cute to think i can figure out that
Bug Reports on GitHub, Please!
Blahblah got you fixed up 
@Lord Thane can we finally get rid of the army return bug?
My KS increased more than 90k when my army returns, making my target out of range 
hahaha.
saadht I think TheKeeper is working on that one. @MithicYort you can prolly put that one on git so we can track it.
Lord Thane I hate to nag but its been days of why I killed 178 knights on an attack where I sent 100% of my army with 2:1 MC's. Can you please take a few minutes and look into this?
Mack10 was the attack from before I updated the MCs? The GT/MC weren't working when I tested them a few days ago, actually working opposite in that they were buffing the attacker lol, should be fixed now tho. Checking reports at this point is gonna be pretty useless because I'm probably gonna build/deploy the target weighted damage allocation idea this week, + couple other battle modifier tests.
So tentatively by the end of the week battles are going to be drastically different, and we'll need new tests to see how the changes shake out.
Lord Thane This was after MC's were fixed I believe.
I posted this days ago, DM'd you and multiple people have mentioned it in the forum, that you have posted on.
This was HUGE bug issue but you seemed to not have time for it.
Now you are saying its too late to go back and look.
Just trying to understand why?
Mack10 yes definitely don't have time, it's a passion project and manpower is extremely limited.
I've looked at a hundred battle reports, and discussed this at length over a dozen threads and hundreds of comments, and now the poll. Time now is to run the test and get new formulas for the battle calc in place.
We have a plan in place to test/fix multiple core mechanics in the battle calc, as long as there's time available to test/build/deploy everything discussed so far then all old battles will be totally obsolete by the end of the week. We'll need new tests/reports to see how the fixes went.
@MithicYort is volunteering to help soft through player reports to help people's voice get heard through the crowd, and TheKeeper is working on a tool we can use to more easily analyze players battle reports. So at least there's some things in the pipe to help improve bug reporting and testing. Theres more stuff in other threads about this too, like we're releasing the battle sim to all players, etc.
Mack10 looks to be the same issue as most of the other reports, the attacking army got its ass handed to them because they were such a smaller army. This has been discussed at length over and over and over - you attack someone that enormously outclasses you and you will get zeroed.
Attacker Totals
Melee Attack Power: 33,635
Ranged Attack Power: 37,395
Total Offensive Output: 71,030
Total Defense: 78,700
Defender Totals
Melee Attack Power: 186,473
Ranged Attack Power: 45,282
Total Offensive Output: 231,755
Total Defense: 303,937
Did you try a truesight before sending that army to its slaughter? Defender also has maxed out MC, saving them from even more possible casualties.
Lord Thane this issue wasnt that he lost. but that he only killed 178 knights and 0 of every other troop. as i understand it losses are divided by % of the troops.
- Edited
DougEfresh looks good to me, pretty much lines up with everything we've gone over in other threads.
Everything else aside, in the most basic terms, he got clapped at range = 78k defense against 90k ranged offense.
Maybe his 38k ranged attack against the 303k defense should have resulted in more casualties for defender, maybe not cuz this is the core battle mechanic that everyone said they wanted last week = someone sends tiny army against a massive army then the suicider should get clapped.
The defender also had a strategy at play and teched out and magic and whatever else modifiers I didn't include.
As it stands, under the current battle mechanics that everyone knows about and everyone has been talking about - this is exactly the results I would expect in that battle scenario. I wouldn't have sent the attack if that's what a truesight told me I was facing.
It's a balance issue too. Like if you send 10 archers against 100 archers, how many archers should the 10 people able to kill? 1? 10? What if those 100 archers have a bunch of buff modifiers as well, then how many should die? What if it's 10 archers against 50 knights and they're using Knights Charge strat? Then it's 10 archers with 20 ranged/0 melee/30 defense against 50 knights with 400 attack/+500 defense, now they can maybe kill 2-3 knights?
Theres so many modifiers I didn't consider in looking at it, but in the most simplest terms it goes back to the basic knowledge we all know - 1v1 can result in a swing either way, 2v1 or even 1.2 v 1 will usually win with mid casualties, and a 1v2 will result in heavy casualties, and a 1v3 will result in getting zeroed out.
I think the new battle calcs we've been talking about will make a scenario where just 1 unit type absorbs all the damage (that makes it through) will be less likely. I don't think it will prevent getting zeroed out in these mismatched battles tho.
I liked someone's suggestion to have a strategy where a general can retreat when they know they face a hopeless battle to preserve some troops, maybe that's what we need so there's less battles getting zeroed out.
Lord Thane should change quick retreat to that
DougEfresh I like that idea, we could tweak quick retreat to do that.
Or maybe it should just be a new feature that works all the time, so people stop getting zeroed out. Need to put that to vote.
- Edited
Attacker Totals
Melee Attack Power: 33,635
Ranged Attack Power: 37,395
Total Offensive Output: 71,030
Total Defense: 78,700
Cats - 1838 = 27570*2 For Far fighting (With explosive, didnt add that in cuz i dont know what it is) Range
Inf - 3874 = 19370
Mil - 13033 = 52132
Rider - 5835 = 52515
RT - 26441 = 39661 *2 For far fighting 79322
Bal - 3086 = 30860 *2 for far fighting 61720
Offensive power 196 182 Ranged Alone
Is this divided? And if so How does a Human out range a gnome? with 12k archers?
I am not following your math?
Defender had
5k knights, = 65000
6k heavy infantry, = 60000
6k archers, = 42000
6k mount archers. = 66000
1k pikes = 7000
240,000 Defence
36000 Long Range Damage*2 for FF so 72000 Ranged offensive
I dont want to beat a dead horse, but how can an army full of units, you could never support without this type of resources only kill <1% of another army?
I have never in my 20 years of playing this seen a Battle report with so many units involved and <1% dies?
You make it seem like I fucked up but I dont see how its mathematically possible?
Especially with so much that came home (I can maybe credit some of that to 2:1 MC's)
- Edited
5k knights, 6k heavy infantry, 6k archers, 6k mount archers. And 1k pikes.
These are approximate numbers taking first digit of the unit (rounded down). So “5k” could be 5000-5999, etc. The pike is the only unit that was exactly 1k. If you want to figure the math, consider adding 500 to each unit (except pike) to get the “average”. Nevertheless, I was curious by the attack/defend as well.
At the time:
No Strat
2:1 MC
Bow tech
Sword tech
Knight healing
BAS 5
I should Add
2:1 MC's on attack
BAS 5ish as well
Sling Tech
3/3 SB
Explosive powder
Far Fighting
Xliest
I am upset yes, I wanted to know why I lost, I am given numbers that dont add up and told I sent a weak force against an overwhelmingly strong one when I was in 2nd place. I had a gigantic army that took a week to build and I killed 178 units and kept getting ignored why this happened.
I ask others and everyone else that has looked at the numbers said something isnt right as well.
Why are you jumping into this conversation without anything productive to add? To stir the shit pot?
Mack10 my analysis was based on the data you gave, the battle report, so I assumed that was a zeroed out army on your part. The new data about what you sent would have altered it, as would all the modifiers that weren't counted as well. Unfortunately I don't think anyone has time to look into it any further. Onward and upward we go to the next rounds of testing.
That's what the beta is about too, testing. That's why everyone got resources, and we tweaked tech times. We looked at 100 battle reports and ran polls and had dozens of discussions, now we're moving on to implementing changes. Spending more time on a 101th report isn't going to get us anywhere, we need to focus on getting actual changes in place so we can see if things improved.