<< Back to General Forum   Search

Posts 1 - 7 of 7   
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/30/2013 18:52:41

SilverShadow
Level 6
Report
Why do we have to attack another territory with at least twice as the defending area has?

Its not 100% logical..i mean in real life war u can also win with only at least the same armies the defending area has

For example, Developer should make the game that count a winning attack if i'm attacking with 3 armies and the defending area has only 2 armies?

Winning attack if (at least) 4 armies attacking 3 armies defending area + along with the "chance/luck factor" or whatever its called.

But no really need to attack with double the number of armies all the time to win an attack
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/30/2013 18:56:39

Wowbagger the Infinitely Prolonged
Level 38
Report
Ah, but it is like real life.

It is true that you don't need to attack with double the number in order to win in real life, but it is the same in the game.

However, you generally have to attack with double the number to GUARANTEE a victory in the game, which is closer to the truth in reality.

And of course, if you want to always win when you outnumber your opposition just manipulate the kill rates as needed.
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/30/2013 19:00:12


Ⓖ. Ⓐrun 
Level 57
Report
Why do we have to attack another territory with at least twice as the defending area has?


You don't. Attack 2 with 3, and to find out how much to attack other numbers, multiply 3 by the number of armies you are attacking divided by 2.

in real life war u can also win with only at least the same armies the defending area has


Maybe you can...but in most modern wars, you see an overwhelmingly powerful force (USA + allies) attacking some buggered force in the Middle East or whatever.

Developer should make the game that count a winning attack if i'm attacking with 3 armies and the defending area has only 2 armies?


Play Strategic 1v1 (or any game with low luck).

Winning attack if (at least) 4 armies attacking 3 armies


Try attacking 3 with 5.

But no really need to attack with double the number of armies all the time to win an attack


What's this thread about again???
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/31/2013 00:35:37

The Duke of Ben 
Level 55
Report
With higher luck settings, you can "win" any battle with relatively close numbers of troops. So long, that is, as you define "win" as "killing more troops than you lose," which would be one of the historical measures of winning battles.

An attack of 5 troops into 6 troops with high luck can result in inflicting significant casualties on the enemy, even if it's impossible to take the territory outright. Once the army is cut down, there's nothing requiring that the game give you the territory in question on the same move. Splitting the actions into separate moves is arbitrary and based on this being a game, rather than real life.

Lower luck settings are less historical, but really, this is a game and it's meant to be both fun and competitive. High luck can result in poor competition, and for some people poor fun. If you want historical battles, turn luck up as high as you can and enjoy when an army of 100 fails to take an army of 50 from time to time, or an army of 50 taking a territory that had 45 defenders.
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/31/2013 00:45:08

Seahawks 
Level 51
Report
wow arun... trolling people with bs stats isnt nice, its really cruel, now most people know always hitting in a 3 to 2 ratio (like 15v10, is stupid, but some new players to the game isnt and if they aren ttaught differently they might never know, USE THE ANALYZE BUTTON TO SEE HOW MANY YOU NEED, normally >80 is good, 95 and above is better
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/31/2013 01:54:19


Wenyun 
Level 59
Report
Mathematically, the ratio that would guarantee a win on 0% luck, straight-round, default-kill rates is 5 to 3. Not every game is 0% luck, straight round, so you generally want to have a bigger ratio for safety rather than a smaller one. (Note that you'll probably want to round up to be safe)

2 to 1 (Or, twice the amount of armies), is a pretty good estimate, and one that is sure to work on Strategic 1v1/2v2 settings (16% WR). While it does become slightly too much with higher armies, it works very well when you want guaranteed expansion. (7v4 may be more useful than 8v4, but it is not guaranteed)

3 to 2, on the other hand, slightly goes over the 5 to 3 ratio. Despite being closer to the 5:3 ratio than 2:1 is, going over is much worse than going under. This is because it fails on lower luck ratios when you go up in armies, unlike a lower ratio which merely wastes armies.

Either multiply by 1.67 (and add accordingly to factor in luck) or just use the analyze button. The former may be easier when you get to higher amounts of armies.
Changing number of armies in a winning attack: 8/31/2013 11:04:37


Pink 
Level 60
Report
in real life war u can also win with only at least the same armies the defending area has

and you can win with the same amount of troops in the first battle? no, thats why you cant conquer here in 1 turn
Posts 1 - 7 of 7