4.3
I’m trying to design a battle system for a small project I’m working on but I have no idea what math I should use.
If 1000 troops are fighting 1000 troops with completely equal conditions, how would I determine the losses each side takes? Any suggestions are welcome. Thanks!
Could you provide more information about what you are looking for?
I mean, as I see it, if 1000 troops face 1000 troops in completely equal conditions, they either tie or the fight is decided by pure randomness, I don’t think there’s any more math there, so please provide more details about that battle system and what problems you are facing so we can understand and help you 
There are lots of ways to approach this. You could go with something like Super Auto Pets where each individual units is unique and you automatically run simulation (sped up probably) to see who wins in standard auto-battler fashion. Another way to approach this is something like Crusader Kings 3 where you have “batches” of units (categories, each one with stats, strengths and counters) that in each fight go through different phases and apply those stats differently in each phase.
Reality is there are many ways to do this, and it’s up to game designer to find approach that works best for the type of game they are making.
Ok, what im looking for is something that takes into account the amount of men on either side to determine casualties. So an army that outnumberes their foe 3:1 will do a lot more damage than their enemy. Ofc, there should also be some randomness because there are many cases where a smaller yet otherwise equal force has defeated a larger one
I should have probably been more specific. The units are represented by numbers and there will eventually be terrain, supply, and tech levels to influence battle, with relative tech levels allowing one force to deal more damage than another. Im just looking for an equation (or code) that can accomplish passable results since I couldn’t come up with one
It sounds to me like you’re looking for RPG-like system but with weighted outcomes.
Each of those things need to be weighted based mostly on how you would like combat to behave and feel to the player. Maybe you want terrain to have great impact, while having advanced tech helps you way less in comparison?
I don’t think it’s a productive question to be asking at this stage. There’s very rarely one solution that fits all, even within genres or subgenres. I would suggest going with your gut and making things that work (even if not too well) for now - and you can modify, rework and change it based on feedback you receive.
Another tip I could give you is if you don’t know where to start from, Sid Meier’s rule of thirds would be great starting point - to quote it: “one-third traditional gameplay, one-third is improved from the last version, and one-third is brand new.”
He’s talking about sequels but you can simplify it as “One third the same, one third improved, one third new”. Find the games that you like, and their parts that you don’t. Improve those things you don’t like, and add new things to make it refresh. Playtest and iterate ideas and formulas until you have something fun 
Thanks for the advice! Ill be testing out some things and seeing what works well.
@lexpeartha - Excellent post.
I’ve done work on tabletop RPG’s and board games, and combat can be as simple or as complicated as you want it to be. But the starting point is usually the chance of mortality. If all things are equal, what is the chance for one character to injure (or worse) another character?
Starting values are usually 50% and 30%, and then adjusted for variance - skill and weapon type are the most simple.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.