Shakes & Fidget - The Game - Supportboard  

Go Back   Shakes & Fidget - The Game - Supportboard > Game & Support > Help & Questions > Character Advice

Notices

Character Advice Need help building your avatar? You've come to the right place.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old 05-27-2011, 11:21 AM
Jaxem Jaxem is offline
Blacksmith
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 199
Default

Build up your strength and con, not dex. Dexterity for a warrior only helps reduce damage done by scouts, and it doesn't reduce it that much. Increasing your own damage (by increasing strength) and your hit points (by increasing con) allows you to do more damage and last longer in fights. A warriors biggest advantage is his high constitution.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 05-27-2011, 11:26 AM
kaoswolf kaoswolf is offline
Truffle Shuffler
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5
Default

okay, awesome
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 05-27-2011, 01:01 PM
Bullbound Bullbound is offline
Supreme Adventurer
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,208
Default

There are several threads about this. Some hints:

Strength: For warriors it increases damage, For everyone it decreases damage from warriors by about 1/20th.

Dexterity: For scouts it increases damage, For everyone it decreases damage from scouts by about 1/20th.

Intelligence: For mages it increases damage, For everyone it decreases damage from mages by about 1/20th.

Constitution: Increases health for all.

Luck: ONLY increases your chance for a critical hit using the ENEMY's level (see the formula by hovering your mouse over the stat)
__________________
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
Please click "Thanks" if you found my post helpful
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 05-27-2011, 01:23 PM
Charista Charista is offline
Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullbound View Post
There are several threads about this. Some hints:

Strength: it decreases damage from warriors by about 1/20th.

Dexterity: it decreases damage from scouts by about 1/20th.

Intelligence: it decreases damage from mages by about 1/20th.
I'm just going to clarify this. Str, Dex, and Int are offensive stats and the equation is:

Code:
Damage = Waepon Damage x (1+Stat/10)
You can see that on your character sheet.

It is suspected that the equation, including defender's stat is:

Code:
Damage = Waepon Damage x (1+Attacker_Stat/10 - Defender_Stat/20)
That would make the stat 1/2 as effective on Defense as it is on offense. The way you phrased it might be interpreted that it is 1/20th as effective on Defense as on Offense.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 05-28-2011, 06:44 AM
CyKoS CyKoS is offline
Truffle Shuffler
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 6
Default

Warriors are fine.

Just get more gold and level your stats if you want to own arena.
I handle Mages and Rangers just fine but my main issue would most likely be rangers and high int mages who stat pad at my level.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 05-29-2011, 09:04 PM
xodidumdum xodidumdum is offline
Truffle Shuffler
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5
Default

The only place warriors are slightly underpowered is against bosses. And mages are in the same boat. Scouts are overwhelmingly able to "get lucky" to clear dungeon bosses at a faster rate than warriors or mages, especially for dungeons 10-12.

As far as you not being able to do well against scouts or mages, it is probably a combination of stat allocation as well as equipment. While the suspected "damage equation" may be a good indicator of what the initial hit may do by someone of roughly equal level (by definition it is a balls estimate, because it is not a linear equation, for simple proof of this, attack someone in the same class with half your main stat, their damage should be 0 based on that) , it is a shockingly poor long term estimate, which greatly affects the outcomes of certain matchups, specifically ones that go longer (warrior v scout being the example).

The initial damage means very little. Damage suppression becomes a big factor as well. Based on the use of about 2200 battles (once I started keeping track), plugging it into a simple markov chain results in a very simple finding, that how quickly damage goes UP (30% per round is hogwash, its just the BASE), is ties closely to ratios of stats. That is not to say it is any specific ratio, simply that it is a decelerating nonlinear movement that bases at around 30% for roughly a 4 to 1 stat allocation. Meaning, if you are fighting a scout, and their dex is about 4 times your str, you will see their damage increase by roughly 30% per round. If the ratio is lower, that ROI will go down, and vice versa. Because the ratios do play a pivotal part in how the mechanics work in battles, it means stat weightings for different classes are different, and forward biased marginal values.

You see this in practice most commonly on the german servers, where theorycrafting has led to some rather unusual stat weightings at the highest levels. The level 290+ scouts actually have MORE HP than warriors of equal level, because of their marginal gains for CON.

If you use just a simple base markov-2 chain, you'll find, that for a warrior, it will spit out the following marginal values:

Str: 1
Con: .3924 + (.141 * Str/Con)
Luck: .1901 + (.094 * Str/Luck)
Dex: .132
Int: .118

What this basically means, is for optimization, you're going to want final stats that are roughly 1.6 in the ratio of str to con, about 2.5 to 1 str to luck, and 7 to 1 for dex and 8 to 1 for int. This does not mean 800 str and 100 int. This means that if the next point of str costs 8, if the next point of int costs less than 1, buy the stat in int until it is 1, etc.

The values for scouts is vastly different. As a result, an optimized scout wears 1 DEX item, and everything else is ideally a 3 stat item. The optimized warrior has either 3 or 4 3 stat items, 0 to 1 all stat items (4 or 5 total epic style items), and the rest is pure str. This is because all things equal, a warrior vs a scout with mirror stats results in a win for the scout roughly 67% of the time (twice as likely to evade the killing blow). Similarly, for a warrior v mage, since the health ratio is 5 to 2, and 4.5 base damage per level (in weapon, vs 1.8 (2 - 10%), the odds are about 61.4% with the warrior because a critical hit from a mage is far less likely to reduce the number of hits required to get the kill, whereas the critical from a warrior IS more likely to be a game changer.

So in short, balance your stats properly, and you will likely see different results. My warrior is around 190, and I routinely tear apart mages up to level 210 or so, run about 75-25 against warriors (the ones that go pure str can actually beat me due to damage suppression), and I run about 90-10 against scouts under 200 because they don't know how to equip. The only place where scouts are overpowered is against dungeon bosses, because their ideal setup lends itself to more often getting "lucky", and that for some stupid reason, the game decided to make like 50% of the dungeon bosses warriors, which present a MUCH larger challenge to a warrior or mage.

And at the highest levels (275+), a properly geared scout will generally destroy a properly geared warrior, a properly geared mage will win slightly more than 50/50 against the scout, and a properly geared warrior wins nearly 80% against a mage (unless the mage gets criticals on 2 of the last 3 hits, shortening the fight by a round, and the warrior gets nothing).

As for the statements about having weapons with much higher damage ranges. This is a risk/reward scenario. If you are shooting for the moon (trying to attack someone out of your normal range), it can give you a better chance, but it will also open the door for people who normally couldn't beat you to do just that as well.

Please note also, a markov-2 chain is a very very simple second order probabalistic matrix, and solves without recalculating a determinant for the 3 variables (marginal values for str,int,dex, since they are relational).

If you want to push further into that number crunching, you will need to solve via a nonlinear n-unbound deterministic matrix, and that will provide a more proper list of values based on str (since everything is marginal, and the above spits out static values for dex and int, when in fact, they are NOT static). For all intensive purposes though, for most people, its more than accurate enough.

Last edited by Bullbound; 05-29-2011 at 10:38 PM. Reason: Please use "Edit" instead of double post
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 05-29-2011, 11:28 PM
Charista Charista is offline
Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 448
Default

Issue 1: Stats in General

They need that kind of obfuscation just to get to "Keep your Str a little higher than your Con"? Wow, talk about overlooking the obvious. Markov-2 chains aren't going to win you any fans. Try something people that didn't go to university can understand.

This RPG is about a conflict between two equations. One is a function of your offense and the enemy's defenses, the other is his offense against your defenses. Whichever equation reaches 0 first wins for the attacker.

The damage calculation is generally accepted to be:
Code:
damage = RND(Min, MAX) * (1+Attacker's_Primary/10 - Defenders/20)
where Defenders = the same stat as the Attackers+Primary
and we ignore Luck, since we know its equation and can figure out exactly how much a point of Luck is vs. a point of Primary
But, when the two combatants have different Primary stats, the defensive stats are generally much lower, This is because they are only 1/2 as effective, and they are only used 1/3 of the time, where the Offensive stat is always used on Offense in every fight. So, in the above equation, we can ignore Defenders/20 whenever fighting someone of a different class for First Order analysis. (Ie. If the Defender's stat is 1/4th your Offensive stat, it is only 1/8th as prevalent in the determination of final damage as yours is.)

Let's look at someone with Primary1 = 3x Con1. (This was common for many players in the early days of the game, and in general this was a full set of Primary Gear with only one Epic.) Using normal gear, I can swap Primary Gear for Con at 1:1. Let's say I swap enough gear that Primary reduces to 2xCon1, so since I subtracted Con1 amount of stat points from Primary1, I have doubled my Con so Primary2 = Con2 = 2xCon1. I sacrifice only 33% damage, because Damage is proportional to Primary, which has lost only 33% of its original value. My HP has increased by 100% by doubling Con.

Or:

Code:
 Case 1: Primary1 = 3xCon1

Case 2: Primary2 = Primary 1-Con1 = 3xCon1 - Con1 = 2xCon1 = 2/3 x Primary1
Con2 = Con1+Con1 = 2xCon1
From this, you can see Con2 = 2xCon 1 and so HP have doubled, but Primary is only down by 1/3rd, so damage is only reduced by 1/3. Most would expect if damage reduced by 1/3, then the trade-off should increase defenses by 1/3, but we got a lot more defenses than expected.

We compare before and after against an unchanged Defender. If it took me 4 attacks to kill the enemy before the change, I now need 6 since I'm doing 2/3rds damage. If my enemy needed 4 attacks to kill me originally, he now needs 8, since my HP doubled. So, before, we were evenly matched, winning based on weapon ranges and first-hit, now I am killing him a lot more often than he is killing me, because his weapon range has to overcome the fact that as a %age of his HP bar, I am doing much more to him. (As a side effect, since it takes a lot more hits, I am more resistant to the standard deviation of a wide range weapon.)

So, if my Primary is very high, I can sacrifice a little of it to kill the enemy a little slower, but because my HP are already low, small increase can greatly improve my survivability. A small sacrifice of Offense gains a large amount of defense.

See? No Markov-2 obfuscations, it's all High School statistics, and it's fairly obvious. Simplify, simplify, simplify.

If we reconsider the the Defender's Defense stat that we earlier trivialized out of First Order analysis, it doesn't change the situation much. With it back in play, Primary = Con leaves us a little weak on Offense, so we want to bump it up a little to overcome the defense. This shouldn't require any advanced mathematical proof. It is fairly obvious. It is entirely pedantic to try to figure out if Defensive stats should be 1/4 or 1/6 Primary. There simply isn't enough value in the difference to buy enough Offense to matter a whit. The random effect of weapon range will overwhelm that tiny little difference.

You do state the correct reason why you lose to high Str Warriors. Strength is a defense against Warriors, as well as an attack stat. While above I can say the Defensive stat is small and can be ignored, when fighting your own class or a dungeon of the same stat, your enemy's attack stat is numerically high and half as effective on defense as on offense. So, if you shift stats from Con to Primary, you lose only half of its defensive strength (by getting it back on Primary) as well as gaining full power on damage. In short, to kill your own class, maximize your Primary stat at the cost of Con. We could waste our lives and try to figure out where you sacrifice too much Con, but there's no need. I've run full Int before, and the breakpoint is lower, so we can't give up too much Con equipment for Int in the Class-vs. same_class contest. Sometimes anecdotal evidence can save us some time. It's easier to experiment and try it yourself than develop the math, for most human beings.

And I assure you FlyingJoe and I have proven quite effectively to each other that wearing all +triple is not a defense against a fully Int Mage. We were the only top 10 Mages for a while, though I see now a couple others are catching up. We both carry Int back-up gear when we're concerned that the other is getting aggressive, and leave each other alone most of the time so that we can stick with Int = 5/4 Con builds to fight everyone else in the top 10.

___

Issue 2: Mages

Mages are the kings of the Random Number Generator.. Typical Arena fights last for only 3 attacks by the winner, two by the loser.

With a wide ranger weapon (highest I have seen is Max = 2.5 x Min), for a Mage to average 50% more damage than average, the Mage need only roll high 3x. For a Warrior having to hit something at +50% damage, he has to hit 7 times at high damage, which is far more unlikely. Against Dungeons, Mages need about 7 hits, but Warriors need 13, so again the Mage is much more likely to have a lucky, high damage fight.

Mages, with wide ranges on their weapons can kill dungeons a lot further ahead than other classes. They simply have a wider standard deviation due to fewer attacks per fight.

So, yes, wielding the wide range weapon is not good on Arena attacks. You can beat some much higher levels when you get lucky, but that means you're going for a low win:loss rate, and yes, you're giving lower levels the chance to beat you; however, the reality is that no low level player is going to notice and so you'll never actually pay the price of having a wide range weapon. If, on the other hand, you are regularly being attacked and losing by a small amount, by swotching to a higher range weapon, you increase teh probablility of a high damage fight, and so can gain some small probability of getting a win, where before it may have been impossible for you to win.

But for dungeons, the wide range and the fact you can attack many times per day means that a Mage will generally drop dungeons ahead of other classes.
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 05-30-2011, 12:06 AM
xodidumdum xodidumdum is offline
Truffle Shuffler
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5
Default

Charista, the problem with your simplification lies in this statement you made: "We compare before and after against an unchanged Defender. If it took me 4 attacks to kill the enemy before the change, I now need 6 since I'm doing 2/3rds damage. If my enemy needed 4 attacks to kill me originally, he now needs 8, since my HP doubled. So, before, we were evenly matched, winning based on weapon ranges and first-hit, now I am killing him a lot more often than he is killing me, because his weapon range has to overcome the fact that as a %age of his HP bar, I am doing much more to him. (As a side effect, since it takes a lot more hits, I am more resistant to the standard deviation of a wide range weapon.)"

While this logically makes sense, its not really true. If a mage takes 3 hits to burn 1M health, considering the damage increases per round, will only need 5 to burn 2M. Not 6. With Scouts, the damage multiplier is often even bigger, because of all the evading and blocking, which perpetuates fights into much later rounds than they would otherwise go to. Also, by reducing the main stat 33% as you say, yes, your raw damage goes down, but you would be very hard pressed to try and convince anyone who has arena'd enough, especially at the empirical level, that, say, going from 4800 str to 3600 str in order to bring con from say, 2000 all the way to 4000, is going to win them a lot of battles. Damage suppression will start to become a big thing, especially against hard hitting targets with decent secondary stats.

Take for example this. Based on actual data collected against a single (well he didnt volunteer per se, but he was an excellent example) target. At 5k str vs his 1150 str, I saw my damage increase at a rate of 34.7% per round over 15831 data points. At 4k str, this was only 26.1%. Over the course of 4 rounds, compounding (against a mage for example), that's the difference between a 4th hit of 328k (base damage 100k * 1.347^4) vs (80k* 1.261^4) 200k. When you go deeper in warrior v warrior or warrior v scout, that difference starts to become astronomical. In this particular example, what started as a 20% damage difference became a 60+% difference in 4 rounds.

So when calculating out longer battles, this becomes an even larger factor. That's why scouts prefer 3 stat gear at the highest levels, and why warriors want to REDUCE fight length and RNG by hitting harder and earlier against scouts. Just a glance over on server 1 in DE reveals some pretty basic stuff. At the highest levels, warriors have the HIGHEST main stats and the LOWEST con. Mages are in the middle, and scouts have the lowest main stats by far, and the highest con by far.

And I understand your concern about using advanced probabilities, but at the same time, it's more accurate than blanket statements, and the numbers generated are going to be more reliable than just eyeballing it.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 05-30-2011, 01:43 AM
Charista Charista is offline
Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 448
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by xodidumdum View Post
While this logically makes sense, its not really true. If a mage takes 3 hits to burn 1M health, considering the damage increases per round, will only need 5 to burn 2M. Not 6.
I'd need massive data sampling to prove that. You need to prove that the Rage effect increases.

However, your position is irrelevant, since it affects both individuals equally. I am taking longer to kill and longer to be killed. Unless teh Rage effect is more effective for my opponent than me, if I increase my survivability by more than my opponent's, it works.

Quote:
With Scouts, the damage multiplier is often even bigger, because of all the evading and blocking, which perpetuates fights into much later rounds than they would otherwise go to.
Again, you must prove tht the Rage effect increases with attack and not successful attack. In my experience, the Rage effect depeneds on the opponent's last successful attack and is not cumulative. I demand sampling to prove any assumptions as to how the Rage effect works. this is usually the largest failure of people that attempt to analyze these things: they rarely know how much work is necessary to actually statistically prove something.

Now, someone brought up Markov, which is indicates someone has more than the usual clue, so I expect you'll have some data for me. (Don't expect me to find it. I can't read German.)

Quote:
Also, by reducing the main stat 33% as you say, yes, your raw damage goes down, but you would be very hard pressed to try and convince anyone who has arena'd enough, especially at the empirical level, that, say, going from 4800 str to 3600 str in order to bring con from say, 2000 all the way to 4000, is going to win them a lot of battles.
It's common knowledge on Server 1, in the top ranks. And it's not on the Arena that we proved it.

It's on Dungeons.

Anyway, I proved it heuristically to myself first, because I had a dearth of Epic drops from L50-110. Since I spent that whole time with normal weapons, and being highly belligerent at 30 attacks per day (9750 victories ATM), I had trouble beating a lot of people. I stumbled upon the INt=Con theory by accidentally wearing the wrong equipment, and beating a dungeon that I had trouble with. Then I sat and figured this all out, tested it over and over, satisfying myself it worked.

And then Darstard had a problem with a dungeon, and listened to my theories, and dropped it in ten minutes.

Nothing says, "It works," like seeing it work.

I'm not the only one that figured it out, though. As I said, FlyingJoe figured it out on his own. I'm sure others have igured some of it out, at least, just by looking at equipment on Page 1.

Quote:
Damage suppression will start to become a big thing, especially against hard hitting targets with decent secondary stats.
Doesn't happen with +triples. You only get high damage suppression against other classes with +all, which hampers you vs. your own class.

It's just rock-paper-scissors. There is no 1 "I win" build, if the equipment playing field is fair.

Quote:
At 5k str vs his 1150 str, I saw my damage increase at a rate of 34.7% per round over 15831 data points.
That doesn't make any sense. What are you changing in order to cause the increase of 34.7%? Your Str? Are you talking about the Rage effect? Was that 34.7% per attack, or per successful attack? Was there a noticeable influence of his damage on yours, ie. Did you get more Rage effect if he hit you for a higher amount?

What you're suggesting here, I think, is an average linear Rage effect of 34.7% per successful attack. this does not counter any of my argument. While it reduces the number of attacks my opponent will take to kill me, it will also reduce the number of attacks it will take me to kill my opponent.

Okay, let's look at my example:

Code:
Case 1:
X = my average damage
N = enemy HP
X+X4/3+X(4/3)^2+X(4/3)^3 = N
=X(1+4/3+16/9+64/27)
A = 1+4/3+16/9+64/27

Y = his average damage
M = my HP
Y*A = M

Case 2:
C = my average damage = 2/3X
N = enemy HP
C*A = 2/3*N
N = C * (A+K) = 2/3*X*(A+K)
A = 2/3*A + 2/3*K
A/3 = 2/3*K
K = A/2
A/2 = 3.24
(4/3)^4 = 3.16
We're over by just a little bit, so it'll take 6 attacks with a lot of overkill.

Code:
 Enemy's attack vs. me
D*A = M
D*(A+L) = M*2
A+L = 2A
L = A
A = 6.48
(4/3)^4 = 3.16
(4/3)^5 = 4.21
So, it also is 6, but at 7.37, there is far less overkill. Recognizing thta there is a random effect, I'll kill on the 6th attack more than 90% of the time, but my opponent will sometimes take 7. So, I've gone from a 50% win rate to winning almost every time I get first attack and winning 50% of the time the enemy does.

Quote:
So when calculating out longer battles, this becomes an even larger factor.
A factor that actually gets used to obfuscate arguments. It affects both players equally, on average, and so can be ignored unless you are doing Third Order Analysis. Even then, it's going to rinse out in the wash. Rage may take an automatic win and turn it into a 90% chance of a win, but it's not going to take an auto-win and turn it into a 50% chance.

You've brought up Block and Dodge. Do these affect my argument?

No.

Any time you're fighting a Mage, you don't get that effect, so that rejects 1/2 of all fights. When a Warrior fights a Warrior, block rates are identical, so law of averages rejects that one. Same with Scout vs. Scout. There is only one case remaining, Warrior vs. Scout. This is the only problem fight, since we do not know the actual Evade rate; however, we can assume that it is used to balance the two classes, and if we make that assumption, Block and Evade cancel. You are welcome to try to prove otherwise. (Don't forget to include Armor. You forgot that when talking about Warrior vs. Mage balance earlier.)

Quote:
That's why scouts prefer 3 stat gear at the highest levels, and why warriors want to REDUCE fight length and RNG by hitting harder and earlier against scouts.
I see no argument that makes that any more important to the Scout than any other class. +triple Epics are the best for all classes against any except their own class, for exactly the reason I have stated. Rage affects no one more than anyone else.

Quote:
Just a glance over on server 1 in DE reveals some pretty basic stuff. At the highest levels, warriors have the HIGHEST main stats and the LOWEST con.
You're dead wrong about the builds on S1.DE. The three highest level Warriors on S1.DE are Str = 5/4*Con. The lowest, at Rank 11, is Str = 1.9*Con, but that makes sense if he is predating on the higher level Warriors, since those Warriors can't change build to counter him or lose to the higher numbers of Mages and Scouts. [Edit: Checked the Mages and Scouts, too. Everyone on the top of the DE HoF is the same as here. Primary = Con, through Primary = 5/4*Con, wiht a couple predators at higher values, but they're lower on the HoF.] Methinks attitudes on S1.DE have changed since you read that argument. S1.US is very similar, except that we have more Wars in the top 15 (9 last week). Some of those Warriors run high Str and prey on Warriors. Others run balanced stats because they get preyed on by Scouts and Mages. FlyingJoe and I were the best off, since we didn't hit each other (much) and could run balanced 100% of the time and joked about hitting each other.

I'm not impressed just because they played a few months more than me, anyway. I'm 4th highest level on S1.US, and far more belligerent than anyone else here. There's only one player on S1.DE with more attacks than me that I could find, so I'm going to flat reject the claim they have more experience than me. (There's one on S1.US, but he got 2K of them from his guild attacking him to get to 10K.)

"Confessions of an XP Addict" was written for more than just explaining how one bad argument infected this game. It also tells you to watch out for other bad arguments.

People's builds, even people that have played a long time, aren't evidence. A weak build can be compensated for with mushrooms,raw attacks/day, and careful target selection, so even having a high Victory stat doesn't mean a thing. Perception is the most common thing people rely on that improperly guides them. If they actually sample their data, they often find themselves surprised by the realities. They've played favorites by avoiding people that their theories told them they should beat, but they didn't, or they remember certain Victories and forget the losses that counter their philosophies.

It is very easy to try different builds. Buy different equipment. Anyone can compare for themselves and figure out if what I profess works, and if they don't like it, just sell the equipment. I highly recommend testing against a dungeon, not a player, since that eliminates the opponent changing level and equipment, and the higher number of attacks removes some of the effects of Standard Deviation, especially for Mages.

Last edited by Charista; 05-30-2011 at 02:11 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 05-30-2011, 11:08 AM
xodidumdum xodidumdum is offline
Truffle Shuffler
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5
Default

Charista, your damage assessment there is missing the following: Against a target with 1150 str, at 5k, damage was going up by 34.7% per round, and at 4k str, it was going up 26.1% per round. Please recalculate using THAT rather than using 34.7% for both cases, and you will understand what I was pointing out.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:44 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright by 'Playa Games GmbH'