TMI against World Republic

Keinutnai wrote:I would like to congratulate all participants of this war. Well done everyone! It was a lot of fun.

Keinutnai wrote:I would like to congratulate all participants of this war. Well done everyone! It was a lot of fun.

Since the war is over, I calculated all losses and kills of World Republic from April 1 (4 hours after breakout of war) until today (17 June).

UU price = 375.000 kuwal
Taking into account all soldiers, mercs, spies, assassins, workers and miners killed and lost and all weapons destroyed and lost. Farming and raiding is ignored.

Unit losses and weapon losses:

kingkongfan1 wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:I would like to congratulate all participants of this war. Well done everyone! It was a lot of fun.

I'm glad we could amuse you, & I'm glad you had fun. but to be perfectly honest for me this was "fun" for all of 3 days. after which it got overly boring, annoying, & monotonous. It showed me many flaws & issues in this game that imo make wars useless in AW. I see no point in building a large, powerful, tech superior, acct/alliance when your enemy can just turtle & hide behind game mechanics to the point where a war is brought to a stand still.

Manleva wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:I would like to congratulate all participants of this war. Well done everyone! It was a lot of fun.

Since the war is over, I calculated all losses and kills of World Republic from April 1 (4 hours after breakout of war) until today (17 June).

UU price = 375.000 kuwal
Taking into account all soldiers, mercs, spies, assassins, workers and miners killed and lost and all weapons destroyed and lost. Farming and raiding is ignored.

Unit losses and weapon losses:

Thank you for your thoughts and I am glad that we were able to provide you with some fun. However like Kingkongfan1 I also found that the war was totally boring when faces with an opponent that did virtually nothing. I Know that you did participate and were the most active from WR and also a few of your members made the occasional foray.

there are a couple of points I will make however.

I see you left out Farming and Raiding - interesting thought process here as they were from my perspective very relevant and provided me with many cheap resources. It was mildly amusing to take them from WR merely to send them back again.

You are I see still obsessed with converting everything to Kuwal and using the resulting answer as a measure of who has done the best. Let me remind you yet again the there are many who find this to be of little interest and has no meaning in the long run. War is costly and the important factor is only if you are willing to pay the cost to obtain the outcome you are after. From a TMI point of view there are a few that had not reached or even come close to that point.

Ultimately the only winner here is boredom and the biggest looser is in fact AW.

Keinutnai wrote:

kingkongfan1 wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:I would like to congratulate all participants of this war. Well done everyone! It was a lot of fun.

I'm glad we could amuse you, & I'm glad you had fun. but to be perfectly honest for me this was "fun" for all of 3 days. after which it got overly boring, annoying, & monotonous. It showed me many flaws & issues in this game that imo make wars useless in AW. I see no point in building a large, powerful, tech superior, acct/alliance when your enemy can just turtle & hide behind game mechanics to the point where a war is brought to a stand still.

(1)But you would probably also not want a type of game where you can destroy everything,(*)
(*) you obviously do not know me very well after the 2+ years I have been playing
(2) not allowing people to grow while at war,(*)
(*) it is my opinion that no player/alliance should be able to "GROW" their acct(s) while at war. if they are able to "GROW" whilst at war then they are not really "fighting", or there are major issues with the game mechanics concerning war in that particular game. in this case Aderan Wars.
(3) because then people would pack up and leave.(*)
(*) What about those of us who have spent the last several years building superior accts, only to find them totally useless, & are ready to leave AW because of it?
Game mechanics which allow annihilation that is too devastating for a player will force them to leave.
(4)Then again if there is too little one can destroy, it would be boring.(*)
(*) such is the case with me & several others (boredom). As we cannot "unbuild" our accts,how do you suggest we correct this problem? Obviously there has to be a good balance. I feel the balance is just right, even though you disagree.

Keinutnai wrote:

They are extremely relevant, however they dont say if the resources came from the enemy alliance or from inactives. For example most raiding will obviously come from inactives, while in farming it can come again mostly from inactives for some players, and mostly from actives from other players depending on playing style.

It is however possible to calculate how much Kuwal and how many UU have been taken by the opponents during the war by going through the logs. The logs do identify the attacker, how much was taken and at what cost. I will admit that this is a very time consuming process and much harder than it should be, this was on of the reasons why I suggested changes to the Alliance attack logs.

WR for example raided over 100,000,000 UU. Obviously TMI lost much less than that. That's why it would be wrong to use these numbers in the kill and loss statistics.

I am not "obsessed" with converting to kuwal, but I like to know how much was destroyed. Obviously the number of units + weapon value is less accurate and harder to imagine than a single kuwal value.
And while I know some people are not interested in the numbers, others are interested. If you don't care about the numbers, don't look at them. Obviously if you don't care about losses, or if you have better economic output, then it doesn't matter that you lost more than your enemy. And I am not arguing against that. All I say is these are the numbers, if you are interested, go over them.

I do think the war lasted too long. The first month would have been long enough. The intensity of the war was much lower after one month. Then again you experience the real intensity only if you are fighting in a team and also if you are among the ones who are massed, and especially if you are massed multiple times. Some TMI haven't been massed a single time. And many TMI attacked on their own, not in a team. Obviously for these people it will be much less intense than for someone who gets massed and fights as a member of a strike team.

Well to be honest I would happily have seen the war continue for another six months however it is all a matter of perspective. If you want an intense war then obviously a shorter period is preferable however it is possible to take a slower pace.

But what do you suggest to make the game more fun? Finding out what to do to make it more fun is not that easy. But I do think that currently assaulting is unfair for the attacker and the other missions are unfair for the defender. If they were adjusted and were purely based on technology (better technology = better kill:death ratio, with a cap on maximum efficiency), then I would like wars more! I felt sorry for the people when I killed at ratio 4:1 and felt it's unfair and unjustified. Was I killing well trained spies or babies at sleep?

There are some major issues that this war has highlighted. There is far to much maths required to be able to make calculated decisions. We have briefly discussed this and you have pointed out just how much maths is required. From my perspective if I look at my Strike action I can see that it is made up of all of the components in your explanation therefore it become rather obvious to me that if my strike is better than your defense I will win the battle.

Gamniac wrote:Just out of curiosity, how do these game mechanics work, exactly?
It's been brought up time and again, it favors the weaker party, but what are the numbers behind it? we know that, we can make suggestion for adjustment or at least work out the actual difference it makes, that's my feeling on the matter.

While I agree that it helps keeping the schmucks who happen to have a big account (or big account owners who happen to be schmucks, whichever is least offensive) from massing anyone new, the protection comes from nowhere (are fewer numbers harder to find or something? Then just blow up a city while you're there!) and makes some difference. A little too much, apparently.

Not sure where this is gonna take me.
I can elaborate at some other time.

kingkongfan1 wrote:
In addition to what sea has stated above, (welcome back sea) there is imo the whole "issue" of why should I go thru the very expensive process of purchasing a more powerful weapons level (MLRS for example) when an inferior player with "weaker" weapons (MA for example) can attack me with fewer forces & cause equal to or greater losses for me as a defender than they suffer as the attacker. I have better training, weapons, techs, PBP's, (better in most every way) & some player that comes nowhere close to being equal to me can just pop up hit me & do more damage to me by virtue of "kuwal cost losses" because of some "game mechanic" I'll ask again, what is the point of spending the time (2+ years now), & the real cash (mostly keeping my SS current) to build a more superior acct than most playing currently only to have a war brought to a stand still by my inferior opponents "turtling" & hiding behind game mechanics? anyone?

Not much. Big flipping nothing, really.

let me explain something, I have been playing for 2+ years now, thru the virtue of hard work my acct is equal to keinutnai's who has been playing for more than 3 years & who has spent real cash in the purchasing of several large accts. (the only real cash I have spent on this game was that which was needed to keep my SS current, & I did buy resources from the game once, around $20 worth). what do I get for all my hard work? Nothing, as all my hard work, & money spent was utterly pointless. what else that needs to be pointed out is that the "game mechanics" don't just protect the smaller, newer, weaker, accts. keinutnai did a mighty fine job of hiding behind them & thoroughly utilized every advantage they provided.

In other words, it might have been a good idea if there was some kind of timer or other kind of limit on this game mechanic protection, like it's lost when the realm exceeds 5-10 Million inhabitants.
Admin should be able to work it into the in-game world by stating the Aderan Council (the nutters you buy Protection from) will look out for the smaller fry, but loosen up their guard when a player has proven to be capable of or grown to a level where he or she can stand his or her ground (sort of)
The really small players (i.e. Newbies and Noobs, don't confuse them) could use a little help, at least at first.

{edit} It might also have been added to keep top players from curb-stomping everybody else, but one would soon grow bored of that, right? {/edit}

This game is billed as a "Strategy" game, well apparently a buttload of annoying math + Game mechanics that favor the defender = "Strategy".

I kind of miss the Strategy aspect (no flanking, armies consisting entirely of tanks or long range weaponry? seriously?), but that's to be expected from a casual game (=can be played 15 minutes a day or hours on end).

& my last question/statement of this post. if you don't like, or want to play a war game, why are you here? the last I checked the game was called "Aderan Wars", not "Aderan Wall Street", "Aderan snugglebunnies", or "Aderan sims".

seaborgium wrote:Its not that it favors the weak
Its attack always loses 5% give or take a little
Defender always loses 4% give or take a little

The only thing that has the highest affect on that is Tech.
admin as a formula of (atk/def)^0.5(i think its been a while)

So if you just look at teh % losses
Atk has 1m units = 50k losses
def has 400k 16k losses
It doesnt work like that.
If you attack with 1 million units and defender defends with 400k, attacker will lose 20k and defender 16k.
Have you never massed that you still dont know it?

which means the defender gets ore XP on the hit. The only way to realllly lower that is to
1. lower the amount your hitting with, which isn't really useful as you have to wait to rebuild
2. raise your tech much much higher so that the power of each unit is much higher then who your hitting.

seaborgium wrote:I'm pretty sure 1m * 5% = 50k.
how does the attacker only lose 20k?
You do know that the losses aren't based on the defenders numbers....

50k atk units = 4,000,000 exp
16k = 3,200,000 exp

kingkongfan1 wrote:

seaborgium wrote:I'm pretty sure 1m * 5% = 50k.
how does the attacker only lose 20k?
You do know that the losses aren't based on the defenders numbers....

50k atk units = 4,000,000 exp
16k = 3,200,000 exp

thanks for backing up what I have been saying for a while now. I wonder if it is possible that keinutnai has been confused by what I/we have been saying due to him having misunderstood certain information? or maybe there is an unknown bug causing issues with the losses on both sides? idk, just thinking out loud.

Keinutnai wrote:Atacker has 50.000 and defender only 400 losses if attacker uses 1.000.000 soldiers in assault against 10.000? The game doesnt work like that!

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Spoiler:

Gamniac wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:Atacker has 50.000 and defender only 400 losses if attacker uses 1.000.000 soldiers in assault against 10.000? The game doesnt work like that!

Then how does it work?
Plenty denial, but no info given, no wonder there are misunderstandings.

Paladius wrote:

Gamniac wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:Atacker has 50.000 and defender only 400 losses if attacker uses 1.000.000 soldiers in assault against 10.000? The game doesnt work like that!

Then how does it work?
Plenty denial, but no info given, no wonder there are misunderstandings.

I would also like to know how it works.

Keinutnai wrote:

Gamniac wrote:

Keinutnai wrote:Atacker has 50.000 and defender only 400 losses if attacker uses 1.000.000 soldiers in assault against 10.000? The game doesnt work like that!

Then how does it work?
Plenty denial, but no info given, no wonder there are misunderstandings.

Then you should scroll up and read what i wrote before.

Defender loses 4% of his units and attacker loses 25% more than defender if techs are same. Better techs lower your losses.

seaborgium wrote:So working with Gamniac.
I assulted him once, yes he gave me the go ahead
I had 725,518 trained, I lost 30,957. That is 4.2668% of 725518.
He had 704,820, he lost 33,038. That is 4.6874%.

My superior tech saved me .7332%, it cost him an extra .6874% losses.

Now if this worked like Kenzu said I should have lost 5% of Gamniac units, ~35,241 units.