictability...
Without Oracle, do you stop attacking if the first battle is an upset? I've lost 7 to 8 army units to one AA... as upsets lead to defender GG.
Thrasher,
You always have the logical answers...
I'm guessing you're referring to GOTW--Oracle works much better in single player. If I'm English or get Monarchy off the English, I'm going with Sam's Castle.
Yup. Samurai Castle is fantastic. If it ever gets obsoleted, you just weren't attacking early enough (or maybe you built it too late). It gives you a huge combat boost for ages. Best wonder in the game (along with a couple others).
I've found oracle to be a massive pian in multiplayer because it doesn't give you the option to attack and lose against your opponent. So if you have 3 legion armies stacked and it tells you the first one will lose instead of having the option to lose and injure them then attack with the next it ends your turn and then turns your opponent into a red cross!
Yeah, can be a mixed blessing. Particularly good though if your gold starved and don't have much, but on the other hand, If you're unit rich and want to wear them down it's a pain, You can usually get the upset eventually though, unless it's plain broken with the Red X
I used to really like the Oracle in FFA because I could just run around attacking any city I saw. I've only had the red X twice in all my games. A pile of legions isn't really a great call if you have the Oracle and need to beat archer armies. It's better to use catapults or something that has better odds. Then you're in great shape because you don't have to worry about losing 18-12 and if you get them down to single units, you can attack with your own archer army or whatever.
Another thing with oracle I don't like is that I feel I have to risk the injured warrior against a barb to see if it's working. If it dies then fair enough it's obsolete but If I get warned I want to attack it again next turn still injured because I feel I wasted a turn. Spent 5 turns once attacking without healing and being prevented from doing so just to not "lose another turn!" Think it healed too...
Am I right in thinking an injured army will heal if oracle says no, but a single unit wont?
I don't think it ever heals but not 100%. Your turn is the attempt as far as I'm aware? I've been wrong before though!
I definitely had my army heal automatically after the Oracle denies an attack. But I am not sure if that always happens to armies or if it is an inconsistent side-effect. Haven't played the Egyptians in a while.
Your single unit does not heal after the Oracle denies an attack.
Too bad the Oracle is so buggy in MP.
My observation is that I heal when denied an attack on a city but not when attacking a barb. Of course I typically use armies when attacking a city and single units when attacking a barb. Armies don't really lose attacking barbs anyway. So it could be one or the other.
And yes, you do heal all the way and it has worked consistently for me when attacking cities. It's pretty great when taking on an early AI and your horse army gets wounded. You don't have to decide between healing or attacking. The Oracle makes the best decision for you.
This is a MP question. But to use GOTW as an example...
Since you can replay GOTW, I noticed that the battle results can change with the same units in the same turn/year. You can win unharmed, lose or win wounded.
I have found that if I attack first before any other action (open city, change workers move units etc.), that my chance of winning unharmed is the most common result.
Is this an experience in MP or have I just been experiencing inductive good luck...?
I'm pretty sure it's only a perception you have.
only mechanism for that i can think of is the one where previous battle effects next battle (to slightly discourage chains of upsets) if that is the case then first battle might involve a reset of those odds to normal while later ones can be a bit weird if you win a previous upset battle... or someone else does.
But you'd still have the normal odds of getting the normal result then.
I lost 112 to 36 before my MI army (walls,vet, and certain upgrade) cant remember it was a while ago to his vet artillery unit, not army.
What did you counter with? Archer? ;-)
ha i remeber playing against emorgs, and watched as my pikeman tore his bomber from the skies
I just lost 18 to 6 as Arabs. Horsemen army with infiltration against England single archer started on island so it kind of sucked.
3-1 odds are nothing.
According to our hit point theory you only have a 60% chance of winning that one, so it's not as big an upset as you think. Still annoying though.
True, but that doesn't necessarily tell the whole story, even if we've got it right. There's that video of Sid talking about battle odds in which he reveals that you have better odds fighting 18-6 than you do 3-1.
In my experience, 18-6 hardly ever loses. That to me is a huge upset. No matter what we came up with in terms of the math, I do not remember losing that one often (not even close to 40% of the time).
This is what Sid was talking about. It's psychologically easier to handle losing 3-1 than it is to lose 18-6.
The fact remains that overrun is the only guaranteed victory. You could lose 45-7. You could lose 150-24.
I had an artillery army with BS support lose to a single MI unit before.
110-16? That is just shy of overrun.
Lol with me it might as well be a 5% chance of winning, I have very bad luck especially in poker.
2 vs 1 is guaranteed victory from 4000 BC to 2100 BC (probably to 2000 BC - i never lost at 2000 BC; except militia vs barbs). The same: WA vs Archer 3 vs 6 = 100% chances to lose (but wounded HA vs Archer 4.5 vs 8 = ~5-10% chances to win, and on Chieftain H vs W 4 vs 2.5 = ~70-75% chances to win).
16 x 7 = 112
I know this is true when attacking barbs. Is it true for other battles? Will a 2 strength horseman always beat a 1 strength warrior in 2500 BC?
I remember Scottie saying the 2:1 guarantee applied to all pre-2000 BC battles.
It is just barbs that it applies to and not in a militia vs barb fight. I had a militia defending a city at 2800 lose and destroy my city. I have seen plenty of 2-1 battles being won by the 1 pre 2000 bc.
4.5 regularly loses to 2.5
Horses 2 v warrior 1 can lose
horses 2 vs horses 1 can lose.
I have even seen a vet horse 3 lose to a non vet horse 1 before 2000.
This seems right to me, but I can't swear to it.
I know (pre 2000BC) I lost wounded 1.5 vet H to .05 Barb, becuase I nearly hit the flat screen with the controler.
It would have been a very costly day!
I needed the gold and it would take 5-10 turns to get another unit there. Which I did, because I was so pissed!
That's 3 to 1 odds, pre 2000BC.
I don't remember ever lossing 1.5 vet W to Barbs though... But many times 1.0 wounded vet W.
Last edited by johnfeddersen; 02-01-2012 at 07:10 PM.
Yes, attacking with a wounded unit increases the odds that you can lose as long as you do not have overrun.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote