I believe I already pinpointed the most valuable criteria. But that’s irrelevant.
It still doesn’t answer my question. I am penalized for playing the game right. Why? Plus - I am not trading it. If my troops are on full mana, I still want to get rid of the 4/5 gem matches in order to prevent my enemy from taking them. And that’s the most basic, and fundamental strategy of Gems of War.
…
I don’t like being punished for it. I was 100% correct when I stated all the score criteria are based on The Dragon Soul.
Well, the question whether this situation counts as collecting mana hasn’t been answered yet, so it might balance out. I understand your concerns though, they are pretty similar to mine.
Data. Data. Data. Can you tell us anything about those two fights over 2000? Were you counting your actions? Were they very fast battles? Mono-color teams?
I just want to remind that most of the formula are wrong:
speed bonus: it should be “SPEED_BONUS = Max(0, 30-MyTurnsTaken) * B%” (thanks @Papa) confirmed by Sirrian who didn’t take 5 seconds to correct his post:
damage bonus is “currently” DAMAGE_BONUS = Max(4, MyTotalDamage/EnemyTotalDamage) * D%
So if you do the same damage than the enemy you get 4D%.
So you need to do at least more than 4 times the damage of the AI to increase your damage bonus.
My reactions are on the whole negative. This is like awarding the win in a basketball game by giving bonus points for numbers of assists, pace, and offensive rebounds. These may be good things, but they shouldn’t be a focus.
My Gorg/Dryad/Famine/Moloch team got fairly low scores. I can see why – it is a slow team. It wins, because it stops my opponent from doing anything. Why should this style of play be punished? This is the best pure yellow team I could come up with for winning the game. I clearly will have to scrap it. This makes very little sense to me.
The devs say that “good” players do certain things, and they award points for that. This team does not do these things. If I have a loaded famine, sometimes I want my opponent to collect mana, so that I can one shot an opposing troop, and I make some temporizing move to let it do so. Does this make me a bad player? According to the point system, yes. According to me, no.
The color bonuses are clear, and add variety to the game. Surviving troops is alright, although that does punish certain types of good teams (bombots!). These new criteria, on the other hand, reward some play styles and punish others, in what seems to be an arbitrary fashion.
These new criteria were clearly implemented to solve some perceived problem in the game. I do not know what that problem was, but they seem to me to introduce many new problems of their own.
How bout figuring it out like a lot are doing. Together. I won’t lie. I wanna know too. I’m not trying to be a butt.
But seriously. They don’t want us to know the exact formula. Alright. So what I’m gonna do is have FUN. Building teams figuring it out. I’m just glad it’s back!
They were a response to the overwhelming vocalizations of many of the same people who are angry at the new point system.
It is very simple to explain what is happening here… When you fix a problem, that isn’t actually a problem, you create the potential to cause problems that actually are problems
If the formula is really the MAX(4, Some ratio) times a percentage, then the MAX function will return a 4 if the ratio is less than 4. This means the only way to budge the result of the MAX function is to have a ratio greater than 4. @turintuor is right on.
Ok… To be clear i am not saying @turintuor is wrong… And my math skills are failimg me atm so can you explain further? Maybe a sample usimg the formula?
Say you got twice as much mana as your opponent. The formula given (MAX(4, ratio)) would return four, since ratio is 2, and 4 is bigger than 2. However, if your oppenent never got any mana at all (one turn kill, or he only got skull hits), then the ratio would be infinity, and your score would be infinite. I really think they meant MIN instead of MAX. This would cap the amount you could get from any one criteria, and I think is what they meant.
I hope they put MIN, and not MAX in the code.
I would not want to count up the number of times I have used one of those functions in my code where I meant to use the other; the resulting number would be far too depressing.
Its more programming logic than math. Take the formula given for the MANA_BONUS:
The MAX function will return the higher of two items in parentheses (4, MyTotalMana/EnemyTotalMana). The first item is a constant (4). The second item is a ratio (MyTotalMana/EnemyTotalMana).
If I collect 20 mana and my enemy collects 10 mana, then my ratio for the second item is 20/10 = 2. The MAX function will then return a 4, because 4 is the higher of the two values in the list. In that case my MANA_BONUS will be the maximum of 4 and 2 (clearly 4) times C%.
So, the only way (based on this formula) to get any result other than 4 times C% is to collect more than 4 times the mana that the enemy collects. It seems like a typo. I doubt the code actually does this.
