A Fun Fact about Monsters

Monsters double in usefulness with every level up. With every level up, both health and DpS go up by (2^0.5)x. That means that a Lv.3 Ogre, will have 2x health & 2x DpS than a Lv.1 Ogre. And a Lv.5 Ogre, will have 2x health & 2x DpS than a Lv.3 Ogre. So a Lv.5 Ogre is literally 16x as effective as a Lv.1 Ogre.

So if you’re wondering whether or not to blitz the next monster dungeon… Do it. I, personally, like to raid dungeons during my alliance’s Ogre Boost time, and was able to progressively level-up my ogres, using ogres. Obviously you need a lot of leadership to do that, but, never underestimate the usefulness of monsters (:

May 1st addition:

Another fun fact I’ve found about monsters! :wink:

  • As stated before, monsters double in usefulness with each level. That also means that they’re only /half/ as useful for each level they /don’t/ have. The problem? They still cost the same amount of morale. So considering that a Lv.5 Ogre is 16x as effective as a Lv.1 Ogre, that means that every morale point spent on a Lv.5, is worth more than an entire Lv.1. With monsters being so weak to start, and in being able summon less of them, they’re almost useless in low-level gameplay.

  • In high-level gameplay, they’re not necessarily useless, as much as they are restricted. Whereas in low-level gameplay, you don’t have enough leadership to make the monsters last, in high-level gameplay, you have more than you need! Ergo, monsters get stacked up, and you can only seem to be using a maximum of 3 at a time.

  • But Goldy Locks tried mid-level gameplay, and it was juuuust right~ (:

At mid-level gameplay, you should be at the point where you’re strong enough both to max your monsters, and to create a small horde of them! Now you’re able to form your monsters into something useful that lasts, /and/ nothing goes to waste! (:

Conclusion? Mid-level players should seriously consider maxing and using their monsters for offense.

Thought there was a fix damage and health. Any screenshot to show, that HP increase by level up?

EDIT: Ahh - thought you mean Level up from King. I have all Monsters on max. :frowning:

Haha! xD I wish. My monsters would be epic by now. 2^61 x base stats. That would be so OP.

True, while regular troops only gain about +20% per level (varies a bit, but on average), monsters gain +40% per level (varies a bit as well!). So their strength after a level up will be 140% or (2^0.5) = sqrt(2) ~ 1.41 of their strength before the level up.

As this stat increase occurs both for attack damage and hitpoints, they will (on average) be twice as useful after every upgrade if you define “usefulness” as “damage * hitpoints”, while regular troops mostly need 2 upgrades for double usefulness.


And lolz… imagining that monster stat increase per hero level up… a single wolf could one-hit the castle gate (unboosted and without howl) :wink:

True. Units only go up about 44% in usefulness, if even that. Like, the units that go from dying in one hit, to dying in one hit, really only go up by 20% •~•

And omg, that’d be hilarious xD Just kick the door in at granny. Why’s she always standing by the gate, anyway?

Bump because of the recent addition (: I wanted to create a new thread, but decided to add to this one instead (:

Monsters are amazing…this nobody can deny. But I did want to point out something about your original math. Adding 50% health and damage doesn’t make a unit twice as effective (nor does adding 100% health or damage). The only time this would be the case is when units can only fight 1v1, which is not the case in Royal Revolt.


As an example to illustrate the point, consider units that have 300 health and do 10 DPS (damage per second) – I’ve picked these numbers to make them the most “fair”, but other numbers will show similar results. If we take a super unit with 50% more health and damage, he will have 450 health and will deal 15 DPS. In order to be considered “twice as effective”, he should be able to be an even match for two opponents. However, here’s what would happen in Royal Revolt:


After a total of 20 seconds, the super unit will kill one enemy (20 * 15 = 300). However, in that amount of time, the enemies will have done 400 damage to him ((10 + 10) * 20 = 400). Now he has 50 HP left, which will be gone in 5 seconds. The last enemy will be standing with 225 HP remaining.


If you change the numbers and give him 100% more damage instead (with no corresponding HP increase), he does even worse. While it will only take him 15 seconds to kill the first enemy, in that amount of time they will also have done 300 damage to him, so he will die at the same time as the first enemy unit.


If you give the super unit double damage and HP (so 20 DPS and 600 HP) – represented by gaining two monster levels, he would be able to kill two normal units and still have health to spare. But put him up against three normal units, and he dies right after killing two of them. This means that every two monster level gains make the monster somewhere between 2x and 3x as effective.


Now ogres in particular have some interesting parts to them: namely very slow attack speed, but also AOE damage. This means that an ogre could do better or worse than these projections depending on how units stream in, and how they clump around him. My guess is that in general ogres are somewhat more effective than the math shows, but not nearly as much as it might seem at first glance.


But monsters are still great – especially since they are sort of free to upgrade.

I agree with the math for your test case - 2 vs 1 simultaneous fight - but first of all, that’s not the only possible/happening combat situation available, and secondly, you also have to factor in things such as spells, other units/structures, etc etc, which also influence the practical outcomes and usefulness of any given unit or combination of units.

Thus, the “usefulness” as used above is of course no 100% accurate measure of the true, actual usefulness during a raid or on defense, but rather a rough guideline or hint, or a “strength” value rather than “usefulness” value. Also, the main point was comparing the upgrading differences for monsters vs regular troops. 


Anyway, some more “test cases” or “scenarios” would be: 

  • Sequential 2 vs 1 (i.e. 1 vs 1 and one side get’s a 2nd unit after the first unit dies), where the “double usefulness” claim 
  • Bigger groups (e.g. 10 vs 5), where group dynamics, range, micro-timing etc play a huge role in the actual outcome
  • Steady reinforcement streams with 2 vs 1 ratio, where not only group dynamics play a role, but also the initial strength difference can multiply over time


I agree – good points.