No, it wasn’t actually an attempt at humour. It was a serious reply to the constant fact-deficient claims of the AI being rigged. Immediately after mentioning those 16 samples, you stated that you believe it’s “20% for Humans and 80% for AI’s”, so I assumed that was your data. I apologize if I was mistaken and these were just the latest samples and you’ve actually collected enough for a meaningful analysis that supports your claim. Based on the majority of forum posts that sound like this, I tend to assume these are just more venting and unsubstantiated claims. Sorry if that was an incorrect conclusion, and I’d love to take a look at the entire data set, just post a link to it along with details of your collection methodology.
EDIT: Or the “latest sample” comment was simply hyperbole, and you decided to create yet another duplicate thread about this instead. I sincerely wish I was surprised
I got slapped really hard by 4x penguin in PvP earlier!
It’s amazing how hard they could hit when there’s so many blue on the board and all their Aura stacks on top of beast buff this week.
So I found the spreadsheet1 of devour occurrence my friend tracked a while ago. He tracked 3563 battles, 2500 of these devour (kerberos) was used and it proc in 1399 battles. So the percentage is 55,96%.
1ignore death mark table as it was not accurate due to statistic flaws and anomaly.
Chipping in here: I don’t agree that Devour in general needs this limitation putting on its mechanic.
If a spell with Devour is too strong and the troop is everywhere, it’s the troop / spell that should be fixed, not the mechanic.
I think moving Kerberos to a 50% chance was a mistake - but even that on its own, at 16 mana cost is probably okay.
I think Forest Guardian was a wonderful troop idea and an interesting third trait.
But put the two together? Suddenly (with an easy +2 purple set-up), one purple surge fills the Kerberos and it’s a coin toss to turn the game. Yeah, blah, it can be drained, countered etc. But not every time.
Most modest solution is probably to take the Beast troop type off Kerberos.
Thematically I don’t like the Forest Guardian (an avatar of nature) giving mana to a burning daemon (not very natural, even if it looks a bit like a dog).
If the current crop of troops were to be adjusted I would most likely support to see the 100% + a conditional. Though these troops would have to have a lower cost than Maw as there is no condition there. So that’s the current baseline.
it might work for now. until we get a trait that gives 50% mana to whatever type Kerberos gonna be next. we already have beast, giant and mech traits for that, others gonna come in time. imagine the hell when daemon get that kind of trait. not just with kerberos, but with other powerful daemon.
just throwing this out there. maybe the kerberos devour chance could be boosted by number of enemies alive? highest when there are 4 enemies. similar to ranger spell. but it better start with more than 50% chance or lower mana cost to compensate.
Was testing my this week’s pvp def team (fenrir, forest guardian, kerberos, wulfgarok) vs my this week’s gw def team (kerberos, giant spider, kerberos, forest guardian) using the pvp one for def and the gw one for attack.
And Kerberos on the def side triggered devour twice from three attempts.
Kerberos on the offensive side (luckily I had two because one got devoured) triggered once from six attempts and the one was after five fails.
…
I could do well without the randomness of devour.
Agree. A 50% starting mana trait for Daemons would be a very bad idea. So many daemons in the game, especially Mythics… Famine ready in just 10 mana anyone?
With the proposed changes to barrier to block devour, what are people’s thought on how this will play out? Will we see more troops like Jotnar and Celestasia coming into the fore?
completely off topic but… ive been playing since around the same time, and im level 269. have you just been playing a ton more than me, or am I missing something? I have celestial armor also…
