Idea! Why not add stats together?

[Evan1000]

I have a great idea! Since there's absolutely no point in having separate attack and defense stats anymore, since battle calculations take both into account, why not just add both of them together into one huge stat? The battle results would be the same, it'd just be much easier to read and less frustrating trying to figure out why someone lost a battle. It'd also make modifiers easier because you wouldn't need a separate +5% melee attack or +5% melee defense anymore, just +10% melee. It'd make shooting for indi awards less frustrating as well.

Any thoughts?

[Dipstik]

Do the words "integer overflow" mean anything to you?

[cooch]

Do the words "integer overflow" mean anything to you?

He'll get back to you. Needs to look that up and figure out implications.

[Evan1000]

He'll get back to you. Needs to look that up and figure out implications.

Math is one of my strong subjects.

And Dippy, players in Modern War have proved it'd take a fair amount of stats (and money) to ever reach an overflow.

[Oh_TheHorror]

This reminds me of a Lewis Black joke. He was talking about how one party has bad ideas, and the other party has no ideas. He said something like, "The Republican stands up and says, "I have a really bad idea!" And the Democrat says, "And I can make it $h!ttier!""

[Jason_Bourne]

I have a great idea! Since there's absolutely no point in having separate attack and defense stats anymore, since battle calculations take both into account, why not just add both of them together into one huge stat? The battle results would be the same, it'd just be much easier to read and less frustrating trying to figure out why someone lost a battle. It'd also make modifiers easier because you wouldn't need a separate +5% melee attack or +5% melee defense anymore, just +10% melee. It'd make shooting for indi awards less frustrating as well.

Any thoughts?

At first I thought this idea, with a small modification, would be a brilliant idea! The modification I was thinking was, instead of adding all numbers, Gree could apply their 'algorithm', and come up with a number, that could be called something like 'PvP Power'.

BUT...! thinking more about it, now I think this would not work, because now with accomplices, winning/losing is no longer a simple function of whether your 'power' is greater that that of the opponent... it also depends on how the two of you have arranged your accomplices/kingpin. So you can lose to an opponent with a certain arrangement of accomplices, but then rearrange and win....

[Evan1000]

I created this thread with as much sarcasm as I could muster, and the sole purpose of pointing out one of GREE's most illogical moves to date.

[Dipstik]

It would be easier to get your sarcasm if you didn't have such a long history of terrible ideas. I suppose this one wasn't 1500 words, though.

[Molly's Voice]

This reminds me of a Lewis Black joke. He was talking about how one party has bad ideas, and the other party has no ideas. He said something like, "The Republican stands up and says, "I have a really bad idea!" And the Democrat says, "And I can make it $h!ttier!""

I lol'd.....

[Molly's Voice]

I created this thread with as much sarcasm as I could muster, and the sole purpose of pointing out one of GREE's most illogical moves to date.

No turning back now, Santa. Own it.

[Evan1000]

No turning back now, Santa. Own it.

Why are you so bent on the fact that I'm this "Santa" character? I haven't believed in him in years.

[Evan1000]

It would be easier to get your sarcasm if you didn't have such a long history of terrible ideas. I suppose this one wasn't 1500 words, though.

History of terrible ideas?

[Captain Torgue]

I have a great idea!

Thanks for the laugh.

[sister morphine]

I have a great idea! Since there's absolutely no point in having separate attack and defense stats anymore, since battle calculations take both into account, why not just add both of them together into one huge stat? The battle results would be the same, it'd just be much easier to read and less frustrating trying to figure out why someone lost a battle. It'd also make modifiers easier because you wouldn't need a separate +5% melee attack or +5% melee defense anymore, just +10% melee. It'd make shooting for indi awards less frustrating as well.

Any thoughts?
They don't involve both your A vs rival D, and rival A vs your D; at least not as a fixed value. Read the AMA post again...

http://forums.gree.net/showthread.php?103124-AMA-Ask-The-Developer-Anything-December-18th-Accomplices&p=1438732&viewfull=1#post1438732


A lot of people have also asked more about the relative importance of attacker attack versus defender defense versus defender attack versus attacker defense. The answer is that they are not a fixed percentage of each segment of the calculation. The bigger the discrepancy between attacker attack and defender defense the less the defender attack and attacker defense matters. In other words, if I attack you and my attack blows away your defense, then your attack and my defense will be largely irrelevant. On the other hand, if my attack is exactly evenly matched with your defense, then your attack versus my defense makes up half of that segment’s calculation

[Evan1000]

Thanks for the laugh.

I try ;)

Extras

[Evan1000]

They don't involve both your A vs rival D, and rival A vs your D; at least not as a fixed value. Read the AMA post again...

http://forums.gree.net/showthread.php?103124-AMA-Ask-The-Developer-Anything-December-18th-Accomplices&p=1438732&viewfull=1#post1438732

Oh, well then that proves my point even further, because that whole calculation is more pointless than what I had originally thought.

If you have a huge discrepancy between your attack and your opponent's defense, your defense would, naturally, be higher than theirs anyway.. so you wouldn't have to have your defense and the opponents attack not count because you would have beat them either way.

They should have had it so the less of a discrepancy you have, the less your defense and their attack stats matter to determine a win, THAT way you actually have a chance of winning battles you would've otherwise had won anyway without a doubt before all of this accomplice bs.

[Max Power]

Lewis Black was one of the best stand up shows I have ever seen. It was like an hour and a half of a really funny professor. He is pretty manic on the Daily Show because he gets two minutes, but when he gets two hours, he turns into a fantastic orator.

[Molly's Voice]

Why are you so bent on the fact that I'm this "Santa" character? I haven't believed in him in years.

The Santa doth protest too much, methinks.

[sister morphine]

The Santa doth protest too much, methinks.
He's only Santa if he lives in Jacksonville.

[sister morphine]

Oh, well then that proves my point even further, because that whole calculation is more pointless than what I had originally thought.

If you have a huge discrepancy between your attack and your opponent's defense, your defense would, naturally, be higher than theirs anyway.. so you wouldn't have to have your defense and the opponents attack not count because you would have beat them either way.

They should have had it so the less of a discrepancy you have, the less your defense and their attack stats matter to determine a win, THAT way you actually have a chance of winning battles you would've otherwise had won anyway without a doubt before all of this accomplice bs.
And they say female logic is weird!!!! :)

It's not so anyway, some players don't have much difference between their A and D (I'm often attacked by players with maybe 20 million separating them), but others have a much larger gap, mine included. ;)

[Evan1000]

He's only Santa if he lives in Jacksonville.

New York

Extras

[Evan1000]

And they say female logic is weird!!!! :)

It's not so anyway, some players don't have much difference between their A and D (I'm often attacked by players with maybe 20 million separating them), but others have a much larger gap, mine included. ;)

Haha, GREE logic isn't really logic at all, it's lack thereof.

And that's rare, because GREE in general gives more attack mods than defense, and it was smart, but now that's all blown out of the water with this stupid new battle calculation.

Except in Tam's case.. who has a defense billions more than her attack.. but she has the money to do so and aim for 16% mafia defense every war, which is smart.

[quityourwhining]

Haha, GREE logic isn't really logic at all, it's lack thereof.

And that's rare, because GREE in general gives more attack mods than defense, and it was smart, but now that's all blown out of the water with this stupid new battle calculation.

Except in Tam's case.. who has a defense billions more than her attack.. but she has the money to do so and aim for 16% mafia defense every war, which is smart.

Tam's attack is actually much higher than her defense, though she does have the highest defense in the game.

[cooch]

[QUOTE=Evan1000;1455469]Haha, GREE logic isn't really logic at all, it's lack thereof.

And that's rare, because GREE in general gives more attack mods than defense, and it was smart, but now that's all blown out of the water with this stupid new battle calculation.

Except in Tam's case.. who has a defense billions more than her attack.. but she has the money to do so and aim for 16% mafia defense every war, which is smart.[/QUO

Evan my friend. You & one shot really should b working for gree USA. A definite improvement for players:cool:

[HavingFun]

I try ;)

Extras

Don't lie, it just comes natural to you.

[Evan1000]

Tam's attack is actually much higher than her defense, though she does have the highest defense in the game.

Oh, I thought she had a higher defense

[Evan1000]

Don't lie, it just comes natural to you.

I'll take that as a compliment ;)