Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 94

Thread: War Win Formula Broken?

  1. #1
    Forum Addict TheOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,044

    War Win Formula Broken?

    Initially, I calculated the WW formula as

    let i be the range of kingdoms you war,

    (1) WW number = SUMMATION all i [ (avg relative nw)*(1 + enemy kingdom i war wins/total wars)] *Ratio is calculated at the time of defeat of opposing kingdom*

    OR

    (2) WW number = SUMMATION all i [ (avg relative nw)*(1+ enemy kd i war wins(at the time of declaration)/2)]

    I took several kingdoms WW number into consideration and both formulas gave the same value as that in the charts. I believe that (1) was the true formula as (2) doesnt make that much sense later in the age. And I thought the devs did a pretty good job with (1).

    However, I realised that both formulas are wrong after I saw ED WW number as 3.10. Their relative KD nw is 103%. (1) would give 1.72 (1.03*1.67). Thus, ED WW number has to be 1.03 x '3'. I have not figured out how '3' is calculated (that makes sense with the other references that I took)

    Not taking anything away from ED (yes they did beat a good warring kd EJ. and good war fought from both sides), but isnt it a little broken that a kingdom at 0/0 gets 3.10 ww over a kingdom who is 2/2?

    Does this mean if kingdom A (0/0) engage in war against kingdom B (3/3), even though both kingdoms are equally skilled, Kingdom A will get like 3.5-4.5 WW if they win while kingdom B gets 1.1-1.2 WW? Isnt it a little too extreme the other way round and unfortunate for kingdom B if they win?? (cough cough. happening soon?)

    Anyone else figured out the true WW formula for this age yet?

    This current WW system is too drastic and extreme. Yes, the WW formula should encourage and reward kingdoms for fighting other kingdoms that are 'equally skilled'. However, the amount of ww gained is just too large?

    I hope that the devs should seriously consider using (1) as the ww formula. It's actually quite fair and just in my opinion. I may be wrong, but please do consult the community.

    -cJ
    Last edited by TheOne; 11-10-2013 at 08:54.

  2. #2
    Forum Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    1,030
    Yeah, it does seem ****ed that a 0/0 can go 1/1 with 3.10. Tho if someone beat them, then that kingdom will gain much too?
    Last edited by munk; 11-10-2013 at 08:40.

  3. #3
    007 licence to post Anri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    5,692
    Seems a bit screwed up
    #?

    #42

    #Pandas

    #Simians

    K L A
    Kaer Loche Alliance

    Real life of Anri - Utopia addict
    http://instagram.com/henke82

  4. #4
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    62
    It must take into account not only the no. ww of opposing kd, but no. ww of your own kd (with a miniumum of 1x ratio):
    0/0 win 0/0; 6/6 win 0/0; etc = 1x ratio
    1/1 win 1/1; 2/2 win 2/2; etc = 1.5x ratio
    0/0 win 1/1; 1/1 win 2/2; etc = 2x ratio
    0/0 win 2/2 = 3x ratio
    0/0 win 6/6 = 6x ratio

    New tactic for ww crown, pump sci for 10 weeks then win 2 wars against high ww kds, bang 10+ ww...

  5. #5
    Postaholic 13nesta13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    806
    thats just beyond broken. it just discourages warring for the first 8 weeks. so can you hypothesise the war win formula, assuming your guess is right?

    if thats the guess, then what munk suggested is invalid. ED is now considered a 1/1 kd, and anyone who beats them DOES not get a huge war win factor.
    Last edited by 13nesta13; 11-10-2013 at 09:39.

  6. #6
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    62
    (ratio of kd size) * ww mod * balance mod

    ww mod = [ (1 + no. enemy kd ww at declaration – no. own kd ww at declaration)]
    ww mod = 1 for values <1

    If enemy kd ww = own kd ww, balance mod = 1.5; except when own kd ww = 0
    Otherwise balance mod = 1


    The ww mod I'm pretty sure about based on a few kd's with 1/1 ww but show up as 2+ww, and ED's recent war. Balance might be different in kds with higher ww's, eg. 3/3 vs 3/3, dunno yet cant confirm.
    Last edited by Duke_; 11-10-2013 at 10:29.

  7. #7
    Postaholic 13nesta13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    806
    so am I right in understanding you're saying only opponents absolute war win no. matter?
    and not their win % (2 wars won out of 3) and their avg opponent size.

    ie. the opponent im fighting now is 4/6 record. and their opponents avg size is 75%.

    im 0/0. yet when I beat this ghetto kd with that type of record I'll be rewarded with 5 ww?

    lol forgive me for saying this, but devs if you're seeing this and duke happens to be right I'm sure most of us would rather have the old formula. this is way broken and doesn't seem to encourage what you intended.

    you're just encouraging later wars and "top feeding".

  8. #8
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    62
    Only have 3 kd's as a point of reference, but based on that, yeah only the absolute no. ww matter

    Edit. Misunderstood your post, I thought you said the enemy kd was 75% of your size. (Enemy kd's Opponent avg size doesnt matter, so yeah it would be 5 ww if both kds are same size)
    So in your example
    no ww = 0.75 * 5 = 3.75 ww
    Last edited by Duke_; 11-10-2013 at 10:54.

  9. #9
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    332
    +1 for WW formula being even more jacked up then last age. Pump until then end... land drop to the size of the highest ww kd and war them for the 'crown' if you can even call it that. Looks like another age where the ww charts are completely ignored cause of the bad code writing.

    This means that someone can win the "Most Warring Kingdom in the World" by ending the age with 1/1. Yeah they are indeed the most warring kd in the world.... haha what a joke.

  10. #10
    Forum Addict TheOne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    1,044
    Can we have a dev/mod comment on this issue please?

    I understand that the majority of the posters here are from top whore-ing kingdoms and the ww formula mechanics does not concern them much. In fact, this new change favours kingdoms who whore/pump science for the whole age and fight 2 wars and bammmmm 9+wins. (I hope I do not come across as too rude or frank over here)

    However, the majority of the kingdoms in this game right now are 'warring' kingdoms. Yes, I agree that there should be some reward in the ww mechanics such that it accounts for the 'level' of the opposing kingdom that you fight, but the current values that are being noted now seems way too huge and extreme.

    I hope the dev/mods realise that alot of players choose to play in the warring tier because 1. they feel it's more exciting 2. they do not possess enough in-game knowledge to challenge for land/ww 3. do not want to get involved in extreme utopia politics (politics is way lesser among the top warring kds). Thus, they would also want to see their result of fighting numerous wars be reflected in their war win number (with the necessary adjustments made for the strength of the kingdom you war against), but they would find it unjust if a pumped up kingdom at 0/0 wins a 100% win rate kd (let's say 4/4) and suddenly goes to 5+ ww.

    Any formula that considers absolute numbers (no of war wins) instead of relative numbers (ratio of war wins) is abusable and broken in my opinion.

    I have spoken to a couple of guys, and they feel that
    (1) WW number = SUMMATION all i [ (avg relative nw)*(1 + enemy kingdom i war wins/total wars)] *Ratio is calculated at the time of defeat of opposing kingdom*
    has sufficient reward in the formula

    -cJ

  11. #11
    Postaholic 13nesta13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    806
    it would have been even better and more accurate/challenging/rewarding if the win formula retroactively adjusts as the age progresses to account for the wins of the kds we have beaten earlier in the age.

    because we nv know when we fight a top kd and when we win that should count for more. For example two top kd fight when both at 1/1. obviously one got to lose. say kd A loses. later on in the age kd A has 5/6 record and kd B 5/5. kd B total win on the charts should reflect that they beat a tough kd in kd A, even though they faced off at 1/1.

    However, seeing that the devs have screwed up so badly on the current formula I'll be glad enough to settle for any bit of normalization and review on the current one, than to reach for the sky and ask for what I just proposed.

  12. #12
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    332
    Quote Originally Posted by 13nesta13 View Post
    it would have been even better and more accurate/challenging/rewarding if the win formula retroactively adjusts as the age progresses to account for the wins of the kds we have beaten earlier in the age.

    because we nv know when we fight a top kd and when we win that should count for more. For example two top kd fight when both at 1/1. obviously one got to lose. say kd A loses. later on in the age kd A has 5/6 record and kd B 5/5. kd B total win on the charts should reflect that they beat a tough kd in kd A, even though they faced off at 1/1.

    However, seeing that the devs have screwed up so badly on the current formula I'll be glad enough to settle for any bit of normalization and review on the current one, than to reach for the sky and ask for what I just proposed.
    Think you're asking a little much with that. It would be great to have those things taken into account... but that would involve the devs to put more than 10 min into this game which I find it hard to believe. Considering they get paid little to nothing to keep this game running... I would say using the formula outlined by cJ would be a lot better and easier for them to impliment.

  13. #13
    Game Support Bishop's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,332
    Actually we dislike the idea of retroactively adjusting scores, that's why its not in the current formula. Formula is something like number 1 in ops post. You should probably wait until you see how it works when you have more wins and ratios to compare though.
    Support email: utopiasupport@utopia-game.com <- please use this and don't just PM me| Account Deleted/Inactive | Utopia Facebook Page | #tactics <-- click to join IRC|
    PM DavidC for test server access

  14. #14
    Postaholic 13nesta13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    806
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Actually we dislike the idea of retroactively adjusting scores, that's why its not in the current formula. Formula is something like number 1 in ops post. You should probably wait until you see how it works when you have more wins and ratios to compare though.
    Certainly looking forward to seeing how the charts will look when KD's progress to 3/3. Quite a few 2/2 KD's facing off each other right now. I shall wait for their wars to conclude before posting further.

    Still, 0/0 KD beats 2/2 KD and gets 3.1 points? With that in mind, I cannot even try to figure/speculate what reasonable formula was used.

  15. #15
    Forum Addict
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    1,014
    It seems like the WW formula requires that kd's war kd's that have already shown they can win wars inorder to get competative points. The WW chart refllecting if a kd beats another kd with lots of wins seems like a step in the right direction.

    It doesn't need to be retroactive, because kd's will need to seek out kd's that have proven to be successful if they want to move up the chart. Whether you war a good or bad kd early isn't as important as when you have both proven yourself to be good and still war eachother.
    Some Quick Tips: http://forums.utopia-game.com/showth...799-Quick-Tips

    "P.S. I'm doing a porn shoot thursday . you can keep utopia." - Huangmo

    [11:12] <@clareyafk> i'm an excellent whore

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •