Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 24

Thread: How to compare generals

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,949
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Again, considering all of rhe Hrothberts are in the same chest, it is quite literally the exact same process for promoting or levelling any of them. So there is no "easier" in regards to promotion, and only their abilities even matter.
    ~VoV~

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,949
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Da Wimsta View Post
    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.
    So you're using a person that simply refuses to invest into Evalice as your example, to show that another general is superior? That doesn't quite make sense.
    ~VoV~

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    as far away as possible from the rest of the world <_<
    Posts
    22,741
    Blog Entries
    5

    Default

    In the same way, you could probably show that a level 80 8 star Evalice is better for defense than x (low) level Katherine with no stars
    Last edited by zserg; 02-21-2019 at 10:00 AM.

  4. #14

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bandigerbolls View Post
    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.
    I would argue based upon ability. Since that is the only reason I use them.
    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

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VersionsOfViolence View Post
    So you're using a person that simply refuses to invest into Evalice as your example, to show that another general is superior? That doesn't quite make sense.
    There are many generals that I refuse to invest in, same with everyone, right? We have limited resources. We pivot, etc...

    Do not misunderstand the post. I'm not saying a general is Better. I'm saying that there is math that can determine when using one is superior to another for a stated purpose.

    I also would never recommend investing in Evalice because there are clearly other generals which would make more sense.

    If someone had, however, invested in Evalice you could still determine at what point another general would make sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by zserg View Post
    In the same way, you could probably show that a level 80 8 star Evalice is better for defense than x (low) level Katherine with no stars
    Evalice level 80 stats: 659 attack 378 defense [(baseStat*3.0)+105]

    2083 / 1239 = 2698 defense

    Level 4 Katherine 33 / 38, 55 physical resistance.

    Evalice would be better than Katherine in this case until the player's stats augmented by the ability reached an eDef of approximately 49,055

    ...

    this was not an evaluation of slot position, however, since we don't have other generals considered in the equation. That would require more work and known information about other generals.
    Last edited by Da Wimsta; 02-21-2019 at 08:43 PM.
    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. #16

    Default

    If i'm not mistaken, Evalice as well as other stat transfering generals have to be used as Masters in alliances to get benefit of their abilities.
    Be kind, for everyone you meet is fighting a hard battle.

  7. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fadasmax View Post
    If i'm not mistaken, Evalice as well as other stat transfering generals have to be used as Masters in alliances to get benefit of their abilities.
    That sounds right, and really ought to have been considered/stated up front, though I don't think any of the question was serious.

    I don't think anyone really wanted to know if Katherine had better attack than Evalice so much as they dispute my claim that math can in fact tell us when to pivot.
    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

  8. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Da Wimsta View Post
    I would argue based upon ability. Since that is the only reason I use them.
    I think you're missing the two points of my argument.

    Because of the odds of getting Astrid on a chest roll compared to getting King, a player will most likely have a 4-star Astrid long before seeing a 2-star King.

    Astrid is level 40 at 1,901,250 XP. King doesn't get to the same level until 6,084,000 XP, yet his stat advantages don't reflect all the extra potions or work to get there.

    This is the "money ball" version of building your team.
    Last edited by Bandigerbolls; 02-22-2019 at 01:54 AM.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,949
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    All of that has to be part of the conversation, but there is no finish line in sight for the game (that we know of), so a lot of people will be focused on the best possible vs the best possible right now. This was all mentioned in the OP.
    ~VoV~

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Orlando, FL
    Posts
    19,949
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default

    Back to Evalice - by shifting player defense to player attack, not only are the actual skill points transferred, but that new pAtk is used to determine the impact of Piercing as well. So an Evalice alliance backed by Gwen/Annika and Hera may actually provide more offensive reach than a straight Gwen/Annika/Hera alliance, depending on just how many skill points you have invested into defense.
    ~VoV~

Posting Permissions

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