Age 61 Power Rankings

[crease]

Are they? Assuming an attacker needs 3 mtpa and 3 mwpa, with 50% crime/channel, 5% pop:

Halfling - 1.3 rtpa, 2 rwpa, 28.9 pop. 5 peasants/acre. 20.575 mil/acre. Assuming 120% ome/dme, and his 65%/35% split, I get 80 OPA assuming all ospec offense and 34.5 DPA.
Undead - 2 rtpa, 2 rwpa, 26.25 pop. 5 peasants/acre, 17.25 mil/acre. Same ome/dme, 65%/35% - 94.185 OPA, 28.98 DPA. Let's set the same DPA: 84.42 OPA and 34.5 DPA.

This ignores the simple reality that the undead would really be running 1 rtpa with CS/WTs for defensive purposes, and have more military. Now you can say 'well gosh zauper, your calculation is so simplistic', but the reality is my calculation is both more realistic and more reasonable than his, while using his rules. For example, I'm not forcing the heavy attacker races to have 10+ DSPA (not clear why you would want that).

His numbers assume no sci, they also assume no forts wtf do you have forts for??

Get the same dpa with 112.7 DME pliss am lazy

[Zauper]

His numbers assume no sci, they also assume no forts wtf do you have forts for??

Get the same dpa with 112.7 DME pliss am lazy

He says:

It does account for science (and FoK), pop bonus, +tpa/wpa (for reducing the raw number needed to hit the minimal mod an attacker requires)

Lowering DME is irrelevant, it just reduces the DPA. It doesn't change the outcome because I'm not holding DPA constant, I'm holding troop ratio constant. I'm also not factoring for the space savings of the undead.