HeroesWorld
  • Log in
  • Create account
  • Mode
    Interface scale

Posts from МОД: Клинок Армагеддона / Armageddon's Blade

Modding
4.8 (4 ratings)
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#727
Auto-translated
I'm talking about expected value.
Let's say luck is zero. For this case, let's take the creature's damage as x.
Then, if a hero has 5 luck points and no special skills, there is a 50% chance that the creatures will deal x damage. With a 50% chance, the damage will be 2x.
What is the expected damage with 5 luck points? That is, what is the average damage? To do this, we take the damage from each attack and multiply it by the probability of it occurring. The result is 50%*x + 50%*(2x) = 1.5x. In other words, the average damage increases by a factor of 1.5 with 5 luck, relative to an unlucky creature, all other things being equal. It's easy to calculate that with 3 luck, the expected value will be 1.3x, and with constant luck (without the elven skill, which is, of course, incorrect), the average damage will be 2x.
These 2x should be compared with 1.3x or 1.5x, but not simply with x. Because a second before we took the true luck value, the damage was already increased relative to the base value thanks to the upgraded luck skill tree. And the increase relative to it is smaller.

Effectively, we can say that true luck makes the "expert luck" skill useless (as it becomes obsolete, replaced by a stronger effect).

In contrast, the dwarven absolute defense does not make anything we upgraded for it useless. It does not require, for example, the "deadly misfortune" skill in the luck tree to work (reducing enemy luck by 1). Therefore, it can be honestly said that it simply halves the enemy's damage. Nuances are, of course, possible – for example, with this very elven luck, which slightly changes the expected value coefficients, but in general, that's how it is. If absolute defense were also convenient to upgrade in terms of the strength of other skills and the chances of obtaining them (at least, it wouldn't require a summon with 4% and missing spells in the guild), I would say that it is much more overpowered.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
Offline Mооnst@r
Registered:
Posts: 1,266
#729
Auto-translated
Ment
So, if a hero has 5 units of luck and no special skills, then there is a 50% chance that creatures will deal x damage. With a 50% chance, the damage will be 2x.
What is the expected damage with 5 units of luck? That is, what is the average damage? To do this, we take the damage from each attack and multiply it by the probability of it occurring. The result is 50%*x + 50%*(2x) = 1.5x. In other words, the average damage increases by a factor of 1.5 with 5 luck, relative to an unlucky creature, all other things being equal. It is not difficult to calculate that with 3 luck, the expected value will be 1.3x, and with constant luck (without the elven one, which, of course, is incorrect), the average damage will be 2x.
These 2x should be compared with 1.3x or 1.5x, but not just with x.

It is the same as with 1 unit, 2 units, 3 units, and 4 units – 100%, that is, x2. The only difference is in the probability of it occurring: 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, and 50%, respectively. The minimum, average, and maximum damage will always deal 100% (x2) with any luck (except for negative luck and luck that gives a bonus to damage)
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#730
Auto-translated
No, I definitely didn't take damage spread into account, and there's no reason to. The so-called "average damage," which is the expected value, is pure statistics based on successful attacks. Out of 10,000 attacks, we have approximately 5,000 successful ones and approximately 5,000 unsuccessful ones. We add them together and divide by the number of attacks to find the average. This is essential for calculating the usefulness of a skill, and it's the simplest way to do it.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
Offline Azmadon
Registered:
Posts: 325
#731
Auto-translated
Ment
No, I definitely didn't take damage spread into account, and there's no need to.

So-called "average damage," which is the expected value, is purely statistics based on successful attacks. Out of 10,000 attacks, we have approximately 5,000 successful ones and approximately 5,000 unsuccessful ones. We add them together and divide by the number of attacks to find the average. This is essential for calculating the usefulness of a skill, and it's the simplest way to do it.

I'm a little lost in your discussion thread, but I'm ready to join the discussion.
Just rephrase your question or the topic of discussion in simpler terms.
For your term "Expected Value," I suggest replacing it with the more familiar "DPS" for simplification, as it might be easier to understand.
«Кто хочет, тот ищет возможности, кто не хочет — ищет причины»
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
Offline Mооnst@r
Registered:
Posts: 1,266
#732
Auto-translated
Ment
No, I definitely didn't take the damage spread into account, so why would I?

The so-called "average damage," which is the expected value, is pure statistics based on successful attacks. Out of 10,000 attacks, we have approximately 5,000 successful ones and approximately 5,000 unsuccessful ones. We add them together and divide by the number of attacks to find the average. This is essential for calculating the usefulness of a skill, and it's the simplest way to do it.

Okay, I understand and have calculated it.
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#733
Auto-translated
Author
I'm a bit lost in your discussion thread, but I'm ready to join the discussion.
Just rephrase your question or topic of discussion in simpler terms.
For your term "Матожидание," I suggest replacing it with the familiar "DPM" for simplification, as it might be easier to understand.
😞
The main thing is that Waterfall_13 understands, in any case.
I can't decipher DPM (damage per... what?).

Very briefly.
1. Luck 0 -- damage X
2. Luck 5, no true luck -- damage sometimes X, sometimes 2X, on average 1.5X
3. Luck 5, true luck exists -- damage always 2X

That's it. If you're saying that true luck doubles the damage, then you've forgotten to take line 2 into account.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
Offline Azmadon
Registered:
Posts: 325
#734
Auto-translated
Ment
True luck doesn't provide a 2x damage multiplier.
The luck stat for a hero, if developed, is equal to 2.25 times the elven luck. Units have a minimum of 3 luck (since we developed it), more realistically 4-5 (it's easy to add artifacts).
With 3 luck, the expected damage without true luck is 1.375. With it, it's 2.25. An increase of 1.63 times.
With 5 luck, the increase is only about 1.38 times.
This is still a very strong bonus, of course, although after the dwarves came out, I was a little surprised that they reduce enemy damage by at least a clean 2 times without any "buts." On the other hand, their development in the center perk is worse in terms of having two schools of magic that are antagonistic to each other, so a certain balance is maintained. For rangers, true luck looks quite natural, on the contrary. I don't know this mechanic thoroughly, of course; if the buff doesn't take effect immediately, that's a good balancing factor. However, x2 damage and x2 initiative later, I can't say that the former is much better – initiative gives you the opportunity to attack different stacks of the enemy in a row, as well as huge tactical flexibility. Essentially, initiative is both an increase in damage and an increase in speed, and the ability to distribute damage differently, and the ability to remove a counterattack in time, and the ability to generally lead the enemy around the battlefield, shooting him down with chaos in the process, etc., etc. By the way, can you develop empathy for such a hero? I would focus on that first
If the damage isn't x2, but noticeably less, then x2 initiative will definitely be stronger. It also depends on the synergy or anti-synergy of these branches, but in general, yes, it sounds reasonable. Oh! I didn't know that was possible, cool. 👍

I reread it.
The gnome's central perk is really good and unpleasant when you play against it (especially when you don't expect it), but it doesn't work when your opponent is a Mage. Secondly, and funnily enough, it doesn't apply to enemy Machines like the Ballista. And thirdly, successful enemy attacks will simply be like normal attacks. That is, if your opponent has simply developed luck, the only meaning of this perk is that the opponent's (only creatures) will not have successful attacks and there will be a chance of unsuccessful attacks (depending on how much luck there is).
The elf's luck is a similar situation in general; without this initial luck from skills, formally, even a regular Banshee's Cry or a couple of artifacts with a minus luck effect will bring everything back to the original randomness "one way or another." But you definitely won't have unsuccessful attacks.

There's also a funny thing, like a week in which Luck and Defense are not activated in battle. That's the week when you can safely rush into the enemy necropolis with a skull of Marquel and feel absolutely comfortable with your -8 luck and defense and with an army of 3 races that hate each other.

Conclusion: I didn't go into the details of the new perks of this mod, but I don't quite agree with the approach of balancing perks based on a strong perk and out of context of the development and characteristics of a specific faction (if I understood the author correctly).
x2 Initiative, if it works as I understand you, then it's OP, no arguments. If anything, there is a spread on the scale, but it still depends on the initiative. And, for example, with a certain gap, your unit will still guaranteed go before the opponent, no matter what spread comes out. Just for comparison, in my mod, Assassins were given as much as 20 initiative to be able to compete with Rangers, and naturally, this guarantees them the first turn against any other creatures (without taking into account artifacts and so on). Again, if artifacts or other effects of "-initiative" affect the opponent, this spread may be such that the Assassins will consistently go 2 times before the opponent's first turn, and this is not the limit. Another example is Furies; for profitability, I gave them invisibility. And naturally, they completely replaced Rangers as soon as the player reaches them. Their higher initiative than Rangers – consistently gives them the opportunity to go before almost everyone in the game, shooters and mages, and go into invisibility (probably everyone except assassins)
«Кто хочет, тот ищет возможности, кто не хочет — ищет причины»
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Ment
User Avatar
Offline Waterfall_13
Registered:
Posts: 1,037
#735
Auto-translated
Ment
😞
The main thing is that Waterfall_13 understands, in any case.
I can't decipher DPM (damage per... what?).

Very briefly.
1. Luck 0 -- damage X
2. Luck 5, no true luck -- damage sometimes X, sometimes 2X, on average 1.5X
3. Luck 5, true luck is present -- damage always 2X

That's it. If you say that true luck doubles the damage, then you forgot to take into account line 2.

All this is irrelevant, what would happen if there was no true luck, what coefficients would there be if there was no true luck... because it has been researched and everything that was before it is no longer important. What matters is that you get a damage bonus of x2.25 with each attack.

As I said above, I consider true luck to be the standard for vanilla, it is the point from which you can start and evaluate other skills. For example, "Forest Guardian" with passive regeneration is, of course, not as strong as true luck, so it requires fewer levels. And "Lord of Darkness", on the contrary, requires 4 branches (+racial).

The convenience of upgrading is also important, and I try to take it into account when distributing skills.

Added 4 minutes ago
Ismail


Bottom line: I didn't go into the details of the New Creatures of this mod, but I don't quite agree with the approach of balancing perks based on a strong perk and out of context of upgrading and the specifics of a particular faction. (if I understood the author correctly)
x2 Initiative, if this works as I understand it, then it's overpowered, no arguments. If anything, there is a spread on the scale, but it still depends on the initiative. And, for example, with a certain gap over the opponent, your unit will still go first, no matter what spread comes out. Just for comparison, in my mod, Assassins were given as much as 20 initiative to be able to compete with Rangers, and this, of course, guarantees them the first turn against any other creatures (excluding Artifacts and other things). Again, if artifacts or other effects "-initiative" affect the opponent, this spread may be such that the Assassins will consistently go 2 times before the opponent's first turn, and this is not the limit. Another example is Furies, I gave them invisibility for profitability. And, of course, they completely replaced the Rangers as soon as the player reaches them. Their higher initiative than Rangers - consistently gives them the opportunity to go earlier than almost everyone in the game, shooters and mages, and go into invisibility. (probably referring to everyone except assassins)

Did I understand the essence of what was written above correctly? You didn't go into the details of the mod, but at the same time you are discussing the overpowered ability in relation to the "balance" of your own mod and you are emphasizing that your Rangers go twice? What difference does it make that your Rangers have 20 INI, when it's not like that in my mod. And it doesn't matter if your Furies have invisibility or not. In my mod, "invisibility" is not available to everyone, it's too unfair.

It is necessary to discuss the balance of the mod in relation to the balance of the mod. You wouldn't discuss the characteristics of a car in relation to the characteristics of an airplane, comparing which one goes faster on the ground, would you?


Added 1 minute ago
Ment

I can't decipher DPM (damage per... what?).

Damage Per Minute - DPM (more suitable for MOBAs)
Damage Per Second - DPS (more suitable for shooters)

I think it is more correct to say Damage Per Action for Heroes.

Added 1 minute ago

P.S. sorry for the late reply, the forum stopped opening at home, and it doesn't load "fresh" pages through a VPN either (it loads old ones). So, I can only access the forum from work, there are some settings here.


Added 18 minutes ago
P.P.S. in conclusion, I want to say that center perks in multiplayer (PVP) in Random Map Games (RMG) maps, in a year of playing my mod (we played mostly in threes and fours), players do not study them, it is too unlikely to "catch" everything successfully that is required, and a mentor is not available on all maps, or there is not enough money.

So, center perks are more of a PVE format (playing against AI), and there it doesn't matter what the probability of catching is, you can always use saves or a mentor to get what you need, the main thing is that the player has fun in PVE.

By the way, the balance of new creatures is also interesting, the third-level creatures are, of course, strong, but again, it all comes down to multiplayer (PVP), to the economy of gold income, the third-level creatures are very expensive, and they have the same HP. So they die in one or two hits, you simply may not have time to realize their potential (and they are easily taken out by chaos), plus you can't buy everything at once, it's too expensive, you have to choose.
Ссылка на мой мод Heroes 5 Armageddons Blade

Ссылка на мои уроки по модостроению в Героях 5

Ссылка на мой Artstation
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Ment
Registered:
Posts: 41,374
#736
Auto-translated
Author
All this is just noise; what would happen if true luck didn't exist, what would the coefficients be if true luck didn't exist... because it's been studied, and everything that came before it is no longer important.
Well, this is already terminology. You could say that true luck doesn't go well with luck that has been boosted beforehand, and thus worsens the "convenience of boosting," okay.
I agree that even something like +100% initiative can be balanced if the boosting process is made as illogical and inconvenient as possible. For example, effectively prohibiting empathy (or even leadership altogether), attack, light, forcing you to learn machine skills, defense, or darkness... I don't know how it's done in the mod, but I can imagine something similar.
There is, however, another nuance. I think that ideally, boosting should have gameplay significance, even if the central perk isn't ultimately taken (only what comes before it is taken). This ideal clearly imposes stricter limitations on the range of central perk strength. If the central perk is too strong, then in order to get it, you need to create a "bad" boosting path, whether it's its difficulty in terms of the chances of getting the desired perks and/or synergies. As a result, the hero will have a garbage build for a long time, and in the end, risks not getting anything at all and being left empty-handed.
On the other hand, a hero who boosts towards a weak central perk will, for the sake of balance, initially have well-chosen skills and perks, and in the end, simply polish them with a weak, but also adequate, super perk.
I think this difference is somehow unfair in favor of the latter.
Author
As I said above, I consider true luck to be the standard for vanilla; it's the point from which you can start and evaluate other skills.
Well, yes, that sounds good, although from my point of view, it's probably the upper standard, being one of the strongest, or even the strongest, if you take into account the entire history.
Author
Damage Per Minute - DPM (more suitable for MOBAs)
Damage Per Second - DPS (more suitable for shooters)

I think it's more correct to talk about Damage Per Action for heroes.
Oh, well, here it is. There was a version about minutes, but I was surprised, what do they have to do with it
Author
P.S. sorry for the late reply, the forum stopped opening at home, and it doesn't load "fresh" pages through a VPN either (it loads old ones). So, I can only access the forum from work; there are some specific settings here.
That's the new reality of the Russian internet; there's nothing to apologize for...
Author
P.P.S. in conclusion, I want to say that in Multiplayer (PVP) on Random Map Generator (RMG) maps, central perks are not studied by players in my mod (we played in groups of three and four), it's too unlikely to "successfully" get everything that's required, and Mentor isn't available on all maps, or there's not enough money.
Well, yes, unfortunately. In this regard, I understand mods in which access to the central perk is simplified to the maximum, so that it makes sense in multiplayer. And in single-player, the balance and requirements are lower.
 

К А
Стикеры GBF в Telegram
0
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline }{0TT@6bI4
Registered:
Posts: 2,078
#737
Auto-translated
I completely agree with Ment regarding the issue of increasing damage! Let's introduce a standard for builds in our build space: damage per 100 turns. The norm of a vector (second order ||•||2), for example, is equal to its length, but in our case, the norm will be the maximum possible damage that can be inflicted by a fixed army (the choice of army is up to the person establishing the norm!) in a given build. Of course, the game isn't that simple, but our Euclidean space can always be modified to the necessary precision. So, in this space, let's introduce a measure: the expected value of the norm of this build across all possible fixed armies. In simpler terms, we take an army of 100 peasants, try all possible ways to defeat 100 dragons (in this build), find the maximum possible damage with different combat tactics, and do the same for each possible army. Of course, in our stochastic experiment, the sample will not be in the hundreds of thousands, or even millions, but that's what mathematical statistics are for! However, we only need it to find the expected value, and given the sample size, it's not advisable to calculate the sample mean, so I recommend using other unbiased estimates. Since we have now strictly introduced a measure in our space, let's start measuring! Returning to Ment's statement, let's formulate it in light of our space with a norm and a measure: the measure of a build with doubled initiative and luck equal to five is greater than the measure of a build with true luck. This is not proven because there are many counter-builds (such fixed armies) that won't allow us to have 5 luck in combat, but only 2 that will "lock" true luck (or more?). Without getting into mathematics, there are enough ways to increase damage without true luck by increasing the corresponding characteristic, so that one of them can be combined with doubled initiative, but there are fewer ways to double initiative!
С уважением, }{0TT@6bI4
_________________
Группа картостроителей
Там ответы на вопросы, руководства, гайды и прочее
Discord-сервер "Герои 5: S.T.A.L.K.E.R"
Сервер по модификации "Герои 5: S.T.A.L.K.E.R"
_________________
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Waterfall_13
User Avatar
Offline Azmadon
Registered:
Posts: 325
#738
Auto-translated
Waterfall_13


Did I understand the gist of what you wrote correctly? You didn't go into the details of the mod, but you're discussing the overpoweredness of an ability in relation to the "balance" of your own mod, and you're emphasizing that your hunters can attack twice. What difference does it make that your hunters have 20 Initiative when that's not the case in my mod? And it doesn't matter whether your Furies have invisibility or not. In my mod, "invisibility" is absent for everyone; it's too unfair of a skill.

You should be discussing the balance of a mod in relation to the balance of another mod. You wouldn't compare the characteristics of a car to the characteristics of an airplane, would you, comparing which one travels faster on the ground?
.

Good evening. No, you misunderstood what I said. This comment was primarily a response to an earlier comment by Ment and a continuation of my previous comment. I was comparing skills based on the vanilla game. Furthermore, I expressed my opinion about initiative, and this was also mostly a response to Ment's comment where he compared whether double damage or double initiative is better.
I did express my opinion about your idea of balancing skills based on the strongest, but I specifically made a note that 1) I haven't personally played your mod, so I can't evaluate it in practice, and 2) even in the example with double initiative – "this is if it works the way I understood it" (because double initiative is one thing, but giving all units the "Charge" ability, like with Rakshasa, is completely different in terms of gameplay and balance).
---- --
*to put it simply, I didn't mean to offend the author in any way. I just expressed a little of my personal opinion. I rarely write in your thread, but I follow the development of the mod. However, since "some time ago," I can no longer watch your videos, and since the forum sometimes glitches, I miss some things. So, I have a vague idea of the latest changes in the mod.
«Кто хочет, тот ищет возможности, кто не хочет — ищет причины»
1
⚖️
0
In reply to Azmadon
User Avatar
Offline Waterfall_13
Registered:
Posts: 1,037
#739
Auto-translated
Ismail

---- --
*to put it simply, I didn't want to offend the Author in any way. I just expressed a little of my personal opinion. I rarely write in your thread, but I follow the development of the mod. However, since "certain times," I can no longer watch your videos, and since the forum sometimes crashes, I miss some things. Therefore, I have a vague idea of the latest changes in the mod.
Okay, I understand you 🙂
To access YouTube and Discord at home, I use the "three funny letters" that our dear Roskomnadzor sent me to. As I wrote above, I primarily consider the central perks as entertaining PvE content. There is a chance to explore them in PvP, but the probability is low, and if it turns out that accessing them is too easy, I am always ready to make it more difficult. The mod is developing, slowly but surely, and balance adjustments are always made and will be made, based on player feedback and new features. I am not striving for perfect balance because there is a mod for that (TE), and it's too boring.
In my opinion, the balance should be in a state of "flow" so that the player is neither too challenged nor too bored.
Ссылка на мой мод Heroes 5 Armageddons Blade

Ссылка на мои уроки по модостроению в Героях 5

Ссылка на мой Artstation
1
⚖️
0
User Avatar
Offline Azmadon
Registered:
Posts: 325
#740
Auto-translated
Good afternoon. I don't have an interface after installing the mod. Any ideas about what might be causing a conflict?
Attachments 1
1 file attached • Total size: 625.2 KB
«Кто хочет, тот ищет возможности, кто не хочет — ищет причины»
0
⚖️
0
In reply to Azmadon
User Avatar
Offline fktifzobr
Registered:
Posts: 3,563
#741
Auto-translated
Ismail
Good afternoon. I don't have an interface after installing the mod. Any ideas about what might be conflicting with it?
Attachment 74603
The screen is too narrow; the interface is designed for a wide screen. As far as I remember, there should be a separate folder containing Azard's interface mod, which overrides the mod's interface.
________________
Correct me if I'm wrong and I'm making up non-existent fixes X)
Мои мини-моды

Мод RTF

Мои NCF существа
2
⚖️
0
In reply to Azmadon
User Avatar
Offline Waterfall_13
Registered:
Posts: 1,037
#742
Auto-translated
Ismail
Good afternoon. I don't have an interface after installing the mod. Any ideas what might be conflicting with it?
Attachment 74603

Since I didn't understand anything about interfaces at the time of creating the Heroes 3 interface, I just tried different things until I got something working. I did this on my monitor in a resolution of 1920x1080 (the buttons are located somewhere between 1700 and 1920 pixels).
Try pressing alt + enter to switch the game to windowed mode, then drag the right side of the screen to the left; the buttons should appear there. Or, move the HazardMainMenu mod from the Waterfall folder to the UserMods folder, rename it or change something in it, save it, and then change it back so that the "date" of the changes is more recent than mine (which were made around 2021, if I remember correctly).

Alternatively, go to the profiles folder in the root directory of the game and manually set the resolution to 1920x1080 (register_resolution must be at least 1 because 0 represents the minimum graphics settings, and the minimum graphics settings do not support a screen size of 1920x1080; if you do this, the game will crash when launched.)


Added after 4 minutes
fktifzobr@mail.ru
narrow screen, the interface is designed for a wide screen; as far as I remember, there should be a separate mod for Azard's interface in a separate folder, which overrides the interface of the main mod.
________________
correct me if I'm wrong and I'm making up non-existent fixes X)

That's correct. My clumsy work led to these fixes 🙃 I don't plan on redoing it yet because my knowledge of menu interfaces remains at the same level, or even worse, since I have forgotten what and where I "clicked" over the past 4 years. And there is a lot to redo; I reworked many things during that period of inspiration, including the main menu, the scenarios menu, the multiplayer menu, and more (probably about 10 windows or more).
Ссылка на мой мод Heroes 5 Armageddons Blade

Ссылка на мои уроки по модостроению в Героях 5

Ссылка на мой Artstation
0
⚖️
0