Herioc Epic

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Ok, after spending hours testing my theory, I've concluded the Herioc
Epic doesn't really work. At least, from my observation, it doesn't
perceivably increase the chances of creating a leader.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:05:06 -0400, Doug <dahjr@comcast.net> wrote:

>Ok, after spending hours testing my theory, I've concluded the Herioc
>Epic doesn't really work. At least, from my observation, it doesn't
>perceivably increase the chances of creating a leader.

How well did you document your elite unit combat results, in order
to determine this?

1/16 to 1/12 chance isn't a huge improvement -- it shaves roughly a
quarter of the engagements needed per great leader. That isn't a bad
thing -- it still means you'll tend to get more with it -- 25% more.

You need statistic counts of hundreds of engagements, at least, for
it to be meaningful. I'd think that 200 battles should be enough to
see the effect (sans Epic, you should expect about 5 great leaders,
with it, you should see 6.

But even at that, luck could change the results too easily. I
figure once you're up to 1000 engagements, chances are that the Heroic
Epic user will see a noticeable increase in leader, and the large
number of events should make it unlikely that it won't be ahead of not
using it.

Only engagements where an elite unit destroys the enemy can generate
a leader (and not against barbarians).

Elite units which have already made a leader can't make another.
You can't make a leader if one exists.

Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking those
can be hard -- easy to miss battles.

Only land attack units make great leaders. Bombardment units, air,
and sea units will not do so.

--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Doug" <dahjr@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:6_udnQE2w4XOGiPd4p2dnA@comcast.com...
> Ok, after spending hours testing my theory, I've concluded the Herioc
> Epic doesn't really work. At least, from my observation, it doesn't
> perceivably increase the chances of creating a leader.
>

Which version and patch level?

What are the test parameters? Hours doesn't mean anything. It could take
that long to set up the test scenerio.

To convince anyone else you need to supply specific results.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

you just explained what he is claiming; it isn't woth building

--
Dutchy


Jeffery S. Jones <jeffsj@execpc.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
vj4tb0hj78vah14ls8li8aeo6e983et16c@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:05:06 -0400, Doug <dahjr@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Ok, after spending hours testing my theory, I've concluded the Herioc
> >Epic doesn't really work. At least, from my observation, it doesn't
> >perceivably increase the chances of creating a leader.
>
> How well did you document your elite unit combat results, in order
> to determine this?
>
> 1/16 to 1/12 chance isn't a huge improvement -- it shaves roughly a
> quarter of the engagements needed per great leader. That isn't a bad
> thing -- it still means you'll tend to get more with it -- 25% more.
>
> You need statistic counts of hundreds of engagements, at least, for
> it to be meaningful. I'd think that 200 battles should be enough to
> see the effect (sans Epic, you should expect about 5 great leaders,
> with it, you should see 6.
>
> But even at that, luck could change the results too easily. I
> figure once you're up to 1000 engagements, chances are that the Heroic
> Epic user will see a noticeable increase in leader, and the large
> number of events should make it unlikely that it won't be ahead of not
> using it.
>
> Only engagements where an elite unit destroys the enemy can generate
> a leader (and not against barbarians).
>
> Elite units which have already made a leader can't make another.
> You can't make a leader if one exists.
>
> Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking those
> can be hard -- easy to miss battles.
>
> Only land attack units make great leaders. Bombardment units, air,
> and sea units will not do so.
>
> --
> *-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
> ** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
> *Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 02:28:51 +0200, "Dutchy" <bla@bla.bla> wrote:

>you just explained what he is claiming; it isn't woth building

I think that it is. It isn't an especially expensive small wonder,
and getting 25% more great leaders over the course of the game is nice
-- especially in the critical middle ages period.

You can skip it if you truly can't afford it, but usually, you have
some city which can. It also makes culture, which never hurts.
--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities. It's a 25%
greater chance of getting Great leaders. He never posted test details and
you can bet money some of the best players in the world have tested it
exhastively and there are no reports of it being broken.

If it's the ancient age and my cities are still small, i will even use a
leader to rush it... if i'm lucky enough to get a second that early.


"Dutchy" <bla@bla.bla> wrote in message news:ca0cn1$bhc$1@reader13.wxs.nl...
> you just explained what he is claiming; it isn't woth building
>
> --
> Dutchy
>
>
> Jeffery S. Jones <jeffsj@execpc.com> schreef in berichtnieuws
> vj4tb0hj78vah14ls8li8aeo6e983et16c@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:05:06 -0400, Doug <dahjr@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > >Ok, after spending hours testing my theory, I've concluded the Herioc
> > >Epic doesn't really work. At least, from my observation, it doesn't
> > >perceivably increase the chances of creating a leader.
> >
> > How well did you document your elite unit combat results, in order
> > to determine this?
> >
> > 1/16 to 1/12 chance isn't a huge improvement -- it shaves roughly a
> > quarter of the engagements needed per great leader. That isn't a bad
> > thing -- it still means you'll tend to get more with it -- 25% more.
> >
> > You need statistic counts of hundreds of engagements, at least, for
> > it to be meaningful. I'd think that 200 battles should be enough to
> > see the effect (sans Epic, you should expect about 5 great leaders,
> > with it, you should see 6.
> >
> > But even at that, luck could change the results too easily. I
> > figure once you're up to 1000 engagements, chances are that the Heroic
> > Epic user will see a noticeable increase in leader, and the large
> > number of events should make it unlikely that it won't be ahead of not
> > using it.
> >
> > Only engagements where an elite unit destroys the enemy can generate
> > a leader (and not against barbarians).
> >
> > Elite units which have already made a leader can't make another.
> > You can't make a leader if one exists.
> >
> > Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking those
> > can be hard -- easy to miss battles.
> >
> > Only land attack units make great leaders. Bombardment units, air,
> > and sea units will not do so.
> >
> > --
> > *-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
> > ** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25
<http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
> > *Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>
>
>

 

[daran]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...

> The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities. It's a 25%
> greater chance of getting Great leaders...

33% greater chance.

Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get

48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.

4 = 133% of 3.

> If it's the ancient age and my cities are still small, i will even use a
> leader to rush it... if i'm lucky enough to get a second that early.

I use my first two leaders on my FP and an army. If necessary, I can
build the HE in a high production city. I might spend a third on it,
though.

--
Daran

We found another: 2^24036583-1 is prime <http://www.mersenne.org>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Daran" <daranSPAMg@lineone.net> wrote in message
news:a662ac.gq6.ln@wheresmeshirt.clara.net...
> On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare
<wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
> wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...
>
> > The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities. It's a 25%
> > greater chance of getting Great leaders...
>
> 33% greater chance.
>
> Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get
>
> 48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
> 48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.
>
> 4 = 133% of 3.

Yep... i've been away from school for too long
I knew it was going to be either 25 or 33 but thought i would opt for the
conservative one. Either way, it's a substantial percentage.


> > If it's the ancient age and my cities are still small, i will even use a
> > leader to rush it... if i'm lucky enough to get a second that early.
>
> I use my first two leaders on my FP and an army. If necessary, I can
> build the HE in a high production city. I might spend a third on it,
> though.
>
> --
> Daran
>
> We found another: 2^24036583-1 is prime <http://www.mersenne.org>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"The Stare" <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:FD1xc.1518$W11.327@news01.roc.ny...
>
> "Daran" <daranSPAMg@lineone.net> wrote in message
> news:a662ac.gq6.ln@wheresmeshirt.clara.net...
> > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare
> <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
> > wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...
> >
> > > The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities. It's a 25%
> > > greater chance of getting Great leaders...
> >
> > 33% greater chance.
> >
> > Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get
> >
> > 48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
> > 48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.
> >
> > 4 = 133% of 3.
>
> Yep... i've been away from school for too long
> I knew it was going to be either 25 or 33 but thought i would opt for the
> conservative one. Either way, it's a substantial percentage.

In case anyone was curious,

1/16 = 6.25%
1/12 = 8.33%

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 17:47:06 +0100, Daran <daranSPAMg@lineone.net>
wrote:

>On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
>wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...
>
>> The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities. It's a 25%
>> greater chance of getting Great leaders...
>
>33% greater chance.
>
>Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get
>
> 48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
> 48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.
>
>4 = 133% of 3.

Oops, thanks.

>> If it's the ancient age and my cities are still small, i will even use a
>> leader to rush it... if i'm lucky enough to get a second that early.
>
>I use my first two leaders on my FP and an army. If necessary, I can
>build the HE in a high production city. I might spend a third on it,
>though.

I usually do an army first, intending to build the Heroic Epic and
fight a lot until I get another one. How fast I can build makes a
difference, but I try to have one decent size 12 or so city.

The FP is so powerful in the long run, though, that it is very
tempting to take it -- you have to have enough cities and a good place
for it, but the war which generated the leader might do that.

--
*-__Jeffery Jones__________| *Starfire* |____________________-*
** Muskego WI Access Channel 14/25 <http://www.execpc.com/~jeffsj/mach7/>
*Starfire Design Studio* <http://www.starfiredesign.com/>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Matt B." <sawdust100@hotmail.net> wrote in
news:10c9n5ei5c6hc89@corp.supernews.com:

>
> "The Stare" <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
> news:FD1xc.1518$W11.327@news01.roc.ny...
>>
>> "Daran" <daranSPAMg@lineone.net> wrote in message
>> news:a662ac.gq6.ln@wheresmeshirt.clara.net...
>> > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare
>> <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
>> > wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...
>> >
>> > > The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities.
>> > > It's a 25% greater chance of getting Great leaders...
>> >
>> > 33% greater chance.
>> >
>> > Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get
>> >
>> > 48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
>> > 48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.
>> >
>> > 4 = 133% of 3.
>>
>> Yep... i've been away from school for too long
>> I knew it was going to be either 25 or 33 but thought i would opt
>> for the conservative one. Either way, it's a substantial
>> percentage.
>
> In case anyone was curious,
>
> 1/16 = 6.25%
> 1/12 = 8.33%

Yeah, I'm with Matt on this percentage thing. Overall there is a
33% increase in the number of leaders generated, but the actual
increase in the chance to generate a leader is small. Remember that a
one-third increase from almost nothing is still almost nothing.

Because of the value of leaders, and the low cost of the Epic,
however, I still think that the Epic is absolutely worth building.

--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Jeffery S. Jones" <jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote in message
news:3ll7c0996q4ft8pat4m62djd26u6g7sjmc@4ax.com...
> On Mon, 7 Jun 2004 02:28:51 +0200, "Dutchy" <bla@bla.bla> wrote:
>
> >you just explained what he is claiming; it isn't woth building
>
> I think that it is. It isn't an especially expensive small wonder,
> and getting 25% more great leaders over the course of the game is nice
> -- especially in the critical middle ages period.
>
> You can skip it if you truly can't afford it, but usually, you have
> some city which can. It also makes culture, which never hurts.

Yeah by the time you can build this wonder (usually) it only take a good
production city 5-10 turns so it's not a big deal. I always build it for
the small incremental chance of getting a leader plus the culture just like
Jeffery said.

GWB

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"Kevin 'Keeper' Foster" <thekeeper@canada.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9501DB37D893Dkdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4...
> "Matt B." <sawdust100@hotmail.net> wrote in

> >
> > In case anyone was curious,
> >
> > 1/16 = 6.25%
> > 1/12 = 8.33%
>
> Yeah, I'm with Matt on this percentage thing. Overall there is a
> 33% increase in the number of leaders generated, but the actual
> increase in the chance to generate a leader is small. Remember that a
> one-third increase from almost nothing is still almost nothing.
>
> Because of the value of leaders, and the low cost of the Epic,
> however, I still think that the Epic is absolutely worth building.

Besides, the Heroic Epic should give your people something to which to
aspire, thus enriching their lives.

 

[daran]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On 8 Jun 2004 01:33:11 GMT Kevin 'Keeper' Foster <thekeeper@canada.com>
wrote in message <Xns9501DB37D893Dkdfosterrogerscom@130.133.1.4>...

> "Matt B." <sawdust100@hotmail.net> wrote in
> news:10c9n5ei5c6hc89@corp.supernews.com:
>
>>
>> "The Stare" <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
>> news:FD1xc.1518$W11.327@news01.roc.ny...
>>>
>>> "Daran" <daranSPAMg@lineone.net> wrote in message
>>> news:a662ac.gq6.ln@wheresmeshirt.clara.net...
>>> > On Mon, 07 Jun 2004 09:30:41 GMT The Stare
>>> <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net>
>>> > wrote in message <5BWwc.1494$Py.646@news01.roc.ny>...
>>> >
>>> > > The Heroic Epic is extremely high on my list of priorities.
>>> > > It's a 25% greater chance of getting Great leaders...
>>> >
>>> > 33% greater chance.
>>> >
>>> > Out of 48 elite victories you expect to get
>>> >
>>> > 48/16 = 3 GLs without the HE.
>>> > 48/12 = 4 GLs with the HE.
>>> >
>>> > 4 = 133% of 3.
>>>
>>> Yep... i've been away from school for too long
>>> I knew it was going to be either 25 or 33 but thought i would opt
>>> for the conservative one. Either way, it's a substantial
>>> percentage.
>>
>> In case anyone was curious,
>>
>> 1/16 = 6.25%
>> 1/12 = 8.33%
>
> Yeah, I'm with Matt on this percentage thing...

He is correct, of course. The percentage increase is just the difference
between these two numbers: a 2.08% increase in the chance that an elite
victory will generate a leader.

> ..Overall there is a
> 33% increase in the number of leaders generated, but the actual
> increase in the chance to generate a leader is small...

Exactly. I don't think anyone is likely to be confused about what is
increased by 33%, my loose wording notwithstanding. The point is that it is
*much* better than 25%.

If we are going to be pedantic, it is the *expected* number of leaders
generated which is increased by 33%. The actual number is random*.

> ...Remember that a one-third increase from almost nothing is still almost
> nothing.
>
> Because of the value of leaders, and the low cost of the Epic,
> however, I still think that the Epic is absolutely worth building.

I agree, and would still think so if the expected number only increased by
25%

*Or pseudorandom if we are going to be even more pedantic. But how far
should we take this?

--
Daran

We found another: 2^24036583-1 is prime <http://www.mersenne.org>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

Daran <daranSPAMg@lineone.net> wrote in
news:e9o8ac.uqt.ln@wheresmeshirt.clara.net:

[snip]
>
> You could argue that the value of an army is intrinsicly less than
> the 200 shields it would cost to build, (i.e. at that time, you

Armies cost 400 shields to build.


--
ICQ: 8105495
AIM: KeeperGFA
EMail: thekeeper@canada.com
"If we did the things we are capable of,
we would astound ourselves." - Edison

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:02:36 -0500, Jeffery S. Jones
<jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:

> Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking those
>can be hard -- easy to miss battles.

Defending units can create a leader and then die in the same turn.
This is easy to do if the he is not protected.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"P12" <nomail@all.com> wrote in message
news:bah9d0dloo11dq4ot26qidjmhch5ofesbe@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:02:36 -0500, Jeffery S. Jones
> <jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:
>
> > Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking those
> >can be hard -- easy to miss battles.
>
> Defending units can create a leader and then die in the same turn.
> This is easy to do if the he is not protected.

I think i read somewhere that the chances of getting a GL on the defensive
are 1/2 normal.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: alt.games.civ3 (More info?)

"The Stare" <wat1@not.likely.frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:%b6Bc.6606$2d7.4437@news02.roc.ny...
>
> "P12" <nomail@all.com> wrote in message
> news:bah9d0dloo11dq4ot26qidjmhch5ofesbe@4ax.com...
> > On Wed, 02 Jun 2004 22:02:36 -0500, Jeffery S. Jones
> > <jeffsj@execpc.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Defending elites do count to generate leaders. But tracking
those
> > >can be hard -- easy to miss battles.
> >
> > Defending units can create a leader and then die in the same turn.
> > This is easy to do if the he is not protected.
>
> I think i read somewhere that the chances of getting a GL on the
defensive
> are 1/2 normal.
>
I would be suprised at this (1/2). In a recent PTW game i watched more
defence leaders die than were created in battle. Defender started as
vet, was promoted, defended again (generally at least twice) created
Leader only for both to die. I suppose the big difference is that
generally you cannot attack more than once a go, whereas you defend
until dead.

Therefore after 3 defences probability of leader has raised to 3/12 and
with a stubborn defender on mountain at 6/12...... If this was only
6/24 it would ba a rare beastie.