|
|
Update
Nov 18, 2021 7:43:24 GMT
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 7:43:24 GMT
Definitely something to do with Stat total. I did some quick maths, and found out that my general in front, Attila, has the highest stat total. And my second general , Hannibal, had a higher total than Washington. The interesting part comes between Moctezuma and Cleopatra. Cleopatra is behind Moctezuma, but Cleopatra has the higher stat total. But, Cleopatra is lvl 43, while Moctezuma is lvl 45.So it's probably lvl>stat total>color, with some other factors in play. Need some confirmation, and the ai seem to judge them different. I also feel bad for the guy looking at this thread and seeing an EW5 discussion. The level of generals doesn't matter. There is a thread somewhere with pictures of all fully upgraded 6* generals without any equipment whatsoever. Also there is a video somewhere. It is just a bizarre AI's calculations, that's all. I recall we compared it without any significant sign of comprehension how Nobunaga could be rated so low. No-one was able to present any decent theory  I thought that AI evaluated HP more than anything else. Because upgraded Cath had only one this advantage over Noby, but, again, there were instances when generals with more HP were rated lower than their more weak counterparts. So, I am as clueless as I was before. GCR's ranking is more logical, at least. Ah, i see. I simply observed that there's a consistency when the generals are at max level, then more differences when they aren't. For health, Cleopatra has a lot of health, but is lower than Moctezuma. Unless they give us the way it's evaluated and ordered, then we'll never truly know. We probably can if we try to find a pattern and use dem maths, but is it really worth doing all that effort just to know something so insignificant? |
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 18, 2021 11:38:29 GMT
The level of generals doesn't matter. There is a thread somewhere with pictures of all fully upgraded 6* generals without any equipment whatsoever. Also there is a video somewhere. It is just a bizarre AI's calculations, that's all. I recall we compared it without any significant sign of comprehension how Nobunaga could be rated so low. No-one was able to present any decent theory I thought that AI evaluated HP more than anything else. Because upgraded Cath had only one this advantage over Noby, but, again, there were instances when generals with more HP were rated lower than their more weak counterparts. So, I am as clueless as I was before. GCR's ranking is more logical, at least. Ah, i see. I simply observed that there's a consistency when the generals are at max level, then more differences when they aren't. For health, Cleopatra has a lot of health, but is lower than Moctezuma. Unless they give us the way it's evaluated and ordered, then we'll never truly know. We probably can if we try to find a pattern and use dem maths, but is it really worth doing all that effort just to know something so insignificant? It doesn't make any difference really. I always was sceptical about any rankings, especially AI-generated ones |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 18, 2021 12:20:09 GMT
via mobile
Post by gladiator on Nov 18, 2021 12:20:09 GMT
It's so strange that they separated Egipt from Byzantine and included Soissons domain into Franks in conquest.
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 18, 2021 12:25:48 GMT
It's so strange that they separated Egipt from Byzantine and included Soissons domain into Franks in conquest. Their decisions almost always depend on the balance issues rather than historic details. It is always a pain to create two equal alliances. I would like to see more than two sides in conquests, but so far it is only my wishful thinking |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 18, 2021 12:40:34 GMT
It's so strange that they separated Egipt from Byzantine and included Soissons domain into Franks in conquest. Their decisions almost always depend on the balance issues rather than historic details. It is always a pain to create two equal alliances. I would like to see more than two sides in conquests, but so far it is only my wishful thinking That would be great actually. It would be much easier to divide the enemies and defeat them. And make the battle field more chaotic. |
|
|
|
Post by Thortilla on Nov 18, 2021 16:02:41 GMT
The level of generals doesn't matter. There is a thread somewhere with pictures of all fully upgraded 6* generals without any equipment whatsoever. Also there is a video somewhere. It is just a bizarre AI's calculations, that's all. I recall we compared it without any significant sign of comprehension how Nobunaga could be rated so low. No-one was able to present any decent theory I thought that AI evaluated HP more than anything else. Because upgraded Cath had only one this advantage over Noby, but, again, there were instances when generals with more HP were rated lower than their more weak counterparts. So, I am as clueless as I was before. GCR's ranking is more logical, at least. Ah, i see. I simply observed that there's a consistency when the generals are at max level, then more differences when they aren't. For health, Cleopatra has a lot of health, but is lower than Moctezuma. Unless they give us the way it's evaluated and ordered, then we'll never truly know. We probably can if we try to find a pattern and use dem maths, but is it really worth doing all that effort just to know something so insignificant? I have the theory that the Equipment also influences since my first three Generals have "mystical" equipment Ex: Attila has the Gugnir. Petain Paladin Ring (if I take it off it drops 3 places) and Meteor Boots. Barabarrosa has Moon Shield. The problem comes with Nobunaga who has the Mystletainn and is still below Saladin who has no legendary equipment, no more health, no more damage, Hit, Evasion, Critical Damage. The only thing that has more is Shield and Critical chance. In summary. Let's not judge the omnipotent AI with our ignorant human minds. |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 19, 2021 2:55:04 GMT
via mobile
Post by malemermaid on Nov 19, 2021 2:55:04 GMT
If GCR gets updated again (which I presume it will be), it would be great if they add more generals in the late Roman Empire Era. I found weird to have my Pompey running loose fighting Attila.
Oh yeah, a three sided war would be interesting
|
|
|
|
Post by stoic on Nov 19, 2021 14:16:00 GMT
Last battle for a "free" Aetius is the most difficult so far. I could complete it with 3* only because my Mammoths are really tanky.   |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 19, 2021 15:52:46 GMT
via mobile
Post by yuanzhong on Nov 19, 2021 15:52:46 GMT
Last battle for a "free" Aetius is the most difficult so far. I could complete it with 3* only because my Mammoths are really tanky. It's lucky because they're only mammoths instead of behemoths 🤣. IMO Limes Germanicus is easier than Hanging Garden where those Behemoths travel around the battles. |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 19, 2021 17:17:10 GMT
via mobile
Post by stoic on Nov 19, 2021 17:17:10 GMT
Last battle for a "free" Aetius is the most difficult so far. I could complete it with 3* only because my Mammoths are really tanky. It's lucky because they're only mammoths instead of behemoths 🤣. IMO Limes Germanicus is easier than Hanging Garden where those Behemoths travel around the battles. Probably they will give us Behemoth as a reward for completing the last HL campaign  |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 19, 2021 17:44:37 GMT
via mobile
Post by yuanzhong on Nov 19, 2021 17:44:37 GMT
It's lucky because they're only mammoths instead of behemoths 🤣. IMO Limes Germanicus is easier than Hanging Garden where those Behemoths travel around the battles. Probably they will give us Behemoth as a reward for completing the last HL campaign Hoping that. Mammoth, Goblin and Terracota are lowest tier beasts with 4 abilities. Behemoths and Griffin are 2nd tier with 5 abilities. Anubis and Cyclops are best tier until now with 6 abilities. But IMO Behemoth is the most OP beast. |
|
|
|
Update
Nov 26, 2021 22:10:12 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Nov 26, 2021 22:10:12 GMT
It's nice that you get 120 free gems for just buying the banners for tge IAPs considering how cheap they are. And another 120 gems for buying generals, which do include Surena but still.
|
|
|
|
Update
Dec 8, 2021 11:29:39 GMT
via mobile
Post by andrei on Dec 8, 2021 11:29:39 GMT
It's nice that you get 120 free gems for just buying the banners for tge IAPs considering how cheap they are. And another 120 gems for buying generals, which do include Surena but still. You mean we need Huo to have gems for Chinese gens achievement. Yack! Good we could dismiss these guys for almost no losses |
|
|
|
Update
Dec 8, 2021 11:48:01 GMT
via mobile
Post by Kliment Jefremovitš Vorošilov on Dec 8, 2021 11:48:01 GMT
It's nice that you get 120 free gems for just buying the banners for tge IAPs considering how cheap they are. And another 120 gems for buying generals, which do include Surena but still. You mean we need Huo to have gems for Chinese gens achievement. Yack! Good we could dismiss these guys for almost no losses Huo is the best! |
|
|
|
Update
Dec 8, 2021 11:51:30 GMT
Post by andrei on Dec 8, 2021 11:51:30 GMT
You mean we need Huo to have gems for Chinese gens achievement. Yack! Good we could dismiss these guys for almost no losses Huo is the best! Yeah, i know.. the best among the worst!  |
|
I thought that AI evaluated HP more than anything else. Because upgraded Cath had only one this advantage over Noby, but, again, there were instances when generals with more HP were rated lower than their more weak counterparts. So, I am as clueless as I was before. GCR's ranking is more logical, at least.
