| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Albatross 
Postmaster General
Joined: 11 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1118
|
 Posted: 15 Apr 2012 at 01:00 |
|
Commanders shouldn't earn exp if they die in the battle.
|
 |
JimJams
Forum Warrior
Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496
|
Posted: 15 Apr 2012 at 00:37 |
What I dislike in the way it works now, is the way it chose which sub-army get the casualties. I would prefer if the second pass would get casualties from the most numerous sub-armies and not the way it does now.
|
|
Ander
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
|
Posted: 19 Mar 2012 at 14:14 |
 Createure wrote:
If you set up an army and leave it at home you can see the exact offence/defence values modified by commander heroism/div bonus in the military overview. |
cool! I never thought of it! 
1 man missiles are ok imo, since you can have only 5 commanders in a town and a newly promoted commander doesn't have any heroism bonus. (so you need to resurrect a commander to use him again)
|
|
Createure
Postmaster General
Joined: 07 Apr 2010
Location: uk
Status: Offline
Points: 1191
|
Posted: 19 Mar 2012 at 13:45 |
|
knight commander+pike...
gives you (1 knight + 1 pike) doubled with heroism... ignoring all divisional bonuses the commander might have.
If you set up an army and leave it at home you can see the exact offence/defence values modified by commander heroism/div bonus in the military overview.
IMO commander bonuses are still too high in small armies though... the commander's heroism should not be acting on the commander's own base attack strength... otherwise pairing a commander with a weak unit like a spearman effectively turns the commander into a 1 man missile for sniping 6-10 enemy troops... something we have seen alot of since the rounding-error updates.
|
|
Ander
Postmaster General
Joined: 24 Apr 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1269
|
Posted: 19 Mar 2012 at 13:23 |
HonoredMule wrote:
One of my "participation credit" armies just sacrificed its one commander + one swiftsteed payload and took out 7 units against a force so overwhelmingly large I got no battle report.
Yay me, but no it doesn't seem right. Keep in mind the commander's personal stats aren't supposed to be able to exceed the army total, equivalent to one swiftsteed.
|
commanders personal stats must be the commanders basic unit stat+ the bonus provided by the army to heroism right? A knight commander with heroism upgrade moving with a T1 pike will be as strong as 1 knight attack + 1 pike attack + (1 pike's worth of attack bonus through heroism) I suppose?
Assuming that, the attack of 3 swiftsteeds killing 7 units doesn't seem very skewed. 3x35(attack of swiftsteed)=105 , 7x13(defense of T1 pikes or archers)=91.
Edited by Ander - 19 Mar 2012 at 13:23
|
|
HonoredMule
Postmaster General
Joined: 05 Mar 2010
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 1650
|
Posted: 19 Mar 2012 at 12:18 |
|
One of my "participation credit" armies just sacrificed its one commander + one swiftsteed payload and took out 7 units against a force so overwhelmingly large I got no battle report.
Yay me, but no it doesn't seem right. Keep in mind the commander's personal stats aren't supposed to be able to exceed the army total, equivalent to one swiftsteed.
|
|
"Apparently, quoting me is a 'thing' now."
- HonoredMule
|
|
Mandarins31
Forum Warrior
Joined: 05 Jun 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 418
|
Posted: 18 Mar 2012 at 18:19 |
|
No, 1 large army only, suffuring the same casualties should have suffered more than a 1 unit loss. As i said, i suppose that here, the large army received only 1 casualties, because it was counted as a group that was profiting of the round up (maybe because of a glitch about the 0% casualties)... but the total def power the large army didnt lose was lost by the rest of the small groups.
If you only had the big one, it would have sufferd 9-10 units loss. that's not unfair in terms of amount of def power lost, but in terms of repartition of the loss... but still i guess there were a glitch... though, JimJams didnt show the full report so we cant know... maybe other small groups in that army received 0 casualties.
Edited by Mandarins31 - 18 Mar 2012 at 18:21
|
|
Rill
Postmaster General
Player Council - Geographer
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Location: California
Status: Offline
Points: 7078
|
Posted: 18 Mar 2012 at 17:55 |
I agree that there seems to have been an overcorrection in terms of allocating casualties. My city was attacked by one chariot and the losses were a chariot, a pikeman and a militiaman, in spite of the fact that I had around 5k defenders on the square and a level 20 wall.
Perhaps a third check needs to be made the ensure that the total casualties is not larger than it would have been if there had been no divisions? Or the logic should determine the number of "defense points" lost and only deduct that many defenders, choosing randomly from among the weakest units? That was the way I thought it was supposed to work, but it doesn't seem like it's working that way.
|
|
JimJams
Forum Warrior
Joined: 20 Sep 2011
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 496
|
Posted: 18 Mar 2012 at 14:11 |
Bonaparta wrote:
Divisioning is simply not profitable anymore, actually it makes you loose more units. One huge stack would loose 1 unit as well. |
I would be ok if it was just not profitable, but actually there is a relevant negative effect.
|
|
Bonaparta
Postmaster
Joined: 03 Nov 2011
Location: Milky Way
Status: Offline
Points: 541
|
Posted: 18 Mar 2012 at 13:10 |
|
Divisioning is simply not profitable anymore, actually it makes you loose more units. One huge stack would loose 1 unit as well.
|
|
Tweet
06MAR12 - Gaming the Combat Casualty Algorithm