miscellaneous

Is it commonly known or widely accepted that the attacker is at a disadvantage? if this isn't the case forgive me but from my experience being the attacker puts me at a disadvantage.

How do you think it puts you at a disadvantage?

Im not versed in programming but maybe there's an advantage idk, do you know? also, you still owe me 77 attacks on one of your ratio whores that i gave you a star for.

If you mean by disadvantage that say a level 100 answerer bot is attacking another level 100 answerer bot with the same stats and it should theoretically end in a 100-100 split win/loss ratio, then that's not how it works. CON and hit chance mess with the actual win/loss ratio, and it used to be that 1 int effective bots with lower IDs would hit first (but that got fixed). So in a 200 fight rape, anything could happen if say, both bots had 50% hit chance against each other. One gets a better hit or might hit more often. Sometimes you might get 110 wins and 90 losses or 90 wins and 110 losses. The closer the two builds, the less variance. As far as I can tell there's no real huge disadvantage of the attacker. It's just a bunch of random luck.

If you're talking about tournaments, then anything goes lol.

Old thread about formulas.

Of course Alan would be the one to explain them. Man knew more about this game than Ender probably ever did. But that's what happens when you don't actually play your own game (insert Ender rant about how he can't play because people would think he cheats, well, who cares, like that ever stopped anyone else from cheating).

The formulas are on the build calculator site btw.

For some reason I'm thinking if two bots roll the same int for attacking first (I forget the formula but I recall there being a random variable + int), then the defender goes first. This might have only been the case in simulators though, I honestly don't remember.

tl;dr:

• The defender has an advantage in long battles, but this likely doesn't matter in practice.
• The attacker used to have an advantage in hitting first more frequently, but this was fixed.

Longer version:

The only existing case I can think of where there's an advantage for either the attacker or defender is in long battles. After 300 total attempts, the fight is over and the defender wins, so there's theoretically a slight edge for the defender. In practice though, this isn't likely to matter for the vast majority of battles. To reach that many attempts, there has to be very high block rates and/or very high miss rates and/or very high HP and so on.

What Zal and Gpof are talking about is one of the more interesting and subtle issues that have popped up over the years. It was fixed in mid-2016 and I encourage anyone interested in this sort of nuance to read the announcement summarizing the problem. In short though, it used to be that attackers had a slight edge in being able to hit first more frequently that became more magnified when both bots had low/minimum int. This became even more pronounced with tournaments for the reasons described in that thread (this is where lower bot ids come in). And one of the most interesting takeaways from that analysis IMO was that the commonly-held belief of "a point in int is a point wasted (for bots aiming to battle)" may not actually be true.

Also, it's true that there are players that are more knowledgeable about certain aspects of the game than I am. This is natural IMO (there are many more of you than there are of me and I'm definitely not the best at everything) and not something I'm ashamed to admit. I rely heavily on folks like Esv that nerd out on relatively minor details of the game and discover issues like the one linked above. Bright players like that with positive and inquisitive attitudes that are pleasant to interact with make running this game fun and enjoyable for me.

Wow I guess my memory wasn't there, cause I even commented that with the mentioned fix in mind.

I just happened to find some random stuff about it when I searched about it. I didn't think there was an advantage. But if one were new to the game and attacked another bot similar to theirs or thought their build was better (for example, str vs. dex bots in the lower levels, balanced vs. everything else later on) and still lost more than won, I was trying to explain why that would be the case. Wasn't trying to be super technical.

I rely heavily on folks like Esv that nerd out on relatively minor details of the game and discover issues like the one linked above.

Other game devs would give those people "contributor" status or something of the like to give them some regards for their efforts. Like Clay, Esv, others. I know I haven't directly contributed to the game but that's mostly because I don't focus on the game's mechanics as it stands. I was always more of an ideas man. You and them are the ones with the coding knowledge.

Bright players like that with positive and inquisitive attitudes that are pleasant to interact with make running this game fun and enjoyable for me.

I almost feel like this is a dig at me and my negative attitude most of the time. A long time ago now I used to contribute different ideas positively to you and the game, even giving you an AC to find others with, but over time and the lack of action of those ideas or other's even better ideas, I got as or more jaded than you did with the development of the game. I'm not a co-owner or co-developer of the game but I never liked your attitude of not acting on suggestions or adding people to the development of the game that could've helped out. I thought it was fairly close minded and led to the development of more of the cheating mechanisms to spite you and your rejections of theirs or others ideas. Has it gotten any better? No. You keep up everything that you said or did years ago regardless of what I or others say.

And while I'm at it, the reason I don't quit is because I like the social aspect of the game, as dead as it is. I do give you a lot of grief where I wouldn't on other games, mostly because this game is a centralized one person development team where others have many facets and complaining to them without say, a super popular Reddit post would be a waste of time. Like sending in a suggestion to WoW and saying "add more sexy elves plz", which might actually get added instead of "ur game sucks, I spent $1,000 on it but I think it sux now". But if you'd rather me not talk anymore and stop annoying you, I'll respect your wishes.

glad to see people talking about this, except you Zal, you make me sick.

tl;dr: Ramblings about how I approach the game and feedback on it.

It's totally fair for you to not like that this is a one man show. I get that that's not ideal if you want to see more development of a game you like and don't want more progress to be gated on the availability/interest of a single individual. I actually really do hear you on that. It doesn't change my desire to run this game largely by myself as a hobby project (and I think there are some very desirable effects of this, such as my 100% confidence in being able to keep this game online long-term), but I also think it's quite fair for you to disagree with this.

What I think is less fair is your frequent negative attitude and claims of my rejecting good ideas, etc.:

• At best I find the negativity mildly grating, but at worst I find it eats at my motivation to spend any of the limited time in my life on bots4. Instead of focusing my energy on the actual game, I get sucked into these sorts of relatively pointless (in terms of changing anything) engagements where I feel obligated to speak up, lest some newcomer read what you write and take it face value. I do appreciate you at least owning up to your negativity though. I usually try to ignore it and just respond to the actual raw content (e.g. in this thread, focusing on game mechanics instead of making direct comments about your attitude...though I am doing that now). My intention in calling out good behavior was mostly to signal that those are the qualities in players I truly do appreciate. I'll never disregard feedback because it's packaged negatively (all feedback in any form is useful), but it makes it SO much easier to consume if the packaging is better and this game's community is on a small enough scale that I think I actually stand a chance at influencing player attitude by making my expectations/desires clear.

• As for rejection of good ideas, not all suggestions are going to be implemented. Full stop. It might be because I don't like the idea, because I don't have time to implement the idea, because I have a different related idea that I want to build, or any other number of reasons. I am positive there are good ideas out there that have been suggested and not implemented. Any game with a channel for making suggestions is going to leave behind a trail of disappointed players who feel their suggestion should have been implemented. What I don't appreciate is this natural process being characterized as me regularly ignoring good ideas (or more extremely, never listening to anything from players). Countless changes in this game have been the direct result of player feedback. The 8+ years of updates documented on the announcements pages (1, 2) speak for themselves. This doesn't mean though that every single idea that's suggested is going to be implemented.

• Regarding recognition for contributors, I do my best to be effusive with my thanks and appreciation, give credit when implementing suggestions or fixing bugs, and sometimes even awarding stars. I'm open to other ideas like trophies and forum titles.

You're free to continue posting in whatever capacity you want as long as you follow the posted rules. I'd appreciate less negativity, but like I said before, I value and welcome feedback in any form.

Sorry for derailing this thread...

Ender, that was a work of art man thanks for posting that! I am left bewildered with Zal's attitude. Even during our rain as Malicious Villainous he was a dick that wanted to create drama wherever he could, almost as though he thrives on it. I mean I am willing to bet that if he plays other online games with a social network we will probably be able to observe the same patterns from him. He is driven by conflict and can not fathom living a life (or in this case playing a game) with out it. He has to be the center of attention and if he is not then he throws temper tantrums. I get it, I enjoy a thorough beef every now and then in good friendly competitive banter, but Zal makes things personal but like his attack on you. Anyone reading this and is new to the game, just attack any bot you see with the name "Zal" in it, if you can't beat it, message me and i will give you a bot that you can use to (redacted) the shit out of him!

to all other players not in torment or strung out, fuck you, see you on the battle field! excpet teacup/bazza. Idk why but i have fallen for that little (redacted)

(Administrivia: I redacted a couple words in Luthrin's post that generally aren't appropriate in 2019, as well as the response to his post since it was addressing one of them. I appreciate the support, but please try to keep it relatively civil.)