EP 4.1 Balance changes

[HUMMAN]

Rsy there is also range of the attack ( in your skirm vs musk) also attack animation (lbs) also if you calculate stats of 5 mam to 10 huss it will be kinda same but in reaility 5 mam is better because quality>quaintity. Not to mention sowars are worse because of pathing etc.

[Dsy]

There is no attack range in this program. It assume both unit start to attack same the time. But it the same as with speed. You can still make conclusions better. Attack animation issues are with only a few units. But you can even still calculate with it. You just need to measure the avarage attack speed of an lbow and you are done.
There is no rule for quality>quantity. And idk maybe you mistyped something. If i use the calculator 5 mam has 2054 score, and 10 huss has 1200.

[Garja]

Speed cant be included since its a "fighting calculator". It shows the results in a scenario where units instantly start attacking each other. So speed is irrelevant. However you can make conclusions still easier. Since if one unit 100 cost effective and an other 100 also their attack type and range the same then you can know that which one is better... But in combat, they fight the same way and the calcultor shows that accurate.

And the stats different weights are in the calculator. For example in ranged fight you compare 2 units. Skirm vs musket:
In attack you will write 30 for skirm, since it has 2 times multiplier.
In ranged resistance you enter 0 for musk since it has no ranged res, but enter 30 for skirm.
And thats it. You are basicly set every stat weights by your own correctly depending on situation.

You don't get what I mean with the weighing of stats. Sometimes attack is more important, sometimes HP is, sometimes the resistance etc. The model doesn't take that into account but in practice it influences the (cost) effectiveness of a unit.
Basically a fighting calculator doesn't really tell how cost-effective a unit is. It gives a score that approximates its fighting power, per cost. It may be a measure close to cost effectiveness but it still differs significantly.

[Dsy]

Even in physics and science you make models which makes ideal cases. Try to go closer and closer to reality. Usually its not even a goal to calculate all the factors since its impossible. If you use electronics which measures even with specific settings can encounter huge anomalies.
So making a model which accurately includes all factor is impossible. If anyone could do it it would be called God.

This program gives you a cost effectivity, fight effectivity score of units where if you compare both start to attack each other the same time with zero overkill and perfect micro. Thats what the program can do and it does it well.

[Garja]

I'm not criticizing the model itself. I'm just saying you can't realistically give a score to cost-effectiveness with a math model. That's why the ideal value that I have in mind for a certain unit tends to differ from the value given by the model.

[Dsy]

It helps only. If you use it can have lot of inofrmations about units.
For example you can compare same speed, same range, same behavior units.
Like put musk into meele vs halbs. And calculate their cost effectivity this way. It helps what unit you should choose if you can get both with one civ etc.

[Hazza54321]

you cant calculate cost effectiveness theres too many other factors

[Gichtenlord]

you cant calculate cost effectiveness theres too many other factors

Dsy can.

[Hazza54321]

My mistake

[momuuu]

You can model stuff though and the model gives a realistic outcome: dont underestinate changes in cost!.

@Dsy fir funzues run some calculations with veteran sowar. They might do even better.

[Rikikipu]

Maybe what could work would be some machine learning where the key concept is that it relies on the experience and not on the theory