• Dear forum reader,

    To actively participate on the forum by joining discussions or starting your own threads or topics, you need a game account and to REGISTER HERE!

Discussion Tournament Changes (post-release)

Lovec Krys

Well-Known Member
@Risen Malchiah Panda is a good source of MM spells, so it all depends how much you value MM spells, if 1/day satisfies the 9 fields Panda occupies and of course your priorities (do I build first Brown, Polar or Panda, do I build all of them? Or only some of them? Do I have some of them from last year, so I can just build another if I want to?).
 

edeba

Well-Known Member
I have no clue how else to describe in simple terms how incredibly broken this formula is.

Inno has a problem with simple terms.

Players are to the advisor as Inno is to the couple in debt... Circles spinning, but the solutions inno comes up with make about as much sense.

 
Last edited:

little bee

Well-Known Member
Hi everyone,
I have been reading this thread for a while and finally made a forum account because I like the tournament changes and can't bear all this whining anymore.
I'm assuming that the formula from MinMaxGame is correct
R = 0.3994 × (1+B) × (1.0045)^T × (1+0.003A) × (E - 0.34P - 4.5)

I think the structure of this formula is perfectly fine. The exponential factor gives the basic per square value of your city. This term needs to be exponential because the rest of the game runs on an exponential scale as well. You can see this easily by looking at the way eventbuildings level with chapter. You will find that they scale exponentially with a base of around 1,008 per research or maybe 1,01 per optional research. (I'm too lazy to calculate more that a few examples, but I'm sure MinMaxGamer could easily verify this number.) If non-event buildings were only on a logarithmic scale then any endgamer should have celebrated the maytree or the wise golem for the gold and supplies they give. Since that did not happen, I assume that the rest of the game is also on this exponential scale and anyone claiming otherwise simply failed to do the math.

I also support the way expansions are considered. If you have twice as much space you can produce twices as many goods for catering. And of course the space you have needs to be multiplied with the per square value of that space. Addition would be ridiculous for this purpose. I sincerely doubt that placing premium expansions really hurts anyone.

And no, I don't see a problem with a multiplicative consideration of Antient Wonders either. Their bonus is almost always a percentage of some base stat. Therefore they give an multiplicative bonus to your city. I do, however, agree with the rest of you that the factor 0,003 per wonderlevel (= 9% per lv. 30 wonder) is to high for many wonders. I think the sunset towers are a good example, because they make calculations easy. All they give is seeds and therefore can't be more valuable as seeds are on the whole. And I sincerely doubt that anyone uses 9% of his entire city for seeds.
I know that many players manage just fine with only the trader, but some might go as high as 1,5% of their city. This gives an upper limit of
0,0005 (= 1,5/ 3000) as a factor for a single wonderlevel before the lv. 30 sunset towers will certainly become harmfull to the spire/tournament.

I also acknowledge that wonders are currently counted twice, once with the multiplicative bonus they give and once with the space they take up themselve. But this fact hits small player much harder than the endgamers and should encourage you to grow. But still, maybe it would be fair to subtract 0,8*(#wonders) from the expansions. (0,8 expansions should be the average size of an antient wonder.)

So while some constants might need recalibration, the formula on the whole looks fine. If anyone disagrees, I suggest you try to constructively explain why, instead of getting into pagelong arguments about how stupid the producers are.
 

spennyit

Well-Known Member
... the rest of the game runs on an exponential scale ...
This is not true. The game runs on a "logarithmic like" way (just a simple example: AW levels - at every level you get the same bonus at a higher cost). BTW, if you read the previous messages, you will find the explanation why the formula should not be multiplicative (it was already given). Finally, are you an end-game player? If not, you probably are still missing some aspects of the game ;-)

You can like the new tournament mode if:
- you are not at the end of the research tree
- you don't go over province 20 in tournaments
- you don't finish the spire every week (the high costs hinder your tournament result)
- you didn't spend real money in premium expansions
- you don't have may high level wonders

Maybe there are other cases, but these are the main cases.
 

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
Hi everyone,
I have been reading this thread for a while and finally made a forum account because I like the tournament changes and can't bear all this whining anymore.
I'm assuming that the formula from MinMaxGame is correct
R = 0.3994 × (1+B) × (1.0045)^T × (1+0.003A) × (E - 0.34P - 4.5)

I think the structure of this formula is perfectly fine. The exponential factor gives the basic per square value of your city. This term needs to be exponential because the rest of the game runs on an exponential scale as well. You can see this easily by looking at the way eventbuildings level with chapter. You will find that they scale exponentially with a base of around 1,008 per research or maybe 1,01 per optional research. (I'm too lazy to calculate more that a few examples, but I'm sure MinMaxGamer could easily verify this number.) If non-event buildings were only on a logarithmic scale then any endgamer should have celebrated the maytree or the wise golem for the gold and supplies they give. Since that did not happen, I assume that the rest of the game is also on this exponential scale and anyone claiming otherwise simply failed to do the math.

I also support the way expansions are considered. If you have twice as much space you can produce twices as many goods for catering. And of course the space you have needs to be multiplied with the per square value of that space. Addition would be ridiculous for this purpose. I sincerely doubt that placing premium expansions really hurts anyone.

And no, I don't see a problem with a multiplicative consideration of Antient Wonders either. Their bonus is almost always a percentage of some base stat. Therefore they give an multiplicative bonus to your city. I do, however, agree with the rest of you that the factor 0,003 per wonderlevel (= 9% per lv. 30 wonder) is to high for many wonders. I think the sunset towers are a good example, because they make calculations easy. All they give is seeds and therefore can't be more valuable as seeds are on the whole. And I sincerely doubt that anyone uses 9% of his entire city for seeds.
I know that many players manage just fine with only the trader, but some might go as high as 1,5% of their city. This gives an upper limit of
0,0005 (= 1,5/ 3000) as a factor for a single wonderlevel before the lv. 30 sunset towers will certainly become harmfull to the spire/tournament.

I also acknowledge that wonders are currently counted twice, once with the multiplicative bonus they give and once with the space they take up themselve. But this fact hits small player much harder than the endgamers and should encourage you to grow. But still, maybe it would be fair to subtract 0,8*(#wonders) from the expansions. (0,8 expansions should be the average size of an antient wonder.)

So while some constants might need recalibration, the formula on the whole looks fine. If anyone disagrees, I suggest you try to constructively explain why, instead of getting into pagelong arguments about how stupid the producers are.

Maybe I should repeat myself again
Just for lols.
In the current formula for a chapter 16 player there is a theoretical difference between players of 45000%
A more "achievable" difference is 15000%, this would be a town build to specifically to exploit this formula.
But for even current players who cannot adapt because of former choices may see differences in the range of 400-1000%

I have no clue how else to describe in simple terms how incredibly broken this formula is.
This has nothing to do with whining but with raw math.
if 2 players in the same chapter could have a theoretical difference of 45000% something is very very very wrong.
 

Deleted User - 86059

Guest
Please remember this is a feedback page not an argumentative page.
So even if you do not agree with someone else's perspective does not mean they are wrong, it just means they see it differently to you.
So please let everyone give their own view without anyone thinking that it's fair game for criticism
 

little bee

Well-Known Member
This is not true. The game runs on a "logarithmic like" way (just a simple example: AW levels - at every level you get the same bonus at a higher cost).
Antient Wonders do not appear exponentially in the tournament formula. Therefore their usefullness per upgrade cost is irrelevant.

If you take any event building its stats will increase exponentally with your chapter. I do not need to be an endgame player to know that. It is simply math and the data is available to everyone. If the persquare value of non-event buildings were rising only logarithmically then event buildings like the may tree would increase exponentially in value. But I remember a lot of endgame players complaining about how useless it is. That suggests that the other buildings scale similarly. The base of this exponential increase is quite easy to calculate. For example the kite outpost gives 630 culture at chapter 5 and 770 at chapter 6. That is an increase by a factor of 1,22. There are 24 resarches to go from chapter 5 to chapter 6 and 20 of them are mandatory. So you need to take the 24th root of 1,22 to get the per research base (or the 20th root for the base per mandatory resarch). That gives a base of 1,0083 (or 1,01). The tournament cost only increases with a base of 1,0045 per mandatory research which is a lot less that 1,01.

This has nothing to do with whining but with raw math.
if 2 players in the same chapter could have a theoretical difference of 45000% something is very very very wrong.
I'm perfectly capable of understanding raw math. If the player with a 45000% higher tournament cost can produce 50000% more troops and goods then he can still go further. Failing to consider that is just bad math.
 

Lovec Krys

Well-Known Member
If you take any event building its stats will increase exponentally with your chapter
Example:
Savory Food Market (seed production)
XI - 920
XII - 1030 (+110)
XIII - 1150 (+120)
XIV - 1280 (+130)
XV - 1350 (+70)
XVI - 1390 (+40)
XVII - 1430 (+40)
No exponential growth of production (it actualy slows down in latest chapters (while costs grows faster)). The same goes for any production hybrids.
 

ErestorX

Well-Known Member
If you have twice as much space you can produce twices as many goods for catering.

Ok, I do not cater at all, but lets assume I would cater as much as possible to save a few boosters I use to produce troops. Playing all my provinces to round 6 I would do more than 95% of the work with troops and cater the rest. Now I delete 25 Manufacturies with houses and culture they needed. Let's assume I could delete the free expansions as well. Afterwards my troop size would be only 70% of the original troop size which means I could do 100% of the work with about 74% of the troops I used before.

See, your argument holds in the lower chapters when catering is still somewhat useful in tournaments but is irrelevant in higher chapters because catering itself is irrelevant.


I think the sunset towers are a good example, because they make calculations easy. All they give is seeds and therefore can't be more valuable as seeds are on the whole. And I sincerely doubt that anyone uses 9% of his entire city for seeds.
I know that many players manage just fine with only the trader, but some might go as high as 1,5% of their city. This gives an upper limit of
0,0005 (= 1,5/ 3000) as a factor for a single wonderlevel before the lv. 30 sunset towers will certainly become harmfull to the spire/tournament.

Inno stated that the benefits of getting one more wonderlevel would always be bigger than the impact of the penalty for that wonderlevel. This implies that the upper limit of benefits from wonders is irrelevant, it is the lower limit that defines the acceptable maximum for the penalty. Since the benefit of sunset tower levels is 0 for players who get all their seeds from the trader there can't be any penalty for the levels of this wonder.

Please remember this is a feedback page not an argumentative page.

I won't argue about opinions but hope that correcting facts and logic is acceptable even in a feedback thread.
 
Last edited:

spennyit

Well-Known Member
@little bee, is this an exponential growth in your maths? (residences) Are you sure that "... the rest of the game runs on an exponential scale ..."?

Cattura.PNG
 

little bee

Well-Known Member
Example:
Savory Food Market (seed production)
XI - 920
XII - 1030 (+110)
XIII - 1150 (+120)
XIV - 1280 (+130)
XV - 1350 (+70)
XVI - 1390 (+40)
XVII - 1430 (+40)
No exponential growth of production (it actualy slows down in latest chapters (while costs grows faster)). The same goes for any production hybrids.
O.k. you are right with this example. But that appears to apply only to seeds. The culture of the Savory Food Market is still rising exponentially with a base of 1,2 per chapter. And the same for the mana and goods at the earlier levels. As I said, I have no interest in calculating more than a few examples. If you think they are exeptions then please feel free to gather more data. If you can calculate if / when the per square production rises exponentially and with what basis than that would at least be constructive. Claiming that there is no exponential grows and that anyone claiming otherwise is stupid isn't.


Ok, I do not cater at all, but lets assume I would cater as much as possible to save a few boosters I use to produce troops. Playing all my provinces to round 6 I would do more than 95% of the work with troops and cater the rest. Now I delete 25 Manufacturies with houses and culture they needed. Let's assume I could delete the free expansions as well. Afterwards my troop size would be only 70% of the original troop size which means I could do 100% of the work with about 74% of the troops I used before.
That argument might make sense with the previous tournament system where the difficulty was only rising with starlevel and not with province. It meant that your tournament performance was limited only by the troops you could produce. Now you will eventually hit unwinnable battles which limit how far you can get with fighting. I suspect that this would happen in your example. And in that case the sqaudsize will have no effect at all. Catering on the other hand remains unlimited. Therefore I support the formula.

Inno stated that the benefits of getting one more wonderlevel would always be bigger than the impact of the penalty for that wonderlevel. This implies that the upper limit of benefits from wonders is irrelevant, it is the lower limit that defines the acceptable maximum for the penalty. Since the benefit of sunset tower levels is 0 for players who get all their seeds from the trader there can't be any penalty for the levels of this wonder.
I understood the statement to mean that the benefits would outweigh the cost on avarage. That is why I am calculating with lv. 30 wonders rather than with a single lv. Players that don't need seeds shouldn't build this wonders. Just like players that don't fight shouldn't build the shrooms. I'm guessing that player who do upgrade the sunset towers would otherwise need around 1% of their city for seeds. So a factor of 0,0003 per level should be fine even for the sunset towers. And most other Wonders are far more usefull than this.
 

Karvest

Well-Known Member
Culture and population gives nothing on it's own to progress in tournaments, the costs of goods/troops production buildings in pop/culture raises at the same speed as pop/culture you can get. What actually affect tournaments - your goods/troops production per cell, which raises slower the farther you go in tech tree and way slower if multiplied by AW levels and expansions.
 

Dony

King of Bugs
Now you will eventually hit unwinnable battles which limit how far you can get with fighting. I suspect that this would happen in your example. And in that case the sqaudsize will have no effect at all. Catering on the other hand remains unlimited.
There are no unwinable fights in current tournament, but there are unnegotiable encounters, max advanced city province 94, round 1, require 55 mils coins to cater or 5,5 mils supplies and there are players who were doing more then 100 provinces in tournament
So its other way around, catering is very limited compared to fighting
 

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
Antient Wonders do not appear exponentially in the tournament formula. Therefore their usefullness per upgrade cost is irrelevant.

If you take any event building its stats will increase exponentally with your chapter. I do not need to be an endgame player to know that. It is simply math and the data is available to everyone. If the persquare value of non-event buildings were rising only logarithmically then event buildings like the may tree would increase exponentially in value. But I remember a lot of endgame players complaining about how useless it is. That suggests that the other buildings scale similarly. The base of this exponential increase is quite easy to calculate. For example the kite outpost gives 630 culture at chapter 5 and 770 at chapter 6. That is an increase by a factor of 1,22. There are 24 resarches to go from chapter 5 to chapter 6 and 20 of them are mandatory. So you need to take the 24th root of 1,22 to get the per research base (or the 20th root for the base per mandatory resarch). That gives a base of 1,0083 (or 1,01). The tournament cost only increases with a base of 1,0045 per mandatory research which is a lot less that 1,01.


I'm perfectly capable of understanding raw math. If the player with a 45000% higher tournament cost can produce 50000% more troops and goods then he can still go further. Failing to consider that is just bad math.
ehhhmmmm did I not say same chapter?
This means the max production deviation is 207.4%% (each wonder +112% production + 45% sapiens over +112% production for units and most likely ~+100-150%? for goods production.

So no you do not get anywhere near +50000% more units, but you do get 45000% higher SS.
You are argueing that something exists in the game that does not exist. and then claim we are whining because of it.

We "whine" because we like the game, we want it to thrive, unfortunatly year after year in the past 2 years it's torpediong itself into the ground.
There where sketchy decisions in the past, but there are quite a few made in the past year that are catastrofic, this is just one of them.
 

galrond

Well-Known Member
See, your argument holds in the lower chapters when catering is still somewhat useful in tournaments but is irrelevant in higher chapters because catering itself is irrelevant.
You seem to think, that being in high chapters is the same as being able to fight your way through tournament.
Though it hold merit in many cases, some cities also depend on catering as a signifient element in tournament.
If it´s a good or bad tactic in new tournament, well that I´ll leave to others to judge :p

Please remember this is a feedback page not an argumentative page.
So even if you do not agree with someone else's perspective does not mean they are wrong, it just means they see it differently to you.
So please let everyone give their own view without anyone thinking that it's fair game for criticism
I don´t think, that you can make the distinction between feedback and arguments.
The arguments ppl have against (or for) the feedback of others, is also valid feedback.
As long as the criticism is constructive, I see no problem in writing, that you think ppl are wrong in their conclusions.
This is a tread, where you´re suposed to give your opinion about the tournament changes. That includes commenting on others opinions :cool:
 

little bee

Well-Known Member
Culture and population gives nothing on it's own to progress in tournaments, the costs of goods/troops production buildings in pop/culture raises at the same speed as pop/culture you can get. What actually affect tournaments - your goods/troops production per cell, which raises slower the farther you go in tech tree and way slower if multiplied by AW levels and expansions.
Would you care to back that claim up with some numbers? I did not and will not do calculations for every single building in game. But if population and culture do increase exponentially then goods should as well as a they are using the population and culture. But again, calculating these numbers would at least be constructive feedback. So feel free to prove me wrong.

There are no unwinable fights in current tournament, but there are unnegotiable encounters, max advanced city province 94, round 1, require 55 mils coins to cater or 5,5 mils supplies and there are players who were doing more then 100 provinces in tournament
So its other way around, catering is very limited compared to fighting
I'm pretty sure I have read a lot of complaints in this thread claiming otherwise. But honestly, I wouldn't know, because in all these 76 pages of "discussion" I can hardly find any reliable numbers. Like how many provinces each of you is able to fight, with wich boosts, with what fighting/catering ratio or how much of your weekly production you are using. That would be interesting feedback. Pagelong complaints about how stupid the producers are, is not.

ehhhmmmm did I not say same chapter?
This means the max production deviation is 207.4%% (each wonder +112% production + 45% sapiens over +112% production for units and most likely ~+100-150%? for goods production.

So no you do not get anywhere near +50000% more units, but you do get 45000% higher SS.
You are argueing that something exists in the game that does not exist. and then claim we are whining because of it.

I have no idea how much more goods/troops the player in your very hypothetical calculation would have. My point is, that you didn't even try to consider it. And that is just a bad model. A good model always has to calculate the cost and the benefit.

I have tried to do that with the sunset towers and calculated that they give at most a benefit of 0,0005 per level; 6 times lower that the 0,003 wich they currently add to the cost. Therefore I belive that this constant needs realingment. But most other wonders are more usefull and therefore I belive that a factor of 0,0003 should be fine for practically any wonder. For most of them it could be much higher.

If you concentrated on these examples instead of insulting the producers then you might actually accomplish something.
 
Last edited:

ErestorX

Well-Known Member
You seem to think, that being in high chapters is the same as being able to fight your way through tournament.

Obviously not. Being in high chapters and having the right wonders and at least one firephoenix (ideally 2 or brown bears as well) is. But most people who have all this aren't interested to do it.

Though it hold merit in many cases, some cities also depend on catering as a signifient element in tournament.

Yes, but those aren't the cities that are playing province 80 and higher.

If it´s a good or bad tactic in new tournament, well that I´ll leave to others to judge

You didn't leave it to me. While I don't know exactly how many provinces I will be able to fight in the new tournament on live, I can already calculate the pitiful number of provinces I will be able to cater. The percentage might be a bit higher than in the old tournament but definitely way too low to be a significant element!
 

CrazyWizard

Well-Known Member
Would you care to back that claim up with some numbers? I did not and will not do calculations for every single building in game. But if population and culture do increase exponentially then goods should as well as a they are using the population and culture. But again, calculating these numbers would at least be constructive feedback. So feel free to prove me wrong.


I'm pretty sure I have read a lot of complaints in this thread claiming otherwise. But honestly, I wouldn't know, because in all these 76 pages of "discussion" I can hardly find any reliable numbers. Like how many provinces each of you is able to fight, with wich boosts, with what fighting/catering ratio or how much of your weekly production you are using. That would be interesting feedback. Pagelong complaints about how stupid the producers are, is not.



I have no idea how much more goods/troops the player in your very hypothetical calculation would have. My point is, that you din't even try to consider it. And that is just a bad model. A good model always has to calculate the cost and the benefit.

I have tried to do that with the sunset towers and calculated that they give at most a benefit of 0,0005 per level; 6 times lower that the 0,003 wich they currently add to the cost. Therefore I belive that this constant needs realingment. But most other wonders are more usefull and therefore I belive that a factor of 0,0003 should be fine for practically any wonder. For most of them it could be much higher.

If you concentrated on these examples instead of insulting the producers then you might actually accomplish something.

This is where your first mistake is made, we can argue over the values you represent here, but those are irrelevant.
The main error is they there is no way you can add a value of 0.003 or any other fixed number here.

R = 0.3994 × (1+B) × (1.0045)^T × (1+0.003A) × (E - 0.34P - 4.5)
See this formula muliplies a bunch of values, this means that the influence that A (wonders) has on R (SS) depends on the other values.
This is why your argument is flawed. if any of the other values grow bigger the influence of A is nog longer the same.

Example;

R = A * 2 * 3
R = A * 3 * 4

Lets say value A is 2
R = 2*2*3=12
R = 2*3*4=24

Now increase A to 2.1
R = 2.1*2*3= 12.6
R = 2.1*3*4= 25.2

While A in both cases has risen with 0.1, in the first example it added a vlue of 0.6
In the second example that same 0.1 added a value of 1.2

Each value of the different values works as a lever for the other values, so how much difficulty something adds depends on those different values.
This is how we come to the conlcusion that there are theoretical difference in difficulty of 45000% in the same sinfgle chapter (so value reseach is in both cases the same), this means depending on expansions and wonders alone this difference of 45000% is created.

You do not need to be a mathematitian to directly understand that nothing in this game could create an offset in 45000% in this game in the same chapter, no space nor wonders is able to create this, nor anything that comes even close to a decent fraction of that.
It's more likely we are talking about a 200-300% range, not a 500-15000 or 45000% range.

so from a cost vs benefit analisys as you said this is a really poor deal.
This is the main issue we have with this whole ordeal.
 
Top