I only wanted to demonstrate that his calculations were wrong from the beginning.
But I still don't see the point why the outcome should be different. If a match between two armies is simulated like an RTS AI vs AI battle there is no point that the result would be different because the AI would be identical. If not either the AI is implemented poorly or the element of randomness is way too weighty which is again the result of an AI poorly implemented.....
I think (and that's my honest opinion) that there shouldn't be an RTS simulation in the background because it's completely pointless. You could roll some dice in the background, it would be the same. At least, rolling some dice would reflect the Risk-origins much better....
And I don't agree that autoresolving would be superior to personally engaging in battle:
Simple example: you have only one trooper, the enemy has five troopers (like in the example above):
a) You autoresolve the combat. Result: you lose
b) You personally engage in combat: Result: It would be very hard to win but there is a chance.
Another example: you have five troopers, the enemy has one trooper (opposite scenario):
a) Autoresolving. Result: you win
b) Engaging. Result: You most likely win but you could also lose if you make bad decisions or play poorly.
Third example: you have three troopers and the enemy has three troopers (balanced scenario):
a) Autoresolving. Result: 50/50, pure random principle
b) Engaging. Result: Depends on your skill but you have a fair chance to win.
So what's the result of these three examples? In two of three basic scenarios you have an advantage to personally engage in battle. Only in the scenario in which you have a far bigger army there is just no point to personally engage in battle. And that's how the game should work imo. The 20% probability to lose a battle if you fight with one trooper against four enemy troopers is just wrong imo. You should have way worse chances to lose this battle and same is true for the other way round. If you attack an enemy with a very small army your chances to win by autoresolving should be minimal (REALLY minimal). So if you want to do that, you should be literally forced to engage in combat personally.
Everything else is just "betting on the system": produce one trooper in each round and send him in a country with a big army and autoresolve the battle. After X rounds you will win this country and the enemy army by pure random principle, because the chances of winning the battle are just way too high.....
You know what I mean now?
Not to engage personally in battle shouldn't be rewarded.....
Last edited by LordCrash; 30/07/13 01:43 PM.
