Let's talk about Luck and ARLS Formula

[Apoca1ypse]

Firstly, its really cool that you've done this 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.

[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]

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?

[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 " "