So, a while ago I made a Uservoice idea concerning analyze graph, basicly the option to change "analyze attack" to "analyze defence".

Old thread:
https://www.warlight.net/Forum/5545-analyze-graph-suggestion
Uservoice link:
http://warlight.uservoice.com/forums/77051-warlight-features/suggestions/3732209-reversed-analyze-graph

Right now WL-master-race games have 0% luck instead of 16%, so upper graph won't be as usefull as it would be, but the lower one that estimate losses is still very helpful.

Very old picture (with graph for 16% luck)



I know it's not a really big deal, but some people (like me) just can't do basic math without calculators, and I think this is rather simple to implement, so please vote.

Good idea indeed. Voted already.

I have a script that calculates the exact percentage of armies killed (can be used both for defence and offense and any luck %). The graph is nice to get a quick idea when I'm lazy, but it may be a little misleading in some games.

I actually dislike them a little bit as they are simulations (try recalculating it several times in high luck % games, the results may differ a percentage occassionally). It would be better if they were exact. Additionally, 100% could mean 100% but also 99.51%. It's OK that there is rounding for all other percentages, but 99.51% is not 100%, certainly not when it could decide the game.

So while I appreciate the idea, I think other things should change as well if the graphs are adapted.

Edited 7/5/2015 17:07:38

^ @MW: what formulas/algorithms do you use to make those calculations? I don't know exactly how WL does its random roll (is it based on a binomial distribution, a gaussian one, or just flat?). Also, I had no idea that Analyze was just a simulation. I'd appreciate it if you could give me a few tips on how to write up a similar script for my own use.

I'm pretty sure wiki have everything you should know to make it. I know at least one more guy who made it, I have one working as well, just made it long time ago and can't understand how it work :P. Generally this is not something big, just for convenience. I thought it is easy enough to code in WL, especially since it use pretty much same algorytm, with different numbers.