Guerrilla Warfare: The Statistics
הודעות: 168
בוקר על ידי: 300 users
Over the past number of weeks there has been a lot of discussion on Guerrilla Warfare and it's power. All these posts have been trying to address the problem with Guerrilla Warfare logically, with a general consensus among the top tier players that it is imbalanced. Unfortunately there are still some apologists who are trying to excuse the imbalance through meaningless arguments. Now, we are going to look at things statistically. Cold, hard numbers.
Considering each strategy is unique in it's cost, attack, range, etc, we are going to break them down into Cost Per 1 Attack (CPA) and Cost Per 1 Defence (CPD)
This is done by dividing the attacking/defending power of the strategy's main attack/defence by the cost.
So for example, if I wanted to find the CPA of Blitzkrieg: 120 / 8 = $15
In the interest of clarity, the in-game currency used to purchase a unit will be referred to as "$".
Lucky Bastard has been given +1.5 attack due to it's potential tank and infantry attacking power.
Iron Fist has been given +1 attack and +1.5 defence to compensate for its HP.
Great Combinator has been excluded from this sample as it is the outlier. It would not be represented accurately using this method.
Cost Per Attack
*Main attack unit's cost / attack*
Blitzkrieg: $15
Desert Storm: $16.25
Hybrid Warfare: $14.44
Imperialist: $12.86
Iron Fist: $13.33
Lucky Bastard: $13.68
Master of Stealth: $15
Naval Commander: $15.45
Perfect Defence: $17.14
Relentless Attack: $11.25
Sky Menace: $16.25
Most cost efficient attack: Guerrilla Warfare: $10
Cost Per Defence
*Main defence unit's cost / defence*
Blitzkrieg: $12.5
Desert Storm: $11.1
Hybrid Warfare: $9
Imperialist: $5
Iron Fist: $8.7
Lucky Bastard: $10
Master of Stealth: $10
Naval Commander: $20 (Naval) 10$ (Land)
Perfect Defence: $7.14
Relentless Attack: $13.3
Sky Menace: $10
Most cost-efficient defence: Guerrilla Warfare: $5, Imperialist: $5
So, Guerrilla Warfare is the most cost efficient strategy to attack with AND to defend with. That's not enough?
Cost Per Range
*Cost of Main Attack, Main Defence and Secondary Defence / Average Range
Blitzkrieg: $9.58
Desert Storm: $11.5
Hybrid Warfare: $13.75
Imperialist: $9.33
Iron Fist: $24.4
Lucky Bastard: $15.33
Master of Stealth: $15.7
Naval Commander: $ 12.3(Naval) $15.7 (Land)
Perfect Defence: $13.33
Relentless Attack: $13.13
Sky Menace: $9.2
Guerrilla Warfare: $12 ($11 if you exclude infantry, as they are almost never used by GW)
Most cost-efficient range: Sky Menace, Imperialist, Blitzkrieg, Guerrilla Warfare.
It also ranks 4th in range efficiency out of 13 strategies in the game, including Blitzkrieg, who's WHOLE PURPOSE is range.
I hear one apologist in particular argue; "but my air transports cost 750".
The whole point of Air Transports is to move units faster from one city so they can defend another city. If your main attack unit is Invisible there's no NEED to move these defensive units so urgently. This depletes the value of the air transport drastically.
In summary:
•Most cost efficient attack
•Most cost efficient defence
•Top strategy for range
•Invisible Main Attack
•Gain your main defence unit every time you capture a country (e.g take Belarus with 4 marines, get 5 militia in return)
There really is no defending GW anymore. Open your eyes.
Remove the City Defence Bonus for GW Militia.
-1 Attack For Militia
Considering each strategy is unique in it's cost, attack, range, etc, we are going to break them down into Cost Per 1 Attack (CPA) and Cost Per 1 Defence (CPD)
This is done by dividing the attacking/defending power of the strategy's main attack/defence by the cost.
So for example, if I wanted to find the CPA of Blitzkrieg: 120 / 8 = $15
In the interest of clarity, the in-game currency used to purchase a unit will be referred to as "$".
Lucky Bastard has been given +1.5 attack due to it's potential tank and infantry attacking power.
Iron Fist has been given +1 attack and +1.5 defence to compensate for its HP.
Great Combinator has been excluded from this sample as it is the outlier. It would not be represented accurately using this method.
Cost Per Attack
*Main attack unit's cost / attack*
Blitzkrieg: $15
Desert Storm: $16.25
Hybrid Warfare: $14.44
Imperialist: $12.86
Iron Fist: $13.33
Lucky Bastard: $13.68
Master of Stealth: $15
Naval Commander: $15.45
Perfect Defence: $17.14
Relentless Attack: $11.25
Sky Menace: $16.25
Most cost efficient attack: Guerrilla Warfare: $10
Cost Per Defence
*Main defence unit's cost / defence*
Blitzkrieg: $12.5
Desert Storm: $11.1
Hybrid Warfare: $9
Imperialist: $5
Iron Fist: $8.7
Lucky Bastard: $10
Master of Stealth: $10
Naval Commander: $20 (Naval) 10$ (Land)
Perfect Defence: $7.14
Relentless Attack: $13.3
Sky Menace: $10
Most cost-efficient defence: Guerrilla Warfare: $5, Imperialist: $5
So, Guerrilla Warfare is the most cost efficient strategy to attack with AND to defend with. That's not enough?
Cost Per Range
*Cost of Main Attack, Main Defence and Secondary Defence / Average Range
Blitzkrieg: $9.58
Desert Storm: $11.5
Hybrid Warfare: $13.75
Imperialist: $9.33
Iron Fist: $24.4
Lucky Bastard: $15.33
Master of Stealth: $15.7
Naval Commander: $ 12.3(Naval) $15.7 (Land)
Perfect Defence: $13.33
Relentless Attack: $13.13
Sky Menace: $9.2
Guerrilla Warfare: $12 ($11 if you exclude infantry, as they are almost never used by GW)
Most cost-efficient range: Sky Menace, Imperialist, Blitzkrieg, Guerrilla Warfare.
It also ranks 4th in range efficiency out of 13 strategies in the game, including Blitzkrieg, who's WHOLE PURPOSE is range.
I hear one apologist in particular argue; "but my air transports cost 750".
The whole point of Air Transports is to move units faster from one city so they can defend another city. If your main attack unit is Invisible there's no NEED to move these defensive units so urgently. This depletes the value of the air transport drastically.
In summary:
•Most cost efficient attack
•Most cost efficient defence
•Top strategy for range
•Invisible Main Attack
•Gain your main defence unit every time you capture a country (e.g take Belarus with 4 marines, get 5 militia in return)
There really is no defending GW anymore. Open your eyes.
Remove the City Defence Bonus for GW Militia.
-1 Attack For Militia
It only works in specific fucking circumstances. You basically have to be negligent or inexperienced not to beat GW in traditional competitive modes. As for scenarios that is just a mess overall that I do not fully get, but iirc you can customize the units sooo...  Basically in a 1v1 or FFA where GW is left to thrive is where it gets "OP". The stats i've seen here compared to the actual gameplay just don't match up. Take Germany GW. Your expansion path is absolutely predictable and you can be beaten on every single attack if your opponent slightly outnumbers you per battle. You can chock that up to rolls or whatever but that's always been my experience in gameplay. UK vs GW Germany is almost inexcusable. The minute you see marines in your battle log you'd have a clear picture of what you need to do to disable your opponent. I think that GW breaks common play patterns because, yes, the strategy does have unusual mechanics that allow that. I think that's more or less what everyone here is describing, and then justifying it with stats. The other thing to consider is that the stats presented were supposedly adjusted (to include?) upgrades. Which upgrades? General in stack? No general? What effect would nerfing GW have on casual players? Are stats an accurate representation of gameplay outcomes? Why are we valuing statistic comparisons at such a basic level? wouldn't it be better if we all said, "okay fuck it lets test this" I don't want to see any more of you complaining about GW if you can't show me screenshots of battle logs / turn by turn things. And not just from three people either. If any of you give so much of a shit about this, lets actually test it by experimenting and looking at the outcomes of GW instead of the raw stats.
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
nigga ill rape you with gw germ so hard your farts wont even make a sound anymore
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
lol your ego so shit you need a boost from beating a 900 elo player? doesn't say shit about how OP the strategy is if you can beat *me* in a 1v1
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
then don't question gw germ gameplay if u dont know how its played if mostly everyone in the whole competitive community is saying how its op, there is something seriously wrong with the strat.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
If the amount of ppl that have said gw is op in this thread represent the whole competetive comunity then thats sad xD, let it go extinct you guys are like less then 10 % of atwar , clearly you should join zeph in scenarios or retire too rp  Or better yet join ww1 its the trap card aetius left us to merge rpers and scenario ppl!! unity by ww1 !!
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
ww1 doesnt even use gw so what's your point???
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
mod of the year ladies and gentlemen
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
I suggest remove defence bonus for city for militia but hold on to the -1 attack for militia
---- Hi
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
Bandido החשבון נמחק |
Bandido החשבון נמחק
How about you gtfo .. gw is fine
טוען...
טוען...
|
give us proof that gw is fine? edit: nevermind no need 
---- ''Everywhere where i am absent, they commit nothing but follies'' ~Napoleon 
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
Nice rep
---- Our next Moments are Tomorrows Memories
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
xaxaxa
---- ''Everywhere where i am absent, they commit nothing but follies'' ~Napoleon
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
My preferred nerf is +5 cost to inf -1 critical to all units and see how it ends up, possibly changing crit for individual units if it doesn't quite work.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
everyone that uses gw benefits from it, thats why they defend it.
----
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
Stfu competetive noobs admit ur place as a extinct faction and go to a corner to play ur one map in silence, Join zeph in scenarios where the soul of atwar remains and leave the stupid bitching threads to rp players. #scenarios is life scenarios is love
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
Heil Siri
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
We get that you hate the competitive community. You have made that clear. But your constant ranting and posting insults about it on global and the forums to provoke is not appreciated. The whole us and them attitude is nonsense anyway. You have a bunch of duels and cws on your profile. Sorry to break it to you but that makes you a competitive player.
---- 
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
Wow wow im just talking how u competetive ppl do, u know being mean throwing tantrums over things and thinking my side of the game is the only one that really matters etc ive never said i havent cw or dueled or tried the competetive side , several ppl saw me play cws etc when roai and freeman liked making em inside the empire , which is why i know how toxic the competetive comunity is and how small lol, whats wrong with pointing out how extinct the competetive side is and trying to embrace em in scenarios ;O
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
bro what ur talking about isnt on topic. we are talking about how op gw is and you are here talking about how comp is dead???? ww1 doesnt use gw, endsieg doesnt use gw... only scenarios that touch gw is ror 6 and some that no one ever plays. so i wouldn't
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
U guys have a strat 2017 page for that , whats wrong with not taking serious this thread :O , you guys are making 1 global thread to talk about strats then 1 personal one for each one and are mad that i find tthis pointless lol. As for gw i fought it alot when i played competetive for a time with roai and free like laoch pointed out , which is why i asked if it had gotten buffed or something before cuz it never was hard to counter, u just had to play agresive vs a gw player . theirs more important strats that need to be buffed which are barely ever used cuz they suck and u guys wanna focus on supposidly how op GW is lol.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
Yea you only need to look at the banlists of the most popular mapmakers to realise how wrong that is. I know youll call me biased as a competitive player but as a mod i have to deal with dramas from all over atwar. The size of the competitive community means it self moderates to a degree. If you're toxic youll struggle to get games or find a clan. The scenario side of the community is much worse particularly regarding banlist disputes and clan dramas. Just yday i was called to a nwe game to clear chat of a bunch of r4s spamming racism and anti semitism. I wonder if any mod has ever had to do that for a competitive game. I haven't and i've never seen it occur in my 4 years as a player. Besides if you're attempting to convert players you're wasting your time. I played scenarios up until r8 and then started competitive. Many of us have similar stories. We have been there done that. Frankly i don't understand why and how you play endless remakes of the same maps vs what are mostly noobs. Where's the competition? Whats the reward, sp? You guys don't even organise tournaments or anything to make it interesting.
----
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
Kaska was talking to me about that the other day , we thought about maybe starting a tournament after the competetive one endes , one that can be a a mix between scenario and competetive so both sides players can mix more etc . Not sure if more ppl would be interested but seemed like a nice idea . Theirs lots of segregation at times in atwar nowadays be it scenario players , rpers , competetives it would be nice having somthing were ppl can mix up and try new things.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
The only people segregating are people like you and tito spamming global and the forums assigning yourselves a group identity as scenario players. You have literally been spamming global non stop all week slamming "competitive players".
----
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
Lmao you think me posting 3 days nubish things on gl where most ppl didnt get butt hurt and were just teasing around is me segregating? when i talk about segregating i refer to the toxic competetive players who think anyone who plays this game different from them shouldent have a opinion and that only their style of playing matters . The kind of ego driven players which spam endlessly isnults to players during cws spectating or try get into personal feuds over people when they think differently.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
= not segregating
---- "Do not pray for an easy life, pray for the strength to endure a difficult one"
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
|
Yo guys, I don't think we'll be implementing strategy changes any soon. Feel free to keep discussing and adding ideas though, as they could be implemented in a future release.
טוען...
טוען...
|
|
Changes to gw, ds and lb are needed desperately.
טוען...
טוען...
|
