Destroy the heathen.Dark Lord Daut.
Destroy the heathen.Dark Lord Daut.
Destroy the heathen.
If he does i go to the next meetupWill robo actually lock it at 999?
If he does i go to the next meetup
Will robo actually lock it at 999?
To me this thread reminds me of that guy who was absolutely sure he had "beat" Descartes because he came up with some random sentence that apparentely destroyed Descartes' logic.
Edit: Here it is just in the unlikely event someone wants to read it. The dude eventually gave up and admitted he was wrong, if I remember correctly.
Beating Descartes, Tarski and Kurt Godel.
Kindly note: Dear All, I have found a non trivial mistake in Descartes's argument. I have sent all of you emails individually, and none of you have gotten back to me. Right now if you read my argument, all you will have against it are rules. Rules you have pre-defined as to why and how...www.aoezone.net
To me this thread reminds me of that guy who was absolutely sure he had "beat" Descartes because he came up with some random sentence that apparentely destroyed Descartes' logic.
Edit: Here it is just in the unlikely event someone wants to read it. The dude eventually gave up and admitted he was wrong, if I remember correctly.
Beating Descartes, Tarski and Kurt Godel.
Kindly note: Dear All, I have found a non trivial mistake in Descartes's argument. I have sent all of you emails individually, and none of you have gotten back to me. Right now if you read my argument, all you will have against it are rules. Rules you have pre-defined as to why and how...www.aoezone.net
I get a kick out of the rush to judgement about me conceding.
However, the trader doesn't have to push in those 4 minutes, he can pretty much take as long as he wants, since the advantage will just keep getting bigger and bigger.3. Let's discuss the decisiveness arguments going on here surrounding the 22% resource advantage. There seems to be a knee-jerk response that if the non trader's push, using his additional 22% military force fails, he's super dead. This again overrates the trader's edge at the moments in the game we are talking about. Let's say the non trader pushes at minute 34. And that push fails with the defender slightly holding using his defensive castle. Even if that push is 5 minutes long, that would only put both players at minute 39: the breakeven. Neither player is ahead or behind in resources at this point. In fact, it will be 4 more minutes before the trader has that same 22% edge that the non trader pushed unsuccessfully with. If the trader pushes at that time, his chances of invading the non trader are equal to the chances we are discussing here. Ie a push with 22% more resources/military. If your argument is that having 22% doesn't guarantee a push will succeed, then the same is true for when the trader is using that same advantage, which would be 43 minutes into an untouched boom game.
There seems to be a knee-jerk response that if the non trader's push, using his additional 22% military force fails, he's super dead. This again overrates the trader's edge at the moments in the game we are talking about. Let's say the non trader pushes at minute 34. And that push fails with the defender slightly holding using his defensive castle. Even if that push is 5 minutes long, that would only put both players at minute 39: the breakeven. Neither player is ahead or behind in resources at this point.
I agree with all of that. But here is the main idea: is 43 minutes what you expected? Is that too long to wait in some, or most of your games? To me, in my experience: games are decided before that most of the time. As I said above: if you put me in a 45 minute treaty game, Id set up trade EVERY TIME.However, the trader doesn't have to push in those 4 minutes, he can pretty much take as long as he wants, since the advantage will just keep getting bigger and bigger.
If the non-trader keeps selling wood he just won't get the same amount of wood, so the trader can afford to take bad fights. And if he changes his mind and starts setting up trade, then he will have even less resources to invest into army, making the gap bigger than 22%.
So yes, if the trader doesn't at least get a big advantage before min 43 he is pretty much dead, assuming players of similar skill-level.
I get a kick out of the rush to judgement about me conceding. Hardly what I said. A 22% resource/military advantage is still worth pursuing. And we seem to continue to just gloss over how LONG this investment takes to recoup that investment. Let's snapshot a few moments in this investment timeline, assuming untouched boom:
~25minutes start trading
27-34 minutes: non trader is up by 22% resources
39 minutes: breakeven where no trader and trader have the same total resources (wood and food assumed rock bottom)
43 minutes: trader finally reaches a moment where HE is up by 22% resources
(these times are all from my initial google document which I've linked many times and has been viewed like 3 times)
I point this out to make 3 main points:
1. For all the rumors of me being so anti-trade, if you put me into a game with a 45 minute treaty, I'd set up trade EVERY TIME. Investment into trading does pay off, and very handsomely. It's just a lot longer than you might have thought. Even if you're fully signed up for the "trade every game" cult, you should at least be aware of the mathematical realities of the investment.
2. Untouched boom is not a very common occurrence. I've asked this question before, but what is the average game length of a BF 4v4 game on Voobly? My experience, and forgetting that, I've provided many pro game examples where the games end WAY BEFORE this payoff timeframe. During this way time for the trade investment to pay off, you are definitely vulnerable to your trade line being raided, and you are definitely down sizable resources compared to an equal player who is not trading. A late castle age push, an early imperial age push, a slung enemy, etc.: these are all risky moments where a trader will be down a sizable investment and very vulnerable.
3. Let's discuss the decisiveness arguments going on here surrounding the 22% resource advantage. There seems to be a knee-jerk response that if the non trader's push, using his additional 22% military force fails, he's super dead. This again overrates the trader's edge at the moments in the game we are talking about. Let's say the non trader pushes at minute 34. And that push fails with the defender slightly holding using his defensive castle. Even if that push is 5 minutes long, that would only put both players at minute 39: the breakeven. Neither player is ahead or behind in resources at this point. In fact, it will be 4 more minutes before the trader has that same 22% edge that the non trader pushed unsuccessfully with. If the trader pushes at that time, his chances of invading the non trader are equal to the chances we are discussing here. Ie a push with 22% more resources/military. If your argument is that having 22% doesn't guarantee a push will succeed, then the same is true for when the trader is using that same advantage, which would be 43 minutes into an untouched boom game.
Just some food for thought, in the event there's anyone left desiring a productive discussion.
Define massive. Because everyone on here throws rocks at 22%. What is the percentage advantage the trader has at 43 minutes that you are using to call it massive.You are missing a very important point though.
If you look at it through "resource gain/min" and not total resources you will see that to the point where the seller has the highest resource advantage he has the higher income. After this point the trader already has the higher income per minute though. So if the push at 6min fails, you invested your 3000 resource advantage already (or at least most of it) and are now in a massive disadvantage because the trader gets more per minute.
All good points, especially the one about trash units. Any composition that doesnt involve all the most gold intensive units (Paladin SO and BBC) is much better suited to this. I could update my army strength google doc for a more realistic composition like Halbs and SO and BBC, or Halbs HC and BBC.This seems to be your most thoughtful post for a long time, getting to a lot of important points. Real appreciation here.
Of course you can still win even if your first no trade push fails. Just after 6.25 minutes your spreadsheet says the traders gold income is higher than the non traders gold income. So since you lost (all or most) of your extra resources in the non succesfull push, you have more total ressources but also more ressources used already. So your advantage is basically gone and the trader will be in a better position ressource wise (higher income, advantage was spent) from THIS MOMENT on, even if the breakeven takes another 8 mins.
Of course you can still hold with trash, walls and everything mentioned here already and sett up trade behind it. It puts you in the same bad position the trader had when he started trade. So whats the big difference?
At this point in the game your ressources will be shorter, simply cause there will be (close to ) zero gold on the map left. So investing gold into trade is way harder for you now, than when you still have 20 vills on gold.
It also follows that on a map with more gold u can delay setting up trade actually. I remember playing Megarandom maps with enourmus amount of gold piles where i had troubles deciding when/if/how much to set up trade.
Thanks. Walls are more of a Voobly problem than an HD problem. I never assault walls: I onager in a sneaky place, or around the wall if all else fails.Thread gotta stay alive so here's my thoughts:
I think that the general idea of not making trade and investing these resources in army (independent of selling surplus resources) can be a good decision in certain scenarios.
I thought of the following: bf, 4v4, other side is loosing at the start of imperial age. Your flank opened the walls of the enemy and you as pocket now have a short time window in which you either kill the opponents flank and prevent trade, or your allies on the other side die.
Its now or never, and so you wont make trade, put the resources in extra paladins and go all in.
In this scenario, I think its nice Rico shows us how many extra resources or army we can have. The calculations dont add a lot because xx% army doesnt help if its stuck behind a wall. I do appreciate the effort though.
I didnt add any new thoughts Im sure but since were not at 999 posts yet, here you go :D
Define massive. Because everyone on here throws rocks at 22%. What is the percentage advantage the trader has at 43 minutes that you are using to call it massive.
Theres an important disclaimer that the trader is vulnerable all along his trade route. If on the other side a push with 22%, or 0% extra military gets to the trade line, his income advantage dies.
If I interpret your excel file correctly, the trader has an income of 425/time unit(50seconds) while the seller has about 120 on average at that point. I used the columns "gold dropped off from this trip" and the increment of "Missed gold from not using villagers to chop - includes guild investment " of your excel file. If these are not the correct columns for income please let me know.
This difference of more than 3 times the resource income is what I call massive.
EDIT: It's not the total difference of income as the wood and food eco is ignored.
The second point, that you have to guard your trade is of course valid. But you should have the resource edge to do that
That is true. But it's a long time out. 42.5 minutes and the trader still has to keep waiting for the resources for a sizable push. I get and agree the advantage keeps growing, but my gut tells me the first 40 minutes are more decisive. I run this often, and many times I'm the defender around 40 minutes, easily win, then push in. Assigning defenders advantage to the trader assumes a world where more than 1 person does what I do, and thats not the world we live in.Of course it won't be easy to push back right away, but he doesn't need to.
What I wanted to say is that after the 6 min mark it gets harder and harder for the seller to push as the resource income of the trader is higher. That leads to my statement that the seller is dead the moment he loses his unit advantage at 6 min. If you fail to push with your 3000 additional resources, you won't have a chance afterwards (barring major mistakes of your opponent).
The trader could just wait a few more minutes after he defended and have an even bigger advantage
Drilling down, its 18 Paladins, 5 SO and 2 BBC for the trader vs 12P, 3SO, and 1 BBC for the non trader. So while a large percentage, its not many extra units in magnitude. Certainly not enough to say the trader can run over the non trader at 43 minutes given the non trader also has his own defensive structures and advantage etc.
So really, its that the non trader will force a fight under the trader's defenses, win with 20+ Paladins, and a handful of siege onagers and BBC to quickly destroy the traders base.