| Author | Morale and luck bonuses |
|---|
I think the system should modified and i'll explain why:
i did lots of battles with morale 3(basic 1 + basic leadership + medal) and often people with 1 luck get more bonuses then i do.I think the system should be like this:
Let's say you have 3 morale that means 30% chance.
first round for farmers:30% yes and 70% no
let's say it's a no.As it is now the next round is
second round:30% yes and 70% no
i think ti should be a cumulative bonus so that we'll have:
second round:60% yes 40% no
and so on and in the eventuality the bonus reaches +100% it should stay.I explain:
let's say we are friggin unlucky and farmers reach 4th round without morale.They now have:
30x4=120% chance.So they'll surely gain the boost.But what about the 20%?it should stay i think so that next round they have 50% chance(30+20). If we don't do it like this the % is screwed again.The math is quite long but i hope every1 understands the reason behind my idea.If you need it i'll even do the math(please don't ask it ç_ç) |
That is what is currently happening except that the cumulative % rate reaches a maximum of 50% and there is no roll-over.
It's so that chance and randomness stay that way. having any 100% chance spoils the randomness. |
| the point is 30% means that every 3 round or something like that i should gain a morale bonus...blocking it at 50% spoils this statistic and in fact i could even have 0 bonuses in the whole fight...not that fair considering that i have to spend talent points AND a good amount of money to reach that +3 |
| wait is this right, if you have 5+ moral, does that mean every second or maybe, 3 turn you will get moral? |
| Where does it say that the cumulative rate is capped at 50%? In the description I found it only says that the base probability – there called F – is capped at 0.5. |
| If I understood right, this is already how it is now. Like for example a stack with 5 morale would never have 3 consecutive turns without burst, and the same stack with 1 luck would not befallen by luck on 3 consecutive turns. Counter for each stack is independant. |
wait is this right, if you have 5+ moral, does that mean every second or maybe, 3 turn you will get moral?
It would be right.I spend tons of talent points(till expert leadership) and money(medal of bravery)to reach that +5.I'm not asking some kind of wicked bonus i simply want that 50% chance means 50% chance.Or in the 1st turn or in the 2nd turn. |
Morale and Luck bonus rules:
https://www.lordswm.com/help.php?section=35
From that site:
probability of morale/luck triggers = F^(1+[moves befallen so far]-[moves not befallen so far]*F/(1-F))
whence F is luck/10 or morale/10
Let's say:
X := moves befallen so far
Y := moves not befallen so far
then it look's like this:
triggerchance = F^(1+X-Y]*F/(1-F))
Example:
If you have 5 Morale and no turn done with a specified unit, your chance to trigger when you move are:
triggerchance(X=0,Y=0) = 0.5^(1+0-0] * 0.5/(1-0.5))= 0,5^(0.5/0.5)= 0.5^1 = 0.5 = 50%
So 50% as expected, now what happens when you get morale on your first move.
triggerchance(X=1,Y=0) = 0.5^(1+1-0] * 0.5/(1-0.5)) = 0.5^(2 * (0.5/0.5))= 0.5^2 = 0.25 = 25%
So after getting morale your chance to get it once more drops to 25%.
Likewise looking at the other case you don't get morale on your first move.
triggerchance(X=0,Y=1) = 0.5^(1+0-1] * 0.5/(1-0.5)) = 0.5^(0 * (0.5/0.5))= 0.5^0 = 1 = 100%
So you can be sure to get morale on your second turn, if you haven't got it on turn 1.
Straws said it already, but I want to emphasize it once more each stack of yours has it's own counter of morale(luck) triggered or not. It's NOT one counter for you whole army!
So people with 1 luck or morale can easily get many times triggered in one round with different stacks, even if this looks they are getting to much.
From my observation what Takesister said is not true. When I played with 5 morale I get morale always latest on my second move. When it would be capped at 50% I should have noticed it, because you would have a 25% chance of having two consecutive rounds of not getting morale and I have made a table for myself to watch the 'getting morale' when I think I need it.
What should be capped at 0.5 is the 'F' from the formula above as written on the page(s. above). So a greater Morale value than 5 should have no more effect than 5 morale. |
| Example: if you have 3 moral, and the fk has 1 thats 4 moral right?...... that would mean only for that creature (i think) every 4th or 5th turn it will get a moral boost? |
every 4th or 5th turn
Precentages don't work like this.
I.e. if you have 50% chance, it doesn't mean that you get it every second turn. It means that IN LONG RUN it will fall approx 50% of time. |
| So, moral and luck don't add up, just it will only be a 10%, 20% so on chance of getting it |
Torrim you dont seem to undertand the concept of chance. Post 10 explains it quite well. 50% chance with YES,NO,YES,NO,YES,NO sequence is not random at all. 50% in a long run but random means there should be no specific sequence like every 3rd turn, every 2nd turn, etc.
You probably just didnt notice when your morale fell more than expected. People always seem to count only when their chances are lower than they expected in a short term. I have never seen a topic saying: I get too much luck, too many elements from MG, too many hunter items.. |
| all i say is:if i have 5 morale and battle lasts let's say 10 rounds each stack any1 of my stacks should have 5 morale bonus(50%).Considering that we can't know from the start the number of rounds it should be an automatic YES 1st NO 2nd...this because we can't know how many rounds we are gonna play |
| I get too much luck I'm goin with +2 and my three stacks of orcs usually attack always with lucky shoot first, I'm tired of ppl swearin at me and sayin I paid the admins or somethin. |
Considering that we can't know from the start the number of rounds it should be an automatic YES 1st NO 2nd...
And why not NO 1st, YES 2nd?
It would be the same 50%, right?
Or why not NO, YES, YES, NO, NO, YES, YES, NO, NO etc? At any given moment the difference between number of Yes' and Noes would not be higher than 1. |
Sorry for doublepost, but I found a good example.
Let's take the coin. If you throw it, it has 50% chance of turning one side up and 50% chances of turning the other side up.
Now throw the coin several times. No one can guarantee you that it will fall 1st side up, then 2nd side, then 1st again etc.
Actually, in LoWM it's even LESS RANDOM than should be, because every time you get NO, your chances of getting YES become higher and vice versa. |
Guys, this is not the place to discuss what randomness is.
The system you are proposing is already in place, just more stringent in the limitation and more random than you like. |
And why not NO 1st, YES 2nd?
It would be the same 50%, right?
Or why not NO, YES, YES, NO, NO, YES, YES, NO, NO etc? At any given moment the difference between number of Yes' and Noes would not be higher than 1.
this system would be ok too for me because it is based on the fact that it aims to reach a perfect 50% balance XD
Guys, this is not the place to discuss what randomness is.
The system you are proposing is already in place, just more stringent in the limitation and more random than you like.
In fact my suggestion was to remove the "bonus" randomnessXD |
https://www.lordswm.com/war.php?warid=486308557
Now please look at this battle:i have 2 morale and he has 2 luck. He had like 4-5 luck on the same unit and even twice in a row while i had only 1 morale bonus (on recruits-.-).
Can you call this system fair?2 people with the same bonus gaining completely different QUANTITY not QUALITY of the bonus.
P.s.:he even had more morale bonus then me rofl |
#8 Check your math ;-) one bracked made a mess in it ...
In your formula, if I had morale 1 and didn't get morale boost first turn, I would be sure to get it the second time. Generally with any possitive morale I would be sure to have X+2>Y, because anytime Y gets to Y=X+1, you get F^0, which is 1, hence 100%.
this is correct: F^(1+[moves befallen so far]-[moves not befallen so far]*F/(1-F))
this is not: triggerchance = F^(1+X-Y]*F/(1-F))
this ] is the mistake, you should have
F^(1+X-Y*F/(1-F)) |
