Forum: empire-en
Board: [584] Players ask Players
Topic: [76896] How on earth did my flanks get defeated?
[1389005]
AgentY [None]
:: Sept. 11, 2012, 11:35 p.m.
This is soooo confusing!!!!!!!!!!
[1389053]
Duterte (INT1) [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 4:50 a.m.
xJadetsssx wrote: »well, "lordsaruman", the defense power combined was higher than the attack power of the soldiers anyway (at least in the left flank)
X = Melee attack power, Y = Ranged attack power, Z = Total Melee defense power, A = Total Ranged defense power
X = 17 * 109 = 1'853
Y = 12 * 135 = 1'620
Z = {(12 * 135) + (8 * 51)} * 1,8 = 3'650,4
A = {(12 * 45) + ( 8 * 125)} * 1,8 = 2'772,0
X < Z
Y < A
So saying "attack power is the higher than defense power" is totally incorrect, at least in the left flank, no one can predict or calculate a battle anyway, so we don't know what kind of other hidden variables are taken in count in the battles.
^_^ GGE is confusing
I think this is just partly correct with one major flaw: you have effectively DOUBLED defense response.
Let me put it this way... I will exclude bonus points for simplicity...
TOTAL Defense versus Melee Attackers (TDvMA): This is the defense response of ALL the current defense units even for a lone (1) maceman as attacker.
TDvMA = (12 * 135) + (8 * 51) = 3650.4
TOTAL Defense versus Ranged Attackers (TDvRA): This is the defense response of ALL the current defense units even for a lone (1) crossbowman as attacker.
TDvRA = (12 * 45) + (8 * 125) = 2772
Therefore for example if the attacker sends both 1x maceman with attack power (AP) of 38 and 1x crossbowman with AP=39 with TOTAL attack power of 77 so what do you use as defense power (DP) value?
77 AP versus DP= what??? 3650? 2772? 3650+2772?
I actually have an idea about this... Defense Response Percentages
... and this is dependent on the attacker melee:ranged ratio ...Let's say the attacker sends 1x maceman and 3x crossbowmen therefore:
'Melee Attacker Percentage MA% = 25%
Ranged Attacker Percentage RA% = 75%
I think you know where this is going...
Total Defense Power = (MA% x TDvMA) + (RA% x TDvRA)
I think this makes sense...
Defense will use (MA% x TDvMA) in response to the attacker's MA% melee troops... while...
Defense will use (RA% x TDvRA) in response to the attacker's RA% ranged troops...
You cannot use 100% of BOTH the TDvMA and TDvRA... but only fractions of the two...
Using my theory...
Total AP = (17 x 109) + (12 x 135) = 1853 + 1620 = 3473
TA = 17 + 12 = 29 {Total Attackers}
MA%= 17/29 = 58.62%
RA%= 12/29 = 41.38%
TDvMA = (12x135=1620) + (8x51=408) = 2028
TDvRA = (12x45=540) + (8x125=1000) = 1540
Total Defense Power = (MA% x TDvMA) + (RA% x TDvRA)
= (58.62 x 2028) + (41.38 x 1540)
= 1188.83 + 637.24
= 1826.07
with Bonus = 1826.07 x 1.8 = 3286.92
Therefore:
Attacker = [B]3473[/B] <<== versus ==>> Defender = [B][COLOR="red"]3286.92 [/COLOR][/B]
[B]WIN [/B][B][COLOR="red"]LOSE[/COLOR][/B]
Of course we as players can only make assumptions... and only the game developers know the real math behind... although our discussions in this forum can make such assumptions more sound as we share ideas...I love GG Empire... not only sharpens swords... but sharpens math skills as well...
[1389054]
xJadetsssx [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 5:03 a.m.
Well nice try, but that formula cannot explain the fact of two identical armies on both flanks, with the same bonus, the same soldiers for the defender and attacker, but still with different casualies
[1389056]
Duterte (INT1) [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 5:37 a.m.
xJadetsssx wrote: »Well nice try, but that formula cannot explain the fact of two identical armies on both flanks, with the same bonus, the same soldiers for the defender and attacker, but still with different casualies
That formula applies to the calculable... I've incorporated it into my spreadsheet to calculate how to adjust my wall defense based on incoming attacker formation. It's hard to do number crunching when you have a huge troop approaching within 15 minutes so I let my spreadsheet do it for me so I can focus on adjusting the wall sliders... so far I was able to handle +10 level attackers versus now level 24 me...
The formula does not however take into account the LUCK/CHANCE factor yet which we agree exists... as I've also observed IDENTICAL FLANKS with slightly different results... one zero loss and another with casualty...
BobFighter834 wrote: »I believe that someone once said on another thread that they sent 2 identical armies to 2 identical RBCs, and lost 1 soldier in the first battle and 3 in the second. They then concluded that there is a luck element.
This could possibly be due to some luck factor. I doubt it, but it's the only possible explanation that I can think of.
[1389134]
sucmfic [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 12:41 p.m.
There is definately a luck factor. It comes up all the time in these sorts of games and is there to stop formulas from making the game predictable. Its developed as a way to add a sense of realism to the battles.
The formulas you guys have posted are logical. I won't contribute with my own one, but it's pretty similar!
Soldiers' Att & Def are the key route to start any formula, then your own factors (bonus items), then "chance".
As the flanks, gate & keep are all individually calc'd, there should be a three part question;
1) Does the "chance" apply to individual sections of the battle, or, does one number cover the entire battle?
2) What is the variant in it's percentage?
3) How does residual damage affect attrition?
Getting the right game formula, understanding HOW the battle kills a soldier and knowing the absolute max would guarantee a win every time, but how many soldiers will return? There's a lot going on behind the numbers we see on screen
The formulas you guys have posted are logical. I won't contribute with my own one, but it's pretty similar!
Soldiers' Att & Def are the key route to start any formula, then your own factors (bonus items), then "chance".As the flanks, gate & keep are all individually calc'd, there should be a three part question;
1) Does the "chance" apply to individual sections of the battle, or, does one number cover the entire battle?
2) What is the variant in it's percentage?
3) How does residual damage affect attrition?
Getting the right game formula, understanding HOW the battle kills a soldier and knowing the absolute max would guarantee a win every time, but how many soldiers will return? There's a lot going on behind the numbers we see on screen
[1389148]
Duterte (INT1) [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 1:33 p.m.
sucmfic,
Do you know a good thread here about TOOLS in the forum? I am still fuzzy about certain things like when you place tools on the wall it says only 1 tool (like stone-throwing) will be consumed for each wave of attack; hence, stacking 100 makes no difference. However when I attack an RBC I see more than 1 stone-throwing tool used by the RBC wall... unless 2 slots use 1 stone-throwing each then shouldn't the flank wall use only 1? Same thing with gate tool which uses only 1. What I'm sure though is ALL attacker tools are consumed and none taken back right?
Do you know a good thread here about TOOLS in the forum? I am still fuzzy about certain things like when you place tools on the wall it says only 1 tool (like stone-throwing) will be consumed for each wave of attack; hence, stacking 100 makes no difference. However when I attack an RBC I see more than 1 stone-throwing tool used by the RBC wall... unless 2 slots use 1 stone-throwing each then shouldn't the flank wall use only 1? Same thing with gate tool which uses only 1. What I'm sure though is ALL attacker tools are consumed and none taken back right?
[1389159]
sucmfic [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 2:22 p.m.
I haven't looked through the forums for a tools one myself, must be one somewhere
For info though, you can use multiple tools if you put them in diferent slots. I've used 6 stone throwers when attacked in one wave.
And yup, all attacker tools get used even if in one slot. (It might be different for second wave tools if the first wave is a success... that bit i'm not sure on)
For info though, you can use multiple tools if you put them in diferent slots. I've used 6 stone throwers when attacked in one wave.
And yup, all attacker tools get used even if in one slot. (It might be different for second wave tools if the first wave is a success... that bit i'm not sure on)
[1389240]
FriedrichEngels (DE1) [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 6:07 p.m.
BobFighter834 wrote: »I believe that someone once said on another thread that they sent 2 identical armies to 2 identical RBCs, and lost 1 soldier in the first battle and 3 in the second. They then concluded that there is a luck element.
This could possibly be due to some luck factor. I doubt it, but it's the only possible explanation that I can think of.
If you're referring to my post yesterday, I was talking about either vet.mace or vet.crossbow on identical RBCs with regular crossbows. I lost 3 vet.crossbows but only 1 vet.maceman (http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?32519-defending-attackers&p=328081&viewfull=1#post328081).
I'm pretty sure there's no random element in fighting. Kreistor, for example, makes very accurate predictions about losses in his Robber Baron Guide (http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?19985-Robber-Baron-Guide&p=110048&viewfull=1#post110048) That wouldnt be possible if there was such a thing as a luck factor.
xJadetsssx wrote: »well, "lordsaruman", the defense power combined was higher than the attack power of the soldiers anyway (at least in the left flank)
X = Melee attack power, Y = Ranged attack power, Z = Total Melee defense power, A = Total Ranged defense power
X = 17 * 109 = 1'853
Y = 12 * 135 = 1'620
Z = {(12 * 135) + (8 * 51)} * 1,8 = 3'650,4
A = {(12 * 45) + ( 8 * 125)} * 1,8 = 2'772,0
X < Z
Y < A
So saying "attack power is the higher than defense power" is totally incorrect, at least in the left flank, no one can predict or calculate a battle anyway, so we don't know what kind of other hidden variables are taken in count in the battles.
^_^ GGE is confusing
I think so far your calculation is correct jade. Maybe Barney was mistaken about his wall bonus. There could have been a martyr wave or just more than 4 (level 3 wall, correct?) belfrys...
Without that 1,8 factor you get:
Z= 2,028 > X
A= 1,540 < Y
It's only a 80 point difference but that doesnt necessarily mean its only 1 traveling crossbowman left at the end. If there's one thing we don't know, it's how losses for the victor are calculated.
[1389270]
BobFighter834 (INT2) [None]
:: Sept. 12, 2012, 7:37 p.m.
Starting Line wrote: »If you're referring to my post yesterday, I was talking about either vet.mace or vet.crossbow on identical RBCs with regular crossbows. I lost 3 vet.crossbows but only 1 vet.maceman (http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?32519-defending-attackers&p=328081&viewfull=1#post328081).
I was talking about you, but another person also said something like this:
A group of people were trying to calculate something in a battle. Another person said something like "I'm glad that you're all enthusiastic, but from what I have found out, there is some luck element in the battles so you're not going to get an exact formula".
It was only a suggestion, but BraveHeart's idea combined with a potential luck factor could have turned this from a win to a loss.
[1389388]
FriedrichEngels (DE1) [None]
:: Sept. 13, 2012, 12:10 a.m.
kudos to braveheart!
That formula makes a lot more sense. I noticed it was odd that jade applied both def. vs. melee and def. vs. ranged skill of all units at the same time. One unit should only be able to defend against a melee attacker or a ranged attacker.
I'm still not convinced about the luck factor though. Can someone prove that there are different outcomes for flanks with exact same attackers, defenders and bonuses? I've never seen that and I get forwarded a lot of combat reports (although most with uneven defenses).
That formula makes a lot more sense. I noticed it was odd that jade applied both def. vs. melee and def. vs. ranged skill of all units at the same time. One unit should only be able to defend against a melee attacker or a ranged attacker.
I'm still not convinced about the luck factor though. Can someone prove that there are different outcomes for flanks with exact same attackers, defenders and bonuses? I've never seen that and I get forwarded a lot of combat reports (although most with uneven defenses).
[1389389]
FastLuke4 [None]
:: Sept. 13, 2012, 12:14 a.m.
the other player had travling knights
[1389453]
Duterte (INT1) [None]
:: Sept. 13, 2012, 5:29 a.m.
Finding the Luck Factor maybe is like finding the Higgs Boson Particle... hehehe.... I'll try to find one battle report where one RBC attack of mine with IDENTICAL left and right flanks yielded DIFFERENT results... it left me scratching my head how one side has ZERO LOSS while the other side has some casualties...
[1389533]
sucmfic [None]
:: Sept. 13, 2012, 2 p.m.
BraveHeart wrote: »...it left me scratching my head how one side has ZERO LOSS while the other side has some casualties...
I've seen this quite a few times too... surely that is evendence enough there is a hidden factor of chance/luck?
[1389675]
FriedrichEngels (DE1) [None]
:: Sept. 13, 2012, 6:53 p.m.
I've seen this quite a few times too... surely that is evendence enough there is a hidden factor of chance/luck?
Not for me, it's not! :P
I want a screen shot plus a screen shot of the tools used
[1391263]
FriedrichEngels (DE1) [None]
:: Sept. 17, 2012, 2:32 p.m.
okay here we go... Robber baron 10 (1 to level 11):
Attachment not found.Attachment not found.Attachment not found.
However, that doesn't seem to be luck, because this exact result was predicted in the robber baron guide (although with heavy crossbowmen instead of veterans). http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?19985-Robber-Baron-Guide
Maybe 14 citizens are just enough to kill a crossbowman (I should have tested that in the middle). 13 seems to be the number where the stats are even and either side wins 50% of the time. I just can't see it in the numbers...
Attachment not found.Attachment not found.
Also, attack power does seem to play a role in defending... Citizens don't have travel or loot stats but they do have attack power.
Attachment not found.Attachment not found.Attachment not found.
However, that doesn't seem to be luck, because this exact result was predicted in the robber baron guide (although with heavy crossbowmen instead of veterans). http://en.board.goodgamestudios.com/empire/showthread.php?19985-Robber-Baron-Guide
Maybe 14 citizens are just enough to kill a crossbowman (I should have tested that in the middle). 13 seems to be the number where the stats are even and either side wins 50% of the time. I just can't see it in the numbers...
Attachment not found.Attachment not found.
Also, attack power does seem to play a role in defending... Citizens don't have travel or loot stats but they do have attack power.
[1393338]
Duterte (INT1) [None]
:: Sept. 23, 2012, 5:41 a.m.
Hey how did you get that image from the "farmer"? Where to click?
I however disagree that attack power gets into play while being on the defensive. This will mess up game play. If you see spearman you attack with crossbowman... you see bowman you attack with maceman... You fight using an enemy's weakness when possible...
I however disagree that attack power gets into play while being on the defensive. This will mess up game play. If you see spearman you attack with crossbowman... you see bowman you attack with maceman... You fight using an enemy's weakness when possible...
[1393359]
BobFighter834 (INT2) [None]
:: Sept. 23, 2012, 8:11 a.m.
BraveHeart wrote: »Hey how did you get that image from the "farmer"? Where to click?
I however disagree that attack power gets into play while being on the defensive. This will mess up game play. If you see spearman you attack with crossbowman... you see bowman you attack with maceman... You fight using an enemy's weakness when possible...
To get the image, go to your defence (or a castle with farmers that you've already spied on) and click on a flank with armed citizens. Now click on the picture of the armed citizens.
This works with any troop - norsemen, defensive kingsguard, even normal troops like bowmen and 2-handed sword.
You can't disagree with attack power being used in defensive battles. It is a fact that attack power is not used while defending - a moderator stated this once.
[1393434]
FriedrichEngels (DE1) [None]
:: Sept. 23, 2012, 1:04 p.m.
I didnt know GGS reaveals all their secrets to you when they make you a moderator...
[1393440]
BobFighter834 (INT2) [None]
:: Sept. 23, 2012, 1:19 p.m.
Starting Line wrote: »I didnt know GGS reaveals all their secrets to you when they make you a moderator...
I'm not a moderator and it's not a secret. I found it out when Jadet (or another player - not really sure) pointed it out to me, and Jadet isn't a mod either.
[1393452]
PurplePancakes [None]
:: Sept. 23, 2012, 1:54 p.m.
makes it sound like some one else was a modBobFighter834 wrote: »and Jadet isn't a mod either.