Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 18

Thread: Age 78 Power Rankings

  1. #1
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,230

    Age 78 Power Rankings

    I've omitted the TM section because its always dubious at best, and without proper intel about science, getting the estimated mods right wouldn't be easy.

    I have dropped science from this one entirely, as such I also dropped wages, and honor as well since no more Bocan. THESE DO INCLUDE SPELLS; GP, Fanat, IA(reflected in econ section), and TW. With these builds @100% wages most races are -1 GCpa per tick; Halfling is -3.3, Elf -8.8, Human +2.5, and Orc +0.4 GCpa...

    NW+MP


    Gains-Losses


    Sustainability


    Economy


    Combined



    ... Let me know if you see glaring error, or have questions

  2. #2
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748
    Thank you.

    It's a noble work.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

  3. #3
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,155
    Thanks always nice to look at others's numbers. :D

    working on my own right now will post in the am, only got enough steam to do math/finalize my own setup :D
    Last edited by Persain; 08-10-2018 at 01:12.

  4. #4
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Posts
    626
    Thanks - very interesting as always!

    Also interesting that it is very close this age (note of course that orc have a sci penalty, and this does not include sciences).

  5. #5
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,230
    Quite true, I hadn't really hoisted that in!

  6. #6
    Postaholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    803


    RoughKnecS

    --> Want art? <--
    --> Or see Tadpole banners? <--

    The industrys greats

    ** Cerberus ** Killah ** Shadowheart **


  7. #7
    Needs to get out more
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Oh
    Posts
    8,748
    Tad knows missile command.
    Quote Originally Posted by Bishop View Post
    Correct me then, instead of being a dick about it.
    love that thick mahogany back with no belly carve or anything...pure thick wood ! The thing ROCK is made of !
    ________
    Weed bowls

    http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=...+say&FORM=VDRE

  8. #8
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,155
    for what its worth it may be a little late, but i i get similar #'s to both tadpole and Rattlehead.

    2 wpa,
    1.5 tpa,
    10% homes,
    20% tg,
    all mounted offense,
    no science.
    54 "raw" def

    At a fixed NW and

    acres.......off.............def out.......def in.......Race
    1,878......178,294...120,30....177,108........avain
    1,792......182,887...109,33....178,176........dwarf
    1,759......199,411...112,65....165,856........human
    1,792......223,529...109,33....143,756........orc
    1,638......225,192...99,948....157,165........elf
    1,793......231,402...114,85....114,854........feary (offspec + leet def)
    1,700......243,905...103,70....103,701........halfing (offspec + leet def)

  9. #9
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,230
    yay! why varying acreage?

  10. #10
    Strategy Moderator
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    4,155
    fixed nw. my sheet fixes either nw across all races or land across all races. i prefer looking at fixed nw

  11. #11
    Regular
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    86
    this thread is complete bull****

  12. #12
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,230
    I know you are but what am I?

  13. #13
    Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    379
    Quote Originally Posted by Persain View Post
    fixed nw. my sheet fixes either nw across all races or land across all races. i prefer looking at fixed nw

    If you are to dense to see the incredible value go drink glue.

    Thanks guys I look forward to this every age.
    Monsters

    Fighting the world back Proudly since Age 35

    #MONSTERS


    "If you have a problem with a post then use the report button.

    24 hour ban for arguing with me. This isn't a democracy." - Bishop

  14. #14
    Postaholic
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    803
    Ok, to spark some discussion here...

    First off, I like your rankings Persain and RattleHead. I've been looking them over each age start with interest. And Ethans of course, but...

    There are some problems, or pro's and con's with your approaches to power ranking. And I'd like to hear a discussion on how these issues could be solved, if at all?

    Rattlesnake:

    I'll be focusing on the military. I have some objections to the other categories, but most of all think it's impossible to weight them into a combined chart - since it more than anything depends on how they're played as a kd. So, I won't discuss that.

    So, on your military power ranking:

    Pros: Nw taken into account in some fashion, lots of parameters (especially taking your other tables into account), modded mwpa and mtpa instead of raw numbers (essential imo if comparing capacity as attackers).
    Cons: Some arbitrary numbers (ppa, off:spec troop ratios), nw not taken enough into account (just one category amongst others in a simple military/nw category), the weighting in the aggregate category is of course arbitrary too, and must be.

    You have equalised the races over land and ppa. Land seems logical, but to me ppa seems a bit arbitrary - and results in widely different and in some cases strange provinces. If you want to equalise over a a sustainable draft in some way, wouldn't income perhaps be a better equaliser? 0 gc income or something - since that would be an underlying factor to the chosen draft. Draft rates in themselves aren't really very interesting, since you don't stop on a certain PPA across the board for all races, but because you reach some sort of limiting factor..

    Persain:

    You have a classic Ethan rankings: equalising along a fixed nw is interesting! The second equaliser is 54 raw def, which I'm not certain about. So,

    Pros: Nw centered
    Cons: Is that mTPA and mWPA? Otherwise that's a major flaw. A fixed raw dpa seems a bit odd... perhaps more so when equalising along a fixed nw. Dunno why this disturbs me really, but it does! Just seems arbitrary.. hmm. Perhaps u have a great explanation for it though!

    And now to my rankings:

    I equalise along land and fixed off and or def. Doing both via a chart. To me that makes more sense. I don't get a #1, but rather a view of in which brackets different races are in the top/bottom. Like this age with Orc being strongest (highest opa) at very low DPA values. Elf being strongest in the mid section. Fae having highest off at very high DPA values. A more dynamic view imo, instead of arbitrarily fixed military ratios or fixed def levels etc. Instead you get a visual of where different hitters peaks. Another equaliser I run is 0 ppa. The benefit of this is that it weights heavily towards military, a power ranking displaying the max you can get out of your military.

    Biggest con of my ranking imo is that it doesn't take NW into account in any way. Nw efficiency is a big thing, and my lil chart give crap all intel on that (if we ignore the lil box that shows total nw on a fixed dpa level for all races - but lets ignore that).

    So. Besides being interested to hear comments on my comments, I also wonder how you would go about incorporating an nw analysis into dynamic chart, any ideas?
    RoughKnecS

    --> Want art? <--
    --> Or see Tadpole banners? <--

    The industrys greats

    ** Cerberus ** Killah ** Shadowheart **


  15. #15
    Forum Addict RattleHead's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,230
    I would argue that I don't limit my drafting to my income either, though. Often as attacker I expect to be fed wages in war. I could even argue that I do draft to the same PPA across the board on attaackers (as high as possible) and so then it comes down to the ratio, which 2:1 is arbitrary indeed, but reflects also my preferences as an attacker I suppose.

    I also agree that outside of the military figures its very tricky to get the weight right, or to make sure you dont account for things twice or miss them etc... The weights I use on my combined are also arbitrary, I approach this from the point of view of strictly warring setup, so this influences how I value certain things I am sure.

    I adjusted the weight of Sustain, because while Avian does tend to burn out, it was sending Avian to the bottom of the heap perennially. This didn't ring true to me so I felt I should tweak it a bit for the purposes of the combined chart.

    Similarly, I found Dwarf was being perennially overrated by virtue of its econ advantages which are many, but from my point of view are not quite as valuable in a WAR setting to a heavy attacker, which is what I am focused on in my analysis. Turtle Power was another recent addition for similar purposes, those with a strong defensive Elite were not being valued in my MP%.

    Certainly my opinion gets into these rankings in this way. I have not changed the weights since I found a set of values that I felt was decently representative of its respective Age's values. I don't plan on adjusting them unless some future changes were to put the rankings at odds with reality(in my opinion), or on expert suggestion.

    im not sure about adding nw to ur chart... ill consider

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
  •