Automatic Hits

[Forwarn45]

I noticed their have been a few complaints about bad luck with autohits. I do think these even out in the end - and I like the idea that otherwise "invincible" units will occassionally get hit - particularly when overwhelmed numerically. But I wonder if 5% is a somewhat high percentage for autohits. If it were reduced to 3% or 4%, maybe it still save the same purpose?

[WanderingHead]

I've never liked auto hits, personally. If the effect is desired, then I thought it was better accomplished with an appropriate combat system. By which I mean, not a parallel system as it is today, rather have a single simple system that provides small probabilities of hits even with disparate unit capabilities.

Of course, it didn't happen and requires a major combat system change, so anyway ....

One of the things I don't like about it is that it completely bypasses all unit capabilities. I know it is more complicated, but I'd prefer something like "prob_auto_hit = 5*attack_value/evasion" (round up, given here as a percentage).

Early sub war the attack value is 1, evasion is 2, the probability would be 5*1/2 = 3% (rounded up).

Consider the units that a militia can't hit in midwar. With the above rule, these units still continue to get harder to hit as their evasion is increased, but they are never impossible to hit.

[YohanTM2]

Like this idea!

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead

I've never liked auto hits, personally. If the effect is desired, then I thought it was better accomplished with an appropriate combat system. By which I mean, not a parallel system as it is today, rather have a single simple system that provides small probabilities of hits even with disparate unit capabilities.

Of course, it didn't happen and requires a major combat system change, so anyway ....

One of the things I don't like about it is that it completely bypasses all unit capabilities. I know it is more complicated, but I'd prefer something like "prob_auto_hit = 5*attack_value/evasion" (round up, given here as a percentage).

Early sub war the attack value is 1, evasion is 2, the probability would be 5*1/2 = 3% (rounded up).

Consider the units that a militia can't hit in midwar. With the above rule, these units still continue to get harder to hit as their evasion is increased, but they are never impossible to hit.

[Forwarn45]

Wanderinghead has some good ideas. Alternatively, I like the idea of just reducing auto-hits somewhat. But it looks like most people are content with the way things are. Oh well. [;)]

[GKar]

I don't think auto hits are occurring too often, but I like WH's idea anyway.

[BenTaylor]

Yes this is more balanced.

[Avatar47]

I would like to see autohits slightly lowered to 4%. That's 1 in 25. Right now it's 5%, 1 in 20.

[WanderingHead]

Another way is to keep the "autohit" probability the same, but change what it does.

Instead of yielding an additive bonus of Evasion*Durability, give a bonus of Evasion*Durability/2.

That way, it is still a good bonus, but increasing evasion makes both Destroyed and Damaged outcomes less likely (especially Destroyed). And the amount of suppression caused doesn't go haywire through the roof like it does now (since it is doubled).

I haven't run the odds on things to be sure, but I think this is my preference for a small tweak. It leaves it as a simple additive bonus but gives significance to tech differences.

It wouldn't be an "autohit" anymore, more of a "critical hit bonus".

I think just changing the odds won't change people's perception of it. 4% or 5%, noone will notice the difference.

[schury]

autohit should be changed, to different units, different treats. i can't bear militia autohit panther or tiger all time time on the Russian plain![:@]

[Forwarn45]

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
One of the things I don't like about it is that it completely bypasses all unit capabilities. I know it is more complicated, but I'd prefer something like "prob_auto_hit = 5*attack_value/evasion" (round up, given here as a percentage).
Early sub war the attack value is 1, evasion is 2, the probability would be 5*1/2 = 3% (rounded up).

I've been thinking about this idea + I really like it - with a proposed modification to keep things more precise and closer to the 5% norm. I would like to see:
probability of auto hit = (5* (attack value+3)) / (evasion +3). No rounding or maybe round-up to half percentage points.

Ths plus 3's have the effect of keeping things closer to 5 when there is some disparity between attack and evasion values. Here are some examples.

Early asw (1 attack value) versus german subs (2 evasion value) =
20 / 5 = 4%.
Transport (1 attack value) versus later-war german sub (4 evasion value) =
20 / 7 = 2.85% (maybe roundup to 3%).

German Tank circa 1940-1941 (8 attack value) v. Soviet infantry circa 1941 (5 evasion) =
55 / 8 = 6.875 % so maybe roundup to 7%. (having the effect of turning a damage result to a kill on the Soviet infantry)

Soviet Infantry circa 1941 (6 attack value) v. German Tank (8 evasion value) =
45 / 11 = 4.09% result depends on round-up

Soviet milita (4 attack) versus German Tank circa 1940-1941 (8 evasion value) =
35 / 11 = 3.18% result depends on round-up

[WanderingHead]

ORIGINAL: Forwarn45

ORIGINAL: WanderingHead
One of the things I don't like about it is that it completely bypasses all unit capabilities. I know it is more complicated, but I'd prefer something like "prob_auto_hit = 5*attack_value/evasion" (round up, given here as a percentage).
Early sub war the attack value is 1, evasion is 2, the probability would be 5*1/2 = 3% (rounded up).

I've been thinking about this idea + I really like it - with a proposed modification to keep things more precise and closer to the 5% norm. I would like to see:
probability of auto hit = (5* (attack value+3)) / (evasion +3). No rounding or maybe round-up to half percentage points.

It's an improvement, but the more I've thought about simply changing the auto hit bonus (make it ev*dur/2 instead of ev*dur), the more I find I prefer it. I think it would be easier to interpret in the combat report and less likely to result in Destroyed, but can be tweaked to give similar probabilities of Damaged.

It doesn't seem like there is a good way to report a varying probability of autohit in the combat report.

Applying Forwarn45's examples to the ev*dur/2 concept, the probabilities of damage from an "autohit", with 6% autohit is:
1) attack 1 against ev 2 dur 3 (bonus = +3): .06 (ahit) * 2/3 (prob 3+d1 >=3) = 4%
2) attack 1 against ev 4 dur 3 (bonus = +6): .06 (ahit) * 1/6 (prob 6+d1 >=12) = 1%
3) attack 8 against ev 5 dur 4 (bonus = +10): .06 (ahit) * 0.961 (prob 10+d8 >= 20) = 5.77%
4) attack 6-1 against ev 8 dur 3 (bonus = +12): 0.06 (ahit) * .941 (prob 12+d5>=24) = 5.65%
5) attack 4-1 against ev 8 dur 3 (bonus = +12): 0.06 (ahit) * .375 (prob 12+d3>=24) = 2.25%

No modifiers included (e.g. sub defending solo) except armor incorporated in 4,5 to match Forwarn's examples.

I don't mind implementing either way if it is OK with Powers That Be.

[kondor]

Auto hit = too often[:)]

[Uncle_Joe]

IMO the autohits are fine. The whole reason they were added was to add an element of unpredictability to the battles and to ensure that there were always risks associated with any attack.
 
In the beta, I did quite a lot of tracking of auto-hits and I never really saw any evidence that it occurs more often than it should.

[BenTaylor]

One way of looking at it 20 militia between them should get 1 autohit on average if in a battle.

Even if you had teched to "10 10" tanks and attacked such a huge but low quality army would it seem reasonable that you would indeed suffer some kind of casualty from them? Don't forget is isn't just the tanks there would be all the supply train etc. I am sure a large enough mass of troops could achieve some kind of damage.

[WanderingHead]

ORIGINAL: BenTaylor

One way of looking at it 20 militia between them should get 1 autohit on average if in a battle.

Even if you had teched to "10 10" tanks and attacked such a huge but low quality army would it seem reasonable that you would indeed suffer some kind of casualty from them? Don't forget is isn't just the tanks there would be all the supply train etc. I am sure a large enough mass of troops could achieve some kind of damage.

Indeed, I have no problem with the fact that the probability doesn't go to zero, it is the fact that it is a single floor which doesn't take tech abilities into account at all. I don't think that a 10 10 tank should be invulnerable to militia, but I do think it should be at least a little harder for the militia to hit than a 9 9 tank. As it stands, they are exactly the same (zero probability of a regular hit, 5% chance of an autohit).