Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 142

Thread: Evocalc Replacement Tool

  1. #31

    Default

    I see bigger number of kills in the middle chart than attacking and defending troops (ie my target had 11k cav, yet it shows 42k cavs die. Same with my 1k layered cav). is the number the "potential" number of defending cavs I can kill with my wave? that's only way to make sense of it.

    The remaining troops and bottom charts have the correct numbers.


    One more thing, no scouts for scout bombs , with pult changes it could be handy to have them there
    Last edited by DaveV; 09-10-2010 at 08:29 AM.

  2. #32

    Default

    Tried it out with 320 attk hero as attacker, 95,444 defending cav, and the rest the same as default.

    I notice in round 5, there are still 2k remaing cav, but they do nothing this round or the next round, and in round 6, there are 7k remaing defending archers, who do nothing either. So should I take this to mean there are actually no remaining cav or archers?

    Total deaths on the left side also show there remains 2k defending cav and 7k d. archers though.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DaveV View Post
    I see bigger number of kills in the middle chart than attacking and defending troops (ie my target had 11k cav, yet it shows 42k cavs die. Same with my 1k layered cav). is the number the "potential" number of defending cavs I can kill with my wave? that's only way to make sense of it.

    The remaining troops and bottom charts have the correct numbers.


    Also techs @ 50% is lvl 10 correct?

    One more thing, no scouts for scout bombs , with pult changes it could be handy to have them there
    Yes and yes. It just shows how much overkill.

    And for the problems with spreadsheet, it seems they stem from converting the file to an older format. I will add another copy of it in 97-03 format when I get home tonight

  4. #34

    Default

    Awesome work!
    I cant believe you managed to do this without resorting to those annoying vba macros. Testing it out, it gave some differences with my battle results against lvl 12s today. Changed defender INT to 410 and it was really accurate, very impressed.
    NA29 - Hello Kitty
    HCs: 2 1 0 1
    HH: Vasco Nunez de Balboa - 99 atk, Aretes King of Nabata - 97 atk
    Granuaile (Grainne Ni Mhaille or Grace O'Malley) - 99 atk, William Wallace - 97 atk

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Bad news for older excel users. Just tried to convert it to and older version from my 07, and it spits back that the nested formulas are too deep for older excel formats.


    Solution is still to get open office (office starter) for free

    Quote Originally Posted by azer0 View Post
    Tried it out with 320 attk hero as attacker, 95,444 defending cav, and the rest the same as default.

    I notice in round 5, there are still 2k remaing cav, but they do nothing this round or the next round, and in round 6, there are 7k remaing defending archers, who do nothing either. So should I take this to mean there are actually no remaining cav or archers?

    Total deaths on the left side also show there remains 2k defending cav and 7k d. archers though.

    Tried it and results agree with your round 4 but mine shows them dying in round 5
    Last edited by AeroAgg06; 09-10-2010 at 08:18 AM.

  6. #36

    Default

    I just input one of my lvl 14 waves.




    my wave failed but according to the cal I should have won with some ball hits (couple of k's). Hero was 510 ATT and 70 intel. defending hero has 300 ATT and 410 intel (lvl 14).

    When I input 510 intel for defending hero I get more accurate results however..

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    Yeah, just put it in calc myself and see what you are saying. Looked like you should have lost ~2k Bally and everything else.

    Not sure I would have gone for something that shows results this close though... Perhaps the 410 INT is an underestimation as well

    Many variables to look at


    I am glad it was an old attack though and not one based on calculator that wiped =P
    Last edited by AeroAgg06; 09-10-2010 at 08:35 AM.

  8. #38

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AeroAgg06 View Post
    when you say you added 20% for warhorn, do you mean to kills or to hero ATT?

    and why did you use 140% for corselt if it is a 20% buff?


    Not saying you are wrong, i just have no solid fact on either of those scenarios, as well as the leadership alteration.

    Will have to look at posts in the morning, gotta be at work in 6 hours, any feedback is helpful, and i have enjoyed seeing tips/alteration suggestions for this sheet. It will help it grow into something better



    FYI, i will not be making alterations that we cannot support as fact instead of theory, i.e. controlling single variables in an attack and see the change, and supported by battle reports.
    In the instructions for Birtles calculator, he said to add 4 to IW to get the effect of corslet. So thats why I used. And I multiplied actual attack of the hero by 1.2 (or 20% increase) to to to simulate warhorn. Birtles had said to add 4 to MT to simulate it, but that didn't seem to get as good a result.

    These are not carefully tested adjustments, and certainly not critiques of your amazing work. I was just pointing out some things I did to make it fit a certain battle report so we could further experiment and test.

    I will try to work with it some more this weekend and give you proper comparisons to battle reports.

  9. #39
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    anywhere
    Posts
    309

    Default 410

    Quote Originally Posted by Qingju View Post
    Awesome work!
    I cant believe you managed to do this without resorting to those annoying vba macros. Testing it out, it gave some differences with my battle results against lvl 12s today. Changed defender INT to 410 and it was really accurate, very impressed.
    Strange but i saw same 410 int to 12 !!!!

  10. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    1,082

    Default

    As for scouts, I haven't had much work with them. They are the only effective way I'm seeing to kill large amounts of defending cats though. Birtles calculator should work fine for this since they will always target the highest combined Att unit and will normally all die after 1 hit.


    Quote Originally Posted by Alfred45 View Post
    In the instructions for Birtles calculator, he said to add 4 to IW to get the effect of corslet. So thats why I used. And I multiplied actual attack of the hero by 1.2 (or 20% increase) to to to simulate warhorn. Birtles had said to add 4 to MT to simulate it, but that didn't seem to get as good a result.

    These are not carefully tested adjustments, and certainly not critiques of your amazing work. I was just pointing out some things I did to make it fit a certain battle report so we could further experiment and test.

    I will try to work with it some more this weekend and give you proper comparisons to battle reports.

    Thanks =) wasn't trying to call you out or nothin, just curious about those numbers, hadn't seen them before
    Last edited by AeroAgg06; 09-10-2010 at 08:46 AM.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •