battle modes?

[godfather]

I am curious as to whether choosing one Battle mode over another will impact th results of the battles. In other words, if choose detailed battle over automated battle or quick battle will the results differ consistently? Am playing in Advanced mode GS

[Randomizer]

Personally I consider Instant Combat to be a crap shoot unless you have overwhelming superiority.  As a test I once ran the same battle as the North six-times with four Confederate (defender) victories and two Union (attacker) victories.  I then fought it out using detailed combat and with about equal WTF to start and managed a decisive win in two-days of messy combat.  Final casualties for both sides exceeded any of the instant game test runs.
 
Have never used Quick Combat so cannot comment.
 
I would recommend that if you have time Detailed Combat is the way to go but those who PBEM seem to have few complaints regarding Instant Combat.  I will sometimes use the latter when it looks like either a walkover for me or a disaster in the making just to save time and still get surprising results on occasion.

[Gil R.]

The calculations that go into determining the winner of non-detailed combat are very different from those that determine the results of detailed combat, and therefore the results in terms of casualties, dropped weapons, captured units, etc., not to mention the victors, are bound to be quite different. There is simply no way to write code that would have the outcome of an automated battle simulate those of a battle that a person has fought out. In general, the superior force -- in terms of strength, quality, supply, generals, etc. -- will win instant and quick combat, and the more superior that force the more likely it is to win.