The Hashashin
Battle analysis of SHARK/VIC Kul Tar sieges against SIN
Authors: Tink XX, Jejune
Introduction
In response to the level of interest surrounding our series of battles in Kul Tar, the Hashashin (SIN) is presenting a series of data collected from the siege operations led by SHARK and VIC against SIN’s He-Man and Fiona. Defense of the SIN cities in Kul Tar involved He-Man’s local forces, composed primarily of T1 orc spears that were used to absorb oncoming cavalry strikes on his besieged cities, as well as tactical cavalry strikes sent from other SIN cities in both Elgea and the Broken Lands. The data collected and presented below is taken from battles between November 1 and December 7 in Kul Tar, and includes the recent sieges of He-Man and Fiona that resulted in both a raze and capture for SHARK, respectively.
Data Collection
Our analysis is based on the data from SIN combat reports that account for battles that took place in the rectangle of coordinates from 765; -293 to 1000; -463. Combat data was collected by using the API combat data feed and compiling all of our reports in a database. Since some of our attack reports came back as “comprehensively crushed” the real number of losses for the SHARK/VIC confed is somewhat higher, although there were only few such reports with substantial SIN armies involved.
Analysis
- Breakdown of losses by the type of troops shows that SIN used almost exclusively T1 orc spears to defend SIN Kul Tar cities against direct cavalry attacks, and assorted T1 and T2 cavalry to break SHARK and VIC sieges. The T1 spear losses for SIN (marked in green) correspond predominantly to SHARK and VIC’s largely T2 cavalry losses (marked in blue). Ranged troops and infantry were most heavily used in SHARK/VIC siege camps, with spear units to a lesser degree. As a result, SIN’s cavalry losses (marked in blue) correspond predominantly to SHARK/VIC’s ranged, infantry, and spear losses.
Table 1. Troop losses in Kul Tar, by alliance.
Alliance | cavalry | infantry | ranged | spear | total |
SHARK | 368,378.00 | 319,054.00 | 690,687.00 | 373,009.00 | 1,751,128.00 |
VIC | 628,048.00 | 92,151.00 | 261,239.00 | 275,606.00 | 1,257,044.00 |
SIN | 592,623.00 | 4,969.00 | 0.00 | 1,694,221.00 | 2,291,813.00 |
SHARK+VIC | 996,426.00 | 411,205.00 | 951,926.00 | 648,615.00 | 3,008,172.00 |
Thus, SIN lost 59% of the cavalry compared to the combined SHARK and VIC cavalry casualties, and 1.7 million spears vs. SHARK/VIC’s combined loss of 1.7 million non-cavalry troops. Note that SIN’s 1.7 million spears includes 1.59 million of He-Man’s t1 spears.
- Another measure of comparing losses is experience points. Unlike raw troop counts, XP points to some degree reflect the build time and cost of the troops, as higher XP units have higher build time, require more expensive advanced resources to produce, and are more costly to maintain. For example, T1 spears have only 1XP point, whereas T2 cavalry have 4XP points.
In terms of XP, each alliance took approximately ⅓ of the total losses:
Table 2. Losses for each alliance expressed as XP points
Total XP Losses for SHARK | 4,629,612.00 |
Total XP Losses for VIC | 3,605,796.00 |
Total XP Losses for SIN | 3,908,535.00 |
- In terms of player participation, we have counted 51 individual accounts on VIC/SHARK’s side against 15 accounts on SIN’s side. This count excludes Lost A as his role in the Kul Tar campaign is best described as ambivalent.
We have counted 104 cities from SHARK, 75 cities from VIC, and 43 cities from SIN involved in combats.
- How did SHARK and VIC casualties amount to more than double the XP points of SIN? The answer to that is combat ratios. The majority of SHARK and VIC cavalry losses is attributed to direct attacks on He-Man’s cities. Direct attacks account for 543,279 out of the total 628,048 cavalry casualties for VIC and 259,454 out of 368,378 for SHARK, or 802,733 for both alliances combined. This cavalry was absorbed almost entirely by He-Man’s T1 spears and accounts for most of his spear losses.
Table 3. Losses of attacking troops
Alliance | cavalry | infantry | ranged | spear | Total attacker losses |
SHARK | 259,454.00 | 44,968.00 | 1,910.00 | 0.00 | 306,332.00 |
VIC | 543,279.00 | 92,151.00 | 55,271.00 | 303.00 | 691,004.00 |
SIN | 591,291.00 | 898.00 | 0.00 | 97,616.00 | 689,805.00 |
SHARK+VIC | 802,733.00 | 137,119.00 | 57,181.00 | 303.00 | 997,336.00 |
A typical casualty ratio in these attacks has been 1:1 or very close to it (1 cavalry unit for 1 T1 spear), as illustrated in a combat report below:
Looking at the other side of the equation, which is defensive losses for SHARK and VIC after SIN attacks, again we see that the ratios tipped in SIN’s favor, since the alliances loaded their defensive troops on plains in the desert, which confers a huge attack bonus to cavalry while not benefitting defenders in any way. Looking at the losses of defensive troops, is also remarkable that SHARK and VIC sieges contained a large share of ranged troops (47.5% for SHARK and 41% for VIC), which have very weak defense against cavalry. SIN defensive troop losses mostly resulted from direct attacks on the cities by VIC and SHARK.
Table 4. Losses of defending troops
Alliance | cavalry | infantry | ranged | spear | Total defender losses |
SHARK | 108,924.00 | 274,086.00 | 688,777.00 | 373,009.00 | 1,444,796.00 |
VIC | 84,769.00 | 0.00 | 205,968.00 | 205,968.00 | 496,705.00 |
SIN | 513.00 | 4,071.00 | 0.00 | 1,596,605.00 | 1,601,189.00 |
SHARK+VIC | 193,693.00 | 274,086.00 | 894,745.00 | 578,977.00 | 1,941,501.00 |
Here is one of the combat reports that illustrates the defensive troop loss ratios:
You can download xml of the report here.
Conclusion
From the strategic perspective, we believe that the outcome of the Kul Tar campaign is too early to evaluate. With SHARK and VIC having an overwhelming advantage in Elgea, loss of some of SIN’s cities in Kul Tar was inevitable. That said, the data above demonstrates a more efficient use of troops by SIN.
