Y other players info don’t show correct value of attack power and defense power ?
viewing other player only shows the base value of their base and dragons as far as i know
It’s not wrong exactly.
The variance is due to applying buffs (and maybe research)
You can search the forums but I believe it specifically show on buff and not the other. (Like the attack buff but not th defense buff)
I haven’t validated it myself but it’s plausible and it’s been this way since I started playing.
It might even be on purpose
The power you see is the baseline power.
I don’t believe that is true. Mine changes when I turn all buffs off and wait for it to update (less than 24 hours)
Gox has answered this in the past as saying it was either the attack or defense boosts that were not included in what others see
I think it may depend upon where you look.
These are for my mini (no boosts at all):
What I see:
What others see on information screen:
What others see on attack screen:
I’ve long suspected research plays into this but if you turn on boosts you should see both numbers go up
Also the player details page is often lagged. (I think it’s possibly updated once a day ish)
Boosts wore off on mini yesterday after war. (He doesn’t get to be boosted all the time)
I’ll see if it changes at all.
You are probably right. I’ve never really looked at this in detail. Just assumed others saw baseline value.
We’ve done a small sample validation on our team and a couple in LC and the problem with validation is that depending on who is looking (self vs others) as well as where you look (profile vs matchmaking page) you potentially will see three different values for each data point…rendering them essentially useless…it’s definitely broken with so many disparate values, but quite honestly, there’s little point in them as they are aggregates that don’t take into account base layout or ‘hobbled’ (someone else’s term) towers for DP or skill of player for AP… some of the latter can be derived or deduced from other stats, but still limited.
As I said the player status page is lagged. I know some people who intentionally change roster and buffs and towers to show weaker numbers between pvp and first War.
How much is it lagged and when does it update, I’ve never bothered to figure that out. I just know that page is unreliable for everyone.
When you look at yourself, you always see the latest numbers for everything including buffs and research and everything.
When you look at others, you lesser numbers in some cases. To get apples to apples you should never use the player info page, and have a teammate or alt tell you what your actual number is.
I respect your opinion on that, but even if that is supposed to be the design, it isn’t working that way. The math doesn’t work. We were also able to see changes near real-time when removing buffs so I don’t know where the lag would be with the exception of the incessant synch issues. Regardless of whether we agree or not, there is little to know value in reading them since the other variables I mentioned are far more valuable in opponent assessments and if I coded anything that had three different values for the same data point, I’d be canned lol… well, unless the intent was to mask /encrypt certain views.
The values are virtually pointless, except as a relative gauge of a base’s defensive power. Base defense strength is built on the Power Level of the attack towers, and Power Level has no direct relationship to the actual attack power of that tower (at least, not for the three capped towers). Once you have towers of the three that are capped over the cap, your reported base defense, to you or to others, will be grossly inflated.
We are in agreement.
Please show your work. It works exactly as I explained for me. It’s not an opinion. Gox was the one who pointed out how it worked in multiple past threads
Player info page is lagged, others are not. Unsure if there are SOME instant changes, never tested for that. I just know if I give it some time it always shows the right numbers
I’m not saying it should or shouldn’t be changed or improved, but it may be an intentional mechanic.
Again I’m not offering an opinion, I’m offering observed results and restating what Gox used to explain the differences.
Feel free to disagree, but it’s not for debate that I did observe what I said I did.
Meh. Those numbers aren’t super important. I generally disregard them unless they’re extreme.
I’ve said this before and I’ll repeat here. Look at the actual towers people! Those ratings mean nothing!
That comes across far more pompous than I am sure you meant, but let’s be clear… it IS your opinion based on your observations and someone else’s post. I will take the time later when I am off work to provide screenshots of what happens… at least to those on my team… but let’s make this an actual scientific discourse and not anything else. I said I respected your opinion and meant it… if you do not appreciate that , or for some reason think that is a slight, then my apologies for trying to point out that someone playing the same game as you provided a different perspective and actually meant to convey an appreciation for this and other opinions/observations you have made.
That said, I was trained many years ago to work to prove the null and will go back take snapshots and provide the results. In the end, however, it is a ridiculously moot point; as none of the values provided serve any worthwhile purpose in assessing an opponent’s defense or attack skills. Even if I take away the ‘hobbling’ effect of certain towers over certain levels. Design and tower level are the only way to gain a meaningful assessment.
You can force an update by placing a tower in and out of storage.
I ignored (mostly) a similar tone in your message. Might have bled into my response
Not really. You didn’t really disagree with my conclusion based on my data, you seemed to disagree with my data, which is not opinion. That is either made up or true. (At least that is how I see it)
Again I don’t see the contention about a conclusion but the data. If you find different data, in extremely interested.
I mostly agree with this and that is why I haven’t fully flushed it out myself yet.
I do think it’s not completely useless. While it’s not super relevant mostly, it does generally give you a standard candle to measure against. You can only really ascertain a is better than b, but b is better than c. It doesn’t really work with saying by how much and it’s less accurate as the numbers become closer together. (1b defense would have a hard time being easier to kill than a 200m defense even if they tried) - but yes we need to look at layout anyways, so there is no reason to care about that. Even base layout doesn’t mean everything. It’s entirely possible for someone to find a new thing that we don’t know to lookout for (although unlikely)
I see… didn’t realize who I was talking to. It is clear your opinion is that you are correct and don’t wish to reconcile that anything formed on loose data is an opinion. I won’t trouble you anymore.