Well attendance, might also have dropped a little, since these past weeks have seen a lot of battles from me, and maybe people got tired of it.
But from no on, at least without events, i will "only" be doing 1 each week, as voted on one of the polls. So maybe people might be more willing to join these again
For you
@Goober Pyle - Would you mind making me some more concrete numbers to go with ? Other than ratio that is ;-)
You seem to have a good idea of how to work with this, and i will rely on what you supply
bottom line up front:
Please enact one of the following two plans:
1) alter Colorado's Medium fort caps to 96 attacking 80 effective ASAP and we will actively monitor the situation and request regular (roughly every 4 regular fights) tweaks to those numbers throughout the rest of august and then lock in new numbers for all forts in September once things settle in (with a recommendation other worlds be asked whether they want to adopt the new numbers we settle on)
2) Take a poll of Colorado (and perhaps other worlds) asking which of the following caps they want to adopt for the foreseeable future (with expectation of another poll in September and/or October)
What Fort Battle capacity limit would you like to have going forward?:
A) Large: 144 attackers 120 defenders; Medium: 96 attackers 80 defenders; Small: 48 attackers 40 defenders
B) Large: 134 attackers 112 defenders; Medium: 90 attackers 75 defenders; Small: 36 attackers 30 defenders
C) Large: 125 attackers 104 defenders; Medium: 84 attackers 70 defenders; Small: 24 attackers 20 defenders
D) (No change) Large: 130 attackers 120 defenders; Medium: 92 attackers 84 defenders; Small: 46 attackers 42 defenders
=================================
Ok, I went back and looked in a little more detail
I looked at every battle on colorado since June 1st
There were 54 battles with at least 46 defenders (so Mediums and Larges with moderate or better turnout)
All defenders wiped out == 0
Win by flag == 2 (ratios of 1.31:1 and 1.18:1)
Lose by rounds ==18
Attack wiped out == 34
more or less when the ratio is <=1.1 odds strongly favor attack being wiped out; above that odds strongly favor the battle ending lose by rounds
(there was one miserable attack wiped out despite a decent ratio (1.136:1 [92:81]), but it was one with a doomed from the start battle plan)
There were 7 battles with relatively high ratios:
87:60 (1.45:1) flag defended
92:70 (1.31:1) flag
captured
82:63 (1.30:1) flag defended
82:67 (1.22:1) flag defended
91:77 (1.18:1) flag
captured
83:71 (1.17:1) flag defended
92:79 (1.16:1) flag defended
Based on this I believe the ratio at which well led attacks have a decent but not overwhelming chance of winning is roughly 1.2:1
When I look at battles with fewer than 46 defender, and exclude awesome and searchers one (a small that is outside of the major alliance battle agreement)
there are 6 battles with ratios higher than the current ratio (~1.09:1)
35:17 (2.05:1) defenders
wiped out
46:29 (1.59:1) flag
captured
32:24 (1.33:1) flag
captured
28:23 (1.22:1) attack wiped out
38:32 (1.19:1) flag defended
32:28 (1.14:1) flag
captured
While this might suggest that smalls may need a different ratio, at least preliminarily it suggests that using the same 1.2:1 ratio does not overly favor the attack even in small battles