Are assassins bugged?

[SpencerH]

During my current Brit campaign I've had a series of very experienced assassins be killed when attacking characters at a 95% probability of success. One or two would be unlucky, but I've lost around 7 this way. Something is wrong.

[marcusbrutus]

Not sure if they're bugged but I do know that a 95% chance of success can give a surprising number of failiures when you get a bit unlucky. Probabilities can be very deceptive.

[Beefy]

acutally i have the diffferent problem! IT TAKES ME AGES to get good assasins cus they always get killed, but when i do get a fairly good one they become god and unkillable! ive ahd an assassin in eygpt for like 20 years and he must have about 25-30 kills to his name!

[Rapidly]

Spencer I had much the same thing happen. I think it was because I was trying to use inexperienced (no or 1 "eyes") assassins, to whom those high success rates apparently do not apply until they become more skilled. Unless the assassin comes with some natural skills already (i.e. has a few eyes right from the start), I find that almost any kill, even the easier ones, is beyond them until they build some skills on easier sabotage missions first. I had one guy who was rated "natural born killer" and he eventually had 10 eyes. He died finally of old age after wreaking much havoc.

[SpencerH]

Spencer I had much the same thing happen. I think it was because I was trying to use inexperienced (no or 1 "eyes") assassins, to whom those high success rates apparently do not apply until they become more skilled. Unless the assassin comes with some natural skills already (i.e. has a few eyes right from the start), I find that almost any kill, even the easier ones, is beyond them until they build some skills on easier sabotage missions first. I had one guy who was rated "natural born killer" and he eventually had 10 eyes. He died finally of old age after wreaking much havoc.

No, these guys are all high level assassins (all over 10 eyes) that I had groomed-up on minor targets with many traits etc.

IIRC, all of these guys were lost on diplomats and generals none were lost against spies or other assasins. Their targets may have been very experienced (I didnt look though) and might have been better protected than normal. If thats the case though, why did the probability say 95%? Perhaps it doesnt calculate based on defenders adjusted strength?

[SpencerH]

Not sure if they're bugged but I do know that a 95% chance of success can give a surprising number of failiures when you get a bit unlucky. Probabilities can be very deceptive.

I'm not a statistician (but I use stats in my work). The odds of losing 7 assassins in this way (while possible) is more than a 'bit unlucky'.

[Rodion Romanovich]

During my current Brit campaign I've had a series of very experienced assassins be killed when attacking characters at a 95% probability of success. One or two would be unlucky, but I've lost around 7 this way. Something is wrong.

You know what they say: Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is enemy action.

[Craterus]

If you tried to assassinate the same guy 7 times in a row, I think the AI would be clever enough to keep a good guard on this guy..

[SpencerH]

If you tried to assassinate the same guy 7 times in a row, I think the AI would be clever enough to keep a good guard on this guy..

It wasnt, but if I attacked the same character 7 times and the probabilty kept telling me I had a 95% chance of success each time and each time my assassin was killed then I'd know something was wrong.

[Barbarossa82]

I think I've experienced a similar effect of unexpectedly frequent failures at high success rates. It struck me that this might just possibly be a "feature". Lame excuse, I know, but it's just about conceivable that these failures are not being caused by the dangers which are being taken into account in the % chance of success figure (e.g. bodyguards, alertness of general, number of troops, competence of assassin etc.), but by the presence of an enemy spy with the army/character being targeted. This would introduce a separate element causing failure which is separate to the features of the target, and therefore not taken into account in the % figure.
Of course that could still be a mistake (and given our experiences with this game, that seems quite plausible), but it could also be deliberate and realistic. It's in the very nature of spies that they're undercover - your assassin wouldn't know about them shadowing his target, so he wouldn't factor them in when assessing his own chance of pulling it off. It comes as an unpleasant surprise to him when he sneaks into the target's tent and the nubile young camp concubine in the corner takes off her wig and reveals herself to actually be Jamesus Bondus. Just looking at the guards etc. that he knew about, he calculated 95% chance of success, but the spy he couldn't foresee reduces this.

[Rapidly]

Sounds reasonable; I'd like to believe it's another "fog of war" feature and that the game is that well designed...

[Zakor]

If you tried to assassinate the same guy 7 times in a row, I think the AI would be clever enough to keep a good guard on this guy..

[QUOTE=Rapidly]Spencer I had much the same thing happen. I think it was because I was trying to use inexperienced (no or 1 "eyes") assassins, to whom those high success rates apparently do not apply until they become more skilled. QUOTE]



Then the chance would not be 95% success any more. The chance for success, as per the original message, was 95%.

[SpencerH]

Of course that could still be a mistake (and given our experiences with this game, that seems quite plausible), but it could also be deliberate and realistic. It's in the very nature of spies that they're undercover - your assassin wouldn't know about them shadowing his target, so he wouldn't factor them in when assessing his own chance of pulling it off. It comes as an unpleasant surprise to him when he sneaks into the target's tent and the nubile young camp concubine in the corner takes off her wig and reveals herself to actually be Jamesus Bondus. Just looking at the guards etc. that he knew about, he calculated 95% chance of success, but the spy he couldn't foresee reduces this.

It would be nice to have an opinion from CA on this. If its a mistake it should go in the bug/issue thread for possible correction but if its a real feature it's something that needs to be advertised and discussed (here).

[LordKhaine]

I don't bother to build up assassins now. It was enough work before, now with the max chance of 95% it's usually not worth the effort. I don't see why they changed it, even a ten star assassin isn't *that* powerful. Last ten star assassin I had still only had a ~20% chance of assassinating a leader or heir.

[SpencerH]

I mostly use them to cut down enemy assassins and spies. I just had a general killed by an AI assassin where I had no one around to deal with him. It was especially interesting since it was immediately prior to a battle (that I barely won without him)!

[SpencerH]

After noticing that 'first' assassination, I looked at my family tree and found that I had actually lost 5 family members out of 24 (total male family dead) to assassins!