Printable View
Have you calculated the gem cost differences between different sets of instant-trained troops and boosted Barracks? And Boosted Hero regenerating? and Spell Factory Boosting? Aren't those costs very different?
Instead of saying won't work, put down what you thought would work.
The time scales are radically different. Troops and spells are measured in minutes to hours. Not days to weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Furthermore the results are radically different. Rushing troops is nothing like rushing buildings. It's a totally different use case.
I have. Do we really need to rehash this topic over and over and over? Just use the gem calculator on the wiki to figure out the "value" of the time. I think a fair amount would be 75% of the current rush cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
So the cost raitos of those are to be ignored and not even looked at as possible data to base things on (possible data; not absolutely positively will be used to base things on)?Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
That seems rather bias. I would rather get the data, look at it, and see if it is worth using, than just ignoring it in this case, given how closely it relates to boosting. There could be a hidden factor in there that Supercell uses in thier calculations that could be helpful.
Who said having to rehash things? Just give your answer you came up with. Or better yet, quote or link the source of a good post which explains things.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
Awesome 75%... Wait, 75% of what? 5 day cost? 1 day cost? 14 day cost?
You very well know that the gem cost for 'buying time' is not linear, and the boost cost has to be a fixed X cost for Y time, or you are starting to get into unprecedented territory with boosts having variable costs.
Saying 75% is effectively meaningless to me. Give me the X/Y cost of a boost. Yes, it likely has to be boiled down into that simple a figure for Supercell to use in thier game design. I gave you my off the cuff guess on cost, two of them. 6/40 and 12/70 for a 4x boost. Have yet to hear any better.
It's like comparing apples and oranges. I never said anything about "ignoring" it. Just that you can't point to the troop boost cost and say "well that totally makes sense for builders" because it doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
This topic is not new. Do not pretend like it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
The cost doesn't have to be linear in order for this to work. The percentage is meaningless to you because you aren't thinking.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
I don't know how else to put it. So let's use some examples.
Your 4x for 6 hour boost = 18 hours of additional time = 197 gems ... so let's make the boost 150 (nice round number close to 75%)
Your 4x for 12 hour boost = 36 hours of additional time = 321 gems...so let's make the boost 240 (again nice around number close to 75%)
I honestly can't believe I have to explain this to you. It's a pretty simple concept.
Which... means you ignore it?Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
...
I mean, no work was done on it because you felt it wasn't worth it, right? Doesn't that fit the definition of ignore?
And I'm not suggesting "totaly makes sense" or nothing. I would be looking for some bit of info that has some relevance to what I'm working on.
Stop assuming, and you might actually understand me for once.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
Of course it isn't new. Why type the whole thing when you can give the results, quote important info, or link to what has been said before. How is asking for citing sources remotely like pretending I don't know this is an old topic?
What kind of logic are you even following here? Am I speaking Greek?! Asking for your answers, or info assumes it was talked about before, and only wanting the relvent info.
With words like that, you wonder why I would even think about reporting you in the past for such horrible and condescending posts on the person's assumed intelligence? I don't care if you have a sticky thread up (BTW, congrats on that) or even a Moderator, you do not talk like that to others and expect a kind responses back.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
...
You know what. Now that I think about it, forget about it. Was going to explain why you simplistic idea was flawed, but I doubt you will get it. Last time I talked with you in length about the simplist of ideas, it was a drama fest that took several people to tell you to shut up, because you were wrong and detailing the thread before it had a chance to get anywhere. To hell with that kind of 'discussion'. You can keep your thoughts to yourself as far as I'm concerned now.
Blah blah blah...Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Very mature... I honestly expected better of you than that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
You're done here. You may leave now, so that an actual discussion can be had.
Say something worth my time if you want a better response.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
It's good to know I have your permission. I'll be sure to file that away somewhere important.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Exactly. Say something that is worth my time, and I will give you a response. Or did you just now figure out that's what I said already?Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
I'll likely have to repeat it, since odds are you'll lose it. But don't worry, I have a good long memory for things. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by dahimi
Now that bickering is over with, anyone else got any ideas? I think I may do some numbers on what is currently boostable and see what I find out.
I did say something worth your time and it wasn't full of touchy feely I don't like you and I'm going to report you whatever whatever. No one wants to read that, including me.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames
Of that I have little doubt.Quote:
Originally Posted by WarrenJames