King's 2nd Tournament - Bloodthirst For Knowledge

In other words, keep the std deviation large on small attacks and narrow it to nearly the average for large, costly attacks. I agree, seems more fair that way, especially if the dice roll is just once per attack. Perhaps, a dice roll/each 10 beasts in the group or each 10 attackers so that the chances of a large attack yielding nothing would diminish to nearly zero while still providing surprises for those only able to attack a small group. This gives more motivation to the large players who are playing for tournament wins, and not merely commander xp, more motivation to clear out the Legions so that the smaller players can get more playable spawns.

bow locks wrote: Just to balance my earier whinge; Attackers: Unit: Quantity: Casualties: Survivors: Commander: hoodietwo Longbowman 1 Damaged for 0, 600 health remains. Troops: Knights 130 0 130 Defenders: Unit: Quantity: Casualties: Survivors: Troops: Small Salamanders 2 2 0 Your victorious troops retrieved: 24 2 Salamander Claws from the slain foes. Right. This is cool. Clearly balanced. Clearly just statistical anomalies.

Hi Bow,

Um.

I could equally pull an example out of the db of someone receiving more than 300 items from a Horde....

Can I ask you to ask someone in your alliance (I'd suggest someone good with numbers... HM perhaps?) to explain the utter irrational futility in pulling a couple of sample numbers out of a hat containing a large number of randomly generated samples and comparing these two sample numbers in order to try and ascertain the probability distribution of what other numbers remain in the hat.

For sure, the risk/reward ratio may (or may not) be fair for the larger vs smaller spawns - but this will *only* be apparent (or not) when you look at all attacks on Legions vs Handfuls as a whole on the entire weighted probability distribution outcome curve.

Drop rates and propensities may (or may not) be adjusted by us, depending on what we find when we look at the data. 

To be clear, we know what the maths says the outcome will be over a statistically significant sample size - the only thing we might alter the maths for are gameplay factors such as the frequency of what *we* want to drop (ie the common vs rare drops), and under what circumstances they drop.

Yours, putting the 'ballistic' into probaballisticly ,

SC

Just to balance my earier whinge;

Attackers:	Unit:	Quantity:	Casualties:	Survivors:
Commander: hoodietwo	Longbowman	1	Damaged for 0, 600 health remains.
Troops:	Knights	130	0	130

Defenders:	Unit:	Quantity:	Casualties:	Survivors:
Troops:	Small Salamanders	2	2	0

Your victorious troops retrieved:
24
2 Salamander Claws
from the slain foes.

Right. This is cool. Clearly balanced. Clearly just statistical anomalies.

yep, number 1 rule: stay away from legions.

@SC: would it be possible for us to get some stats during or after the tourny that breaks down how each Race performs in the tourny? It'd be nice to get some inter-species rivalry going I think. :P

Now... anyone want to bet against me when I say...

Biggest collection: #1 Human, #2 Elf, #3 Orc, #4 Dwarf
Unique collection: #1 Elf, #2 Human, #3 Orc, #4 Dwarf

...?

Brids17 wrote: Is it me or is larger not equalling more? I know it's suppose to be random but I'm finding killing groups of 10 work out to have better odds than killing groups of 300. I killed ten spiders today and got one leg from them. That's ten kills per item. I also killed 66 dogs and got 4 items, that's 16.5 per item. 175 brown bears and 7 items, 25 per item. 374 spiders and 12 items, 31 kills per item. Not only that, 31 kills per item for a horde is the highest I've ever received. Doesn't sound very random to me.