Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 23 of 23

Thread: Age 61 Power Rankings

  1. #16
    Forum Fanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Persain View Post
    who the crap runs 3 m tpa and wpa on an attacker. Its been a while since i looked at his exact numbers. He doesn't do "wrong" math its just his actual math is hidden a bit. For example, its not 65:35% unit count, its 65:35 pure number count. i.e. a race thats all specs with no leets would have 6500 off specs, 3500 def specs. However a race with a 65/0 leet and a 0/35 dspec would have 5000 each dspecs and leets. Its y i said his numbers are "Ease" of running an attacker, or put more simply its a ghetto power ranking for those that dont really constantly tweak their prov.
    Well, I don't know what you run in ghettos. I picked the 3 mod numbers for the sake of demonstration, I have no idea what numbers he chose. You could have more or less. You're right; the TPA is probably high on an undead. 1.5 mod instead, maybe? The idea was to come up with something universal rather than tailor it and he said he wasn't looking at any kind of a/t or a/m, I guess I could go lower, but going lower benefits the undead more than the halfer, so that doesn't seem like it would be ideal. What would you run on an attacker?

    I realize that that's how he does his 65:35, but that's a dumb way of doing it. My numbers are more realistic. (and look at that, they reflect a different outcome).

  2. #17
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Zauper View Post
    Well, I don't know what you run in ghettos. What would you run on an attacker?
    personally 1 tpa and 1.5 raw wpa is what i suggest my kd run as pure attackers. when it comes to attackers if your having yours try to NS/cast as a base on mine kd wide i consider that a small victory. As for HIS assumptions i don't remember exact what he did but
    Quote Originally Posted by Zauper View Post
    I realize that that's how he does his 65:35, but that's a dumb way of doing it. My numbers are more realistic. (and look at that, they reflect a different outcome).
    /me nods
    ;)
    As i said this numbers reflect one set of assumptions. Its a good starting point to examine the races and provides a general feel for the races, even if its not a perfect picture. He never posted these power rankings for people like you/me they are for people who cant do the math and yet still want a general picture of pure military power/nw efficiency.

    Also for what its worth hes not incredibly wrong as far as overall strength halfer was pretty powerful this age ours ran about 35-36 pop/acre with only marginal 1k bpa end of age. And while that says nothing of kd wide strategies like yours to run warheads and simply outgrow, then out pump the server, or building cows/calfs, having hybrids...the final MPNW____%Max that he calculates does provide a little insight into nw efficiency and is a good place for the average player to begin thinking about the races.

  3. #18
    Scribe
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    OSU
    Posts
    294
    i ran close to 4 mtpa during our eoa war as orc tact, but i do it because I don't lose thieves to intel and after a day or so I can op other attackers.

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    14
    hahaha Meow ?? ooo please tell me I'm right....

  5. #20
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,524
    @Zauper - can't take long to respond, but in general your values looked like a sufficiently similar approach. I'd used 10% pop sci, and only 2 mWPA (3 mTPA though), but a higher pes/a of 8. I'd have expected the first two to partially balance the last one, so I'm unsure how we have as big a gap as we do. I'll rerun my numbers in a day and a half with your assumptions and see if it is just more sensitive to pes/a than I though.
    I should note I use a dynamic mix of TGs and forts individual for each race, 30% space split between them. No horses though.

    Perhaps wrongly to most, but I'm measuring Military Per NW, not per acre. Though the opa does list higher on halfling, most of their "4%" gap is due to lower NW/A. I've found the Military Per NW to be better than just OPA, others will scream at this. OPA on fixed def is pretty close usually.
    it's vs. its is ambiguous - from now on I'm attempting to use the proper possessive it's, and the contraction 'tis. (Its will just be the plural.)

    Think Different

  6. #21
    Post Demon
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    1,524
    Final Changes Power Rankings:

    Rankings____OPA_____DPA____NW/A____MPNW____%Max
    Elf_________74.69____40.22___179.71____0.64____83.06%
    Faery______67.21____36.19___154.17____0.67____87.13%
    Human_____72.51____39.04___164.68____0.68____87.99%
    Avian______75.13____40.45___163.29____0.71____91.95%
    Dwarf______77.46____41.71___167.99____0.71____92.15%
    Orc________78.29____42.16___166.82____0.72____93.79%
    Undead_____82.83____44.6____171.89____0.74____96.30%
    Halfling_____82.82____44.6____165.52____0.77___100.00%


    Only Orc is directly changed from the Prelim values - it's science penalty is dropped to -15%. The other values have moved slightly because I didn't run the TG/Forts optimizer last time, and used 20% TG, 10% forts on all races. (UD picks up .04% from this.)

    RE: halfer vs. UD
    Zauper, I've found the two big pieces of the puzzle that were missing. First, your lower pes/a assumption adds about 1% to UD's strength. Secondly, I assume TW is in use - removing it lowers halfer by about 2%. [Edit - er, UD has it too, so that doesn't explain the HA vs. UD gap, though it helps with the rest.]
    Combine all this with your use of OPA/DPA against my use of OPNW and DPNW, and we get two distinctly different outcomes. Whose assumptions are most realistic (and for which players?) is a question we are unlikely to resolve.

    All that said - in many ways, I take your calculation as a *confirmation* of my general methodology. While we disagree on which race is strongest, we both have halfer and UD within about 4% of each other. I think we'd both be comfortable saying someone wishing to play attacker should be fine with either race in most kingdoms (aka, my just above 200th kingdom). While I think neither of us would claim faery works naturally as an attacker. (Not that I don't play stupid stuff like that sometimes... but I don't recommend it to others unless they know quite well what they are getting into.) Of course, a lot of the fun is picking and defending a "best" race - but in the end it is a theoretical argument to most players when they get to actual race selection.
    Last edited by Ethan; 20-03-2014 at 01:21. Reason: UD has TW too - so, ya, still a few % I can't explain.
    it's vs. its is ambiguous - from now on I'm attempting to use the proper possessive it's, and the contraction 'tis. (Its will just be the plural.)

    Think Different

  7. #22
    Forum Fanatic
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    chillin in the sun
    Posts
    2,951
    per acre, combined off/def on elites, peak offensive potential, the differences between spec and elite armies, and raw off/def are more important than per nw. power/nw is sometimes useful to track, but it is highly manipulable and starts to fall apart once the stresses of war, ops, growth, and chains are factored - stresses that Halflings are particularly bad at handling. power/nw is really only keenly felt for elves and faeries using their elites offensively, and humans/elves using their elites defensively. for everything else, nw differences are so marginal that traits are far more meaningful for a core attacker.

    also considering the total nw efficiency for combined offense and defense, and human looks substantially better - 10 points for 5.5nw, compared to 10 points for 5nw for halfling (who has to use 1.2 troops for every single human troop, thus negating their population advantage). this doesn't take into account spellbooks, tpa mods, peak offensive potential which is very important for a core attacker, human defense specs being a lot easier to use than halfling offense specs, humans being much better at post-chain, etc.

    while halfling can theoretically play a core attacker with some offspec, 10ospa on halfer is a quick way for that halfling to be chained or nightstriked into oblivion. it only appears viable in the ghetto because ghettos suck at utilizing t/ms, and assume halfer has thieves. it is not too hard for a low-tier warring kingdom to either be taught the value of t/ming, or get a semi-decent t/m who knows what s/he is doing; or at the least, those kingdoms will understand the value of chaining a halfling over chaining an undead, and learn to prioritize the targets they can do the most damage to rather than the province they are most afraid of.

    evaluations of nw-efficiency shouldn't rely on taking a snapshot of a province under ideal circumstances, with a strict assumption of draft rates and troop ratios. the only context where nw-efficiency makes sense is to compare the values of the troops to what they offer, and assume that training grounds, mounts, spells, and other effects can vary dramatically based on the situation. wider considerations have proven consistently that nw-efficiency matters surprisingly little, particularly in growth kingdoms and for defensive provinces.

    while a halfling core or part-core can work for a warring kingdom, it wouldn't work without a long plan to utilize thief training costs, cheap elites, better offspecs in a way that doesn't guarantee death, and especially the tpa bonus. other races don't have to work as hard or require as much support to utilize all of their bonuses, with most bonuses being inherently effective.
    Last edited by noobium; 20-03-2014 at 02:53.

  8. #23
    Forum Fanatic
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    2,661
    Quote Originally Posted by Ethan View Post
    RE: halfer vs. UD
    Zauper, I've found the two big pieces of the puzzle that were missing. First, your lower pes/a assumption adds about 1% to UD's strength. Secondly, I assume TW is in use - removing it lowers halfer by about 2%. [Edit - er, UD has it too, so that doesn't explain the HA vs. UD gap, though it helps with the rest.]
    Combine all this with your use of OPA/DPA against my use of OPNW and DPNW, and we get two distinctly different outcomes. Whose assumptions are most realistic (and for which players?) is a question we are unlikely to resolve.

    All that said - in many ways, I take your calculation as a *confirmation* of my general methodology. While we disagree on which race is strongest, we both have halfer and UD within about 4% of each other. I think we'd both be comfortable saying someone wishing to play attacker should be fine with either race in most kingdoms (aka, my just above 200th kingdom). While I think neither of us would claim faery works naturally as an attacker. (Not that I don't play stupid stuff like that sometimes... but I don't recommend it to others unless they know quite well what they are getting into.) Of course, a lot of the fun is picking and defending a "best" race - but in the end it is a theoretical argument to most players when they get to actual race selection.
    There are, I think, two big things:
    1) I prefer to peg a defense value and look at offense at that defense. The reality is, when you're attacking on 1000 acres, you have a sense of what defense you need. Maybe it's 20k for your goal, or maybe it's 40k -- but assuming that the attacker has the same goal, they have a defense in mind. So you peg a defense, or potentially 2-3 sets of defenses (low/medium/high) and see how that shifts things.
    2) I find 'OPNW' 'DPNW' and 'MPW' to be horribly misleading numbers. In order to optimize 'PNW' numbers, you would want to run a lower draft with less twpa and higher BE so you get more out of forts/TGs. That is bad. What matters, much more so, is what is your offense? What is your defense?

    I mean, the reality is that you can shape the numbers to help pretty much any race -- higher TPA helps halfling, higher defense helps fae/elf, higher WPA helps fae/elf. Higher peasants helps halfling.

    Essentially, races like undead and orc, who gain 40% more offense/off unit than halfling just need to have enough space for the other stuff to overcome the halfling offense. So it becomes a question of how deep you draft, how much other stuff you have, etc.

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
  •