Battle Math

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Weasel

This isn't real life, but if it were, none of the rivals you attack get warned you are attacking them which makes each attack you initiate the equivalent of a surprise attack. Unless you were unlucky enough to launch a surprise attack against someone highly trained in hand to hand combat, your victim wouldn't be fighting back with all their might, even if they managed to get in one single punch.



Your theory allows for the possibility of a draw, which cannot happen. If you destroy your opponent in mafia attack vs mafia defense, yet they destroy you in both the kingpin and accomplice categories, a tie breaker must come from somewhere. As per the AMA:

"Largely irrelevant" is not "completely irrelevant/no longer a factor."

---

My "theory" (which I've been using successfully since just before the first accomplice war) is perfectly sound. You only need to score 50% to win an attack, which is why it has been possible for mini and low level accounts to beat high level players with much bigger stats, but who haven't paid enough attention (or any) to getting accomplices. A draw is therefore not possible; you either score 50% or higher, or you don't.

The mafia win will do it alone. To win on accomplices if your mafia isn't good enough you need to win convincingly on both.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zippy69

Talk About GREE BS...

Here's A Cbt to get your heads round; would love to head Developers Point of View on this one...

Lvl 126 cassidy 88.66m/562/291
& I LOST WITH 171.88m/666/155

lost in one field (which was for least points) hammered opponent in all other fields 80/20...

GREE sux

---

Lol cassidy my leader!!! YAY YAY

here's the gree equation ..

your monthly salary is $2000 .. your house rent is perhaps $500 a month. your food and other expenses equate to $700. so that's total expense of $1200. you are still left with $800.

http://i61.tinypic.com/30njl2h.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TZora

here's the gree equation ..

your monthly salary is $2000 .. your house rent is perhaps $500 a month. your food and other expenses equate to $700. so that's total expense of $1200. you are still left with $800.

http://i61.tinypic.com/30njl2h.jpg

---

Suppose that you still have 40 years until retirement, your monthly budget on CC is 40*$800=$32000.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordsagacity

Suppose that you still have 40 years until retirement, your monthly budget on CC is 40*$800=$32000.

---

Now if that isn't a perfect example of some Gree math, I don't know what is.

($800*12)*40 = $384,000 would be a lot more accurate.

maybe accurate but gree doesn't like simple equations, they like to go a little deeper into equations and come up with the answer that no one can imagine. the way your attack and your rival's defense is calculated, it's no less than mental masturbation :p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TZora

maybe accurate but gree doesn't like simple equations, they like to go a little deeper into equations and come up with the answer that no one can imagine. the way your attack and your rival's defense is calculated, it's no less than mental masturbation :p

---

Hahahaha!!

http://www.paranormalparagons.com/up...89605_orig.jpg

it's like, gree staff everyday meditates before starting their shift ..

money .. money .. money .. money .. money *goes in a loop*

and the fun aspect is just flushed down there ...

http://www.jillstanek.com/flushing%20toilet.jpg

If it is true that 20% comes from assigned and 30% comes from unassigned accomplices, can someone tell me why I lost to someone with lower defense than I, but when I assigned higher stats accomplices and unassigned lower (thereby giving me lower unassigned stats and higher assigned) I could beat the same player?

It would seem from the reported math that keeping your higher stats accomplices unassigned and assigning lower stats would be the preferred strategy. But in practice it is working the other way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheWarthog

If it is true that 20% comes from assigned and 30% comes from unassigned accomplices, can someone tell me why I lost to someone with lower defense than I, but when I assigned higher stats accomplices and unassigned lower (thereby giving me lower unassigned stats and higher assigned) I could beat the same player?

It would seem from the reported math that keeping your higher stats accomplices unassigned and assigning lower stats would be the preferred strategy. But in practice it is working the other way.

---

that gave me some more mental orgasm.. must unread :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheWarthog

If it is true that 20% comes from assigned and 30% comes from unassigned accomplices, can someone tell me why I lost to someone with lower defense than I, but when I assigned higher stats accomplices and unassigned lower (thereby giving me lower unassigned stats and higher assigned) I could beat the same player?

It would seem from the reported math that keeping your higher stats accomplices unassigned and assigning lower stats would be the preferred strategy. But in practice it is working the other way.

---

It depends entirely on how your rival has got their accomplices. I've seen a lot of people with low numbers in kingpin; like you say it just makes it easier to beat them if you've got a bit more there.

I wish you were right, but this is not the case. I lost to an opponent with 73 mil defense against my 207 mil attack and roughly similar accomplices and kingpin numbers. How can you explain this? I forwarded the screenshot of this outcome to Gree and got the canned response of how the math is supposed to work but no real explanation for the outcome. In my opinion, this is a complete mess created by incompetent programmers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by is1j

I wish you were right, but this is not the case. I lost to an opponent with 73 mil defense against my 207 mil attack and roughly similar accomplices and kingpin numbers. How can you explain this? I forwarded the screenshot of this outcome to Gree and got the canned response of how the math is supposed to work but no real explanation for the outcome. In my opinion, this is a complete mess created by incompetent programmers.

---

If the rival's 73m defense was stronger than your own defence, chances are their attack was stronger than yours too and they actually won the mafia stats category.

Bang on the money with your comment about a mess created by...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Weasel

If the rival's 73m defense was stronger than your own defence, chances are their attack was stronger than yours too and they actually won the mafia stats category.

Bang on the money with your comment about a mess created by...

---

Agreed. 207m vs 134m is only a x1.3 advantage. Not enough if the accomplices are also close.

The formulas above are only partially correct. You also have to know that they only apply on Mondays. On Tuesdays, you double everything. Wednesday's, you have to divide your total by 1.723 and take the square root of the opponents total attack (which of course as Weasel said you don't know). Thursday's things really get interesting and involves all your male accomplices going against only the female accomplices of your opponent...for the first 12 hours, then everything switches. Things then start to get complicated on Friday but involves a lot of diagrams so can't really explain it well.