Page 15 of 17 FirstFirst ... 51314151617 LastLast
Results 141 to 150 of 164

Thread: Hate to beat a dead horse but wtf devs? Why even allow us to attack other players?

  1. #141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    I know I'm kind of beating a dead horse here, but... that's the name of the thread afterall.

    Using my previous numbers

    10k Rams: 40,000,000 food
    60,000,000 lumber
    15,000,000 iron
    6,850,000 seconds (with 168 attack hero)

    100k Scouts - Cost:

    100k scouts 1,200,000 food
    2,000,000 lumber
    1,500,000 iron
    160,000 seconds (same hero)

    I'll use server 2 market prices to reduce resource costs to gold
    Food .55
    Lumber .47
    Iron .399
    Time - Priceless

    10K Rams - 56,185,000 gold

    100K Scouts - 2,198,500 gold

    For the price of those 10k rams you could have made 25 groups of 100k scouts in less time.

    25 groups of 100k scouts should be able to knock back ~500k archers.
    Unless they have scouts, or close gates, or move their archers out.

    But assuming everything goes perfectly, the coffin nail for the scout bomb is that the 2.5 million scouts it takes to kill 500k archers eats 300 million food a day, or roughly 150 million gold, making the total cost for killing 500k archers over two hundred million gold assuming you can do it in 1 day.
    Thats the gold from over 400 attacks on level 5 NPCs.

    With a 200 attack hero one barracks can put out 5 scouts a min or 7200 a day. To build 2.5 million in a day you would need 347 barracks, or around 35 per city. In reality such an army is going to take more then one or even two days to produce, even for active top tier players.

    Spending a minimum of 200 million gold, and closer to 400 million gold, to kill off an army that eats less then half of your attack army isn't a winning strategy.

    That is the investment of what, roughly 900 attacks on level 5 NPCs assuming everything goes off without a hitch and you can pull it off in two days?

  2. #142
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    IN YOUR DREAMS
    Posts
    2,303

    Default

    So the swordsmen can kill off archers like cav? that is nice.

  3. #143

    Default

    I see one problem being All attacks are " ALL OR NOTHING "

    meaning you completly win or loose. there is no short skirmish or gorilla strike or option of retreat built in for a savvy Hero to use.

    What if you just wanted to attack at range 2 rounds and withdraw and march back? Or 5 rounds or till 30% of army died then call retreat...

    You can with some strategy peck at walls and def and still maintain a army without loosing all. Or allowing all the def troops with there open gate to reach your troops before your skirmish hit and you withdrew.

    Not all commanders or suicidal and delay and withdraw actions or gorilla strikes are a effective form of attack. All or nothing wile sort of heroic in nature is not always the brightest of moves.

    I think coding in a rounds of attack or retreat like a camp feature would go a long way into making combat abit more dynamic and fun... Also it would get more control to the attacking commander as it were. Not just send X amount of troops to Y and attack. But attack for how long and retreat if Z factor occurs. If you get my meaning...

    I also think Defenders should get to check (put check marks beside a unit type *example Transport) units to run out the open gates or not. As it is now if gates open everything leaves. I honestly believe in some cases a defender may want to hold some in reserve or just not have that type of unit commit to defense... He/she may know they will just loose that type for nothing on a open gate at this point but could not be helped as it is now...

    Then again 1/2 a million people may think this is the stupidest thing they ever heard or read.
    Well there is a game suggestion box. I guess I could go drop it there for proper ridicule and dismissal...
    Last edited by Soin; 06-26-2009 at 05:35 AM.

  4. #144

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kassikas View Post
    Unless they have scouts, or close gates, or move their archers out.

    But assuming everything goes perfectly, the coffin nail for the scout bomb is that the 2.5 million scouts it takes to kill 500k archers eats 300 million food a day, or roughly 150 million gold, making the total cost for killing 500k archers over two hundred million gold assuming you can do it in 1 day.
    Thats the gold from over 400 attacks on level 5 NPCs.

    With a 200 attack hero one barracks can put out 5 scouts a min or 7200 a day. To build 2.5 million in a day you would need 347 barracks, or around 35 per city. In reality such an army is going to take more then one or even two days to produce, even for active top tier players.

    Spending a minimum of 200 million gold, and closer to 400 million gold, to kill off an army that eats less then half of your attack army isn't a winning strategy.

    That is the investment of what, roughly 900 attacks on level 5 NPCs assuming everything goes off without a hitch and you can pull it off in two days?
    You can move archers out for incoming rams also, except rams takes hours to arrive, scouts take minutes.

    Scouts in the city don't do anything, I already proved that.

    Closing the gate would be annoying, but you just wait til they're offline, and again since it only takes minutes to get there its much less likely they'll come online during an attack than any other type of attack. (Also you'll kill some towers so its not a total loss)

    Again, I'm not telling you to kill 500k archers, I'm comparing the equivalent costs. He said 10k rams and 60k ballis failed to kill 100k archers. I said for the same build cost as JUST THE RAMS you could kill 500k archers. If you factor in the cost for the 60k ballistae (210mil more gold) then really the costs are even before you factor in the cost to feed the rams and ballis. To say that it's not a winning strategy by comparison is to wear blinders (lower build cost killing more than 5x as many units). Admittedly feeding the scout army ups the costs, but you'd have to feed a ram army as well, and while it is less costly, it still reduces the difference.
    Also can you come up with any army that can kill 500k archers all stationed in a high level town (10k rams would be instantaneously annihilated by 500k archers)? I'm certainly willing to listen if you can. And if you can do it for a cost lower than the one you just outlined I'll certainly be more than happy to reconsider the superiority of this strat.

    Quote Originally Posted by Sloan View Post
    I agree with your numbers, but I'd like to see someone succeed in scout spam attacking, and winning. If only because I've had 100k scouts scout bug against someones walls before, and they cost me -600k honor worth of units. I think they may have killed less then 3k units total.
    Do you mean succeed in successive waves of attack, or with one attack? I can provide you with one set of data, but not multiples unfortunately. I've never denied its a very expensive proposition and since I restarted on a new server I no longer have the resources to perform tests for people.
    Last edited by pokey; 06-26-2009 at 05:59 AM.

  5. #145

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    You can move archers out for incoming rams also, except rams takes hours to arrive, scouts take minutes.

    Scouts in the city don't do anything, I already proved that.

    Closing the gate would be annoying, but you just wait til they're offline, and again since it only takes minutes to get there its much less likely they'll come online during an attack than any other type of attack. (Also you'll kill some towers so its not a total loss)

    Again, I'm not telling you to kill 500k archers, I'm comparing the equivalent costs. He said 10k rams and 60k ballis failed to kill 100k archers. I said for the same build cost as JUST THE RAMS you could kill 500k archers. If you factor in the cost for the 60k ballistae (210mil more gold) then really the costs are even before you factor in the cost to feed the rams and ballis. To say that it's not a winning strategy by comparison is to wear blinders (lower build cost killing more than 5x as many units). Admittedly feeding the scout army ups the costs, but you'd have to feed a ram army as well, and while it is less costly, it still reduces the difference.
    Also can you come up with any army that can kill 500k archers all stationed in a high level town (10k rams would be instantaneously annihilated by 500k archers)? I'm certainly willing to listen if you can. And if you can do it for a cost lower than the one you just outlined I'll certainly be more than happy to reconsider the superiority of this strat.



    Do you mean succeed in successive waves of attack, or with one attack? I can provide you with one set of data, but not multiples unfortunately. I've never denied its a very expensive proposition and since I restarted on a new server I no longer have the resources to perform tests for people.
    The '900 level 5 NPC attack' cost depends on a two day time line. Such a strategy would require coming online once an hour or so for two days to train troops, assuming the population regeneration of ten cities can actually handle 2.5 million troops in 2 days.

    That cost depends on pure optimization (again assuming it is actually possible given population figures, which I will concede is likely) which requires things like not sleeping for 48 hours. Realistically operation scout bomb is going to take a week or so, which drives the price up into the billions of gold rather then the 'mere' hundreds of millions for anyone who 'only' logs in eight or so times a day.

    Massive scout bombs make the theory of taking out 500k archers possible on paper, but the sheer amount of effort and expense to take out something that can be replaced in a day or two ensures that it will stay nothing but a rather clever and brilliant bit of problem solving that sadly has no practical use.

    Theoretically possible if someone ever bothers to try it, something you yourself will not be trying for a couple of months if ever, doesn't make something a good strategy or viable.

    Is it possibly more viable then massive ram attacks sent wave after wave? Sure, but that is like saying slitting your wrist is a more viable way of staining an enemy's shoes then opening your throat.

    From a strategic perspective, both are a pointless waste that will not profit you in any way. If someone is griefing your newbies hard enough to warrant a massive response, it is smarter to just defend your newbies.

    And that again assumes that everything lines up just as you expect.

  6. #146

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kassikas View Post
    The '900 level 5 NPC attack' cost depends on a two day time line. Such a strategy would require coming online once an hour or so for two days to train troops, assuming the population regeneration of ten cities can actually handle 2.5 million troops in 2 days.

    That cost depends on pure optimization (again assuming it is actually possible given population figures, which I will concede is likely) which requires things like not sleeping for 48 hours. Realistically operation scout bomb is going to take a week or so, which drives the price up into the billions of gold rather then the 'mere' hundreds of millions for anyone who 'only' logs in eight or so times a day.

    Massive scout bombs make the theory of taking out 500k archers possible on paper, but the sheer amount of effort and expense to take out something that can be replaced in a day or two ensures that it will stay nothing but a rather clever and brilliant bit of problem solving that sadly has no practical use.

    Theoretically possible if someone ever bothers to try it, something you yourself will not be trying for a couple of months if ever, doesn't make something a good strategy or viable.

    Is it possibly more viable then massive ram attacks sent wave after wave? Sure, but that is like saying slitting your wrist is a more viable way of staining an enemy's shoes then opening your throat.

    From a strategic perspective, both are a pointless waste that will not profit you in any way. If someone is griefing your newbies hard enough to warrant a massive response, it is smarter to just defend your newbies.

    And that again assumes that everything lines up just as you expect.
    I must open a question mark @ your statements. Say you have 20 barracks in a town, and an idle population of 15,000 (easily attainable). You say 1 barracks produces 5 scouts in a minute. So 15000 / 20 = 750 per queue, or 150 minutes (2.5 hours). Population regen is actually one of the things I dont know explicitly in this game, but I'm going to assume 30 minutes for full regen and you can prove me wrong if you know better. I'll assume the average barracks level to be 4 in a town (for archers) so you can queue up a minimum of 10 hours worth of troops every 2 hours. Why exactly does this require you to not sleep for 48 hours? You will have to play roughly 4-5 hours a day, but that still leave 19-20 hours to do other things... (admittedly in 10 hour chunks)

    That also produces 150,000 scouts per town per day, so with 10 towns that's 1.5million scouts per day. Yes it will take about 2 days to produce 3mil scouts playing 5 hours a day. Again I never said this was a ton of fun, but it's certainly not as impossible as you make it sound.

    I repeat, find me a method to attack someone (no one said anything about newbie griefing) with strong defenses that is possible, then find one that is plausible, then find one that is more efficient, and if you can even get past stage 1 I'll be impressed.

    Again, I'm not suggesting that you go attack someone with 500k archers. But for the same cost as 10,000 rams you can build a scout army that can kill 500k archers, making it 5x more efficient than an existing attack.


    You know what I feel the real irony is in this conversation? People seem intent on saying this problem or that problem with this method, like "its too costly" or whatever. Yet we then still report day after day of people complaining "Oh I sent 100,000 archers and XYZ number of units at some guy and they all died killing 20 enemy guys" or "I sent 100,000 cataphracts at someone and killed 20,000 swords", "Why did my 35,000 catapults and 80000 archers only kill 1k Archer Towers?". So in reality people are actually already spending far more than my method costs, and getting lower results. Yet people complain that my method is impractical. Simply for fear of stepping outside the box.
    Last edited by pokey; 06-26-2009 at 07:45 AM.

  7. #147

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    I must open a question mark @ your statements. Say you have 20 barracks in a town, and an idle population of 15,000 (easily attainable). You say 1 barracks produces 5 scouts in a minute. So 15000 / 20 = 750 per queue, or 150 minutes (2.5 hours). Population regen is actually one of the things I dont know explicitly in this game, but I'm going to assume 30 minutes for full regen and you can prove me wrong if you know better. I'll assume the average barracks level to be 4 in a town (for archers) so you can queue up a minimum of 10 hours worth of troops every 2 hours. Why exactly does this require you to not sleep for 48 hours? You will have to play roughly 4-5 hours a day, but that still leave 19-20 hours to do other things... (admittedly in 10 hour chunks)

    That also produces 150,000 scouts per town per day, so with 10 towns that's 1.5million scouts per day. Yes it will take about 2 days to produce 3mil scouts playing 5 hours a day. Again I never said this was a ton of fun, but it's certainly not as impossible as you make it sound.

    This assumes you have 200 barracks, 10 200 attack heroes, or are waiting around to move that 200 attack hero ten times every time you train, and that population figures, which are unknown for you, work as you say they do. Also assumes you have zero taxes and production in any of your cities.

    Tested population respawn on a city with 13k free pop. Came back as ~1300 in 6 mins. Assuming 15k would give you ~1500 every 6 mins, that would double your figures. Full respawn would take an hour, not half an hour. Would have to play in four hour blocks twice a day, more if you do not have 10 heroes with 200 attack and have to make rounds with one hero. That turns Evony into a full time job.

    Additionally, turning off your production would cost you >240 million potential food a day, which on a two day time period tacks on another two hundred and fifty million gold figure to the price tag of this strategy.

    So even at the 2 day time line, we are looking at way over half a billion gold price tag for this tactic, which is ten times your original figure. Plus sixteen hours of tedious annoying work. Few people actually have that set up, and fewer still are going to spend 16 hours online to kill 500k archers.

    And once again, that is assuming everything lines up just how you think. Given that you quoted the price of this attack at ~50 million gold, and it has proven over half a billion, I think it is fair to say that one should reasonably question the claim that it would work exactly as you have outlined.

    Quote Originally Posted by pokey View Post
    I must open a question mark @ your statements. Say you have 20 barracks in a town, and an idle population of 15,000 (easily attainable). You say 1 barracks produces 5 scouts in a minute. So 15000 / 20 = 750 per queue, or 150 minutes (2.5 hours). Population regen is actually one of the things I dont know explicitly in this game, but I'm going to assume 30 minutes for full regen and you can prove me wrong if you know better. I'll assume the average barracks level to be 4 in a town (for archers) so you can queue up a minimum of 10 hours worth of troops every 2 hours. Why exactly does this require you to not sleep for 48 hours? You will have to play roughly 4-5 hours a day, but that still leave 19-20 hours to do other things... (admittedly in 10 hour chunks)

    That also produces 150,000 scouts per town per day, so with 10 towns that's 1.5million scouts per day. Yes it will take about 2 days to produce 3mil scouts playing 5 hours a day. Again I never said this was a ton of fun, but it's certainly not as impossible as you make it sound.
    Go back and read my argument please. I said that any method for killing 500k archers under current game mechanics is akin to slashing open a body part to stain an enemy's shoes, from a tactical perspective.

    I even conceded that this plan may actually be more viable then other methods.

    But that doesn't change the fact that even if everything lines up all perfectly, which is highly dubious given the notorious inaccuracy of Pokeynomics, it is still not a good idea. At the end of all this, you have still lost far more then your enemy, and you put a huge amount of effort into it.

  8. #148

    Default

    The 10k rams and 60k ballista killed more then 100k archers (twas a total of 200k dead defenders if I remember in battle report in the battle report section.) is what I said. following the logic of an incredibly massive tank to give your ballista time to actually fight, a 60k rams/40k ballista combo could potentially kill a relatively heavily defended town.

  9. #149

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sloan View Post
    The 10k rams and 60k ballista killed more then 100k archers (twas a total of 200k dead defenders if I remember in battle report in the battle report section.) is what I said. following the logic of an incredibly massive tank to give your ballista time to actually fight, a 60k rams/40k ballista combo could potentially kill a relatively heavily defended town.
    It may be easier posting the report, if available.

    do u even lift 1v1 il rek u


  10. #150

    Default

    Good Idea, I'm basing my estimates on
    battle6.evony.com/default.html?logfile/ea/80/2b/a9/ea802ba98086d838e2244a2bff6a5c88.xml
    I can't say for certin that the rams were the cause of the win, but it'd make sense, as I've seen 60k ballista attack someone before, and kill 60k archers.

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
  •