Let's talk about Luck and ARLS Formula

[Adoede]

It's time for me to make a contribution to the community.

From my experience, here are some of the benefits a high luck score can bring:
1) You learn skills faster - even with lower intelligence
2) You get more arena tokens from your fights...so you advance in the game faster (and have a better rating in blood gods)
3) You seem to get more item drops in tavern quests and conquest battles
4) You pick up your weapon if disarmed faster
5) You have better initiative rolls at the beginning of fights
6) You have a better chance of scoring a knockout
7) You are better at using your defensive skills at the most opportune times (like surprise ending)
8) You simply fight better

And perhaps many more benefits you all can share about that I've missed.

I had a chance to track the stat points / cost of about 100 HOL prospects recently and I found a way to measure the relative Luck stat of each Glad.

This is Adoede's Relative Luck Score Formula (ARLS Formula for short :) )

(Total Gold Cost / 1.75) - Total Base Stat Points = ARLS

You get your base stat points by adding all 7 of your known stat values together.
So, if you're Arrrrrghpirate and have 570 base stat points at a cost of 1155 gp:
(1155/1.75) - 570 = ~ a 90 luck score (the highest I've ever seen, btw)

I tracked 96 HOL prospects using this formula and this is how the data broke down:

96 Total
<50 Luck: 1 glad = 1%
50-59 Luck: 24 glads = 25%
60-69 Luck: 34 glads = 35%
70-79 Luck: 25 glads = 26%
80-89 Luck: 11 glads = 12%
90+ Luck: 1 glad = 1%

That is a nice bell curve if you ask me. Incidentally, the lowest score recorded was a 35...a total outlier since the 2nd lowest was a 51. And as I said before, the highest was 90.

My glads with high luck all do better in the arena. But I've noticed that luck seems to benefit offensive glads more than defensive ones. Meaning a defensive glad can get by with a middling luck score and be fine. Offensive glads have a harder time with lower luck. I think this has to do with the consistency of a defensive glads fighting style and tactics whereas offensive glads fighting styles vary from fight to fight.

Now, this is all based on my subjective observations so I could be totally off...but I think the ability to judge the relative luck score of glads can be helpful in deciding if a particular glad is the one you've been looking for or not.

Edit: Also, there are lots of gear pieces in blood gods that boost luck, so a gladiator with a middling score in luck is not at a huge disadvantage in the end-game...just in case some of you are tempted to dump your rosters like I was when I worked this out!

Chime in and share your experiences with Luck!

[oedi]

This was very interesting, so I had to test your formula. Im very happy now that Ive named so many of my glads after their gold cost :)

1118 estimated luck 94 maybe I should consider bringing him back from retirement retired
1141 estimated luck 92 active in blood gods
1011 estimated luck 87 always suspected he was a very lucky glad :) retired
1122 estimated luck 83 active in blood gods
1109 estimated luck 83 active in blood gods
1021 estimated luck 81 retired
1017 estimated luck 76 retired
1128 estimated luck 75 brand new recruit
0980 estimated luck 69 retired
0981 estimated luck 68 retired
1131 estimated luck 67 brand new recruit
1077 estimated luck 67 retired

[Kreegan]

What we certainly know that lucky gladiators have generally better performance than the unlucky ones, if they are otherwise evenly matched. What we don't know is what does exactly Luck do. My bet is that it improves your chances for certain positive events during a fight and maybe it decreases the chances for some negative events. I doubt that it acts outside of a battle - item drops for instance (I've not seen any better loot during tavern or conquest quests than usual no matter the Luck increase).

[Cynaidh]

Wow I am currently looking for a slave for AB Gold, going to have to get my calc out now :)

[Prinny]

Im just going to be the ass here.
Nice that you have spent your time in making this and thank you for your efforts, however:

How exactly did you figure out the luck stats wre possible to calculate like this? Exactly what is the formula based on as we all know that you can't see actual luck stats.

35 as a stat is low even for normal glads and I have rarely seen a stat at the 40-45 range, hence I believe there is without a doubt something wrong with the formula.

I have always believed (and still do) that everything in this game is based on rolls just like the ones you see at skill/attribute trains.
I think luck modifies the chances for a roll to be required EG: Your 9 or under roll to train becomes a 9,5 or under roll and so on.

[Adoede]

Sure Prinny,

Here's how I came up with the formula. I figured there must be a relationship between the luck stat and a gladiator's cost. And we know the gold cost and the seven other stats. Thus the only variables were the luck stat and how much each stat point is worth in gold. I just assumed all stat points cost the same for this model.

At this point I had a basic formula from simple algebra. Gold cost divided by stat worth needed to equal the total stat points. First, I tried assigning a stat cost of 2 gp to the formula, but the luck scores seemed too low. Then I tried 1.5 and they were too high. The best balance I found was at 1.75 - which is why I went with that value.

Now, of course, stats in the 90's might cost more than stats in the 60's, and if so the model breaks down. But two things: 1) When I compared luck scores with the perceived luck of my glads, it matched up well. And 2) even if the formula is off by a bit, it is still valuable for letting you see relative estimated luck vs. other glads and prospects.

The reason I did this was because it takes so long to get an HOL glad that I wanted to be somewhat confident the luck score was at least decent before I committed - I'm sure you all can relate to that feeling and the related frustration of having a glad with great stats who just seems to have bad luck.

As for the 35 low score - yeah, that threw me off too. But that was the only one. And since the rest of the data matched so well with what would be expected, I figured it really was just a TERRIBLE luck roll. After all, I have seen some stats in the 30's for other stats before.

I wasn't going to share all this at first - just because it is my guess and based on a small sample size of 96 glads...and so I could use it for my own advantage. But, I figured it would be more fun to spark this community to collaborate on these types of insights in other areas too. This game is very competitive, but that doesn't mean it can't be a warm community as well. With strategies and gearing options galore, there is plenty to keep things competitive and tip one's hat to managers who are able to consistently be on top.

[Alba Kebab]

Im very happy now that Ive named so many of my glads after their gold cost :)
So that's what the number names of Oedi's glads meant? OMG, to think I always thought they were code for himself instead of something so obvious!:eek:

To the topic:
Nice post Adoede, especially with all the efforts put into crunching numbers.
Lemme sit down and take notes.

[Cynaidh]

Honestly it seems to work, I just went threw about 400 HOL Slaves, and spot checked them with this formula, and it gave me the results i was expecting to see based off there cost vs visible stats never once was there an off the wall luck number. Ended up grabbing one that calculated out to having a 91-92 luck score, so will see how lucky the glad is.

[Adoede]

Oedi - wow...your glads have great luck scores! I wondered if people could get higher than 90 luck with this formula...now I know they can.

Cynaidh - Great to see you run with this formula like that. Care to share the rest of his stats and keep us updated if you notice signs of luck on that glad:) (Lots of extra arena tokens from tavern runs, etc...) Oh, and did you keep that data from the 400 prospects you passed up? I'd love to add the numbers to my post (how many under 50, between 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90+)

And to comment on Luck - there are lots of gear pieces in blood gods that boost luck, so a relatively middling luck score is not necessarily a huge handicap in the end-game. Has anyone tried to boost luck really high and what effects did you see?

[Pit Lord]

I think you are totally off :D. Every base stat weight is different. The whole thread is a joke I hope.

[Adoede]

That's certainly a possibility. If each stat is weighted differently, then yes...this is totally off. Still...if we can get more data, perhaps we can say with more certainty whether this is a strong theory or not.

If each stat really is weighted differently, then the luck scores should be all over the place (some over 100, some in the 20's etc...) But the luck scores come out pretty much where you'd expect if they were a regular stat alongside the 7 other stats. That's what makes this formula interesting...

If not, the joke's on me since I use this to help select my glads...either way, pretty fun to try to figure this stuff out, eh? And honestly, this at least gives me some way to evaluate a glad's possible luck rather than the total "leave it to chance" I had to live with before. I'm convinced enough to have peace of mind in selecting glads.

[Pit Lord]

We don't even know if luck is connected with other stats or it is a separate random roll. In case it is connected with the other stats we have to keep in mind the different stats weight differently.

size >> stamina > strength, agility, intellect >> presence, chi

We can see this trend both on the items and slaves available in the game.

Presence and chi are "cheap" stats while size is the most "expensive" (special stat). Stamina seems to be little more expensive than the other 3 main stats.

Lets assume luck is connected with other stats.
Now lets assume we have 2 imaginary gladiators and compare them:
Both gladiators cost the same and have the same "visible" stat summary:
Gladiator 1 80-80-80-80-90-70-80
Gladiator 2 80-80-80-70-80-80-90
Gladiator 1 has more points in the "expensive" stats size and stamina while gladiator 2 has more points in the "cheap" stats presence and chi. Therefore we can expect Gladiator 2 to have more luck than Gladiator 1 (a lot more in this particular case) because his other stats are "cheaper" and both gladiators have the same price.

And if you observe Ahhnold performance you can indeed believe luck is connected with the other stats.

[Kreegan]

Actually Intellect is as expensive as Stamina, if not even more.
Luck seems to be on a par with Strength/Agility when it comes to "price", judging from the extra Luck provided by certain items.

[Adoede]

All very good points, Pit Lord, and things I've thought about too. (Although that point about Ahhnold is a bit harsh...I think it's more a function of his style and weapon and balancing issues in the game. Otherwise all other expensive glads would have the same problem...)

I did initially think that your scenario was how luck would have been figured in the game too. That's why I didn't bother trying to figure it out until one day I just decided to start tracking my HOL prospects to see if there were any trends I could figure. The formula seemed to work. And then, I was quite surprised by the seeming accuracy of the formula in matching what I expected the luck scores to be for my active glads.

Again, if the stats are weighted differently, I would expect the formula to come up with some luck scores that are just totally illogical. If Strength was worth 2 gp each and Chi was worth only 1 gp each, for example, then that should wreak havoc on the results from the formula if the glad had high strength and low chi and we should have some luck scores waaay too high or waaay too low to be possible. That would discredit the formula straight away. But through my ~100 trials and Cynaidh's 400 it has consistently given reasonable values for luck. Just look at Oedi's values in his response to the thread above. Those are very reasonable values and an "authentic-feeling" spread. I'm not saying this formula is guaranteed to be right...but the circumstantial evidence is pretty compelling.

Truth is, we can't know for sure if the formula is accurate unless we have 2 identical glads who cost different amounts (which we'll never have).

[Cynaidh]

Cynaidh - Great to see you run with this formula like that. Care to share the rest of his stats and keep us updated if you notice signs of luck on that glad:) (Lots of extra arena tokens from tavern runs, etc...) Oh, and did you keep that data from the 400 prospects you passed up? I'd love to add the numbers to my post (how many under 50, between 50-59, 60-69, 70-79, 80-89, 90+)

Hmm i didn't write them all down, i saw values from 70-94 which seemed right for HoL Slaves.

The one i kept wasn't the best over all stats but i want to try it:

85-77-82-87-88-73-60 cost 1127

Plan is a shield using KO theatrics, want to see if the luck helps the KO rate, something like:

blade, shield, called shot, crowd pleaser, GV, armor move, hamstring, ko, surprise ending, bloody spectacle

[Apoca1ypse]

Firstly, its really cool that you've done this :D I think this is the first proper attempt anyone has made for working out luck.

Nate has said that some stats are weighted differently in slave prices, size being the main one. I dont know if he has stated that some other stats are also weighted differently though. However, while size is weighted differently, at least having a metric to guestimate a bit more accurately is nice :)


As for Ahhnold, ignore him from any studies. TBH I dont actually know how much he cost, I just know that it was 1170+. I spoke with Nate about him and was told that his luck isnt bad. As far as I can tell, his luck is average. I've run a hell of a lot of 2H ragers (7?), and he doesnt feel unlucky compared to the others. In regards to not being a top 10 glad with his stats, that is very much a function of his style, compared to anything else. I just really dont want to run him with a pair of axes.

[Apoca1ypse]

hmm, I merely assumed people were talking about Ahhnold as the glad with less than 35 luck. by your metric and a cost of 1170, Ahhnold has 77 luck.

Bruce Willis has 96 luck apparently, but it certainly doesnt feel like it. He does have 100 size though, and that will certainly play a part there.

[Adoede]

The one i kept wasn't the best over all stats but i want to try it:


You are bold, my friend. BOLD!

Honestly, I love how you play the game - willing to try random things for the uniqueness of the experience and to test your theories. You're cool in my book!

[Adoede]

Nate has said that some stats are weighted differently in slave prices, size being the main one. I dont know if he has stated that some other stats are also weighted differently though. However, while size is weighted differently, at least having a metric to guestimate a bit more accurately is nice :)

Thanks for this, Apoc. It seems Pit Lord is right after all. Do you remember what else Nate said about the slave prices? Is there a link to the thread? Did he say anything about higher stats costing more than lower stats? For example, a stat in the 80's costing more in average than a stat in the 60's?

I agree that the formula is still helpful - you just have to be mindful of how the "weightier" stats might be skewing your final result. Thus the 96 luck score for Bruce Willis might accidently incorporate the higher cost of a 100 size glad - skewing the result higher than should be the case.

So:
1) Use the formula to get an initial luck estimate
2) If size is high, expect your actual luck to be a bit lower (because weightier cost of size boosts some of that gold cost that's attributed to luck)
3) If sta and int are high, expect your actual luck to be a bit lower
4) If str and agi are high, luck score should be about right
5) If pres and chi are high, actual luck is probably higher

You guys get the picture.

So Big tall Wars with lots of Size and Stamina might be skewed higher in the formula than is the case.

p.s. - really, int is weighted heavier than strength and agility?

[Adoede]

The closest I've come to identical glads is this:

Seraph Mertrell - 70 78 98 75 78 81 73 (553 base stat points) Gold Cost: 1098 gp
Seraph Mursi ---- 76 75 98 75 81 80 66 (551 base stat points) Gold Cost: 1076 gp (just retired)

According to our theories so far, if they both had equal luck, Mursi should have cost more because of higher size, higher strength, and lower chi and presence. (he does have slightly higher intelligence, but the balance of things suggest he cost more overall). But actually, Mertrell cost quite a bit more than Mursi suggesting a higher luck score for Mertrell.

Here are their current records:
Mertrell - 1057 wins, 817 losses = 56.4% winrate, 1874 total fights
Mursi - 933 wins, 917 losses = 50.4% winrate, 1850 total fights

In reality, Mertrell seems waaaay more lucky than Mursi ever was. They were nearly identical builds - both speed theatrics with exotics (claws) and the same skills except Mursi had SOTC instead of SE - not much of a difference factor for speed glads. But look at how much better Mertrell has fared than Mursi. That is perhaps partially attributable to better luck.
- Mertrell got tons more arena tokens than Mursi in the beginning and got to level 50 long before Mursi did
- Mertrell just fights "luckier" and his record shows it.

So, if I had to guess, I'd say luck does seem to factor into a glad's market price.

[Sotc]

There might be something to the arena token drop/luck score correlation. My speed rage has +45 luck and he seems to get a noticeably more arena token drops than my other glads. As for gauntlet end prizes/conquest end prizes, not so much.

[Adoede]

Thanks for that bit, SOTC. I'll edit the original post.

Thanks to new info from Prinny, Pit Lord, Kreegan and Apoc, we have to fine-tune the formula to incorporate different "weightier stats". (Now I'm committed and have a brain-worm pushing me to figure this out)

So...can you guys chime in on some details for me?

1) What is the highest bonus you've ever seen for each stat on a piece of gear? Maybe this will help figure the different "tiers" of the stats. So far, I have:
Str +25, Int +25, Agi +27, Sta +22, Size +11, Pres +30, Chi +30, Luck +25

2) It seems the simple version of the formula seems "close" because the average gold cost per stat point is somewhere around 1.75. I'm trying to figure how the different stat tier's pricing works out so it averages around there and gives us a "weighted" version of the formula.

Some versions I tested that seemed to work well were these:
1) Str, Int, Agi, Sta & Luck are 1.75 gp each. Size is 3 gp each. Pres and Chi are 1 gp each. This averages out to 1.72 cost per stat.
2) OR based on the tiers I mentioned above, Str, Int, Luck at 1.75 gp each, Size is 2.5 gp each, Pres and Chi are 1.25 gp each, Sta is 2 gp each, and Agi is 1.5 gp each. This also averages out to 1.72 cost per stat. (and seems to match my glads perceived luck even better than the original formula)

If you'd like your glad to be included in my calculations, send me their stats and gold cost - and tell me if you think they're lucky or not. In fact, send me your luckiest glads so we can test the formula. So far, I only have 12 glads I'm using as my test cases for my spreadsheet.

[Alba Kebab]

Seen size +12 on a piece of leg gear just yesterday.

[Adoede]

I ran the weighted formula (#2 version) with the 12 HOL glads and this is a comparison of the weighted vs. non-weighted formula results:

Non-weighted simple formula | Weighted formula
Glad 01: Non-weighted 80 | Weighted 92
Glad 02: Non-weighted 74 | Weighted 88
Glad 03: Non-weighted 84 | Weighted 79
Glad 04: Non-weighted 83 | Weighted 91
Glad 05: Non-weighted 64 | Weighted 74
Glad 06: Non-weighted 64 | Weighted 78
Glad 07: Non-weighted 81 | Weighted 87
Glad 08: Non-weighted 63 | Weighted 65
Glad 09: Non-weighted 69 | Weighted 77
Glad 10: Non-weighted 77 | Weighted 84
Glad 11: Non-weighted 90 | Weighted 92
Glad 12: Non-weighted 92 | Weighted 92 (this is Cynaidh's new glad...lucky either way!)

As you can see, many had a significant difference. It's even more noticeable with non-HOL glads

Name _____St In Ag Sta Si Pr Ch Luck Cost Non-weighted/Weighted
Non-HOL 01 61 69 65 67 75 73 73 53.7 923 _____44/54
Non-HOL 02 66 74 64 67 60 66 83 55.3 908 _____39/55
Non-HOL 03 67 72 67 60 63 70 63 60.3 893 _____48/60
Non-HOL 04 74 60 78 67 73 56 63 73.9 946 _____70/74
Non-HOL 05 60 63 71 70 76 72 63 62.0 929 _____56/62
Non-HOL 06 51 71 75 58 74 65 52 66.7 890 _____63/67
Non-HOL 07 60 74 59 77 65 86 66 54.6 925 _____42/55
Non-HOL 08 65 57 68 84 51 57 54 74.4 880 _____67/74
Non-HOL 09 65 55 64 77 55 70 65 57.6 867 _____44/58
Non-HOL 10 69 68 75 84 62 67 77 65.6 970 _____52/66
Non-HOL 11 68 72 75 71 57 65 61 72.9 927 _____61/73
Non-HOL 12 56 75 73 61 67 55 63 71.6 901 _____65/72
Non-HOL 13 60 65 66 69 62 66 60 62.1 877 _____53/62
Non-HOL 14 60 53 70 67 64 59 51 65.0 848 _____61/65
Non-HOL 15 61 60 55 61 58 66 54 56.4 810 _____48/56
Non-HOL 16 64 73 68 66 48 77 85 50.7 885 _____25/51
Non-HOL 17 61 66 48 67 69 75 72 42.6 859 _____33/43
Non-HOL 18 73 54 56 75 57 57 45 70.7 850 _____69/71
Non-HOL 19 72 55 74 79 58 73 72 60.3 923 _____44/60
Non-HOL 20 66 63 56 65 85 65 79 46.1 913 _____43/46
Non-HOL 21 59 55 48 52 67 67 60 44.1 779 _____37/44

Some of the non-weighted results are ridiculous (#16 has 25 estimated luck non-weighted)
So the "weighted" formula definitely looks more accurate...

Waiting on some more gear data before I post the revised "weighted" formula for you all to enjoy.

[Pit Lord]

Estimating the exact "weight" of each stats probably won't be as simple as looking to the highest stat presented by the items. The highest stat is just that - highest possible stat in given item - if the item has the highest possible stat but the other stats are lacking it means the stat took a large part of the item budget.

We must first assume the items have "battle rank" budged. What is battle rank? Its the same as the rank (block rank, crit rank etc.). Its the minimum quantity of stat possible (although 1hp would be the minimum this will make the things too complicated).

We can than estimate the weight of each stat in "battle rank" points. As example:
1 rank = 1 battle rank
1 chi = 6-7 battle rank
1 int = 11-12 battle rank
1 deff = 3-4 battle rank
1 size = 20 battle rank
and so on...
This is just example not actual values.

The problem with this approach is the items have different budgets....
There certainly are different quality items of the same color - "common" legendary, "rare" legendary...

What I mean if we can estimate the "battle rank" of each stat including luck by looking the items then we will be able to estimate very close the gold price of each primary stat presented (or hidden) in the slaves. This way we can estimate the luck very close.

This all is valid if the luck is connected with the other stats and not random roll...

Then there is the question how each stat or combination of stats influences the performance of the gladiator.

The best thing about this game is you can play it 5 minutes per day and you can also easily sink hours in exploring it.

[Apoca1ypse]

I bet Nates reaction to this thread is as follows:

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/MichealJacksonPopcorn.gif

[Adoede]

Hahaha - nice one Apoc :)

[Adoede]

What I mean if we can estimate the "battle rank" of each stat including luck by looking the items then we will be able to estimate very close the gold price of each primary stat presented (or hidden) in the slaves. This way we can estimate the luck very close.

This all is valid if the luck is connected with the other stats and not random roll...

I get what you're saying Pit Lord and I agree with the concept. But the big question is how do we determine the relative weight of each stat in comparison with the other stats? The reason I wanted to see the highest bonus values for each stat is that I think it will give us a clue to the "weightiness" (battle rank) of each stat with the other stats.

So far I have:
Size: +12
Sta: +22
Int: +25
Luck: +25
Str: +27
Agi: +27
Pres: +30
Chi: +30

That shows us 5 tiers of stats...and Size is 2.5x more valuable than Pres/Chi on face value. At least this is a start to trying to figure what the gold cost per stat might be.

As for whether there is a link between Gold cost and luck, my post about my nearly identical glads is supposed to argue that there is truly a seeming correlation.

[Adoede]

As for Ahhnold, ignore him from any studies. TBH I dont actually know how much he cost, I just know that it was 1170+. I spoke with Nate about him and was told that his luck isnt bad. As far as I can tell, his luck is average. I've run a hell of a lot of 2H ragers (7?), and he doesnt feel unlucky compared to the others. In regards to not being a top 10 glad with his stats, that is very much a function of his style, compared to anything else. I just really dont want to run him with a pair of axes.

Hey Apoc, I'd like to pick on Ahhnold because he's the only glad that we know at least a little about his luck (isn't bad...). All my weighted models put his luck pretty high. That's the case for three different formulas I've tried. Now did Nate say his luck isn't bad (as in it's pretty average)...or that his luck isn't bad (as in hey, pretty good!). :)

And is there anyone who has a glad and knows their cost and luck?

[oedi]

I got a couple of old glads with very similar cost and total of stats that might be interesting to check out.

76 74 67 74 73 68 60 gold cost 981 total stats 492
77 83 73 67 63 65 63 gold cost 980 total stats 491

[Apoca1ypse]

Hey Apoc, I'd like to pick on Ahhnold because he's the only glad that we know at least a little about his luck (isn't bad...). All my weighted models put his luck pretty high. That's the case for three different formulas I've tried. Now did Nate say his luck isn't bad (as in it's pretty average)...or that his luck isn't bad (as in hey, pretty good!). :)

And is there anyone who has a glad and knows their cost and luck?

I asked what his luck was like, Nate said test for myself, I did some stuff, and reported to say that it seemed pretty good and Nate simply said " :) "

[Adoede]

Interesting...

According to my projections, I ran him with a few different "weighted" formulas and he came out like this:

Gladiator: Ahhnold
5-tier stat cost projection: 90.0 Luck
High Beta projection: 89.6 Luck
Low Beta projection: 89.9 Luck
(Beta measures the amount of deviation from the average...so in High Beta projection, size "weighs" more - Low Beta has less deviation)

Seem about right to you?

And what do you mean, "You did some stuff"?

[Alba Kebab]

Did a few tavern runs maybe? chance of picking up stuff in tavern do seem to be governed by luck.

Chance of gambling at street games does not, however.(as far as I can tell, so far)

[Apoca1ypse]

Interesting...

According to my projections, I ran him with a few different "weighted" formulas and he came out like this:

Gladiator: Ahhnold
5-tier stat cost projection: 90.0 Luck
High Beta projection: 89.6 Luck
Low Beta projection: 89.9 Luck
(Beta measures the amount of deviation from the average...so in High Beta projection, size "weighs" more - Low Beta has less deviation)

Seem about right to you?

And what do you mean, "You did some stuff"?

"stuff" included some tavern runs and fights. got a few fight tokens and item drops. Was still very early days for Ahhnold (~lvl 10) but he seemed somewhat lucky. As time has progressed, I've gome to see him as having average luck.

[Adoede]

The main things I see with my seemingly lucky glads is they get better rolls for learning skills faster and consistently get a lot more arena tokens doing taverns and conquests. Did Ahhnold seem pretty lucky in that regard? I can't seem to come up with a version of the formula that gives him anything worse than an 85+ luck score. My glads who have similar estimated luck get at least 2-3 arena tokens every time they do the 20 tavern quests. Does that happen with Ahhnold?

Also, with the higher levels of the game, luck seems to play less of a role in the fights because skills are so dominant by then...which makes sense. My "lucky" glads who seemed to pull victory out of thin air pretty regularly in the Primus and below game had a much much harder time doing that in blood gods.

[Apoca1ypse]

Any luck he may have is mitigated by how I run him, but he did seem lucky early on.

I dont do tavern runs that much so I have no idea if he gets extra fight tokens. He does get more than either Bruce when doing arena fights though.

[Cynaidh]

Follow up on the glad i bought, so far with tavern runs have seen between 2-7 each day extra fight tokens.

[Adoede]

Yowzers! 2-7 fight tokens is a ton! That glad is at the top of the list of luck in nearly every simulation I run.

[Apoca1ypse]

I think you get increased token drops at lower levels. I remember winning a heap more when I last leveled up a glad.

[Adoede]

Crow, Narol and Cynaidh, as promised if you PM me an email address (you can just create a random one if you want privacy) I'll send you my latest data and calculators on figuring luck. It includes three different projections and an average of the three so you can get a relative idea of how a prospect's luck might turn out. Even if it just gives a range, that is still pretty useful I've found.

And Crow, I'll pm Nate right now about joining your team if you'll do the same when you have a moment. Peace!

[FrosteeFyre]

My best Non-HoL glad:

75, 75, 73, 70, 74, 71, 72 = 510 total stats
cost: 958 / 1.75 = ~547

Luck = ~37 My gladiator (he is lvl 20) gets on avg 2-4 arena tokens per 20 tavern quests

My new gladiator I purchased is:

79, 61, 79, 56, 67, 65, 58 = 465 total stats

cost: 936 / 1.75 = ~535

Luck= ~70 This glad is lvl 7 and he's lost a surprising number of fights he really shouldn't have based on his supposedly high luck.

Hope these stats helped!

[Adoede]

I just saw an HOL glad with a 37 agility...and it was the top prospect of the day too.

[Silverwing]

Is there a way to measure luck?

[Adoede]

Not officially, no. Just some basic thoughts gleaned from conversations throughout the forums about how to estimate it. Although with the HOL glad I saw yesterday sporting a 37 agility, one of the main potential flaws of my calculations was eliminated (the incorrect assumption that HOL glads couldn't have attributes below 55-60 in anything).

I use three calculations - one assuming 5 stat-cost tiers, one assuming a high level of variance in stat-costs per attribute, and one assuming a low variance in stat-cost per attribute.

That said, luck can be boosted using gear, so average luck doesn't seem to be a big weakness in the end-game. High luck does seem to play a role in knockout rate and defensive triggers though...