• Howdy partner! You seem new here. Why don't you make an account and join the discussion? You can register here.
    Already have one? Then you login here!

Revised Battle Formula Feedback (Pt 2)

s3b-1q

Guest
I added a potion of new beginning to every players inventory so feel free to test complete new build of skills
Thanks a lot :) That's, perhaps, the easiest way. Can't wait to try a new build :)
 

h4v4n4

Reservist
I think that´s a good change but vast. So it will be good if you add poition of new beginnig at normal server because reskill stamina will not be sufficient. Now strenght isn´t best fortfight atribut.
 

rainy

Guest
I think that´s a good change but vast. So it will be good if you add poition of new beginnig at normal server because reskill stamina will not be sufficient. Now strenght isn´t best fortfight atribut.
We will see if this change really comes to live worlds we should test it a lot more
 

*Koshka

Reservist
How many it is planned to carry out test fights? Yesterday's fight was on not built up fort, it seems to me fights on the built-up forts where there are bonuses of heights at protection are necessary.
And it is bad that new icons of forts on the card same, for all forts, big and small. Earlier, to 2.0 they differed
 

Diggo11

The West Team
Dev Team
How many it is planned to carry out test fights? Yesterday's fight was on not built up fort, it seems to me fights on the built-up forts where there are bonuses of heights at protection are necessary.
We didn't have 24h waiting time for the last battle, we just chose an already declared one. Hopefully tomorrow and next week we will be able to hold larger battles.
 

*Koshka

Reservist
We didn't have 24h waiting time for the last battle, we just chose an already declared one. Hopefully tomorrow and next week we will be able to hold larger battles.
It's nice). I will try to participate as much as possible, very interestingly. Really, fights everything in health already bothered
 

Roflman

Guest
OK, We can build moat around the fort and head skill for attackers will be swim..
 

torpedo3k

Private
The logic behind fine motor skills was two fold:

[*]Skills are spread across all attributes evenly. Strength players have health, charisma players have leadership (x^0.5) and mobility/dexterity has two skills (0.6, 0.4) each used approximately half the time.
although it seems logical and fair, I initially don't like the change. The result of having a stronger attack in brazilian worlds (I play in 5):

1) made forts change hands more often. This has worked as a motivation for fighters to keep fighting even in weaker allies.

2) also motivated allies to build up forts so they could be more defendable.

I can't judge other countries but the new formula - far from being a consensus - from my point of view has helped to improve participation in battles.
 

torpedo3k

Private
battle in Antiszociális

date: 24 august
side: attack
class: soldier
build: I have not especialized. I've distributed attibutes between dex (mostly) and mob (some). So I could use skills in hp, leader and to round up fms and hiding.

81 x 80 was a fail attack. Even so what really troubled me was the incapacity to kill ST in lvl 5 while AT was lvl 1. That made me suspicious something wasn't right, having all shooting into only one tower and no one got killed there.

I think the changes I made were benefical - it was the first time since the change in the formula that I got 20 upb's (my historical is 13-15 and rarely 17).

but I call the attention to el bundi's performance. The guy has 11k hp. He dodged 188 shots and his average shooting was 350 (mine 389 with 5250 hp). I have the sense I just wasted time in calculations trying to find a nice build. If his performance becomes regular to someone in defense, I can say we are back to square one regarding hp. Then it's useless to change formulas, make calculations and adjusting builds, hp rules totally and above all.

to early to tell, let's keep testing.
 

medfly

Private
date: 24 august
side: attack
class: soldier
build: I have not especialized. I've distributed attibutes between dex (mostly) and mob (some). So I could use skills in hp, leader and to round up fms and hiding.

81 x 80 was a fail attack. Even so what really troubled me was the incapacity to kill ST in lvl 5 while AT was lvl 1. That made me suspicious something wasn't right, having all shooting into only one tower and no one got killed there.

I think the changes I made were benefical - it was the first time since the change in the formula that I got 20 upb's (my historical is 13-15 and rarely 17).

but I call the attention to el bundi's performance. The guy has 11k hp. He dodged 188 shots and his average shooting was 350 (mine 389 with 5250 hp). I have the sense I just wasted time in calculations trying to find a nice build. If his performance becomes regular to someone in defense, I can say we are back to square one regarding hp. Then it's useless to change formulas, make calculations and adjusting builds, hp rules totally and above all.

to early to tell, let's keep testing.
I was in the same battle on attack, and have made adjustments for a fairly balanced 130 FMS/hiding, 88 lead with about 4K health, w/ 50-50 mob/dex distribution. I had over 200 aim as a by-product of dueling. This too was the first beta battle i've gotten 20 bonds. Approximately 75% hit rate with high 300's average damage, and not bad dodging either.

Still hoping that the FMS is swapped for shooting instead :P
 

Jarema 27

Private
We still need to test new formula on two forts,full built and completly unbuilt,tomorrow we have occasion to try on the second one.

In my opinion it shouldn't be like that,let's see the most popular and still one of the best skills - pure HP.On normal worlds it's still the most common build.If we consider full HP in attack after change and full HP on deffend we see how wrong's new formula,attack lost only weapon against deffend - Stamina,deffend still has buildings,it doesn't seems fair.
Even when bonuses are more influential,HP is still the most important thing,player with 1200 HP and full bonuses won't stay on the first line,because even with the best build he will be killed.
Stamina equalised building bonuses in good way in old formula,in new it was too strong,now deffend is unbeatable in my opinion,especially on built fort.

Please look on the Ot3k's idea

Old Formula

b=x^0.6+y^0.4+z^0.5+n+m+o

Proposition

b=x^0.4+y^0.5+z^0.6+n+m+o
+
Additional Damage: Damage + (damage * leadership / 2 * max HP)

IMO worth to try.
 

*Koshka

Reservist
Please look on the Ot3k's idea

Old Formula

b=x^0.6+y^0.4+z^0.5+n+m+o

Proposition

b=x^0.4+y^0.5+z^0.6+n+m+o
+
Additional Damage: Damage + (damage * leadership / 2 * max HP)

IMO worth to try.
Additional Damage: Damage + (damage * leadership / 2 * max HP)

such formule will be too good to soldiers
 

aamgdp

Private
I think changing stamina to FMS is wrong step. Better would be decrease stamina exponent from 6 to 5,5 or incerase numbers of defenders (on normal world: small 42 to 46, middle 84 to 92 and big 120 to 130/beta: small 21 to 23, middle 42 to 46 ang big 80 to 88) In my opinion it's better to do it than changing fort skills.
 

torinogranata

Reservist
I notice: 0 resistance with 220 fms. It looks like stamina(and not fms) affects resistance formula. Is that a bug?
 
Last edited:

h4v4n4

Reservist
I think changing stamina to FMS is wrong step. Better would be decrease stamina exponent from 6 to 5,5 ...
I think about this too. But i think that optional is only 5. HP players on attack will be reduced but not so much.
 
Last edited:

Diggo11

The West Team
Dev Team
Thanks to everyone who attended test battles so far. Here are some more of my thoughts:

It could be unwise to assume strength is no longer the most important attribute. Remember, even though both mobility and dexterity now have two skills, one from each (dodge and aim respectively) is generally accepted to be wasteful in quantities above 20 or thereabouts. Obviously health, leadership, hiding and fine motor skills remain the critical skills, and all are in different attributes. I anticipate a fair percentage should now belong outside strength, but not expecting it to be a thing of the past.

I think it is too early to write off switching the skills at present, but I do estimate we've probably swung back too far in favour of the defenders. Before throwing the baby out with the bathwater, however, it would be ideal if we could make other additions. For example, we may consider giving workers a more attacking class bonus (e.g. you receive X% of your target's sector bonus) and slightly reducing the tower bonuses.
 
Last edited: