GBG Battles vs. Negotiations (Top Trader vs. Top Fighter data)

[UBERhelp1]

TL;DR, it all depends, and just speculation.

Your questions become irrelevant because of SC and good strategies, I can get unlimited attacks on a sector by turning it over between two guilds for the season with 5 SCs acting on it. Does that make attack better? Well not necessarily. See, the thing is that if you have both unlimited troops and unlimited goods, the negotiator will go farther because the attrition is the limiting feature for attacking only. You will eventually at some point hit a spot that you can not surpass due to the attrition boost while fighting, but this point is never reached with negotiations (if you have the theoretical unlimited goods/troops). If you assume that there is also unlimited attack boost (and as a side note this would mean that you wouldn't need unlimited troops as they'd never die) then the attacker would come out on top. Depending on the player's attack boost, this point could come at such a high value that time itself becomes the limiting If a fighter only has an hour but a negotiator has five, then that also causes differences. Your questions seem to assume that both types of players (fighter, negotiator) spend the same time in-game, which most likely is not the case. If the player has more time, it might be more beneficial for them to negotiate because they would hit the wall when fighting and have "gap" time waiting for the attrition reset, which is something the player would want to avoid in an optimized scenario.

Also, when you ask about the # of times someone can do something, is that averaged? Just once? Because I could save up lots of goods and spend them all in one battleground instead of spreading them out, giving me a higher, outlier-esque value.

Over (a not that long period of) time, these values will be useless as everyone will have leveled more GB, gotten more boosts, and overall improved. And, it seems like Inno might finally begin to add more value to being a negotiator [BETA SPOILER] One of the next GB will have a boost similar to that of HC, but for negotiations.

Finally, I've found that the best way to get data is to find it yourself; message the best players in multiple worlds and find their results, organize the data and you have the answers you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I don't care how long a member has been around there is no excuse for being a forum bully. People like me come here to get our questions answered, find helpful information, and develop ideas and strategies. Those who are interested in inflating their own egos by shooting down newcomer questions and insights need to be held accountable and reprimanded by forum moderators, regardless of how long they have been around. Take an example from dontwannaname; he is giving me some of the exact info that I came here looking for. If it would have been left up to Agent327 and others like him my post would have been hijacked, my question would have been unanswered, and my city strategy would have remained undeveloped. That should always be unacceptable on a forum where the goal is to build up the community and provide helpful solutions and answers.

Agent gave you answers, sure they were blunt but they were correct. If you don't like them, tough. If you ask your boss a question and (s)he says to figure it out, do you rant about how that shouldn't be acceptable and how it's wrong that they won't help you? No. You'd be the one to get fired. Just take it in stride and move on.
[EDIT] People also tend to get annoyed when you create multiple threads for the same topic.
[EDIT 2] Whoah I didn't think I wrote that much.

 

[DeletedUser40546]

TL;DR, it all depends, and just speculation.

Your questions become irrelevant because of SC and good strategies, I can get unlimited attacks on a sector by turning it over between two guilds for the season with 5 SCs acting on it. Does that make attack better? Well not necessarily. See, the thing is that if you have both unlimited troops and unlimited goods, the negotiator will go farther because the attrition is the limiting feature for attacking only. You will eventually at some point hit a spot that you can not surpass due to the attrition boost while fighting, but this point is never reached with negotiations (if you have the theoretical unlimited goods/troops). If you assume that there is also unlimited attack boost (and as a side note this would mean that you wouldn't need unlimited troops as they'd never die) then the attacker would come out on top. Depending on the player's attack boost, this point could come at such a high value that time itself becomes the limiting If a fighter only has an hour but a negotiator has five, then that also causes differences. Your questions seem to assume that both types of players (fighter, negotiator) spend the same time in-game, which most likely is not the case. If the player has more time, it might be more beneficial for them to negotiate because they would hit the wall when fighting and have "gap" time waiting for the attrition reset, which is something the player would want to avoid in an optimized scenario.

Also, when you ask about the # of times someone can do something, is that averaged? Just once? Because I could save up lots of goods and spend them all in one battleground instead of spreading them out, giving me a higher, outlier-esque value.

Over (a not that long period of) time, these values will be useless as everyone will have leveled more GB, gotten more boosts, and overall improved. And, it seems like Inno might finally begin to add more value to being a negotiator [BETA SPOILER] One of the next GB will have a boost similar to that of HC, but for negotiations.

Finally, I've found that the best way to get data is to find it yourself; message the best players in multiple worlds and find their results, organize the data and you have the answers you want.

Well said, Here here.!!

 

[DeletedUser34893]

As soon as the developers are done with that "aid all" button can we get them to work on the "negotiate all" and "fight all" button. Stupid game, all that thinking and clicking...

 

[Agent327]

Ok now that is some HARD DATA. That is a good example of the kind of info I am looking for. Would all know-it-all-well-known-forum-trolls please hold their peace?

"I can do about" isn't HARD DATA.

Your questions become irrelevant because of SC and good strategies, I can get unlimited attacks on a sector by turning it over between two guilds for the season with 5 SCs acting on it. Does that make attack better? Well not necessarily. See, the thing is that if you have both unlimited troops and unlimited goods, the negotiator will go farther because the attrition is the limiting feature for attacking only. You will eventually at some point hit a spot that you can not surpass due to the attrition boost while fighting, but this point is never reached with negotiations (if you have the theoretical unlimited goods/troops). If you assume that there is also unlimited attack boost (and as a side note this would mean that you wouldn't need unlimited troops as they'd never die) then the attacker would come out on top. Depending on the player's attack boost, this point could come at such a high value that time itself becomes the limiting If a fighter only has an hour but a negotiator has five, then that also causes differences. Your questions seem to assume that both types of players (fighter, negotiator) spend the same time in-game, which most likely is not the case. If the player has more time, it might be more beneficial for them to negotiate because they would hit the wall when fighting and have "gap" time waiting for the attrition reset, which is something the player would want to avoid in an optimized scenario.

Also, when you ask about the # of times someone can do something, is that averaged? Just once? Because I could save up lots of goods and spend them all in one battleground instead of spreading them out, giving me a higher, outlier-esque value.

Over (a not that long period of) time, these values will be useless as everyone will have leveled more GB, gotten more boosts, and overall improved. And, it seems like Inno might finally begin to add more value to being a negotiator [BETA SPOILER] One of the next GB will have a boost similar to that of HC, but for negotiations.

Finally, I've found that the best way to get data is to find it yourself; message the best players in multiple worlds and find their results, organize the data and you have the answers you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent gave you answers, sure they were blunt but they were correct. If you don't like them, tough. If you ask your boss a question and (s)he says to figure it out, do you rant about how that shouldn't be acceptable and how it's wrong that they won't help you? No. You'd be the one to get fired. Just take it in stride and move on.
[EDIT] People also tend to get annoyed when you create multiple threads for the same topic.
[EDIT 2] Whoah I didn't think I wrote that much.

Hear hear!

You just forgot one more limiting factor. No sectors available to fight or negotiate.

 

[Loren1979]

TL;DR, it all depends, and just speculation.

Your questions become irrelevant because of SC and good strategies, I can get unlimited attacks on a sector by turning it over between two guilds for the season with 5 SCs acting on it. Does that make attack better? Well not necessarily. See, the thing is that if you have both unlimited troops and unlimited goods, the negotiator will go farther because the attrition is the limiting feature for attacking only. You will eventually at some point hit a spot that you can not surpass due to the attrition boost while fighting, but this point is never reached with negotiations (if you have the theoretical unlimited goods/troops). If you assume that there is also unlimited attack boost (and as a side note this would mean that you wouldn't need unlimited troops as they'd never die) then the attacker would come out on top. Depending on the player's attack boost, this point could come at such a high value that time itself becomes the limiting If a fighter only has an hour but a negotiator has five, then that also causes differences. Your questions seem to assume that both types of players (fighter, negotiator) spend the same time in-game, which most likely is not the case. If the player has more time, it might be more beneficial for them to negotiate because they would hit the wall when fighting and have "gap" time waiting for the attrition reset, which is something the player would want to avoid in an optimized scenario.

Also, when you ask about the # of times someone can do something, is that averaged? Just once? Because I could save up lots of goods and spend them all in one battleground instead of spreading them out, giving me a higher, outlier-esque value.

Over (a not that long period of) time, these values will be useless as everyone will have leveled more GB, gotten more boosts, and overall improved. And, it seems like Inno might finally begin to add more value to being a negotiator [BETA SPOILER] One of the next GB will have a boost similar to that of HC, but for negotiations.

Finally, I've found that the best way to get data is to find it yourself; message the best players in multiple worlds and find their results, organize the data and you have the answers you want.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Agent gave you answers, sure they were blunt but they were correct. If you don't like them, tough. If you ask your boss a question and (s)he says to figure it out, do you rant about how that shouldn't be acceptable and how it's wrong that they won't help you? No. You'd be the one to get fired. Just take it in stride and move on.
[EDIT] People also tend to get annoyed when you create multiple threads for the same topic.
[EDIT 2] Whoah I didn't think I wrote that much.

There is no such thing as unlimited goods. Even CF levelled up to perpetual unbirthday rq has its limits. You can only click that button so many times in a day. That is why I am also asking how long each one takes. Dontwannaname gave me info that I was looking for, not Agent327. If you all need an example of how to understand and helpfully answer a question go back and read dontwannaname's comments.

 

[Algona]

If you all need an example of how to understand and helpfully answer a question go back and read dontwannaname's comments.

Just so you know, you're sneering at the poster who has written the seminal Guide on Settlements used by thousands of players.

UBER also has a well established history of being helpful and pragmatic, you might want to take a hard look at what they have to say instead of dismissing it even though it does not fit exactly what you want.

UBER is one of the posters on this forum you may not agree with, but you should always seriously consider what they have to say.

 

[Loren1979]

"I can do about" isn't HARD DATA.

It is actual numbers; that is what I am looking for, numbers (data). If you have more exact numbers, post them here. If not, move along; you are cluttering up my post. The more numbers I get, the more accurate the results. There is a quite a bit of info on forum pages that is based on player data (example HC reward hits, etc). That data can never be exact because of the nature of probability, however it can give the rest of us a good idea of what to expect.

 

[Loren1979]

Just so you know, you're sneering at the poster who has written the seminal Guide on Settlements used by thousands of players.

UBER also has a well established history of being helpful and pragmatic, you might want to take a hard look at what they have to say instead of dismissing it even though it does not fit exactly what you want.

UBER is one of the posters on this forum you may not agree with, but you should always seriously consider what they have to say.

Sorry, I don't care how many seminal guides a person has written. I know when someone is taking the time to understand my question and when someone is just being a hindrance. Again, there is no excuse for being a bully. This is my post; if you don't have an actual answer to my easy-to-understand question, move along. I would rather hear from beginner players who actually want to be helpful than this plethora of well-known-know-it-alls who want to argue about whether my question is answerable or not.

 

[Loren1979]

Finally, I've found that the best way to get data is to find it yourself; message the best players in multiple worlds and find their results, organize the data and you have the answers you want.

This is helpful, I will probably need to do something of this nature. It also underscores the fact that there is such data, it is available, and my OP was not unintelligible, unreasonable, or unanswerable. It also admits that this is probably not the best place to find such data due to the know-it-all-well-known-players and wanna-be-know-it-all-well-known-players who hang out here and either greatly reduce or altogether destroy the effectiveness of a forum like this. If a forum moderator sees this; just know that it is high time to drain this swamp. There are probably at least 5 comments on this post that should just be deleted because they are irrelevant and counterproductive to the OP. The OP was simple, direct, and answerable; don'twannaname proved that. ....But, just look at this mess.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

There is no such thing as unlimited goods.

It depends upon what is meant by unlimited goods. Unless I were to stop doing RQs, I do not have enough time in the day to spend (by negotiations) the goods I generate, so therefore I have unlimited goods by any practical measure.

One could counter that if I spent less time doing RQs and more time doing negotiations, it would balance out. But the limiting factor in doing negotiations is finding provinces that require only current age goods.

 

[Loren1979]

It depends upon what is meant by unlimited goods. Unless I were to stop doing RQs, I do not have enough time in the day to spend (by negotiations) the goods I generate, so therefore I have unlimited goods by any practical measure.

One could counter that if I spent less time doing RQs and more time doing negotiations, it would balance out. But the limiting factor in doing negotiations is finding provinces that require only current age goods.

This is true, but those limiting factors are part of the data that I am looking for. For example: The fact that your city can only produce current age goods is a limiting factor that is relevant to my question. It takes time to trade down goods. It takes time to find sectors that fit the goods that you can produce. Which brings up the hypothetical question: Is there somewhere a HMA player with a SG who can produce higher numbers? Or will you possibly produce higher numbers when you level up to LMA where you get 2 rq slots (not sure if 2 slots are available in HMA or not)? This all makes for interesting discussion, but the numbers you gave me already are helpful and appreciated. If you can narrow it down any more let me know.

 

[DeletedUser37581]

This is true, but those limiting factors are part of the data that I am looking for. For example: The fact that your city can only produce current age goods is a limiting factor that is relevant to my question. It takes time to trade down goods. It takes time to find sectors that fit the goods that you can produce. Which brings up the hypothetical question: Is there somewhere a HMA player with a SG who can produce higher numbers? Or will you possibly produce higher numbers when you level up to LMA where you get 2 rq slots (not sure if 2 slots are available in HMA or not)? This all makes for interesting discussion, but the numbers you gave me already are helpful and appreciated. If you can narrow it down any more let me know.

I don't think it would be possible to build a city capable of producing thousands of previous age goods every day. So for someone who does a ton of negotiating, previous age goods will always be a limiting factor. SG and event buildings left at the previous age don't even come close. In fact, I don't have SG in my city because it would be a waste of space and FPs (the FPs would be better spent buying previous age goods).

Fortunately, one answer to is build up a huge stockpile of goods before advancing ages. And then use that stockpile wisely so it will last for as long as needed.

 

[Graviton]

Sorry, I don't care how many seminal guides a person has written. I know when someone is taking the time to understand my question and when someone is just being a hindrance.

If you're conflating Agent with Uber, then no you don't know when someone's being a hindrance, and you're using the word "bully" very loosely. Uber took the time to give a thoughtful answer about the myriad of variables that undercut whatever anecdotal evidence you get from the relatively tiny population of players who post on this forum. You're getting numbers from a handful of people who play under varying circumstances with varying goals. Any conclusions you draw from these numbers will be next to meaningless unless you follow Uber's and others' advice: ask high-level players; document exactly their city setup and production; take into account that the maximum number of advances is affected by numerous factors that differ from player to player and guild to guild. In short, your "method" isn't going to produce statistics, it's only going to produce a theoretical discussion.

This is my post; if you don't have an actual answer to my easy-to-understand question, move along.

You created two posts for some reason, which is bad form; and you don't get to control what other people respond to. The only thing you can control is your reaction. So if you don't like some of the replies you get, ignore them or report them, but arguing with them is counter-productive and claiming that you're "bullied" is nonsense.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

Fortunately, one answer to is build up a huge stockpile of goods before advancing ages. And then use that stockpile wisely so it will last for as long as needed.

This is the strategy I'm using.

I had previously parked in LMA to build and level GBs, especially an Arc 80. When I advanced into CA, I had a stock of ~25K of each LMA good, ~2,500 of each CA good. Each day, I fight as far as I can, then negotiate. I moderate both to not decimate either my units or my goods. About the time GBG kicked off, my Zues, CoA, CdM and CF were all entering the sweet spot, they've all just passed level 50.

With a city that makes ~350 FPs per day from collections alone, and the guild's 1.9 thread, I've quickly extended both my ability to fight longer and my ability to negotiate more as I increasingly save goods on the front end by fighting more, and produce more goods from a higher level CF for use on the back end to negotiate more.

Between GBs, Special Buildings and RQs, I produce ~800 CA goods per day just collecting my city. I can produce 1,000 more donating to guild mates' and friends' GBs on 1.xx threads, doing 'Spend FP' RQs along with a UBQ each time it passes by. I've also kept my Special Buildings tied to LMA for a daily supply of LMA goods and I keep a constant stream of CA goods moving down to LMA, and work to balance my totals across all 5 goods in each age.

This far into GBG, my goods stash currently stands at ~7k of each CA good and ~16.75k of each LMA good. My daily baseline GBG is to fight to attrition 25 which allows me to fight with almost no loss of units. Then I negotiate up to attrition 50. This leaves some reserves in the tank both fighting and negotiating to use as needed. As my core GBs continue to level higher, I'll be able to fight more and negotiate more.

To preserve goods, I also negotiate across multiple provinces to negotiate with only 4 or 5 initial choices as much as possible, and when the chances of completing a negotiation on the 3rd turn are low, I'll abort the negotiation without taking the last turn, saving the goods I'd otherwise just be throwing away.

My plan to age up is to wait until my LMA goods are down to about 1k of each, upgrade all my special buildings to the current age, then in the week between GBG rounds to run as many 'Spend FP' RQs as possible for one final CA goods push. Then I'll jump into InA at the start of the next GBG round, rush through tech to enable RQs, then rinse and repeat the process, letting my goods supply determine the length of time I'll spend in each age.

At some point though, it's about time, interest, and good enough being good enough. I'll continue to build and level GBs to improve my game, especially the myriad of fight GBs I've yet to build, but at some point, that won't translate into higher GBG engagement. Rewards or not, GBG can quickly become an exercise in monotony. I'll chase my daily rewards and I'm happy to do a bit extra in the clutch, but when I'm done for the day, I'm done for the day. Some days that's because of resources, most days, it's because I'm just done.

 

[Loren1979]

This is the strategy I'm using.

I had previously parked in LMA to build and level GBs, especially an Arc 80. When I advanced into CA, I had a stock of ~25K of each LMA good, ~2,500 of each CA good. Each day, I fight as far as I can, then negotiate. I moderate both to not decimate either my units or my goods. About the time GBG kicked off, my Zues, CoA, CdM and CF were all entering the sweet spot, they've all just passed level 50.

With a city that makes ~350 FPs per day from collections alone, and the guild's 1.9 thread, I've quickly extended both my ability to fight longer and my ability to negotiate more as I increasingly save goods on the front end by fighting more, and produce more goods from a higher level CF for use on the back end to negotiate more.

Between GBs, Special Buildings and RQs, I produce ~800 CA goods per day just collecting my city. I can produce 1,000 more donating to guild mates' and friends' GBs on 1.xx threads, doing 'Spend FP' RQs along with a UBQ each time it passes by. I've also kept my Special Buildings tied to LMA for a daily supply of LMA goods and I keep a constant stream of CA goods moving down to LMA, and work to balance my totals across all 5 goods in each age.

This far into GBG, my goods stash currently stands at ~7k of each CA good and ~16.75k of each LMA good. My daily baseline GBG is to fight to attrition 25 which allows me to fight with almost no loss of units. Then I negotiate up to attrition 50. This leaves some reserves in the tank both fighting and negotiating to use as needed. As my core GBs continue to level higher, I'll be able to fight more and negotiate more.

To preserve goods, I also negotiate across multiple provinces to negotiate with only 4 or 5 initial choices as much as possible, and when the chances of completing a negotiation on the 3rd turn are low, I'll abort the negotiation without taking the last turn, saving the goods I'd otherwise just be throwing away.

My plan to age up is to wait until my LMA goods are down to about 1k of each, upgrade all my special buildings to the current age, then in the week between GBG rounds to run as many 'Spend FP' RQs as possible for one final CA goods push. Then I'll jump into InA at the start of the next GBG round, rush through tech to enable RQs, then rinse and repeat the process, letting my goods supply determine the length of time I'll spend in each age.

At some point though, it's about time, interest, and good enough being good enough. I'll continue to build and level GBs to improve my game, especially the myriad of fight GBs I've yet to build, but at some point, that won't translate into higher GBG engagement. Rewards or not, GBG can quickly become an exercise in monotony. I'll chase my daily rewards and I'm happy to do a bit extra in the clutch, but when I'm done for the day, I'm done for the day. Some days that's because of resources, most days, it's because I'm just done.

Very helpful and well put together. Thank you

 

[Loren1979]

If you're conflating Agent with Uber, then no you don't know when someone's being a hindrance, and you're using the word "bully" very loosely. Uber took the time to give a thoughtful answer about the myriad of variables that undercut whatever anecdotal evidence you get from the relatively tiny population of players who post on this forum. You're getting numbers from a handful of people who play under varying circumstances with varying goals. Any conclusions you draw from these numbers will be next to meaningless unless you follow Uber's and others' advice: ask high-level players; document exactly their city setup and production; take into account that the maximum number of advances is affected by numerous factors that differ from player to player and guild to guild.

I did't have a big problem with what Uber posted, except for the fact that we all know that the data is going to vary depending on how each players city is set up, etc. That is the whole point of this post: Which city setup can contribute the most advances to GBG? Which one pulls the most GBG rewards (not necessarily the one that makes the most advances, since negotiations get 2X the advance but only approx 25% more chance of pulling a reward per advance)? And what is the most efficient ratio of negotiations vs. attack (fighters still use negotiations sometimes and traders still use attack sometimes). And, how does all of this relate to the time factor? How much time is involved with each method. From this information I and others can assemble a strategy that fits our guild, our purpose in playing the game, and our time schedule. Since this is all pretty technical. I asked 4 simple questions from which I intend to consolidate my conclusions. We don't need more blinding flashes of the obvious fact that setup and strategy will produce varied results, we need numbers that can help us decide which setup and strategy we want to use. The more people who jump on here to let me know that the answers will be varied the less chance I have of actually getting the info I am looking for.

In short, your "method" isn't going to produce statistics, it's only going to produce a theoretical discussion.

Read my OP again. A simple answer to those questions will provide good statistical data. Based on the set probability involved in negotiations, it takes a certain amount of time to do negotiations even at maximum efficiency. The same for battles, at maximum efficiency, it will take a certain amount of time. We don't need exact numbers, just something to work with. What we do with that data and how we incorporate it into our individual strategies is where the variables come in.

You created two posts for some reason, which is bad form; and you don't get to control what other people respond to. The only thing you can control is your reaction. So if you don't like some of the replies you get, ignore them or report them, but arguing with them is counter-productive and claiming that you're "bullied" is nonsense.

I also stated in the other thread that if the OP owner feels my comment is counter-productive I would delete it along with all my replies. Would the rest of you be so respectable as to extend the same offer here?

 

[Kranyar the Mysterious]

I also stated in the other thread that if the OP owner feels my comment is counter-productive I would delete it along with all my replies. Would the rest of you be so respectable as to extend the same offer here?

If you want to delete any of your replies here as well, you certainly have that right. Not sure why you feel you'd need our permission to do so.

 

[Loren1979]

Your questions become irrelevant because of SC and good strategies, I can get unlimited attacks on a sector by turning it over between two guilds for the season with 5 SCs acting on it.

Actually, not only do SC and good strategies not make my questions irrelevant they could actually be utilized to confirm relevance. Take those 5 SC, position them, and get an experienced fighter to put 100 advances down. Time the results and repeat, but this time use an experienced negotiator. You have just provided a baseline minimum time for both negotiations and battles. This is the type of info that I am looking for. From this type of data we can begin to project the time difference between negotiating and battles.

Agent gave you answers, sure they were blunt but they were correct. If you don't like them, tough.

Agent did not give answers to my questions. Furthermore, as I have just demonstrated, he is wrong about them being unanswerable. I am surprised that you are not able to see through his response.

If you ask your boss a question and (s)he says to figure it out, do you rant about how that shouldn't be acceptable and how it's wrong that they won't help you? No. You'd be the one to get fired. Just take it in stride and move on.

If I was to ask my boss a question and was told to go figure it out for myself; I would do exactly that. If I go to a forum, specifically designed for posting questions and finding information and solutions, and get told to go figure it out for myself, I might look that person square in the eye and say, "mind your own business; I'm not directing my question to you." My questions are directed to people who have numbers to share; everyone else can go create their own post where they can share their two sense and argue with each other.

 

[UBERhelp1]

Actually, not only do SC and good strategies not make my questions irrelevant they could actually be utilized to confirm relevance. Take those 5 SC, position them, and get an experienced fighter to put 100 advances down. Time the results and repeat, but this time use an experienced negotiator. You have just provided a baseline minimum time for both negotiations and battles. This is the type of info that I am looking for. From this type of data we can begin to project the time difference between negotiating and battles.

Agent did not give answers to my questions. Furthermore, as I have just demonstrated, he is wrong about them being unanswerable. I am surprised that you are not able to see through his response.

If I was to ask my boss a question and was told to go figure it out for myself; I would do exactly that. If I go to a forum, specifically designed for posting questions and finding information and solutions, and get told to go figure it out for myself, I might look that person right in the eye and say, "mind your own business; I'm not directing my question to you." My questions are directed to people who have numbers to share; everyone else can go create their own post where they can share their two sense and argue with each other.

That still is not baseline, as lag can play a part. You'd have to measure latency as well. If one really good fighter has a lot of lag, then it will take them longer to do their 100 advances than one who has less lag. That difference only gets bigger the more advances you do.

 

[RazorbackPirate]

From this information I and others can assemble a strategy that fits our guild, our purpose in playing the game, and our time schedule. Since this is all pretty technical.

This is where my concern lies. There is no strategy that fits your guild, there are only strategies that fit your guild members, individually.

The strategy @dontwannaname uses and the time spent executing that strategy fits for him, the strategy I follow and the time I spend executing that strategy works for me. Regardless of the numbers, I have no interest in following @dontwannaname's strategy, nor do I expect him to want to follow mine. I've gotten plenty of 'advice' about things I 'should' do to do more of this or that, and while I take it all under advisement. I play my game and build my city in a way that suits me and me alone.

Use this info to help people understand the myriad of choices available and how to improve their individual performance according to their individual wants and needs, but there is no 'one size fits all'. There is no 'best' way to build a city for maximum impact in GBG. I don't care what the numbers say.

Everything I do in my city I do for me. That my city can also be benefit to my guild is great, but my city is my city. I build it and play it to suit me, not my guild.

From this type of data we can begin to project the time difference between negotiating and battles.

All well and good, but useless information overall. Regardless of the math, my game will progress the way it does. I fight or negotiate as it suits my needs, not as it suits the guild's needs. Tell me I have to negotiate when I want to fight, or fight when I want to negotiate, you'll likely get neither. I'll just bail, let the province be won or lost without me, and come back later when I can play my game, my way. You'd do well to factor my zeros into your equation.