Quote:
Originally Posted by Soyweiser
A computer game with fairly clearly set rules and boundaries. No map has provinces that all have 100 income. So there is little use in using that as an example.
|
Ok so you still didn't understand why I used it as an example. Imagine a map where you have around 10 provinces. for each player. So you get your share of 10 provinces and those 10 provinces provide 1000 gold income Between all of them. What is the difference between the 10 provinces providing 10 100 gold and say the new case: 2 provinces providin 25 1 providing 50 1 providing 400 3 providing 75 and 2 providing 125. There is no difference. The avarege ammount of gold you are going to loose due to barbarian attacks is the same over the game or over couple of games, as it is with the 100 gold example. Since those events are supposed to be random they are supposed to be be happening with an equal chance over all your provinces.
Giving you 1000 gold income as an example is the easiest example to be more realistic empires get around 15 provinces (in MP expansion phase of the game) with income of around 1500(Ofcourse it depends on many other factors like if you take production or not if you take death or not but if you want to compare two things its better to abstract yourself from those details for a better comparison) so a Net income of 1500 would have been easier for you to understand. But there is no difference between between getting 10 provinces with 1000 overall income and 15 provinces with overall income 1500. the average is 100 gold per province.
P.s I by no means mean that 100gold per province is the average gold income for multiplayer. To check this you'd have to take statistics from all the multiplayer games ever played. And to average them(something which is impossible) So you have to work with rough data. For some games it could be 125 gold per province for others it would be 75 but that wouldnt change my calculations in any way since they are percentage based (how many luck events/ unlucky events are happening)(so at the end it would end up to be the same gain)