Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: How to compare generals

  1. #1

    Default How to compare generals

    Mursulis would like to have a fact based critical analytic discussion on the methodology for the analysis of generals in Castle Age.

    I think we should humor him.

    Given the evolution of the game to include not just generals but alliances, and general's items, and chaos gems which can augment General's stats and abilities, and etc.

    Given the manifold elements involved in general selection this thread will serve two purposes.

    1.) To engage in informed debate over the methodology for analysis.
    • cost of promotion both stars and levels
    • other material limitations
    • availability
    • relationship to other generals in alliance
    • stats
    • abilities
    • opportunity costs


    2.) To engage in informed debate over generals in relationship to purpose/facet of game.
    • Monster Hunting
    • Cleric
    • Mage
    • Rogue
    • Warrior
    • Defending
    • Attacking
    • Arena
    • Other special purposes...


    The goal is not to merely discuss the best but also the best for ______.
    Come say hello FB link
    Web 3 Keep link

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    #1 it's not nice to be mean to ppl
    #2 nobody cares about da wilbsta

  2. #2

    Default

    I'm of the belief that discussion of generals should not be divorced from alliances, but that discussion of a general should be distinct from discussion of an alliance.

    The motivating belief here is that comparing gen x vs. gen x between two players will never actually occur as such. Where there were historic battle in which players would face off strider vs. strider, players are not likely to find competition of generals running in solo.

    I believe that the claim "my ________ is bigger than your"s does inherently imply "my alliance with ________ as master"* as a matter of performance.

    I believe that other features of the game have evolved in the same way. When I compare my Astroth Blade +31 with another player's item it also implies the gems that are equipped.

    When discussing the Astroth Blade in general, however, it is still discussed in the general sense. It has 2 slots, and can take a legendary gem.


    So, generals, like items, take on the values they have for me when I talk about mine.


    *other conditions applying...
    Come say hello FB link
    Web 3 Keep link

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    #1 it's not nice to be mean to ppl
    #2 nobody cares about da wilbsta

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,907
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Actually, I have been giving this a bit of thought. The subject is far too vague to be contained in a single thread, because the use of generals has always been situational. Alliances are no different in that regard throughout all aspects of the game.

    As I mentioned in the other thread, which wasn't as lame, for some players, Halcyon provides a larger direct boost to defense than Katherine can.

    Deciding between switching to Daphne or Krystalia depends on whether your runes are bigger than the guild you're up against or not, along with which tower you're in if it's 100v.

    Butcher is fairly useless if you have full health in a GB, but can make all the difference in a close battle.

    Jera is only helpful if you can get the win, whereas you may need Evalice or a pierce general for the added reach, and that decision is again based on your own stats relative to your opponents'.

    If you have a solid set of +crit gems, Straticus may easily replace Dolomar in a mh alliance. Then again, you may need an elemental resistance general instead, to avoid elementals popping up and reducing your damage on that monster.
    ~VoV~

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,907
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Also, it is totally pointless to compare an attacker's Katherine with a defender's, when her Resistance is only active while defending.

    And sometimes you can't worry about what the best possible is, only what the best you have is.
    ~VoV~

  5. #5

    Default

    The basis for comparing of "bests" on my part, in the years past, was on the basis of a discussion of parity within the game. As the developers showcased that they had no interest in establishing any such balance the conversation did eventually die.

    I don't think it is a secret that use and context have meaning, but I do believe a true "objective" analysis can be done in many cases.

    The mathematical calculation for when Katherine's ability/benefit exceeds Evalice's--even for straight attack--can be made.

    Math is the basis for establishing that Malekus, for example, is the best monster hunting general.
    Come say hello FB link
    Web 3 Keep link

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    #1 it's not nice to be mean to ppl
    #2 nobody cares about da wilbsta

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,907
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    I think that in this thread, you're gonna have to actually show the math to prove the points, instead of just saying "cuz maths".

    I would certainly be interested in the math that would lead to Katherine being a better choice for offensive PvP general than Evalice.
    ~VoV~

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    as far away as possible from the rest of the world <_<
    Posts
    22,629
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    I think that in this thread, you're gonna have to actually show the math to prove the points, instead of just saying "cuz maths".

    I would certainly be interested in the math that would lead to Katherine being a better choice for offensive PvP general than Evalice.
    I am curious about that too. Kath raises resistance ... Which isn't counted on attack ? If you're looking at stars/stats, it might be harder to promote chest heroes, but not impossible

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,907
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Technically, it's the same mechanics involved when it comes to promoting any general. Srsly, it's just a button. So "harder" is inaccurate. I believe the term you're looking for is "more expensive". Although anything over 5* for Kat may be every bit as expensive (if not more), after factoring in the costs of refreshing the Emporium. Chest general drops at any tier are easier to calculate the odds, and thus costs.
    ~VoV~

  9. #9

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    I think that in this thread, you're gonna have to actually show the math to prove the points, instead of just saying "cuz maths".

    I would certainly be interested in the math that would lead to Katherine being a better choice for offensive PvP general than Evalice.
    Quote Originally Posted by zserg View Post
    I am curious about that too. Kath raises resistance ... Which isn't counted on attack ? If you're looking at stars/stats, it might be harder to promote chest heroes, but not impossible

    Ok, here goes:

    The mathematical calculation for when Katherine's ability/benefit exceeds Evalice's--even for straight attack--can be made.

    Person X has Evalice level 5 -- Transfer 30% Defense to Attack -- in an attack load because of being Wall.

    Person X doesn't want to use resources to promote Evalice because they don't care much about Generals stats since there are other generals to promote... like maybe Katherine. The person is working on Katherine and wants to know, when should Katherine replace Evalice as slot three in attack load.

    So, when does Katherine in third slot exceed 30% D ----> A in attack benefit.

    Evalice gives 90 attack bonus for every thousand Defense. 30% of 1000 =300 . 300 Defense *.7 = 210 attack...

    Att + Def (.79) instead of Att + Def (.7)

    Use Katherine when Kat a + def(.7) > .09Def + Evalice 23.23 stats

    Let's use me as an example: 13133 Defense (idk if Evalice works on green numbers) = 1,182 attack boost with Evalice.
    That is roughly the same as 4 star level 64 Katherine (1,179 if my math is correct). So, if I were using Evalice in slot three and I could get a 5th star or level 65 for my Katherine, it would make sense to switch.

    [Note: this doesn't take into account pierce, I'm also not sure if generals stats count with pierce.]

    Math is the basis for establishing that Malekus, for example, is the best monster hunting general.

    Sorry I don't have the damage equation handy right now. General's stats make a huge difference though, and Malekus has huge stat bonuses that no other generals get.
    Come say hello FB link
    Web 3 Keep link

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    #1 it's not nice to be mean to ppl
    #2 nobody cares about da wilbsta

  10. Default

    There are several ways to compare generals, and some ways contradict others.

    For instance, one might say King Hrothbeort is better than Astrid Hrothbeort because he starts with higher numbers than she.

    I would argue that Astrid is much better because she's easier to add stars and faster to level up.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •