Let’s keep this thread civilized please Right now, for me there is no known evidence/proof that the 100 mana per turn and 50 per tile hit on defense were ever right/implemented in that way. So I currently trust Petri’s statement until proven wrong. We should all work in one direction and not bash each other.
In my video that I posted above and recorded 1 day ago ([SOLVED] New mana per turn calculation on defense? 80 mana per turn instead of 100!) you can see that a fast hero with level 9 mana troop (= +7% mana gain) already charges in 9 turns (without being hit by a single tile), instead of the normal 10 turns. I assume Zero’s opponent had at least a level 9 mana troop 7 months ago. So between end of June and now it seems like nothing has changed in that matter.
Seems like either the break point is different or our assumed numbers for total mana needed to be charged are wrong. Here is a quick calculation that I did:
We know for sure that a fast hero charges in 10 turns on defense, without a mana troop and without being hit (I have proof for that if needed). And we know for sure that a fast hero with a level 9 mana troop (= +7% mana gain) charges in 9 turns on defense, without being hit (see video posted above).
a) Blue background: Assuming a fast hero needs 800 mana to charge, gets 80 mana per turn and has a crit troop, we would end up with the initially mentioned results: fully charged in 10 turns.
b) green background: Assuming a fast hero needs 800 mana to charge, gets 80 mana per turn and has a level 9 or 10 mana troop (= 7% mana gain), we do not end up with the results shown in my recorded video. According to my calculations - even when rounding up - a fast hero with +7% mana gain would still charge in 10 turns but my recording shows different. So something has to be wrong with our numbers… either the 80 mana per turn or the 800 mana needed to charge a fast hero. Am I missing something?
It sounds like you were involved in the previous calculations for mana gain on defense. Can you show your calculations please, so we can track it down? Or what were your calculations based on?
I do realize it, yes. But I am asking, is there any proof that it has ever been different? If so, can you provide this proof please?