Forces of Good Cheating?

Old campaign - Where the druchii members discussed the Storm of Chaos campaign.

Moderators: Underway, The Dread Knights

User avatar
Alkkrision
Daemon Prince
Posts: 1924
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 1:06 am
Location: Liverpool

Forces of Good Cheating?

Post by Alkkrision »

Is it just me, or does it seem like the forces of good are cheating?

1 Day after reaching Schippel (or however it's spelt), they're winning by 25%! We had 55% on another town one day, then 45% on the next day!

So what's going on guys?! Are we just not posting our victories at all, or are the forces of good resorting to heavy loss action and are saying they won anyway?!

I'm not going to encourage cheating, but for our sake guys, help the forces of evil, and build up a huge bank of victories to report daily!
User avatar
Endrin paladii
Beastmaster
Posts: 363
Joined: Tue Jul 06, 2004 7:18 pm

Post by Endrin paladii »

Some of the special events we have been playing at GW are horribly disadvantagous twards evil. We lost the first 3 events horibly but have won the more recent 2. The worst one was defend the herdstone, OMG, houndreds of brettonian knights practicly on top of it in turn 2, thats just not fair. We shoudl have been allowed to deploy aroudn it, instead of rushign up and trying to defend.
Inconsistancies in fluff bother me.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

The whole SOC campaign is not fair, whatever we do the one who are suppose to win will we. Its out of our hands guys dont you see it. To be honnest with you I'm thinking to stop posting results in SOC the situation got me tired already in the first 25 or so days.... it practicaly sucks.... :?
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Alex c
Resident Beastmaster
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 12:51 pm
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by Alex c »

Maybe the title of this thread should be changed to "Forces of Evil whining"?
"Imagination is more important than knowledge"
- Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

Yeah maybe why not? Anyway the point is that we are loosing this war and I dont think something can be done Alex its too fu**in obvious...
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Alkkrision
Daemon Prince
Posts: 1924
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 1:06 am
Location: Liverpool

Post by Alkkrision »

Actually, we asked in Games Workshop and they say the campaign isn't rigged, and that we can influence what happens. We now reckon it'll be more on the lines of chaos winning, Archaon becomes a daemon. But he goes away to the higher order of gods. Chaos will fight themselves in the Empire to see who becomes the new leader, and as they weaken, the forces of good begin to rally and push chaos out.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

And what if it was rigged? Do you think they'd say so? We will see in the end! I agree with the influence although I think its a slight one... ;)
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Alex c
Resident Beastmaster
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 12:51 pm
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by Alex c »

Oloth wrote:And what if it was rigged?


Well it is rigged in that Archaon is guaranteed to reach Middenheim due to the victory conditions of some battle sites, but then they've always said he'll get there. Imagine if it wasn't rigged, then the Attackers would be nowhere near as far as they are now...
"Imagination is more important than knowledge"
- Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

Yes you've got a point there Alex but then again its no fun.... I mean look at Boshenfels, I think it wasnt meant to fall from the beginning, thats why our efforts there managed nothing, and the skavens also.... And what about Lustria? Are the results there trully so balanced or is it rigged too?
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Alex c
Resident Beastmaster
Posts: 1298
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2004 12:51 pm
Location: Michigan, USA

Post by Alex c »

Oloth wrote:And what about Lustria? Are the results there trully so balanced or is it rigged too?


Well, if anything, I expected Lizardmen to win a lot more games and win the subcampaign. They are a much more forgiving army than the Dark Elves and somewhat easier to use. If it is somehow "rigged" (which I don't think any of the campaigns are really, certainly not the subcampaigns) then I would think it would be in favour of the Druchii.
"Imagination is more important than knowledge"
- Albert Einstein.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

I guess you are right but then again I have so many wins against lizzies its hard to beleive that. Buut then again I only have two regular opponents and I have to admit they are not the best generals I ever mat... :?
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Seraphlaw
Druchii Archangel
Posts: 1699
Joined: Thu May 22, 2003 5:00 am
Location: Somewhere Kicking Butt with DE

Post by Seraphlaw »

i doubt ppl are honest with the results they post anyway... and since we can only submit 1 score a day of course ppl would sumit the winning one...
Seraphlaw

"HA! What damage can a DRUCHII do?" - Famous Last Words
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

That's for sure but then again as mentioned in another thread since me and my friends are on holiday we play more than 2-3 games per day and it happens that I win more than one. Then I post my one win and the second opponent posts his loss in order to post as many actualy played games as we can. Some people consider this a cheat cause GW said only winners should post but I think its fair enough since the battle was played... ;)
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Darkspear
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1524
Joined: Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:50 am
Location: A Tropical island near the Pacific

Post by Darkspear »

Well, if anything, I expected Lizardmen to win a lot more games and win the subcampaign. They are a much more forgiving army than the Dark Elves and somewhat easier to use


i think the main reason y we have a slight advantage in lustria is because de are a united community who share tactics, army lists,tips and so on. I know other forums do it too but compared to druchii.net no doubt the druchii players will have more insight due to the large amt of response and feedback receive. not to forget the in-depth analysis of the lizardman army by dark alliance. i think another thing that people have not taken an account to is that our senior members (DA, underway etc...) have contributed significantly to the no of wins. they have been into the hobby for long and thus i feel that winning isn't a chore for them.
In my land, everyone calls me the darkspear. The most famous spearmen commander of all.
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

Yes darkspear is right Druchii.net has organized the DE players and the lizzies know that as well, thats why we see so many of them in our forums lately.... They spy on us... :twisted:
"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
Valorian the merciless
Beastmaster
Posts: 352
Joined: Mon Jun 24, 2002 6:33 pm

Post by Valorian the merciless »

wait a minute, there's a lizardmen analysis?
where can i find it?
...I'm the king....
...the master of parody...
...Rejoice...
...for the writing continues...
User avatar
Oloth
Beastmaster
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Mar 19, 2004 12:47 pm
Location: Athens - Greece

Post by Oloth »

"Oloth regar nindolen vel'uss b'luthyrr lil Darthiir"
User avatar
Ranieth
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1221
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2003 4:06 pm
Location: Linköping, Sweden.

Post by Ranieth »

Yeah, they're winning with a whole lot over there.
Our campaign might be rigged too, in favour of the lizards. I suspect that the other two might be too, but in favour of the attacking armies (Wood Elves and Tomb Kings, as they're retaking and not just taking ground).
User avatar
Mtucache
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1636
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 7:40 pm
Location: Michigan

Post by Mtucache »

I think "rigging" has absolutely nothing to do with the sub-campaigns. There's no strategy behind it, and there's no special scenarios which would make them stray from simply counting the victories. The results you're seeing are a direct result of the battles being posted.... there would be no reason to skew them. I feel any advantage in the campaigns are because of the difficulties that the armies have when playing eachother.

The Wood Elves have a slight advantage over the Beastmen because of their list, and the Tomb Kings have a significant advantage. Add to that the neglect on the Beastmen and O&G parts, because of posting victories primarily to the main campaign, and you're going to have the results you're seeing.

The Dark Elves and Lizards are fighting each other, to the exclusion of all else (basically ignoring the main campaign whenever possible), and the army lists are fairly even... so you're seeing results that are very close to 50/50. Plain and simple... there's no reason to suspect any tampering is taking place.

I feel this topic is rediculous... if anything, I'd say the Defenders should be the one's complaining. They've dominated almost every conflict so far, and yet they're still beind driven back... sure the argument can be made that Chaos only has to win a war of attrition, but so far I don't think any of the "evil" races have deserved to win a single battle in the Middenhiem campaign.

Bottomline: You're seeing that players who prefer to play Empire are dominating the evil races, and that cheating and subversion is very limited by only posting one battle per day. This way you're getting a true representation of how WHFB armies match up.... not a bunch of pock-faced teenagers who are sitting in front of their computers all day posting hundreds of battles that have never taken place.
Sevwall
Slave (off the Altar)
Posts: 20
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 4:34 pm

Post by Sevwall »

Why dont you just petiotion for the number of battles reported, like in the main campaign. Then you verify the results.

I hear the lizardmen are looking for the #'s as well, since this stalemate is making noth sides suspicious.
------------------
Your Friendly Nieghboorhood Lizardman
User avatar
Sobek
Lord Commander of the General Staff
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Looking for his Abacus....
Contact:

Post by Sobek »

One common misconception that we've found while studying the campaign is that the percentage doesn't represent the percentage of control of a site as it did in the EoT, affected by daily wins. In this campaign, it represents the percentage of overall wins from the start of the campaign until now. This would mean that as more and more battles/wins from either side are reported, it will become increasingly harder to affect the percentage of a site. that is largely what we're seeing now in Lustria. In addition, since all armies are supposedly balanced as GW stresses, this would tend to cause the natural percentage, assuming that both sides 'care' equally about the site and have roughly equal numbers, to statistically average out around 50%.

MTUCache was spot on with his analysis of the reasons why some of the numbers for subcampaigns are skewed. The Beastmen and the "Badlands attackers" just don't care as much about those subcampaigns, and are posting in the Old World. So the WEs and TKs easily have the advantage, explaining the numbers we're seeing.

As for the concern about the initial high numbers in sites in the Old World, this is to be expected as well. The FoL are spreading out wins, while we're concentrating ours on specific locations. Therefore, when a site opens, and they post wins there, while we don't, it's easy for them to get that large initial percentage. However, it's fairly easy to counteract that as we start posting wins to balance it out, and it becomes increasingly difficult for the FoL to maintain that lead. In the end, all the numbers will continue to head toward an average in the low to mid fifties. I say this number merely because of the amount by which they outnumber the FoD. They can post more wins, after all.
User avatar
Bleys
Malekith's Best Friend
Posts: 1708
Joined: Thu Oct 16, 2003 6:40 pm

Post by Bleys »

Well, from talking with a friend who is on the O&G side of things, a big reason why the numbers were so skewed in favor of the Tomb Kings at the outset was because the posting was "broken" and no one but Tomb Kings could post in that particular Subcampaign for the first five days or so.....

That would be a real damper on the other side of things if you couldn't post! ;)

As for the rest of it, I'd have to say that GW has a reall good idea of what the meta-plot is, and how the wins fall will influence how quickly things move.
Currently Listening To: In Flames
User avatar
Sobek
Lord Commander of the General Staff
Posts: 201
Joined: Thu Mar 04, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: Looking for his Abacus....
Contact:

Post by Sobek »

Bleys wrote:Well, from talking with a friend who is on the O&G side of things, a big reason why the numbers were so skewed in favor of the Tomb Kings at the outset was because the posting was "broken" and no one but Tomb Kings could post in that particular Subcampaign for the first five days or so.....
This is true. It hovered around the mid to high 70th percentile at first, then after it got fixed, it began to come down, starting to stabalize out where it is currently. Low 60th percentile, I believe. I'm not looking at any numbers now, so please forgive if they're incorrect. The point, either way, remains the same. :mrgreen:
Ashork
Slave on the Altar
Posts: 9
Joined: Mon Apr 12, 2004 9:56 am

Post by Ashork »

Sobek: You are correct with the numbers. Tomb Kings got as high as 78% before Orc Players could post (5 day lead) We have come back and had them done to 60.3% which has now gone up to 61% in favor of the Tomb Kings. One problem with the badlands campaign is that the Tomb Kings can fight anyone they want and post the victory in the badlands. Orcs have to fight Tomb Kings and we are finding it hard, much like you guys here, to find opponents (alot of orc players dont have access to tomb kings players) This really unbalances the sub-campaigns I think (I do see what GW wanted to do).
User avatar
Alkkrision
Daemon Prince
Posts: 1924
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 1:06 am
Location: Liverpool

Post by Alkkrision »

I reckon they could have at least added a few more subcampaigns, Dark Elves vs. High Elves would have been a good one seeing as Malekith is in Ulthan right now.
Locked