Results 1 to 10 of 53

Thread: Battle System Research

Hybrid View

  1. #1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vecius View Post
    Theory 7 (I would LOVE a real proof on this one, then someone could have enough info to complete a battle simulator; this is currently my biggest dilema as I can't figure out exactly how this functions):
    A battlefield is always 5000 spaces long, with 2500 being the midpoint. Each unit starts Z distance away from the midpoint (in which direction depends upon wether the unit is attacking or defending), where Z=(unitRange/2) + 100

    Proof: Again, this is my major dilema that is keeping me from making a battle simulator, as I have not been able to confirm this is true; it only SEEMS to work for most situations I've tested. If you test one of any melee unit versus one of the same melee unit, both units reach each other in a single round, meaning that they are fairly close. All melee units have unit speeds over 100 (to cover the 200 distance between minimum range units at the start of battle), so all melee units reach each other in the first round. Ballistas do too, meaning that the total sum distance ballistas start apart cannot be more than the range of a single ballista plus two hundred. However, my big dilema comes from the fact that two catapaults actually take 2 rounds to get in range of each other, meaning that two things moving towards each other at 80 speed don't cover the 'buffer zone' in a single turn to end up in range of each other, so the buffer either has to be higher than 160 distance units, or some other strange system I haven't thought of defines how units are placed in the battlefield at the beginning of battle. OH and my 5000 total BF range is based upon the fact that defensive units all have 5000 range, and since I assume the can always hit everything (which is fairly obvious from looking at BRs) at any time, and that I don't think any unit can get over 2400 range.
    This is wrong. In city battles, the starting distance can be much less than 5000 if no traps, abatis and defensive trebuchet are involved.

    The report in OP in this thread supports <5000 assertion - just ignore rants of the OP.

    http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=25439

    It is possible that starting distance can be much greater than 5000 if traps, abatis and defensive trebuchet get wall range bonus.

    In my opinion, one of the bigger unknown is the contribution of the hero - probably affecting all aspects of the battle including range in some unknown factor with no published cold-hard numbers aside from hero attributes.

    Good luck.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celegans View Post
    This is wrong. In city battles, the starting distance can be much less than 5000 if no traps, abatis and defensive trebuchet are involved.

    The report in OP in this thread supports <5000 assertion - just ignore rants of the OP.

    http://bbs.evony.com/showthread.php?t=25439

    It is possible that starting distance can be much greater than 5000 if traps, abatis and defensive trebuchet get wall range bonus.

    In my opinion, one of the bigger unknown is the contribution of the hero - probably affecting all aspects of the battle including range in some unknown factor with no published cold-hard numbers aside from hero attributes.

    Good luck.

    I'm not seeing it. I agree that my theory on starting distances is almost certainly wrong, but that post doesn't prove it. The reason the defending archers didn't target the other archers isn't because they started too far away, it's that by my targetting theory, they see the ballistas as a more significant threat.

    Is it something else in there you saw? I am interested in seeing contradictions to my theories, theories are useless if they aren't correct, just don't see the one in that post.
    You load sixteen tons, what do you get
    Another day older and deeper in debt
    Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
    I owe my soul to the company store

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vecius View Post
    I'm not seeing it. I agree that my theory on starting distances is almost certainly wrong, but that post doesn't prove it. The reason the defending archers didn't target the other archers isn't because they started too far away, it's that by my targetting theory, they see the ballistas as a more significant threat.

    Is it something else in there you saw? I am interested in seeing contradictions to my theories, theories are useless if they aren't correct, just don't see the one in that post.
    The fight only lasted 3 rounds. I don't think this outcome would be possible if they started 5000 paces apart. Defending archers saw attacking ballista and attacking archers at the exact same spot at the start of the battle and decided that ballista was a bigger threat as you suggested.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celegans View Post
    The fight only lasted 3 rounds. I don't think this outcome would be possible if they started 5000 paces apart.
    I think the theory is just written confusingly, sorry. 5000 isn't the distance everything starts apart, it's just the maximum distance something CAN start apart, if it had 4800 base range (which nothing does); it's the size of the 'battle arena'. The distance each unit starts from the center is (baseRangeOfUnit/2) + 100, so the ballistas start 1400/2 + 100 = 800 units from the midpoint, so the ballistas on both sides start 1600 units apart, which, if they both move at least 100 on the first turn (which they will easily pass with HBR, even with HBR 0 they would) or have range extension from archery to extend their range far enough (or, as is true with most cases, both), they will still be in range of each other in the first round.

    (EDIT: According to the theory, I still don't have proof. My reason for it is that if you exercise a catapault vs another catapault, it takes them 2 turns to kill each other, so the first turn must have them too far apart still, while 1 ballist vs 1 ballist ends in the first round, meaning that the ballistas move 200 spaces closer on the first turn and can see each other, but the catapaults move 160 spaces closer but don't, so the buffer has to be something bigger than 160, or some other weird system.)
    Last edited by Vecius; 06-28-2009 at 10:13 PM.
    You load sixteen tons, what do you get
    Another day older and deeper in debt
    Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
    I owe my soul to the company store

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vecius View Post
    My reason for it is that if you exercise a catapault vs another catapault, it takes them 2 turns to kill each other, so the first turn must have them too far apart still, while 1 ballist vs 1 ballist ends in the first round, meaning that the ballistas move 200 spaces closer on the first turn and can see each other, but the catapaults move 160 spaces closer but don't, so the buffer has to be something bigger than 160, or some other weird system.)
    Yeah - I guess 1 catapult vs 1 catapult in 2 rounds is bizarre. Heck even battering ram vs battering ram ends in 1 round.

    Speaking of weird how about 1 catapult + 1 worker versus taking 2 rounds? Or 1 catapult + 1 battering ram versus taking 2 rounds?

    Here's one possibility. Catapult does not target any troops except for opposing worker and battering ram in round 1 - though it probably does target wall defenses. No need to claim weird starting distance by this assumption.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Richmond, BC, Canada
    Posts
    113

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celegans View Post
    Yeah - I guess 1 catapult vs 1 catapult in 2 rounds is bizarre. Heck even battering ram vs battering ram ends in 1 round.

    Speaking of weird how about 1 catapult + 1 worker versus taking 2 rounds? Or 1 catapult + 1 battering ram versus taking 2 rounds?

    Here's one possibility. Catapult does not target any troops except for opposing worker and battering ram in round 1 - though it probably does target wall defenses. No need to claim weird starting distance by this assumption.
    Hmm those are good points. I think what happens in 1 catapault + 1 worker vs 1 catapault is that the two catapaults move 160 closer on the first turn; but still aren't in range, so the defender catapault shoots the only thing it can see, the worker / battering ram. Then they move one step closer again, and now they do see each other so they double KO each other. Interesting though.

    And yeah, claiming there is a total distance of 5000 in the field IS pretty pointless, since you could technically say a battlefield is 1,000,000 spaces long with the midpoint at 500,000 and still get the same result. The reason I put that there is because I assume traps and abatis and etc. are counted as existing at the very far edge of the battlefield, but can still hit the whole battlefield, and since they have 5000 range, it wouldn't make sense to have 5001 or more range since TECHNICALLY, if a unit existed that had enough range to start outside the 5000 unit field, it may be outside targetting range of the traps and stuff (even though there isn't any possible way any unit could do that).
    Last edited by Vecius; 06-29-2009 at 12:01 AM.
    You load sixteen tons, what do you get
    Another day older and deeper in debt
    Saint Peter don't you call me 'cause I can't go
    I owe my soul to the company store

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Vecius View Post
    Hmm those are good points. I think what happens in 1 catapault + 1 worker vs 1 catapault is that the two catapaults move 160 closer on the first turn; but still aren't in range, so the defender catapault shoots the only thing it can see, the worker / battering ram. Then they move one step closer again, and now they do see each other so they double KO each other. Interesting though.
    Well - did you try 1 catapult + 1 warrior? Or archer or pikeman or other units? I ask because in those cases, battle lasts more than 2 rounds - i.e. catapults did not attack those other units in round 1 and did nothing obvious before killing each other in round 2.

    Here's another funny one. Try 2 catapults versus 2 catapults (3 rounds). Or 30 catapults versus 30 catapults (6 rounds). That smells like defense bonus - catapults are not good at killing each other - rather than weird range issue.

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Celegans View Post
    The fight only lasted 3 rounds. I don't think this outcome would be possible if they started 5000 paces apart. Defending archers saw attacking ballista and attacking archers at the exact same spot at the start of the battle and decided that ballista was a bigger threat as you suggested.
    The Question is, a bigger threat to win the war or battle? For instance do troops attack those first who threaten their troops type or who threaten to do the most damage to their entire group?

    I think they target what is targeting them in defense. So if Cavs reach archers in 1st round the pikes don't seem to target them at all and the cavs kill all archers before pikes even seem to engage them. In this scenario Cavs are the first to attack.. Therefore the archers attack the Cavs in defense without even targeting the opposing archers until the cavs are dead.. the Pikemen seem to target the archers as they are firing at them and they get whipped out. It seems if the cavs take 2 rounds to reach the archers then the pikemen will engage them.

    Also, I know in the old scout battles the defending troops got first attack and therefore 75K scouts would kill the 100K trying to scout. That is basically a turn based battle system. So is this the same for all attacking troops? If so it would also define who gets attacked first because you would know what side is doing the attacking.. In essence the attackers targeting system at that point would come off defense rather then trying to do the most damage. That is assuming defenders get to attack first as in the scout battles.

    Which would also explain why in a valley battle the troops seem to target the opposing troops in a different order then they do when you attack a city.
    In a valley as in the exercise both troops attack at the same time.. I don't believe this to be the case in a siege against a city..

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •