I came across this playing against the AI. Is this intended? You can move a unit that obscures line of sight to fire from a unit behind and then (provided the firing unit doesn't move or turn) use undo to place the original unit back in front - thus allowing light infantry bows for example to fire ...

stockwellpete wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:50 am

rbodleyscott wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 10:34 am

Pete, when you have completed doing that set of samples, it would be worth comparing a set for 30 Heavy Infantry Offensive Spearmen vs 30 Heavy Infantry Offensive Spearmen.

Yes, OK. How many should I do for each test? Would a 1,000 be sufficient?

If you can stand it.

Pete, when you have completed doing that set of samples, it would be worth comparing a set for 30 Heavy Infantry Offensive Spearmen vs 30 Heavy Infantry Offensive Spearmen.

One more quick question. Does Rand() generates uniform distributed number between 0 and 1, or it generates normal distributed number as N(0,1), i.e. standard normal distribution? Rand(x,y) generates a uniformly distributed integer between x and y inclusive. That is why (to mimic an approximation to...

Sorry, but I don't know about the structure of computer games, but you seem to be saying that there are a number of different RNG's operating in the game at the same time. Have I understood that correctly? If so, do they operate autonomously from each other? I would presume that they do. So, it is ...

It would be very useful if there was a note to delete old versions of the scenario, but I don't know if something like that is possible, maybe Richard can comment. In the Community Content thread Richard could highlight the need to delete old versions, but then how many people would read that? Far ...

The tooltip is said to be the result of 1000 trials' result. The ideal way is to do more than 1000 to see whether the result is in accordance with the tooltip figures. But that may mean we need script to do it other than manually testing more than 1000 times. That code only tests the Win:Draw:Lose ...

I am sorry, but Pete's argument that games should be closer on average otherwise there is too much RNG is a complete crock, because of the snowballing effect once one player gains an advantage for whatever reason. Mostly when this does not happen it is the Pyrrhic situation where one side wins on o...

stockwellpete wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 6:59 am

76mm wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:48 am

Is there any reason to think that single player tests would have different results from multiplayer

Yes, I would like to know this as well. If I create a scenario 20 v 20 war bands and use hot seat, is the RNG the same as in multiplayer?

Yes

76mm wrote: ↑

Tue Mar 19, 2019 3:48 am

I'd be happy to help with testing, although probably not 1000 times... Is there any reason to think that single player tests would have different results from multiplayer?

No, the same RNG is used.

To be fair we should do a rigorous test of the Win Draw Loss RNG and the CT test RNG. I mean that will settle it once and for all. Bugs in code do exist The tooltip is said to be the result of 1000 trials' result. The ideal way is to do more than 1000 to see whether the result is in accordance with...

MVP7 wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 11:46 pm

The relatively high odds of untouched warbands double dropping cohesion on first impact sounds a bit rough for multiplayer

Only because the scenarios in question contain almost nothing but warbands on both sides! These are edge case scenarios.

It also seems odd that all of the results in Pete's tournament were so lopsided--if the double-breaks were randomly distributed between both sides, you would expect the effect to be roughly the same, and therefore games to be closer, and yet they were not. I am sorry, but Pete's argument that games...

Warbands are not supposed to behave like sturdy shieldwalls. These will come in the Dark Ages DLC, and they will have a much much lower chance of double dropping, because they will have +1 for being heavy foot, and no -1 for fighting impact foot. From what you have previously told me, that is the s...

Cunningcairn wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:28 pm

rbodleyscott wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:27 pm

Cunningcairn wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:20 pm

Is there a current table showing troop type modifiers and combat characteristics?

No, just the .pdf manual and the PatchNotes file, which shows all changes.

Is one in the pipeline?

We curently plan to update the .pdf manual for the next dlc but one.

Cunningcairn wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 8:20 pm

MikeC_81 wrote: ↑

Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:43 pm

Oh I forgot about that little rule change you made.

Is there a current table showing troop type modifiers and combat characteristics?

No, just the .pdf manual and the PatchNotes file, which shows all changes.

Cohesion Drops and Terrain Disorder are deliberately not cumulative. Only the Cohesion status is actually recorded, the Disorder status is determined according to the unit's situation - e.g. in terrain or near elephants. Whichever has the worse effects in the particular circumstances applies. Becaus...

Anyways I misspoke for the Loose Order Warbands. It is ~4% chance (3.89% if want to be picky) to double drop for YOUR Warbands. The overall chance for SOMEONE's Warband (yours or your opponents') is double that at 7.78%. Sorry for any confusion. Short answer for Heavy Foot Warbands head to head on ...

Yes, and it would be much more memorable than the larger number of occasions when this did not occur. The nature of random events is that they are random - i.e. they are not evenly spread. Sometimes there will be more than the average number of fringe results, sometimes there will be less. I know y...

Loose Warbands going head to head will see one or the other double drop 4% of the time Presumably the % is the same for close order war band units? Yes, but higher for Loose Order vs Close Order. In a 1200pts game between two war band armies you might expect there to be around 15 war bands on each ...