That is true for basically all issues which require a call to the random number generator in this game (damage rolls, critical and evasion rolls, AI decision-making, creature-spawning item and scroll results...). Load the same game twice, do the exact same thing, and you get the exact same result. Load the same game twice, do the exact same thing except for something that seems like it *ought* to be irrelevant, and you might get different results.

I don't know how they actually programmed it, but it looks to me like the save-game file probably saves your random seed in it as well. In that case, you ought to be able to also change the damage and results by e.g. swapping an army to reserve, using a griffin egg then dismissing the griffin, and swapping that army back from reserve just before the battle.

The game is just a deterministic computer program when you get down to it. Given the same input (troll moving to a certain square and attacking a certain thing), the output will be the same. Random number generators are just deterministic programs too and aren't truly random. The randomness they are supposed to produce isn't random, just close enough (or not as the case may be here and in many other games). The fact that the numbers are the same from reload to reload just shows that the RNG isn't based on anything that changes from reload to reload, such as a real time clock.

Well, but it is obviously done on purpose. This is very common with strategy games. For instance, Civ4 uses a seeded RNG where the seed for the same 'effects' use the same progression. For instance, you could get a RN for an 'attack' and then grab a random hut (like a chest) and then reload and do them in opposite order, and get the same thing.

In King's Bounty a lot of it isn't even randomized during play, it is simply fixed at start. The only things that are pseudo random are AI tactics, board make-up and 'egg' items.

Gah, the one time I don't Ctrl-C my post, the board loses it.

Anyhow, I'm not sure where I stand on the "randomized at start and predetermined thereafter" vs "randomized during the game". On the one hand, in game randomization allows for and encourages, to some extent, reloading over and over to get the best result. On the other hand, predetermined means if you ever reload, you know exactly whats going to happen. That encourages testing everything first and then restarting for an optimal playthrough.

Didn't one of the Civs (or many of them?) have an option to switch from the default predetermined nature to the constantly randomized way? I recall finding that much more palatable. Probably due to too many infuriating tank losing to spearman type situations. Reloading easily fixes a flaw (IMO obviously) of basic game mechanics.

For Civ, I think they really put a lot of efforts in the Civ4 to temper the Tank vs Spearman win by spearman situation.

But I do remember that in Civ 2, everything "randomized" wasn't