Comparison and valuation of certain units
-
I have to compare 2 different units which have rather similar superficial combat strength and i have a big problem to get a idea of which of them is stronger.
Those units are meant to be the most used cannonfodder units by specific factions but the first one (Tribesmen) should be the significantly more used one.The battle round configuration is set to:
1 round of air battle (simulating ranged/skirmish)
then
2 rounds of land battle (simulating melee in this case)
(3 battle rounds total)Tribesmen
2/2/1 and 1/2 air combat
Bowmen
1/1/1 and 2/3 air combat
Now here my questions and my attempt to conclude which one is stronger.
First i took into account that there are double as much land battle than air battle rounds, which would lead to the conclusion that land battle combat values (melee) is double to be weightened than air battle values (ranged/skirmish)
But i had to remind myself that there is a chance that there will no land battle at all (overwhelming air kills) or only 1 battle round. (if retreat is choosen by attacker.
Another related and general thought i had was, that the first round of battle (air) is in some way more important than the second round (land), which is proven by the extreme consequence that, like i wrote above, there would be no further land battle rounds at all, where more melee oriented units would have the chance to play out their higher combat values against an enemy army which had only units with high air battle values.
Questions:
(Edit: Condition to be aware of: Tribesmen can only be produced in every owned territory, 1 per round, if there is a high value leader type unit.)Do i miss any important aspect about that analysis?
How would you argue about which unit you would prefer to build?
Is there any mathematical way to approach this problem how to valuate this comparison?
How would you put PU cost on those?
Which one would you prefer to buy in those circumstances if they both would cost the same?
Thanks for reading.
Every comment much appreciated. -
This is how I initially point(pu) units.
Create a spreadsheet with your units and values, set your initial pu purchase by adding these all together.
main attack value
main defence value
Move value for land and sea (If flying x1.5, depending round up or down)
First Fire =1pu
Blitz=1pu
small transporter=1pu
larger transporter=2pu
etc
In your case ignore air attacks(for now) and what humans want- Let the AI play against itself make sure you have very low Victory conditions set.
- Do not continue the game.
- Check the Purchase History for each faction to see what the AI is buying
- Modify your purchase pu, by adding in 1 or 2 more pu, this where the air values come in and any other abilities that you want to add, put these in the spreadsheet and try to cost them.
- Ensure no unit costs 3pu or less, so 4+. 3pu unit are are usually too good as fodder in value. (Just my opinion.)
Advanced pricing
- Check the Hard AI logs, having set them to finest and 99 turns.
- Pick a tab
- Press ctrl+A then ctrl+C (select all, copy selected) paste into Notepad++
- Search for the word "probability" this will give you a guide to what the AI thinks is worth buying.
-
@thedog Thy so much for this.
I am ignoring the air values because i know that the AI doesnt take them into account regarding purchase, if that is what you meant by ignoring i guess?@thedog said in Comparison and valuation of certain units:
Advanced pricing
Check the Hard AI logs, having set them to finest and 99 turns.
Pick a tab
Press ctrl+A then ctrl+C (select all, copy selected) paste into Notepad++
Search for the word "probability" this will give you a guide to what the AI thinks is worth buying.This i was not aware of. This is incredibly useful to find out the cost evaluation for the AI then.
-
@torpedoa said in Comparison and valuation of certain units:
I am ignoring the air values because i know that the AI doesnt take them into account regarding purchase, if that is what you meant by ignoring i guess?
Yes and that your style of using air values might skew the purchase price, if you put too much weight on those values.
-
@torpedoa You can't balance two units independently of the rest. Balancing is best done through trial and error, or experimenting and playtesting. The value of each unit depends on many things, including but not limited to: the average attack/defense of stronger units, the price of stronger units, the army composition chosen by the enemy, the average production of territories, the total number of territories, the average width of the frontline, etc. This is mostly because small battles behave differently than large ones, so the expected frequency and importance of small battles can change the value of one unit over another.
But here is the following intuition. Each unit of bowmen, when faced with a healthy supply of tribesmen as fodder, is expected to kill
2.5/6units in skirmish phase. That will "save"2.5/6 * 2/6 = 5/36bowmen in the first round of melee, because the dead enemy units can no longer fight. In the same round another1/6tribesman is expected to die. Then, another1/6 * 2/6 + 5/36units are saved. In the third round, you now effectively have1 + 5/36 = 41/36bowmen for each unit of bowmen, so you will kill41/216tribesmen. A total of2.5/6 + 1/6 + 41/216 = 167/216units killed and5/36 + 7/36 = 72/216units saved. Similarly, in the case of tribesmen, first round:1.5/6killed,1.5/6 * 1/6 = 1.5/36saved. Next round:2/6killed,2/6 * 1/6 + 1.5/36 = 3.5/36saved. Final round,37.5/36 * 2/6 = 75/216killed. Total:201/216killed,30/216saved. If I assume that both units have the same price, then bowmen very slightly outperform tribesmen (239/216 * costto231/216 * cost).But in practice, if stronger units play an important role, then I'd want my fodder to deal as much damage as possible as soon as possible, because their role isn't to survive for more battle rounds. I'd go with bowmen over tribesmen every single time, given the choice.
-
