Defending XP - Is it bugged?

[KGB]

Game 26291 (Darklords26).

Last turn my L1 Assassin was attacked in the open by 5 Lt Calv, 1 Wolfrider and 1 Elemental. Then in another battle by 1 Lt Calv. That should be 75x6+150+225=825 XP. Given I had some prior experience (2 turns before that I captured a city with a Spider/Giant defender which is at least 500) I expected to reach level 2 but I didn't as my hero only shows 962 XP.

I am not sure how I am getting a number like 962 unless the XP isn't giving me 100% of what I should get. The Wiki doesn't indicate there is any negative modifier for being a defender (in a city I could see one but not outside a city).

KGB

[piranha]

50% xp for defending. Need to update the wiki.

[KGB]

Is there any reason why you only get half when defending?

That's a big incentive to just ram units into enemy heroes without worrying about leveling them up because if you wait until it's their turn they basically get double XP for the same battle.

KGB

[SnotlinG]

The main incentive is to encourage offensive.
Also we are worried it would be to good to just stand defending a city with your hero if you get 100% of the xp (since your stack can then be 32 units)

[KGB]

For defending in a city I understand only giving 1/2 XP.

But defending elsewhere where it's at most 8vs8 seems a bit unfair to the defender especially since the attacker can send multiple stacks and you can't have the game 'auto level' for you between waves of attack stacks.

You could just change it so that if the defender has 8 or less units they get full XP. That way the only time you get 1/2 XP is defending in a city with multiple stacks.

KGB

[LPhillips]

That sounds good to me, but is it simplistic enough for the game? Is simplicity more valuable than practicality here?

[Versace]

KGB's idea makes a lot of sense but as LPhillips pointed out it makes the game again that tiny bit more complicated. Many exceptions to rules/complicated rules alienate new players. I am quite indefferent wether it works this way or that way so for simplicity's sake I would keep it as it is.

[KGB]

It's complicated? Not sure in what way.

Right now the game doesn't even show how much XP you get per battle. Or rather it shows the progress bar moving but when you review the battle you can't see the XP reward. That's why the bug LP reported about double heroes not getting 1/2 XP was there for so long and why no one realized you are only getting 1/2 XP for defending.

The Wiki page here:

http://www.warbarons.com/wiki/hero_leveling

can be amended after the 'Battle Experience Calculation' to say:

Modifiers:

Multiple heroes - Experience divided equally among all surviving heroes (Ex. 2 heroes = 1/2 XP each) with the exception of Search A Ruin gives all XP to the hero that searches.
More than 8 units in your stack - 1/2 XP awarded
More than 16 units in your stack - 1/4 XP awarded

I am pretty sure anyone who is capable of playing this game is capable of understanding that

KGB

P.S. Right now with the 1/2 modifier on defense will make you do illogical things. For example if you see an enemy hero stack approaching your city and you have only weak defenders and you know you can't hold it and lack gold to self-raze then the absolute best thing you can do is suicide all your men (assuming you can't run away) to deny the opponent XP in a cheap manner. Not sure that kind of tactic is 'obvious' to all players given it runs counter to common sense.

[LPhillips]

Actually, the best thing you can do is disband the units, and that feature remains. I'm not sure what is ever accomplished by giving the enemy XP in exchange for a couple of units, which he was willing to sacrifice for XP in the first place. So I think your one and only example is illogical

The current setting actually encourages more dynamic play, in which the reward is greater for playing offense than defense. It's an excellent feature to discourage turtling, avoidance of enemy heroes, and increased super stack dominance.

[KGB]

Actually, the best thing you can do is disband the units, and that feature remains. I'm not sure what is ever accomplished by giving the enemy XP in exchange for a couple of units, which he was willing to sacrifice for XP in the first place. So I think your one and only example is illogical

You can do that too. That doesn't make my example illogical. The reason for that is quite simple. Disbanding only kills your armies. Suiciding can potentially kill some of his armies. The tradeoff being XP you give the opponent vs number of potential kills. With 1/2 XP awarded suicide becomes a more attractive option since you aren't going to give away much in the way of XP. Half XP is a much harsher penalty than you realize, allowing you to effectively use 2x as many men against an opponent before leveling him up.

The current setting actually encourages more dynamic play, in which the reward is greater for playing offense than defense. It's an excellent feature to discourage turtling, avoidance of enemy heroes, and increased super stack dominance.

I disagree with that. I doubt 99% of the players even know there is any difference in XP between attack/defend. Certainly more know now if they are reading this thread but prior to that I bet 99% of the players didn't know. So it wasn't influencing their behavior / encouraging more dynamic play. Will it in the future do so? I don't know the answer to that other than to say it's been forever since I've seen a player attempt to turtle (at least a couple of Beta's or more).

I'm personally of the opinion that we don't get enough high level heroes (L5+) now so anything that awards more XP should be done. That's one reason I hope we get quests in the next version to allow even more XP to be doled out.

KGB