Warlords TBS Series
Spin-off Projects
Home Forum
Welcome,
Guest
|
|
TOPIC: Bug list of 1.02
Re: Bug list of 1.02 6 years, 7 months ago #3464
The table should look like this:
Warding on Offense:
vs Assassin | vs Lightning | vs Acid|
---------------------------------------
Yes | Yes | Yes |
Warding on Defense:
vs Assassin | vs Lightning | vs Acid|
---------------------------------------
Yes | No or Seldom | Yes | I was planting 10-warding 1-hit 15-str (base 9 + 9 in open, capped at 15) units in stacks of 8 and attacked them with lightning units, 1 at a time. lgt10 units were killing 7.4 wrd10 units in a row, on average. With the maximum of 22 and a minimum 0 kills, N=26 battles in total. I ordered battles by number of kills descending using Excel and calculated the probability P of killing at least that much units for each battle n, Pn=n/N; and the probabilty of killing 1 unit based on that, P = Pn^(1/k) for each battle, where k is the number of kills. These probabilites occured to be pretty similar, ranging from 0.86 to 0.94, 0.9 on average. lgt9 units killed from 0 to 41 wrd10 units each, P=0.9, same to lgt10. lgt8 units, as expected, demonstrated P=0.8; so i suspect lgt is capped at 9 if less or equal to defender's wrd. lgt5 units shown P=0.42, which is quite strange value, out of order. Don't know how to explain it. I expected 0.5. I think i could disassemble the executable file to look at the actual code, hope it isnt too complicated |
|
Darklords players, you are welcomed here: lastcitadel.ru
Last Edit: 6 years, 7 months ago by Molotov.
|
Re: Bug list of 1.02 6 years, 7 months ago #3465
Molotov,
You will probably find disassembling the code to be harder than you think. I've seen the code and it isn't well written and it contains 'goto' statements which is going to make it that much harder in assembler mode. I'm still not 100% clear what you did. Did you: 1) Create a 15 strength 1 hit unit (9+9) with +10 warding 2) Create a 1 strength 1 hit unit with +10 lightning 3) Have a stack of 8 lightning units attack a stack of 8 warding units 4) Compute the expected kill odds without warding/lightning and compare to what you actually got and use that to figure out if there is a bug? Why do all that in step 4. Just watch the battle instead of clicking through it. If you see lightning strikes there is a bug. If you don't then there isn't. I *think* I recall that there is different battle code used if you click-through a battle versus watch it play out with animations. I believe the click-through code has different bugs than the animated code. This is why in PBEM games I sometimes click through battles and sometimes watch them play out. KGB |
|
|
Re: Bug list of 1.02 6 years, 7 months ago #3466
I was attacking stacks of wrd10 units with 1 lgt10 unit until it was dead, as it can miss sometimes. That is, lgt10 does not fire with 100% chance against a defending wrd10 unit, the chance is lower. To find the actual percentage I gathered some statistics and it occurred that for lgt10 its 90%, as well as for lgt9, and 80% for lgt8, and 42% for lgt5. Maybe these results were spoiled by skipping battle animations..
|
|
Darklords players, you are welcomed here: lastcitadel.ru
|
Re: Bug list of 1.02 6 years, 7 months ago #3467
Molotov,
I think recall Steve saying there is no 100% chance for Acid/Lightning/Assassin. So even if you have a +10 Lightning unit against a normal unit (0 warding) it will only get a lightning hit 90% of the time. That would fit with your Lightning +10 and Lightning +9 units both hitting at only 90%. The real numbers that matter are the lower values (+1 to +5) which is where 99% of the units will be in battle. For those you need to watch animations to see if a Lightning +2 unit gets a strike against a Warding +2 unit. So you should definitely try with the animations to see if that is different. I am sure I remember that it works differently which is why people in online games who click through battles experienced different things than PBEM players who normally watch the battle animations. KGB |
|
|
|
Time to create page: 0.87 seconds