A question about leaders...
If I had 10k land, 10k huts and had a 100 ratio, would that be better than having...5714 huts and a 175 ratio?
Assuming you mean leader/land ratio:
The second setup is better. Missions are cheaper, and your defense ratio is better.
if you are talking about leader/hut ratio:
the first one is better. Mission output is higher, defense and attack are unchanged.
Thanks.
If you need other tips please ask.
Quote from: Twilight Shadow on February 23, 2011, 04:43:02 PM
If you need other tips please ask.
Um, why are you saying this, when Shadow was the one who answered the question?
I was going to but shadow beat me to the punch. So its basically a shout ;)
If you have a million leaders your output is going to be the same if you have a 100 leader/hut ratio or a 175 leader/hut ratio....
The second setup is better on all accounts.
You get the same output. You use less loyalty per spell cast. Your net is a lower (which can be a bonus if your close to the next net tier).
Spells rely on leaders and their output has nothing do with the actual hut amount.
QuoteIf you have a million leaders your output is going to be the same if you have a 100 leader/hut ratio or a 175 leader/hut ratio....
No. Only if you drop the excess land in the second case will your output be the same. If you have land that is not huts, your output takes a hit.
Hmm, ok I was considering having total of 5700 odd land, not running that many huts and having 10k total.
Spell output is dependent on hut/land ratio?
I know loyalty costs increase generally with land.
QuoteSpell output is dependent on hut/land ratio?
Yes
I'll have to take a gander at the code sometime.
Quote from: Twilight Shadow on February 24, 2011, 09:56:57 AM
I was going to but shadow beat me to the punch. So its basically a shout ;)
Basically posting for the sake of posting.
$cash = round($this->self->e_trpwiz * ($this->self->e_health / 100) * 65 * (1 + sqrt($this->self->e_bldwiz / $this->self->e_land) / 2) * $this->self->race->magic / ($this->self->calcSizeBonus() * $this->self->calcSizeBonus()));
Yeah, hut/land ratio matters. Good to know.
where is that from? Definitely not our code ^_^ But the logic is the same, yes.
Quote from: Shadow on February 24, 2011, 03:29:02 PM
QuoteJuska: If you have a million leaders your output is going to be the same if you have a 100 leader/hut ratio or a 175 leader/hut ratio....
Shadow: No. Only if you drop the excess land in the second case will your output be the same. If you have land that is not huts, your output takes a hit.
BOTH INCORRECT.
If you have 100ratio land/huts your output is at it's peak. Losing some land gives a slight penalty, you will loot for less on 175 but it's cheaper on loyalty and far greater in the long run.
$cash = round($this->self->e_trpwiz * ($this->self->e_health / 100) * 65 * (1 + sqrt($this->self->e_bldwiz / $this->self->e_land) / 2) * $this->self->race->magic / ($this->self->calcSizeBonus() * $this->self->calcSizeBonus()));
No. What matters is hut/land ratio. For a given amount of leaders, as long as they aren't coming or going per turn, the absolute value of your land is irrelevent except to determine how many leaders you can have on it.
10k land at 100 L/H ratio has the exact same output as 5715 land at 175 ratio, the only difference is that in the latter case, missions are cheaper.
Quote from: Shadow on February 27, 2011, 07:36:53 AM
$cash = round($this->self->e_trpwiz * ($this->self->e_health / 100) * 65 * (1 + sqrt($this->self->e_bldwiz / $this->self->e_land) / 2) * $this->self->race->magic / ($this->self->calcSizeBonus() * $this->self->calcSizeBonus()));
No. What matters is hut/land ratio. For a given amount of leaders, as long as they aren't coming or going per turn, the absolute value of your land is irrelevent except to determine how many leaders you can have on it.
10k land at 100 L/H ratio has the exact same output as 5715 land at 175 ratio, the only difference is that in the latter case, missions are cheaper.
DUDE
Don't correct me with BS
Go test it out then come back and apologize.
Sevz, be nice.
I'm a long standing veteran, if I didn't have the correct answer i wouldn't of posted.
I'll wait for an apology
Shadow's been here longer than you, and he's a staff member. There's nothing wrong with pointing out a flaw with someone else's logic but just be polite about it.
My information comes from the code. It is obvious just by reading that line Juska posted. The logic at RWL is the same. And I have tested this many times.
I've mastered nearly every code out and shadows wrong.
100million leaders at 100/100 ratio cast loot for more than 100million leaders at 175/175 ratio.
Option 2 is better for efficiency
it's around 2% to 7% penalty, there's a bits of the code you wouldn't understand.
see if you can answer me a few questions.
I earn X loyalty when i'm at 100ratio. If i get to 120 ratio via capture would i get a loyalty bonus? Original servers had this aswell as extra loyalty when using generals hut.
Used to be known as an extended casting strategy by the creators of the first codes
Sevz, grow up. Everybodys had enough of you making demands and constantly belittling Shadow and the other staff members. Whether you're right or wrong isn't what is important, what is important is that you are civil about it, something you constantly fail at.
Being a "long-standing veteran" means nothing. Most veterans probably don't have an in depth knowledge of the code.
Also, you demanding an apology shows just how immature you are when you are the one provoking and insulting. Saying "you wouldn't understand" also reeks of arrogance and superiority.
Well, it is pretty simple to test. I invite anyone who is interested to do so.
a 2 to 7% difference could easily be due to demolishing one too many huts and losing a few leaders.
That's QMT's code, as far as I know updated versions of RWL's code aren't available for download.
Sevs may be right, personally I'd take game play experience over code only. But w/e.
Even though Sevz is being an butt, I actually thought he was right. I was fairly positive 100 ratio made slightly more, but was more inefficient.
RWL code is the same as that. If sevs is right, it's a bug, that much is obvious from that line of code. I'll test it when I run on turbo.
HAHAHAHA
You blame a bug before you admit i'm right
Go fix the bug.
What's your point firetooth? Yeah i don't like contributing valuable/accurate information to be told i'm wrong. I'm not an admin or moderator so i'll say what i want to who i want and if i get banned who cares? Feel free to report me. I've got no obligations to be nice and quite frankly it's not my style.
Test done on test server, currently same code as turbo.
18k land, 100 ratio:
loot output:
$109,938,580 CashAfter dropping land to 175 ratio:
loot output:
$109,938,580 CashI probably shouldn't hold my breath for an appology? I invite anyone who still doubts me to test it for themselves, but I am done arguing this nonsense.
QuoteI've got no obligations to be nice and quite frankly it's not my style.
Yes, you do. If you want to continue playing at RWL, anyway. This thread is borderline what I will tolerate from you. You have had more than enough warnings in the past that there really is no need to give any more, but I'll give you this one anyway.
Shadow
Modding
Dodgy
Having more huts and spending the extra loyalty should have a higher output. First time i ever saw the change and it doesn't seem right.
I occasionally drop land when the circumstances are suitable and i've always taken notes on production. Nothing i can say now. I've been corrected since my last trial and error evaluation.
*deletes old information*
There is no way an intentional part of promisance code makes for a 2-7% difference when someone as drastic as dropping almost half your land happens. Wherever you saw it happen, it was either due to a bug in the code, or demolishing 1 too many huts and losing 2-7% of your leaders. In fact, 2-7% is just about exactly the range of leader losses possible for demolishing one too many huts (it is actually 1% - 6.5%)
the land code is a bit fishy here, after you've been attacked, dropped land, and built cities for a couple weeks your land is usally ~200 more or less than your building totals, but that couldn't account for a 2-7% output fluctuation.
I didn't mean that the fluctuation would be due to land discrepancies, I meant that he probably just demolished a few too many huts when dropping to 175 ratio, and lost a few leaders that way.
By the way, the land discrepancy only happens if you are in online battles. Apparently you do it more often than most ;)
Maybe it was a bug. I don't have a technical explanation. I had copy pastes from old rounds with significant differences. approximately 10% less output saved heaps of loyalty.
Obviously i'm not killing leaders.
Well sure. If you drop enough that you lose 10% of your leaders, you get 10% less output and save nearly half the loyalty cost.
Why is it obvious you are not killing leaders? Minor player error is more likely than major code error, especially when both codes use the original promi output codes, which work here. The fact that the percentages work out so nicely also indicates player error.
Online battles are fun, no wonder.