This post is a discussion between "Tactical battles" (battles where you command your troops yourself) and "Auto-resolve" (battles where you leave it to the AI to generate results without your participation).
-Tactical battles are fun because you are able to fight battles, and win fights using your troops. For many players, the enjoyment comes from being able to win difficult battles.
-Others might enjoy the feeling of proving themselves better than the next guy.
-Some battles can become very repetitive. In such situations, it remove the sense of enjoyment of fighting difficult battles (maybe because after the first five, there is very little left for you to figure out).
-Repetitive battles can also feel like a chore over time. If your strategy always works (the opponent can't figure out how to defeat it), then you might start wondering if there is any point to these battles. You might ask yourselft, shouldn't I be able to hand things over to the AI and you go worry about something else?
-Solves the problem with repetitive battles by handing things over to the AI to determine who would win (and with what results).
-Saves game time so you can worry about other stuff.
-Auto-resolved battles may get very different results than what you could get if you fought the battles yourself.
-You might quickly determine that the AI is out of touch with reality, causing you to lose fights you could easily win had you fought them yourself.
-You might decide that your computer has something against you and is cheating to cause you pain.
1) If you can win 5 or more battles under the same conditions (such as terrain, and troops, etc...) using the same strategy, you should have the option to save the results. There after, every such battle you fight, you could choose to auto-resolve those battles getting the same results as the average of those 5 or so battles (maybe with a +/- 5% or 10% difference each time). This will ofcourse have no effect on any battles that the computer determines to be significantly different enough that the outcome might turn out to be significantly different.
1a) If the battles starts as you expected, but then the AI does something different than the last 5 times, should you be allowed to enter the fight where things start occuring differently? If not, would some players in multiplayer intentionally lose the first 5 battles in hopes that in the next battle, his opponent decides to auto-resolve the battle so he would fight against an AI that he knows he can beat, and not the player?
2) Create an AI to handle the battles for you. For those who have played Dominions 3, that is what I'm kind of thinking about, except you might be able to make better strategies for your AIs to use.
3) Have a tactical ability stat for your civ (like diplomacy or research). Having a high value in this stat will give you an edge in battles where you choose to auto-resolve things. You might have some variations on this stat to reflect different battle conditions like an open field, or castle siege.
3a) This stat is researchable like most other civ stats.
3b) This stat can be be boosted by fighting tactical battles every so often to show the game how good you are. Likewise, not fighting these tactical battles will cause this boost to gradually fade with time.
What are your guy's thoughts?