Knights and Merchants.net Forum

Calm down guys, I have understand that right, ED you want to delete the tower from KaM Remake?

However I have a nice movie with my 2 towers + Shadoes 4 milita´s. I will show it you tomorrow

I think you don't have that right.

Anyway you don't respect the people who have the right to say that, that's not like it makes a difference then.

Should i not upload the movie? i only want to show, that there is a balance problem/random luck^^ There is no name "shadoe" in the movie,because i thought that you dont like sth. like that.


Here is the movie. Only 1 minut. NOT to say shadaoe is bad or sth. like that, only that the whole forum can see this "random luck" or unluck for me, in the remake.
10 Stones, but only one milita is dead. So that is not like normal(i think 3/5) Maybe because of the map, or the units are so close to the tower?!idk.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NBEqKmyt ... e=youtu.be

No names are in the movie, if someone want that his name is there, than PM to me,pls.

Oh no you can post a replay/video of that if you want, I was talking to Bo

Ok, than i misunderstood you

Mocie is in my last Post.

So what's your point there?

About your movie Pawel, try this over and over again and you'll get some different results. There will always be the factor luck.

I know. But 10 stones and one is dead, is a little bit hard, do you dont think so. I know. it would be great if from 20 people. One time would be 10 hit and one time 15 or 17. but 5 from 20???

To's posts are very polite and well written, and I would like to thank him for that. If it wasn't for him I wouldn't be paying much attention to this topic. I think the current accuracy is good, but having read his posts I acknowledge that spamming towers MIGHT be overpowered, I just haven't seen evidence to convince me of that yet.

What I'm annoyed at is that I provide some counterarguments (which of course probably have flaws) and certain people get angry and say we should just take their word for it because they're experienced, and then start going offtopic about experienced players being most important, and insulting the moderators because their offtopic and offensive posts are deleted. I can't take people's arguments seriously when they can't discuss without insulting or saying to just believe them because they know best. You will never change my mind on something by doing that.

And people all got hooked on this "majority" thing. The fact is we'll never know what the of KaM players majority want unless we individually survey all 15,000+ people who downloaded the Remake, not counting all of the illegal downloads. The players in the RC and on the forum are mostly more experienced because random inexperienced players are unlikely to sign up for beta testing. So I think it's fairly irrelevant to try to convince others by saying "most people agree with this". If Krom and I don't understand your reasoning then we won't change things in the Remake. So making lists of players who think this or that isn't helpful to us. Making us understand the problem IS helpful. I'm quite open minded about these balance issues, I like to hear other people's ideas and opinions when they're polite about it and use well reasoned arguments, and I like to provide counterexamples to explain why I might disagree with their opinions. I don't like jumping to decisions quickly, I like taking it slowly and making considered changes, not just seeing a problem and doing a quickfix then finding that the fix added more problems or broke some other part of the gameplay.

I think this discussion on tower spam is interesting and worth having. I am not convinced yet that tower spam is a problem, but a significant number of people hold that view and we do listen to those opinions. Krom and I want to see this discussion continue POLITELY with more evidence, examples and reasoned arguments, such as To has been doing.

I started a topic here for discussing the experienced/inexperienced players mattering, so we don't have to keep deleting the offtopic discussions:
viewtopic.php?f=11&t=1143

Some people seem to think screaming and complaining loudly will make us listen to you or believe your opinion is more important. The fact is it does the opposite for us.

See, that's why I originally said that a replay proves nothing. All of the fighting events are based on random, so you always can play a bunch of games and then pick the few where chance worked for your argumentation. So you can find a replay where one barbarian kills a pikeman and two scouts. You even find a video on youtube where a single militia kills a knight. But I think that it is clear to everyone that militias are not overpowered with respect to knights. So the replay _proves_ nothing, but it only _shows_ that it can end very unluckily. Krom made an interesting remark on that.

Sure, in that video only one militia was killed by ten stones. And sure in the other game only 10 militias were killed by 23 stones. But again, this proves nothing because these are single cases. When talking about random, the only thing you can count on is the average.
And the average is that 10 stones kill 6 militias and 23 stones kill 14 militias - except they are built one next to each other like in that screenshot. Then the hit value decreases because it's quite likely that two stones are thrown at one unit.

For the thread: I think, towers are fine now. They not too weak, but still not overpowered. In fact you should see that they are the only defensive building that the game has. So if you loose your army on the battlefield they are the only hope that you have. They will never kill the enemys troops, but hopefully the delay the attack by a few minutes so you can recruit a smaller army again. So people with a good economy might have the chance to survive if they have lost the first battle, thus it's finally again about the construction of the economy, which you spend the previous hour for. I like that.

Just a little remark, in that video hit rate was not 10% (10stones=1militia), but a 17% (12stones=2militia).

And yes, thats an issue. I would like the random to be "less random". So that from 1000 tests it would not be 0% hitrate in 0.1% cases, but something more predictable - e.g. 17% at least.

@Krom
one chance to achieve that would be the Law of large numbers. Let's say you calculate each fighting process not only once, but 10 times and then take the mean value out of that, you'll end up closer to the desired average.
The drawback is, of course, that this is the brute force method, so this consumes much more CPU time.

Yes this would be a meter in the right direction, i think! Random is fine. However to much random is not good for a Strategy game, I think.

agreed, they miss walking militia way too much imo :/