Jump to content

Alexander the Great

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
  • Interests
    Gaming; Outdoors; Sports; Music; Comedy; Socialite
  • Leader Name
    Alexander Philippou
  • Nation Name
    Idealistic Texas
  • Nation ID
  • Alliance Name

Contact Methods

  • Discord Name: iLegendary_MasterCarry#9546

Recent Profile Visitors

233 profile views

Alexander the Great's Achievements

Casual Member

Casual Member (2/8)



  1. Just wondering if the editing feature of the PnW Wiki is broken? I was unable to edit any pages—even "talk" page creation. Very strange.
  2. Thanks Alex, I just know sometimes that a decimal point going from "0.5" to ".05" or "0.2" to ".02" can have a big effect in certain instances!
  3. You are conflating every toss together with individual tosses. Each person's individual missile strike command is supposed to have a 50% chance of hitting each time (assuming that ID is in effect). This is like going to Google's coin flipper and expecting to flip 9 heads or tails in a row (out of 10). Try it. See how that works for you. The probability of that is 0.1953125%. This means that you could expect to do the entire exercise nearly 100 times to even fit the criteria of having a chance of seeing it occur.
  4. Anecdotal evidence is reliable When the outcomes of the problem are predictable in the absence of a counter-measure (ID, VDS, Guardian, Covert) When the effects of the error are large When the effects of the error are immediate When the effects of the error can be confirmed by repetition When the effects of error can be confirmed by an ‘N of 1’ trial This situation meets 3 and arguably 4 of those criteria. To go with your coin example, we're saying in this case that I somehow managed to flip a perfectly weighted coin [for simplicity's sake we could use a virtually generated coin] (or multiple coins) and get heads 9 out of 10 times; that's mathematically highly improbably to an n-th degree for something that is 50%. I.r.t. Guardian: once again, the entire point of the policy is based on increasing the probability that your opponent will not damage your improvements; affording someone a simple weapon (two in this case) that can circumvent this is denotatively illogical and counter-productive to the balance and design of the game—unless the balance and design of the game is simply to allow the person with the most missiles and nuclear weapons to win all wars, which would be objectively idiotic. This is logically saying, "I am willing to sacrifice 20% more loot to ensure that whatever my opponent throws at me will have half of its normal chance of destroying an improvement." Hold on, I'll "fix" it.
  5. I understand how probability works, but there are mathematical anomalies that are an issue here. You saying that your VDS and blocking 4/46 and 5/15 nukes only serves to prove my point, to be honest. From a mathematical perspective, you're figuratively trying to reason-out and explain how you rolled a "20" on a d20 four times in a row without the die being loaded or sanded (the odds are greater of you winning the multimillion dollar lottery exactly than this occurring naturally, if you're a bit confused).
  6. Note how this literally says nothing at all about it not applying to missiles and nuclear weapons. THAT is the actual text, screenshotted that I just put.
  7. In fact, without it applying to missiles and nuclear weapons, that effectively makes Guardian one of the absolute WORST policies in the game, it is pointless. No one cares that they lost an improvement in a ground/naval attack—we do care about losing them to missiles and nukes, especially whenever there is no guaranteed way of stopping those two styles of attack. The counter-play to ground and naval is that gasp you can build up forces to prevent this occurring. There is no counter-play to missiles and nuclear weapons outside of %-chances that they won't hit; Guardian fits this logic PERFECTLY and for it to not be applied here is shocking, appalling, and illogical.
  8. Excuse me?!?!?! Pardon my french, but why in the actual and unironic [email protected]#$ would guardian not prevent missile and nuke improvement destruction and not even state that?!?!?!?!?!? That. Is. Not. Acceptable. By. Any. Means. Fix that. Whatever else is done, fix that $#!^. Do not sit there telling me that I can put a 50% chance of not having improvements damaged and then, for no reason whatsoever, trick me about it. That is an extreme issue. Make a note on guardian that says "This does not apply to missiles and nuclear attacks" or change it to work with them. Period. Please & thank you.
  9. So I'm wondering if a decimal point got placed in the wrong spot in coding or something like this. So far, I have had 2 missiles fired upon me that hit and destroyed an improvement while having the ID project and Guardian DP. This is quite literally a 5.8824% chance of happening (aka extremely unlikely and nearly unheard of). Then it gets worse…Aurora's MA head, CholanK, fired 6 missiles at an enemy with an ID and only 1 of them hit; after this, he fired 3 nuclear weapons at an opponent who had VDS with none of them hitting. These are mathematical anomalies that are seriously screwing up gameplay. Are you sure that there isn't something wrong in the code? We're talking numbers in the "99%+ range that "x" event should not happen."
  10. Interesting, I concur and understand. It is extremely odd indeed. This also happened when I had more than 2 times my opponent's navy. Granted, it did eventually give me an IT but it required my opponent to have 53 ships to my 150 (opponent is c-11 to my c-10). When my opponent had 71 ships to my 150, it only gave MS still.
  11. This is a bug report regarding naval battles. Whenever my nation has literally over 1.25 times as many ships as my opponent and the game does not give an Immense Triumph in a naval battle, it is an extreme issue that should not exist. Please fix this absolutely atrocious bug. This literally costed me a blockade because the game did not register the immense size difference between my navy and my opponent's navy. There is no world where having literally 50-60 more ships than my opponent results in a "moderate success". It's really and truly obnoxious. You wait hours and hours to pull of the perfect attack and the servers at PnW are too on-fire to properly execute it. Pretty sadge and definitely not working as intended, unless you intend to make unrealistic odds a commonality.
  12. So long, Oasis! It was a good time!

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and the Guidelines of the game and community.