I will see what I can do.
But that's apples and oranges. My problem has nothing to do with the balance of an actual RTS match. My problem is with the balance on the STRATEGY MAP.
That is in fact the same problem. There is no difference between a Strategy Map battle and the RTS battle during the campaign (I do NOT talk about the stand-alone skirmish mode): It is always the same battle, but you can only decide whether you would like to fight it yourself or autoresolve it. Autoresolve should be adjusted in such a way that it mirrors the outcome of the underlying RTS battle (if it is actually fought). For an
average player the results on the screen which you see at the end of the battle should be roughly the same - no matter if autoresolved or not.
Troopers are overvalued on the STRATEGY MAP. In the Autoresolve, for a series of 9 matches in which one sides entire forces was only 1 Trooper (a 3 Gold unit), the enemy took the following losses in gold: 14, 14, 9, 10, 0, 10, 14, 0, 8. That's an average of 8.78 Gold destroyed for each 3 gold Trooper destroyed.
My problem is how Troopers cost 3 gold to make on the Strategy map, but in autoresolve, they seem have the combat effectiveness of a 9 gold unit. It has nothing to do with how an RTS battle plays out.
Yes, I completely see your point. My argumentation is, however, the following: Even if you fight an RTS battle where one trooper faces a huge army as starting units, on the screen which you get at the end, the huge army will very likely have quite substantial losses (because the lonely trooper gets support from units produced during RTS), so this is where the 3 gold versus 9 gold problematic which you mentioned comes from. A good autoresolve should take into account this mechanics - that is why you see the ninja trooper duing autoresolve.
