damage calculations etc.

[DaemianLucifer]

Horrible idea :/.. Making mass low number stacks much more effective is bad imo.. It's already good for taking retaliations and casting buffs\debuffs..

Actually its a nice idea.Its easier to take out one dragon then hudred peasants.For 100 peasants you need about 100 arrows,and for a dragon you need just one lucky shot.

Bad idea,however,is that the damage is fixed.

[Gaidal Cain]

Actually its a nice idea.Its easier to take out one dragon then hudred peasants.For 100 peasants you need about 100 arrows,and for a dragon you need just one lucky shot.

I think he was talking about the damage that spellcasting creatures does. If so, I wholeharetdly agree. It's just plain silly that two stacks of 1 druid should do more damage than one stack of 2 druids...

[DaemianLucifer]

I think he was talking about the damage that spellcasting creatures does. If so, I wholeharetdly agree. It's just plain silly that two stacks of 1 druid should do more damage than one stack of 2 druids...

Oh,right.Here,I agree.Why did they choose non linear progression is beyond me though.

[Pitsu]

Happened to read Heroic Corner news, and this is what they propose for caster creatures:

Spellpower = trunc(21*log10(trunc((stack size*10)/growth)+10)-22)

Havent tested myself yet.

[Gus]

i'll need to create an app where you enter the size of the stack... i can estimate combat damage by doing the maths, but that... no way =P

[Nebs]

Pitsu, your formula seems more 'correct'. That is if I didn't screw the formula putting it in excel

=TRUNC(21*LOG10(TRUNC((C2*10)/4)+10)-22)

This is for druids, c2 is stack size. Getting 28 for 100 druids, 106 for 500,000 druids. With your formula getting correct results for those 2 values (29 and 107).

[Pitsu]

Err, actually it was proposed that the SP= a base value + that long equation. Thus a constant -1 from the correct value is OK. The original link:
http://www.heroes.ag.ru/h5/

However, the very beginning with stacks of 1 or 2 units only seem to be incorrect also with that equation. I guess the final equation is actually a sum of two functions. But, based on information from elsewhere, the official equations may be available not in too distant future

[DaemianLucifer]

Why cannot they just release these informations?Its not like its some top secret that can destroy the world.

[zhuge]

Requesting to make this a sticky so that this important thread won't be lost.
A big thank you to all who contributed to our current understanding of game mechanics.

[Cunning Death]

Why cannot they just release these informations?Its not like its some top secret that can destroy the world.

Well I was thinkin' a bit a suddenly it struck me. They are like the writer of Harry Potter, she is always soo mysterious and tends to keep stuff for herself until the next book's out, no matter what fans are guessing in the numerous forums. I guess that people at nival and ubi are reading threads like this with extreme excitement

This logarithmic stuff ... I don't like it. At least it could be power law, like 0,5 or something. The actual status suggests that druids splitted into smaller groups are more effective

[DaemianLucifer]

This logarithmic stuff ... I don't like it. At least it could be power law, like 0,5 or something. The actual status suggests that druids splitted into smaller groups are more effective

Well they are more effective in smaller groups.And that is quite dumb.

[Gus]

it's completely stupid.
in the early game, if you have Sprites against you guarding mines, you're in trouble. Especially if those sprites happen to be split in 4 groups instead of one, because then that's 8 "Wasp Swarm" cast on your level 1/2 creatures... utterly stupid.

[Cunning Death]

it's completely stupid.
in the early game, if you have Sprites against you guarding mines, you're in trouble. Especially if those sprites happen to be split in 4 groups instead of one, because then that's 8 "Wasp Swarm" cast on your level 1/2 creatures... utterly stupid.

And splitted stacks do more dmg together than a single one thanks to the logarithmic function

[Gus]

yeah, that's what i meant, i should have made this clearer, sorry for the lack of precision =)

[Cunning Death]

it's completely stupid.
in the early game, if you have Sprites against you guarding mines, you're in trouble. Especially if those sprites happen to be split in 4 groups instead of one, because then that's 8 "Wasp Swarm" cast on your level 1/2 creatures... utterly stupid.

yeah, that's what i meant, i should have made this clearer, sorry for the lack of precision =)

and thanks to the random generator mechanism you won't have more chanche if you reload

[Lord Zeus]

Why cannot they just release these informations?Its not like its some top secret that can destroy the world.

They probably want to release a "Official Strategy Guide" which has all this infomation, of course for a nominal fee of 124,99$

[csarmi]

Pitsu, your formula is nice. I can't test it, but I think you should use 2-based logarythm (log) instead of the natural e-based (ln). It is more natural here (if I were the creator, I would have used it) because the usual numbers become more meaningful (for example, for a weekly growth of creatures you get exactly 2 inside (and log2 = 1)).

If I was to look for a nice formula, I would start with it.

[Pitsu]

Csarmi, i sent you a file so that you can play around with the numbers if you wish. Log2 is an interesting idea which i did not think about.