BPA and libraries.

[johnnydoe]

This guy I was talking to said that libraries are useless if one has less than 700 BPA. Is that true?

Have any of you non-sages ever used libraries? On what BPA? He also said that 10% libs is the golden number. Why is that?

Thank you in advance.

[Ethan]

Due to the various non-linear equations involved, it is important to realize that any linear rule of thumb will break down at extreme values. But, with extensive simulation, I had found that a good rule of thumb was x% libs for every x*100 BPA for a sage. Due to the sage bonus, it takes 1.7 (1.69) times as much bpa in a sci to get the same bonus for a non-sage. Thus, for a non-sage prov, one wants around x% libs for x*170 BPA. Thus at 700 bpa you want 700/170 = 4.1% libs.

This formula is usually only close when x is between 5% and 15% - usually below 5% they just aren't worth it at all. (It's that non linear bit causing problems.) 10% holds no magic value - strat designers just have problems with non-round numbers. Although it is rare that more than 10% is useful except for a determined sage, so it does provide a loose maximum. Given that, I'd have said go to 5% at 800 or 850 BPA, and don't both before then.

I will eventually get time to try and rebuild my static sim with the TG/Forts solver built in, but it might take a long time. And even when done it'd be a fairly simplistic tool meant for modding to your particular prov's situation and hardcore analysis. (The TG/Fort solver involves a quintic! Not for the faint of heart when it comes to math.)

Also remember, all these static optimizations run at the edge - anything fairly close will be 99% effective, and dynamic considerations and play-style prevent any truly "right" answer. I use libs well before the rule of thumb because I am used to them and can maximize them better than I can just simply overdrafting more with extra banks... for others it is just the reverse. Use static optimizations as a guild for your instincts and skill, not a replacement.

[vines]

Yo you're wrong about it taking .69 more time to get as much bpa in a sci to get the same bonus for a non-sage. Just by eye-balling it would take around 3 times the amount of time for a non-sage to get the same science-bonus. I'm it most likely more than 3 times but like I said I'm just eye-balling it.

Johnny Doe don't listen to that fool that told you that. Play the way you want to play. I have used libs in the past with far less than 700bpa. Any thing above 120bpa is not worth it.

[Ethan]

That was even more incoherent than usual. At least the vines math is in typical form.
I'm guessing "anything above 120bpa is not worth it." should actually read "below" instead of above. Where the 120 came from I've no clue, though I admit my value is also a "take on faith" number for everyone except myself.
I am quite sure that it a perfectly accurate first order approximation to say that a non sage needs 169% of a sage's sci to get the same result. (Nothing about how the sci is acquired, nor how quickly - just the result.) Firstly, whatever sci multiple can be ignored since it will multiply both values equally - thus we can pretend it is 1. Lets take a sage with 100 bpa and a non-sage with 169 bpa in a sci category. Sage has 100^.5 = 10X the base sci, then gains a 30% bonus for 13% sci before libs. Non sage has 169^.5 = 13X base sci, with no bonus so 13% sci with no libs. Thus showing they produce the identical sci level.

Using algebra: x is sage bpa, y is non sage bpa, w is sci effect (for both).
Then w = (x^.5)*1.3
And w = y^.5
Thus y^.5 = (x^.5)*1.3
Squaring gives y = ((x^.5)*1.3)^2 = (x^.5)^2*(1.3)^2 = x * (1.3)^2 = x*1.69
Thus y = 1.69*x, with no dependence on w.

I assume that was overkill for most of the readers - but if I'm feeling like responding at all, I might as well go all in.

[vines]

The 120bpa is where I stop at any more than that is a way. I was answering the question unlike you. Also you have to take in account how much faster and cheaper a sage can get books because geting the books is the most important thing. If you don't take in account each different science then you have this. A sage with 100bpa not taking in account the +30% sci eff. you end up with 130bpa. Now a none sage with 100bpa how much more bpa would they need to match the sage 30%. But it is going to take the none sage twice the effort for the none sage to get that raw130bpa then it would take a sage to get that raw130bpa. You're forumla is wrong and not done, by the way.

[nipster]

Sorry to revive an old thread, but I was wondering about what % of libraries should you have at around 3,000 BPA

[nooblet]

do you want better channeling and gains science? everything else, you can only calculate what the libs would be equivalent to in farms+banks+homes, and run just enough libs to pay off that land percentage... and it's not particularly necessary, since there are a zillion other buildings that have better direct effects.

never sacrifice a building you need for libs... just like homes, except libs have a lot more going for them.

personally i'd rather double up in size and be far more useful to my kingdom, than sit on 4000 bpa and feel awesome raping 1k acre provinces.

[nipster]

Here is my sciences now, with 9.7% Libraries Avian/Sage, running 4.6 WPA Raw and 3.6 TPA Raw, I want to honor whore in our next war so magic and Theivery sciences are important, I do a learn attack every 8 hours OOW. I want to adjust my libraries for maximum benefit

** Effects Summary (Known Science Only) **
51.4% Income
33.2% Building Effectiveness
27.4% Population Limits
153.8% Food Production
43.2% Gains in Combat
159% Thievery Effectiveness
167.3% Magic Effectiveness & Rune Production

[nooblet]

max tg+tax, reasonable level of thief dens, maybe forts depending on how large you are. have a plan for when you inevitably get fat.

if you can fit libs somewhere in there, great, but don't sacrifice any of those three buildings. you're going to need to be fed food, gc, and runes throughout the war.

short-term honor whore is garbage anyway.

[Persain]

Cant give exact advice on lib seeing as your concept is a lot differnt than mine. I'd use t/m science to lower my raws down to suicidal levels. However what i can say is

short-term honor whore is garbage anyway.

this. Unless your left untouched in a 6+ day war your not gonna put on that much honor. You'd be lucky to get 200 honor/day via t/m ops assuming u dont get hit and no one is oping u back. Against a competent kd your mod wpa/tpa are still gonna make you vulnerable to MS/NS so i'd at least try fit libraries in around a standard attacker build instead of constructing your build around libraries.

[tak3shi]

Here is my sciences now, with 9.7% Libraries Avian/Sage, running 4.6 WPA Raw and 3.6 TPA Raw, I want to honor whore in our next war so magic and Theivery sciences are important, I do a learn attack every 8 hours OOW. I want to adjust my libraries for maximum benefit

** Effects Summary (Known Science Only) **
51.4% Income
33.2% Building Effectiveness
27.4% Population Limits
153.8% Food Production
43.2% Gains in Combat
159% Thievery Effectiveness
167.3% Magic Effectiveness & Rune Production

Wth you must have been chained to pieces whats that on in excess of 5k bpa?

[Arch]

Wth you must have been chained to pieces whats that on in excess of 5k bpa?

^ plus 25% libs maybe. :D

[tetley]

I assume that was overkill for most of the readers - but if I'm feeling like responding at all, I might as well go all in.

this technical stuff delivers. whenever I read an ethan math post I feel impressed.

[Lestat]

Listen to Ethan