WTF Mickster

[DHaran]

now I can see we are talking about two completely different things because you cannot explain yourself clearly.

WTs have a bonus that reduce the damage done by enemy provinces, such as less troops killed in a NS against you.

Of course when you sent higher amounts of thieves on an op you will lose more, that is obvious to everyone. I said the damage against you is reduced by your WT bonus, regardless of what your defending tpa is, even if it is 0 tpa.

WTs DO NOT modify how many thieves the enemy loses on an op, it only modifies the chances of him failing.

[Archi]

hahaha.

Vines, stop it.

it is so, so, so wrong, and you should trust me and Dharan when we tell you that you all wrong.

you are proven wrong so stop the endless stupidity please

[vines]

wt are more effective with more tpa. Because more tpa rises the base losses for enemy thieves and wts modify the base losses for enemy thieves. Like wise higher tpa rises the base protection from enemy thieves, and tws modify that base.

DHaran is is not my fault you didn't understand the information I was putting across. I telling you time and time again that you were confusing the information that was being put forth.

[vines]

Archi it is clear that other guy--I won't name any names--was confused and didn't understand the concepts I am putting forward until now.

[Archi]

@vines

"wt are more effective with more tpa"

THIS IS WHAT YOU SAID !!! read it again...

and i can say it again....YOU ARE WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, OHH SOOO WRONG

[DHaran]

"wt are more effective with more tpa"

Another misuse of the word EFFECTIVE. The building's factor in the thievery equations is constant, the tpa is just another factor used in determining the outcome.

"wts modify the base losses for enemy thieves"

From the Guide:

Watchtowers

While your own thieves can protect your land against enemy thieves, a little extra protection is never a bad thing. People assigned into Watchtowers will screen your borders and can catch thieves attempting to conduct operations in your province.

% * 2 Chance of Catching Enemy Thieves
Decrease Thievery Damage by % * 3

They only modify damage by the enemy, and they increase chances of catching enemy thieves. WTs in NO way modify base losses of enemy thieves, they only increase the chance of a failed op and reduced damage on successes.

You need to take your own advice and read the guide vines, you have no idea what you are talking about. I can prove you wrong on every post you make easily. The only person who doesn't see how wrong you are is you.

[vines]

Read the information I put up. I did not simple say tws modify the loses one loses. You don't understand the information being put forth, and so, you become confused and it shows in your posts. So I'm just going to say whatever to you.

[Cheech]

At least this thread turned to pure entertainment.

[DHaran]

I am copying exactly what you say word for word, and it is wrong vines. You are the one who doesn't understand, I am clearly countering every post you make with a detailed explanation of why it is flawed. If you can not understand my explanations, then you need to stop posting until you can learn to communicate better.

[Ezzerland]

Archi you're wrong about that wts with no tpa may or not caught a crime attempt on your province. For sure it will not prevent another attempt. The reason is the one doing the crime will lose no thieves.

This is also inaccurate.

Find a province with 0 thieves and run some ops sending all your thieves on him. You will still lose thieves on failed ops and you will still fail ops.
The reason is because ops are now calculated with a built-in auto-fail and a minimum thief loss mark. This has been true for maybe 5+ ages.


Whether you like it or not, WT's, as a building, are NOT better or worse based on the amount of thieves you have. This is like saying that you cannot make money with 0 banks.

[freemehul]

This is like saying that you cannot make money with 0 banks.

wanna place bets as to when vines is going to say that you cannot make money with 0 banks?

[Ezzerland]

No, I don't want to bet, Because I imagine it's coming :p

[Newark]

/me fluffs bean bag chair, makes popcorn, plops down, and waits for more vines' insight.

[Catwalk]

vines is so wrong it makes my toes curl. Please don't stop.

[Elb]

Scarily, it took 10 pages, but I understand what he is saying and actually thought it was true at some point. I feel dirty :/

I thought losses in a failed op were lower if the enemy province has no thieves. It appears vines thought the same, but instead of saying "higher # of thieves" he has said higher tpa helps more.

Lets define "Effectiveness" as "The power or capacity to produce a desired result"

Now, the desired result of WT and TPA and TD is all the same. That is, to reduce damage done to your province. This can be done either by reducing losses (WT - Decrease Thievery Damage by % * 3) or by making ops unpalatable due to high losses per failed op (and hence less ops = less damage).

So if having less thieves (or low tpa as vines has described it) does result in less casualties for an enemy failed op, then WT's are more 'effective' with more thieves (or higher tpa) as you will inevitably get less ops done against you over time (if for no other reason than you will cause their tpa to drop faster/op, assuming they are willing to ignore higher losses)

So, I guess the next point is do thief numbers of the opped province in any way effect the losses suffered from a failed op?