Casualty rates.

[DILL3NGER]

Hi,

Could someone explain the casualty rates and the way it works please.

The reason I ask is because even though I'm winning fights I'm suffering unacceptable losses. The wierd thing is that when I'm attacked whether I win or lose I don't lose many if any units.

A typical example is like the other day when I attacked a guy with something like 4k defence vs my 47k attack. I obviously won the fight but lost -

1 x Demolitions 200k
1 x Commando 85k
1 x Viper Jet 1.2m

Really??? The other point being why am I only losing top end units? why am I not losing the cannon fodder stuff like scouts and light gunners? everytime its demolitions or rocket soldiers b-52s comanches harriers.

Any help would be greatly recieved.

DILL

[Thenoob]

Would you like some cheese with that wine lol. Sorry to hear about your losses maybe if you attack people higher then your stats you won't loose as many units

[DILL3NGER]

Well he was there and it was rude not to.

But that doesn't answer the question. What determines the units you lose? My unit losses are so high I'm thinking of sending in a ticket but if someone could tell me otherwise I'd appreciate it.

[CJ54]

Well he was there and it was rude not to.

But that doesn't answer the question. What determines the units you lose? My unit losses are so high I'm thinking of sending in a ticket but if someone could tell me otherwise I'd appreciate it.

I can directly answer at least half of it.

The game only looks at your units that are actively applying to your stats. The number of units that apply to your stats at one time (the game picks the best out of what you have) is related to how many allies and your level (the exact formula is your level * 4 *5 if you have at least five allies per level, and it caps out at 2000 units at level 100). If you have more units than that, the game only picks the best ones to apply to your stats. Likewise, the game only looks at those active units for casualties. In most of the cases I've looked into, when someone is losing the better stuff it's because all they're USING is the better stuff*.

We are investigating the reports of higher casualties that were sent in over the weekend; a lot of that turned out to be perception based on the way the newsfeed works, but that's only for defenses.

*A more concrete example that I've actually seen: if you are level 100 with 500 allies, and you have 3000 Super Hornets and 5000 scouts and nothing else in inventory, you will only lose super hornets until you are back below 2000 super hornets.

[vitus79]

so basicly what u're saying is if i want low casualties i have to be weak. or in other words if i u want to be strong you will lose bombers, rovers and elite choppers left right and center until they are replaced by indestructables?

during the pvp battle i lost at least 70 stealth bombers, mech rovers and elite choppers each. i have around 300 each of the valor items. thats not even half my army. there HAS to be meat shields in my army but still i only lose the highest value units. i dont understand the mechanics but like everyone else participating this weekend i realized a much higher casualty rate. so most likely things got tweaked to either make us weak or go all in on the LE sets..

[Jonmutley]

There is another thread further down the list with a lot more people with this problem.

[Poopenshire]

The people in the past had used meat shield no where as simple as described above. Here is how its commonly used. a person will have 250 Super hornets with low casualty rate. To make up for that they have 400 or more demolitions at high casualty. not only is demolitions a higher casualty rate their consumption rate is greater. By the numbers the demlitions should die first. What ends up happeni.g is the super hornets die first and larger numbers.Another example is someone has 4 or 5 high end boss loot. Compare that with 300 or more demolitions again. The demlitions do mot die but the boss loot does preferentially. Now the qualifier: they all go to battle. this has always been the issue that valuable units die before.cheap ones that are taken to battle.

[Paulss99]

Hi CJ, can you explain to me how before the pvp battle I could attack people (with a defence of less than 10k a lower rank and less than 300 units) 30 times and not loses unit but since Friday I lose 1 - 3 units every battle even though my top 300 units are Higher stats than my opponent andmany are indestructable. Something definitely changed last week.

I have built an army of valor units(I am on invasion operation 387). I have been carrying out 150 - 300 attacks a day for the past 4 to 6 months and I would only lose around 1-2 units at most. I now lose that per battle! A prime example of my usual target is LARI (level 200) with defence of circa 600. This person has clearly given up playing so is an easy person to attack I must have attacked them a couple of hundred times in the past few months and never lost a unit. I tried attacking the other day and lost 2 units!

[Jonmutley]

I can directly answer at least half of it.

The game only looks at your units that are actively applying to your stats. The number of units that apply to your stats at one time (the game picks the best out of what you have) is related to how many allies and your level (the exact formula is your level * 4 *5 if you have at least five allies per level, and it caps out at 2000 units at level 100). If you have more units than that, the game only picks the best ones to apply to your stats. Likewise, the game only looks at those active units for casualties. In most of the cases I've looked into, when someone is losing the better stuff it's because all they're USING is the better stuff*.

We are investigating the reports of higher casualties that were sent in over the weekend; a lot of that turned out to be perception based on the way the newsfeed works, but that's only for defenses.

*A more concrete example that I've actually seen: if you are level 100 with 500 allies, and you have 3000 Super Hornets and 5000 scouts and nothing else in inventory, you will only lose super hornets until you are back below 2000 super hornets. CJ, why are they losing units if there army's so high on attack score? If you have a usable army that's double or triple stronger then why loss units? The other guy is losing less in value so technically that's a Win for him. But, it says I won? Funny way of looking at war. My usable army's stronger by triple, I attack and win but lose a lot of units. He's lost nothing. That's like, in Iraq, America and UK losing big, expensive units and men and the enemy have lost nothing. So with that logic, America and UK keep going till very few units left and then go home to the family. When the kid asks " how many people did you kill daddy"? Daddy says " none son, we didn't kill a bean.But we won all the same. we showed them when they blew up our kit and shot our men, we shouted at them we won, we won as we ran for the mess hall". Seems an odd understanding of the word won.

[Jonmutley]

So that means hitler won the battle of Stalingrad? That means hamburger hill was a successful win? That means when Rommel knocked out most of britains tanks within a few weeks it was a resounding success for monty? Of course not. A win in war is damage to an opponents army, infrastructure and equipment. Not getting 30 grand out of them and losing 70 grands worth of kit. That's a loss, whichever way you want to wrap it up.

[Q Raider]

The major difference over the weekend from my observation was losing units on almost EVERY Defence, successful or not.

I stopped attacking after 12 successful attacks against opponents whom I previously DID NOT lose units to. The units lost were Transport Raiders (5), Brigands (8) (both which I know are pretty fragile but not against these players) Super Hornets (3) and Elite Water Cruisers of which I also lost three, more than I had lost in probably the previous thousand attacks.

My player was attacked fairly consistently over the PVP event and even though winning a good share of those battles (certainly in the early stages) T/R's, Brigands, SH and Cruisers continued to be the only units lost yet there are higher casualty units in my inventory which would be going into battle.

The change occurred when the phantom correction came through. I had been doing PVP earlier in the day with only the normal expected loss rates. After the correction was done there was an immediate increase in the losses experienced.

[I am a cow]

the thing is with casualty rates is that when there is a event (pvp crates or bosses) its best not to have too many units of high value because they seem to have an increased than usual. I lost 9 super hornets
and 3 expert attack drones in 4 attacks during the colonel iron event whereas I had not lost a single EAD or Super hornet before.

Conclusion

The casualty rate is ridiculous during events

rather than have a lot of strong units get some meat shields meaning desert leaders, light gunners etc

[Jonmutley]

Ok, let's have a look at this. I've just had a guy I've raided. I've got an attack score of 9481. That is my usable units with the allies I have. This is your program's calculation, not mine. The guy I'm raiding has a defence score of 5126 and again, the program's calculation, not mine. The bit I can work out with the info provided by your program is the difference. Which is a difference of 4355 in my favour. I look in his inventory, the units were of a far lower standard as mine plus i have actually bought about 10 units with gold. We are talking FAR lower standard. Then, i check for boost buildings all on level one and two buildings not built yet. Cool, i have got all boost buildings on two and I'm uk so extra boost to sea. Plus, he's USA so he doesn't have a country boost for equipment, I raid one tap. Get the first bit of money, lose a sniper. Cool. Do it again and get the second lot of money and lose a balistic missile sub! Wow I've got 45 grand for that hit and I've lost 2 mil. I think shall I tap to take the double money? Why not, can't get any worse! I tap again, LOSE! Plus the demise of a expert attack drone, a Bradley, 2 snipers and strike eagle! Mathematical madness! The defence score IS THERE CURRENT LEVEL WITH ALLIES SCORE in relation to units. That's not the argument. The figures on the list are the result of the calculation. With that result I base by choice of if to attack/raid. If my attack figure is almost double there's then that should mean Im bringing almost double scored units to battle. Not double the amount of units, the amount of units based on the calculation for which the results are shown on the players profile. Ie there attack points. So we have established, that the attack and defence score IS THE CALCULATION. Obviously without boost buildings. We've established that my enemy has a lower amount of boost generated from buildings and very poor defence buildings. We were on the same level and he had 2 less allies than me. Plus, on the after results, I looked at his top 25. At the bottom of his top 25 were units with defence of 11. At the bottom of my 25 were units with 45 attack one of them was an uncommon from the current event! Lol now tell me I haven't done my homework like a good boy. I also had some snipers as you can see as cannon fodder. I have done everything to size this guy up for a raid. CJ, please, can you look in to this as things did genuinely change roughly about Friday last week. It was a really sharp curve of losses, very out of the ordinary and still a problem. I've made sure that I've got cannon fodder in my attacks, I've read loads of hints on here but to be honest, to no avail. I've added allies, removed allies really looked hard at my list and spent some times up to half an hour going through everyone on the list with the same or lower allies numbers. What is also odd, I found a guy with 1600 defence and as I say, i have an attack of 9481 but he had anniversary buildings un collected so I thought, I've got to have a pop! I took the lot and only lost 2 snipers, I don't get it. ???

[Jonmutley]

the thing is with casualty rates is that when there is a event (pvp crates or bosses) its best not to have too many units of high value because they seem to have an increased than usual. I lost 9 super hornets
and 3 expert attack drones in 4 attacks during the colonel iron event whereas I had not lost a single EAD or Super hornet before.

Conclusion

The casualty rate is ridiculous during events

rather than have a lot of strong units get some meat shields meaning desert leaders, light gunners etc problem is your stats go down with the fodder. It's a loss loss situation unless you have an army of gold units. Then you can plough on up to the top with ease. Try it, get the fodder in, get some spanking units in with a smattering of middle men and watch that attack score fall! attack then and you will still lose the higher ones bud. I've tried it, it's rubbish. Gold is the only way to go or camp. Or, of coarse, keep doing it and feeling disheartened. Problem is, if people get disheartened for to long they knock it on the head. I guess? Lol

[John Snow]

Ok, let's have a look at this. I've just had a guy I've raided. I've got an attack score of 9481. That is my usable units with the allies I have. This is your program's calculation, not mine. The guy I'm raiding has a defence score of 5126 and again, the program's calculation, not mine. The bit I can work out with the info provided by your program is the difference. Which is a difference of 4355 in my favour. I look in his inventory, the units were of a far lower standard as mine plus i have actually bought about 10 units with gold. We are talking FAR lower standard. Then, i check for boost buildings all on level one and two buildings not built yet. Cool, i have got all boost buildings on two and I'm uk so extra boost to sea. Plus, he's USA so he doesn't have a country boost for equipment, I raid one tap. Get the first bit of money, lose a sniper. Cool. Do it again and get the second lot of money and lose a balistic missile sub! Wow I've got 45 grand for that hit and I've lost 2 mil. I think shall I tap to take the double money? Why not, can't get any worse! I tap again, LOSE! Plus the demise of a expert attack drone, a Bradley, 2 snipers and strike eagle! Mathematical madness! The defence score IS THERE CURRENT LEVEL WITH ALLIES SCORE in relation to units. That's not the argument. The figures on the list are the result of the calculation. With that result I base by choice of if to attack/raid. If my attack figure is almost double there's then that should mean Im bringing almost double scored units to battle. Not double the amount of units, the amount of units based on the calculation for which the results are shown on the players profile. Ie there attack points. So we have established, that the attack and defence score IS THE CALCULATION. Obviously without boost buildings. We've established that my enemy has a lower amount of boost generated from buildings and very poor defence buildings. We were on the same level and he had 2 less allies than me. Plus, on the after results, I looked at his top 25. At the bottom of his top 25 were units with defence of 11. At the bottom of my 25 were units with 45 attack one of them was an uncommon from the current event! Lol now tell me I haven't done my homework like a good boy. I also had some snipers as you can see as cannon fodder. I have done everything to size this guy up for a raid. CJ, please, can you look in to this as things did genuinely change roughly about Friday last week. It was a really sharp curve of losses, very out of the ordinary and still a problem. I've made sure that I've got cannon fodder in my attacks, I've read loads of hints on here but to be honest, to no avail. I've added allies, removed allies really looked hard at my list and spent some times up to half an hour going through everyone on the list with the same or lower allies numbers. What is also odd, I found a guy with 1600 defence and as I say, i have an attack of 9481 but he had anniversary buildings un collected so I thought, I've got to have a pop! I took the lot and only lost 2 snipers, I don't get it. ???

This topic is as old as the game. Some tips to keep your loss rates to a minimum. First, no matter how large the delta between your att stat and your rival's def stat, the casualty rate does not go to zero. there is a baseline casualty rate. Diversify the units you take to battle. The more you have of one kind of unit the more likely you'll lose that type of unit. A magic number seems to be 40%. Attacking people whose def stat is 40% or less than your att stat seems to make a difference. Upgrade your infirmary. Buildings have a def rating. Higher value buildings have higher ratings.

[Jonmutley]

The major difference over the weekend from my observation was losing units on almost EVERY Defence, successful or not.

I stopped attacking after 12 successful attacks against opponents whom I previously DID NOT lose units to. The units lost were Transport Raiders (5), Brigands (8) (both which I know are pretty fragile but not against these players) Super Hornets (3) and Elite Water Cruisers of which I also lost three, more than I had lost in probably the previous thousand attacks.

My player was attacked fairly consistently over the PVP event and even though winning a good share of those battles (certainly in the early stages) T/R's, Brigands, SH and Cruisers continued to be the only units lost yet there are higher casualty units in my inventory which would be going into battle.

The change occurred when the phantom correction came through. I had been doing PVP earlier in the day with only the normal expected loss rates. After the correction was done there was an immediate increase in the losses experienced. everybody's saying it because its true, not because we all got together on another forum to make it up. here we have another example of a person who noticed the increase after the faction fix. I know I sound a bit peeved but when you've lost absolutely millions in units suddenly which I had been building up over masses of raids and attacks, it's partially understandable. As q raider I'm sure appreciates.

[Jonmutley]

This topic is as old as the game. Some tips to keep your loss rates to a minimum. First, no matter how large the delta between your att stat and your rival's def stat, the casualty rate does not go to zero. there is a baseline casualty rate. Diversify the units you take to battle. The more you have of one kind of unit the more likely you'll lose that type of unit. A magic number seems to be 40%. Attacking people whose def stat is 40% or less than your att stat seems to make a difference. Upgrade your infirmary. Buildings have a def rating. Higher value buildings have higher ratings. Jon, I appreciate what your saying I really do. Your not wrong, the difference if you look closely is around 90%. If your saying losses are far less at 40% then 90 % is better. He did have an infirmary on 1. I know it doesn't matter to me much. But my infirmary is on two. As for my army there is a good spread of men. Both lowly snipers with a range of middle men with as strong a set of units at the top to raise my stats. I've sent several messages on other threads and there is another thread on this subject which is current and a far few pages long. My I'd number is 521254216. Your more than welcome to come and have a look at my inventory and message me on allies forum bud if you think there are glairing holes in my army.I've asked two other guys to have a look who said I was sloppy and lazy in my choices of enemy and my army was to blame. They as yet haven't asked to be allies and commented on my wall. Even tho I wrote them a message. Again, confusing. I'm lazy but I'm the one sending the messages and asking them to put there money where there mouth is and ..................nothing. I'm not talking about you Jon of course. Just an observation that there is plenty of criticism by people and not enough actual effort to help someone out a bit. Know what I mean geeza?

[Alpha dog]

Hi CJ, can you explain to me how before the pvp battle I could attack people (with a defence of less than 10k a lower rank and less than 300 units) 30 times and not loses unit but since Friday I lose 1 - 3 units every battle even though my top 300 units are Higher stats than my opponent andmany are indestructable. Something definitely changed last week.

I have built an army of valor units(I am on invasion operation 387). I have been carrying out 150 - 300 attacks a day for the past 4 to 6 months and I would only lose around 1-2 units at most. I now lose that per battle! A prime example of my usual target is LARI (level 200) with defence of circa 600. This person has clearly given up playing so is an easy person to attack I must have attacked them a couple of hundred times in the past few months and never lost a unit. I tried attacking the other day and lost 2 units!

This is pretty much what I'm experiencing as well. I never found a player with such low stats this weekend during PvP but I was looking for fodder. And when I attacked these guys that I would usually lose nothing or the odd high casualty unit on. I was losing 1-3 high end low/very low casualty units along side the odd commando or biowarfare troop. Lost over 50 expert attack drones and many other valor units. It's highly frustrating, these losses never affected me in this way before

[Opinvu]

The proof is there. For 6 mo you attack an abandoned account with 300 a/d never loosing troops and then one day in 6 attacks you lost 11 troops.

I have concluded in my own observations that CJ's explenation is correct. But that formula changed right before the PVP tournement. I was fine with loosing 11 snipers in 6 attacks, no biggy, lowest man in the useable army. But I didn't get anything different that day, and instead of loosing a bunch of snipers I lost 2-12 of everything in arsonal. 24mill and counting in lost troops and not 1 lost battle. Sure winning is expensive but at least admit its part of the mechanics to keep the money flowing only.

[Q Raider]

This topic is as old as the game. Some tips to keep your loss rates to a minimum. First, no matter how large the delta between your att stat and your rival's def stat, the casualty rate does not go to zero. there is a baseline casualty rate. Diversify the units you take to battle. The more you have of one kind of unit the more likely you'll lose that type of unit. A magic number seems to be 40%. Attacking people whose def stat is 40% or less than your att stat seems to make a difference. Upgrade your infirmary. Buildings have a def rating. Higher value buildings have higher ratings.

The last six attacks were against a known dead account. 500 allies but only 243 units and Defence less than 5k.

My Attack strength was around 140k, infirmary is at level 6 and also have two 20% casualty reduction units, plus another with a smaller amount (2% or 5%) yet units were lost on every attack.

Kinda knocks your 40% argument around a bit, no matter which way you want to look at it.....

[Tournai]

Obvious that something has changed CJ.

I read early in another thread at the start of the PvP event, that GREE and their mechanics were lying about it to you or not telling that they did change something.
Yes the calculations are right, before the event like a hundred other people confirmed to.

I started the event with 9.5 Million, at the end of the event i only had 500 K left.
Only because I did not want to drop my stats of course and bought my losses back.


I noticed the casualty rate to, but did not mind because a win is a win for the faction, even though we did not even make it to the top 50 list.

What I also did was farming the Amphibious Trooper, with 150 I started the event, and NEVER lost a single trooper before the event with pvp or raid. When the event started those started to be my cannon fudder, I lost lost almost every battle a trooper.

In the Future like in KA, I will expect to have about a 100 maybe more Undistructible units, so every other unit, that can die, will be fodder. and the highest will be the first.

So the simple solution to this all is shaving 500 allies and 2000 Undistructible units, so nothing can die anymore?

For all players that are willing to Join the Dutch? read my signature!

Greetz leader of The Dutch Fighters.

Doornik a.k.a Tournai

[mickymacirl]

The ONLY legal solution to not losing trinkets is to have a 2000 gold army. End of.

[Wufnu]

Well I just attacked someone at 20% of my a/d, hit him 9 times and only lost one Light Gunner. But at my level and attack score these players are few and far between.

I've given up on raiding for profit because I always end up with less than I started. I'm only doing the valor missions and I'm not sure that's worth it either.

It seems to me the only 2 viable strategies (with this new loss rate) are camping and buying 2000 gold units.

I definitely think someone tweaked the algorithim whether by accident or design. And I'm leaning towards design to see if they're gold sales went up after the "adjustment", which they most assuredly did as it was just before the last event.

[Tournai]

indeed it is to trigger us buying gold!

[Wufnu]

indeed it is to trigger us buying gold!

Well they tried it on the wrong guy. I'm a contrarian so what I'm going to do is buy NOTHING until they get it back to where it was.

I thought they had the rate just about perfect when I started a month ago. I could even take chances and attack someone with a higher D than my A and get away with "some" losses but nothing that would break the bank. I thought that was the reason to have the option to put points into attack?

I thought when I first experienced this last week that it had something to do with leveling past 50 and that I was hitting people that had sunk a lot of points into defense. In other words the higher your opponents level the more D points you might run into when attacking. But I soon realized that something else was afoot when EVERYTIME I attacked with the same relative A/D ratios I would take increased losses.

I know this isn't a knew problem with this game. If you read back through the old posts they went through this same thing about the same time last year.

[Jonmutley]

Well they tried it on the wrong guy. I'm a contrarian so what I'm going to do is buy NOTHING until they get it back to where it was.

I thought they had the rate just about perfect when I started a month ago. I could even take chances and attack someone with a higher D than my A and get away with "some" losses but nothing that would break the bank. I thought that was the reason to have the option to put points into attack?

I thought when I first experienced this last week that it had something to do with leveling past 50 and that I was hitting people that had sunk a lot of points into defense. In other words the higher your opponents level the more D points you might run into when attacking. But I soon realized that something else was afoot when EVERYTIME I attacked with the same relative A/D ratios I would take increased losses.

I know this isn't a knew problem with this game. If you read back through the old posts they went through this same thing about the same time last year. I'm with you on that to. Whilst these problems are in place it's doing exactly the opposite of what gree want. I'm not buying anymore gold until this problem is sorted. End of. Still waiting for a realistic explanation CJ?