why did it work?

[Bijo]

why did it work? after i have tried 99% of som+som with over 140 tests without failing and 30 tests on 98% without failing i started to check the 97% of som+som just now ... and it worked also...if the first gen have no bonus why did it worked then? even with a random factor i should have failed on the other tests i did... i think the first gen have no bonus but the first out of 5 and not the first out of 4
the one that stays at home :)

here is the calcs i did

>.som 83,067 100,288 = 101301
>.calc 101301*0.97 = 98261.97

Offensive Military Effectiveness: 124.0%
(i am in war)
8080 Ogres (8/2) + 8080 War Horses + 4 generals

>.calc 8080*9*1.24*1.03*1.03*1.03 = 98534.25

so som+som showed 101.3 but i send 98.5k i should have fail
unless there is a random factor but even if there is a radom factor i should have fail on all 140 tests i already did but i didnt

so what do you think about that?

[Clampy]

Well, you know my opinion on the matter :)

(For those who don't, I did similar tests to Bijo with similar results)

[VT2]

Your math sucks, Bijo.

8080 orc elites = 64,640 raw offense.
8080 ponies = 8080 raw offense.

64,640+8080=72,720 (x1.33) =96,717.6 modded offense - not 98,534.25.

Since you claim to never have bounced, I'm going to assume you've sent more than the listed defense each and every single time, and since your math is indeed quite awful, few are going to take you seriously.
Actually, you're probably used to that by now.

"What do you think about that?" I don't think you're doing it wrong - I know you're doing it wrong.
If we pretend that you did indeed send my claimed offense, against the listed defense, that would be an undersend of 2.7641%.

We can take your mess of a post in a whole bunch of directions.

1) I claim that all generals past the first sent count. You claim that all generals past the second sent count.
It's a known fact that each general sent, past the first, gives 3% more offense.
Since the second, third, and fourth counts, and you only calculated for the third and fourth to count, but conveniently pretended that you didn't in your' calculations' above, you didn't bounce.
You oversent by 0.2359%.

2) You messed up somewhere.

3) Attacking is so easy, not even you can screw it up.

In conclusion, I win, you lose, and neither you nor Clampy - for all your trolling, stupidity, or pretend-math - can prove that there is a random-factor.
I could run a quad using my inactive human on World of legends now, if I really wanted to, using only straight up math, and making sure I undersent by roughly 3% each time. The result of me doing that would, to no one's surprise, be 4 failed attacks.

How do I know this?
Because I never, ever bounce, and I never, ever oversend by more than a single unit, due to fractions not letting me send 0.2 units, or what have you. There's simply no reason to.

[Prelude]

I think VT2 just owned himself, hard.

8080 orc leets = 8080*8 = 64640
8080 war horses = 8080*1 = 8080
Offensive Military Effectiveness: 124.0%
4 generals, 1st doesnt count so total modifier = 1.09

(64640+8080)*1.24*1.09= 98,288

Obviously different to Bijo due to rounding errors but there you go.

[Bijo]

wtf......are guys kidding me or what?????????????

is this a joke.............

i wrote i send 8080 Ogres (8/2) + 8080 War Horses + 4 generals
i had Offensive Military Effectiveness: 124.0% (plus i am in war)

i used the highest off calc (*9*1.24*1.03*1.03*1.03) and not the lowest like vt2 or Prelude that used (*1.09) should that ppl here will see that even with the highest calc off its still lower then som+som

ppl sometimes cant read.... >.som 83,067 100,288 = 101301

i send below that!!! ok?!

and it didnt fail!!!!!!!!

vt2 or Prelude just wrote a lower off points so its only strengthed my point

i mean wtf comon....

[Prelude]

You realise that unlike most things in utopia, General bonus is actually added right?
so 1.03, 1.06, 1.09
vs 1.03, 1.03^2, 1.03^3

[Bijo]

You realise that unlike most things in utopia, General bonus is actually added right?
so 1.03, 1.06, 1.09
vs 1.03, 1.03^2, 1.03^3

you are missing the point plz read the thread again...

[Mourhelm]

1. Prelude is right - that's 1.09 not 1.03^3
   From the guide:
   

   (note that unlike many other bonuses, the bonus from generals are additive, which means sending all 4 generals will give a 9% offensive bonus)

2. How did you check that your SoM+SoM is right? Did you ever think that it might be wrong?
3. Maybe there is a bug in the game.

[Clampy]

Mourhelm, keep in mind that the guide is quite inaccurate in many cases and just plain wrong in others.

Also the same basic idea has been tested by a number of players before, often hitting eachothers provs so they can read their def and have the friend attack them (csarmi, oyzar, Lead_Pipe and myself to name a few), and all have come to the same basic conclusions - that an undersend can succeed.

I'm going to go with 3. or alternatively that simply the guide is incorrect and there is a factor missing (such as first general for example).

[nfidel2k]

It's easy. Approximately 3000 of his defense points were napping at the time of your attack. You took way too long making your calculations, and they fell asleep. So you actually did oversend.

Or it could be the first general.

Or the random factor.

Or both.

[Bijo]

It's easy. Approximately 3000 of his defense points were napping at the time of your attack. You took way too long making your calculations, and they fell asleep. So you actually did oversend.

Or it could be the first general.

Or the random factor.

Or both.

i have to rule out the random factor because i didnt fail once...
maybe if i had a few fails then there would be some random factor around
but because i didnt and the 97% seems to work also now, then...
i will have to go with the conclusion the the first general have a bonus or that there is a bug in the game

i am thinking more in the lines of...
"only the first general out of five dont have the bonus"
and generals 2,3,4,5 do have it because this way its seems to be all good

[Nobody]

i have always been under the assumption that 4 generals = +12% (3% each)
also, gaging by the listed defense values for the 2 SoMs you have listed, I believe that your SoM calc is wrong, but without knowing the troop counts and DME for those 2 SoMs i cant be positive ... however with *similar* troops counts and *similar* DME, there is no reason those 2 SoMs should add to a higher number than they are.
Check your SoM calc... are you using it set to low, medium or very high accuracy ?

[Bijo]

i have always been under the assumption that 4 generals = +12% (3% each)
also, gaging by the listed defense values for the 2 SoMs you have listed, I believe that your SoM calc is wrong, but without knowing the troop counts and DME for those 2 SoMs i cant be positive ... however with *similar* troops counts and *similar* DME, there is no reason those 2 SoMs should add to a higher number than they are.
Check your SoM calc... are you using it set to low, medium or very high accuracy ?

Nobody i know how som+som works and also what are its limits
i know because i rewrote the code of it myself and as for the so called low, medium or very high "accuracy" its only the range.. and as prove i am only use the -/+25% range no more always

if you wanto check my som+som knowledge i will show you somthing nice
146903104524465 154634846867858 162366589211251 170098331554644 177830073898037 185561816241430 193293558584823
there you have 7 soms with 15 digits numbers thats will give you 2 hits in the 25% range :)

so i think i know how to calc right ;)

[Nobody]

those are just random strings of numbers, not SoM values. please try again. kthnx.

I understand you *wrote* some code or an SoM calculator, but that does NOT prove that your calculations are correct in the first place.

using just the numbers you have listed for defense alone is not enough to actually calculate a real defense. Give us the 2 SoMs in full that you had used instead of just listed defense on the both of them. Going on just those 2 numbers alone without any variance for DME or troop counts is not enough to actually calculate a viable defense.
Until such time as you show the 2 ful SoMs, I will believe that your SoM calculator is in fact the source of your problem.

[Clampy]

Nobody - even if that were the case how do you explain it with the other four or so of us who did it with our own provinces - hence we could simply look in our throne page or military affairs page (if some army out) and read off our defense? Kinda hard to mis-calc that :p