Noob questions.

**The Celtic Viking** · 11-25-2011, 16:27

Actually, that's not true, Kival. Though GG2 indeed did add accuracy modifiers that didn't exist before (for arrows, sling bullets and javelins, that is), missile accuracy cannot have been 100% prior to his fiddling as they still missed a lot. (Yes, I have checked it to be sure.)

**Kival** · 11-25-2011, 17:12

Originally Posted by The Celtic Viking

Actually, that's not true, Kival. Though GG2 indeed did add accuracy modifiers that didn't exist before (for arrows, sling bullets and javelins, that is), missile accuracy cannot have been 100% prior to his fiddling as they still missed a lot. (Yes, I have checked it to be sure.)

Are you sure that's not only attack lower defense in the random calculation of attack?

**The Celtic Viking** · 11-25-2011, 17:26

Originally Posted by Kival

Are you sure that's not only attack lower defense in the random calculation of attack?

Yes - when I said they "missed" I meant that their arrows landed off target, i.e. in the ground.

**Lazy O** · 11-25-2011, 18:31

But weapon upgrades are bugged, that is not a fair comparison at all.

**vartan** · 11-25-2011, 18:38

Originally Posted by Lazy O

But weapon upgrades are bugged, that is not a fair comparison at all.

They're only "bugged" in your opinion and that of many other misinformed. It just works differently than you'd like it to.

Originally Posted by Brave Brave Sir Robin

Yes. Accuracy is a whole separate entity here when discussing missile units. An arrow that "hits" its target with attack "x" still needs to overcome defense "y" before the 1 lethality value kicks in. However, the chance of the successful hit is randomized by the accuracy value of the missile itself.

This is quite disturbing. It means that the attack point you get from a chevron is different from the attack point you get from a weapon upgrade. That and gg2 misinformed me and/or I misunderstood him. Because if you remember, it isn't simply attack vs defense. If this was the case, you couldn't hurt an enemy unit if it had a certain defense or higher. Remember that even at the lowest attack values there is an apparent minimum chance to hurt the enemy.

**Brave Brave Sir Robin** · 11-25-2011, 18:59

Originally Posted by vartan

They're only "bugged" in your opinion and that of many other misinformed. It just works differently than you'd like it to.

This is quite disturbing. It means that the attack point you get from a chevron is different from the attack point you get from a weapon upgrade. That and gg2 misinformed me and/or I misunderstood him. Because if you remember, it isn't simply attack vs defense. If this was the case, you couldn't hurt an enemy unit if it had a certain defense or higher. Remember that even at the lowest attack values there is an apparent minimum chance to hurt the enemy.

Well I remember us testing the defense bonuses vartan and it didn't seem to matter whether 1 bronze shield was added or the unit had an extra point of armor. However, the attack bonuses may operate differently. TCV got nearly 3 times as many extra kills by adding the weapons upgrades. If you just gave Caucasian Archers 10 attack in the edu and tested it, I feel the results would be much more similar to those he received testing with the 3 chevrons added rather than with the gold weapons upgrade though all three would be at 10 attack.

This may mean that attack bonuses are broken while the defense ones are not.

**gamegeek2** · 11-25-2011, 21:50

All "attack" values are the same. "Lethality" is separate from attack, as is "accuracy" but weapon upgrades provide the same sort of attack boost as do chevrons, though chevrons provide other bonuses as well (morale, for example).

As far as I know, attack and lethality are interchangeable values. If somebody can come up with a concise study to disprove this statement (which is supported by phalanx man's study) please, I welcome it.