Undead conversion formula

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

Quick glance feels like that 7 acres comes from hitting out from fortified or in fortified.

The acre gained was supposed to be higher but was reduced by stance. What you gain does not affect the conversion what you hit will do.

fortified reduces conversion even more than %50..

[jacko]

it seems possible actually because 772 might seem as a big number but when translated into percentage, it could be pretty low.. for example, if he send 15k specs for the hit, conversion rate is %5 only compared to %10-12 on worst cases.. there could be gs/gbp/kdrnw involved to reduce land gains further but has less impact(?) on elite conversions..

People posted in here and in others threads about UD's conversions that oversending does not increase the number of leets gained;
noobium : "converts are based on the defense broken, so oversending does not improve converts any. (from what i remember it actually makes converts far worse when oversending than would be expected.)";
Palem : "Oversending lowers conversions."
Palem quoting Bishop :
"The attack must be a traditional march
In your attack you need to not oversend- i.e you need to get "a tough battle message"
If your offense is all specs (by offense i mean all your offense not just what you send) then you get a big boost to converts - as much as double your base. If it is less you get less of a boost."

So, the general opinion is that oversending is bad for conversions; I don't know the exact numbers of armies sent/ armies hit, but I can tell he (the attacker) had all his leets at home, he attacked only with ospecs. Roughly, he had somewhere around 7-8 k ospecs sent, or a bit above (the number of leets at home, somewhere between 5-6 k). That would make some aprox. 10% conversion rate, which is not unsual at all. What is unsual is that he still got that %, giving the big NW difference between him and the target, as well as those 7 acres gained. Bishop said "NW plays a huge factor, as does the gain itself as the convert formula is a modified gain formula.", which simply doesn't apply here, in this case.

[LoRD_SaMPuaN]

People posted in here and in others threads about UD's conversions that oversending does not increase the number of leets gained;
noobium : "converts are based on the defense broken, so oversending does not improve converts any. (from what i remember it actually makes converts far worse when oversending than would be expected.)";
Palem : "Oversending lowers conversions."
Palem quoting Bishop :
"The attack must be a traditional march
In your attack you need to not oversend- i.e you need to get "a tough battle message"
If your offense is all specs (by offense i mean all your offense not just what you send) then you get a big boost to converts - as much as double your base. If it is less you get less of a boost."

So, the general opinion is that oversending is bad for conversions; I don't know the exact numbers of armies sent/ armies hit, but I can tell he (the attacker) had all his leets at home, he attacked only with ospecs. Roughly, he had somewhere around 7-8 k ospecs sent, or a bit above (the number of leets at home, somewhere between 5-6 k). That would make some aprox. 10% conversion rate, which is not unsual at all. What is unsual is that he still got that %, giving the big NW difference between him and the target, as well as those 7 acres gained. Bishop said "NW plays a huge factor, as does the gain itself as the convert formula is a modified gain formula.", which simply doesn't apply here, in this case.

how did he break 75k def with 7-8k off specs only?

p.s. i strongly believe kdrnw doesnt effect conversion rate although it effects gains significantly..

[jacko]

Well, he probably sent more, I don't know for sure the numbers, but no way he had 15 k leets. Let's not forget he's a warrior, 5 gens to attack; he had horses too, so maybe 9-10 k ospecs were sent. That was not my point; I wanted mainly to point out the difference between Bishop assertions and this hit numbers : "NW plays a huge factor, as does the gain itself as the convert formula is a modified gain formula" vs. hard bottomfeeding and 7 acres land hit.

I'll try get a hold of him and find out how many ospecs did he really sent.

[Bishop]

Well, he probably sent more, I don't know for sure the numbers, but no way he had 15 k leets. Let's not forget he's a warrior, 5 gens to attack; he had horses too, so maybe 9-10 k ospecs were sent. That was not my point; I wanted mainly to point out the difference between Bishop assertions and this hit numbers : "NW plays a huge factor, as does the gain itself as the convert formula is a modified gain formula" vs. hard bottomfeeding and 7 acres land hit.

I'll try get a hold of him and find out how many ospecs did he really sent.

I created the formula. When i say NW plays a big factor i am not just saying it for the lols.

[jacko]

I created the formula. When i say NW plays a big factor i am not just saying it for the lols.

I don't doubt that; all I'm saying is that in this particular hit, the number of ospecs sent seems to play a bigger role than NW difference or land gains.

[jacko]

Ok, my mate told me he sent aprox 8300 ospecs/horses in that hit.

[pathetic sheep]

Then it must have been a glitch or something, 'cause I swear to God, that is the exact post of his hit. I have his pic on my phone, I wish I knew a way to show it to you, that way maybe you would believe me. The NW numbers of him and the target are 95% close to what they actually were when he made his hit. I didn't looked at them in the exact moment of the hit, my initial post was a few hrs after that, but they could not gain/lose more than a few thousands in that time. He was much bigger compared to his target, gained 7 acres and converted 772 leets.

LE : I found a way to share his pic; I've erased the target's loc.

http://imgur.com/MAXcYnc

http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/z...Y6Yeo1_500.jpg
[img]http://i815.photobucket.com/albums/zz72/yoshe*****/Other/GZbqLZ3AXoqcycuq4mihY6Yeo1_500.jpg[/img]