Altima wrote:Let's also consider royal warlords as well.
Warlords take a long time to purpose-build, as we see from Jillian attempting to pop an heir (which, in essence, is a royal warlord, probably level 1).
I don't think a warlord takes that long to pop (relatively speaking). And while they are used as warlords I guess the heirs potential makes them special and leads to an extremely long build time. A royal heir for Faq/TV would take 60 turns, with a Turnamancer it is taking 40 - now Jillian was able to produce much of her current airforce, including 5 or 6 warlords in a similar amount of time.
Now we see these factions with dozens of warlords, as well as massive standing armies. Granted, some of these sides have been around for thousands of turns, but I still find it hard to believe that these sides can devote time to popping warlords, heirs, casters, AND units.
When popping a warlord there is a (very, very, very
) slight chance a caster might pop instead, rulers don't have any control over it.
But it also depends on the number cities you have and what lv they are. Warlords (and thus casters) and heirs seem to only pop in the capital. In that case you can have all your other cities popping pikers and stabbers and what have you while the capital concentrates on command units until it has enough. The more cities you have the more troops you can be popping. And we saw this with Oss deciding to stop Dhrystone popping gumps in favor of popping infantry - in the time it took to pop 1 gump you could have popped about 27 basic infantry units. Presumably similar times apply to things like Megalogwiffs, which explains why Jillian didn't have any real ground forces beyond her 5 warlords and a handful of knights (promoted from the few stabbers she popped in the early days I assume).
My theory is that there is, perhaps, a special mechanic that allows a side to promote units to Warlord status. Stanley mentions turning the 'most handsome' unit he had to Chief Warlord, which supports this statement.
Stanley himself rose through the ranks, so it can certainly happen.
danielkaplan123 wrote:I think this is a great point! I'd offer 'from the capital' may be because they have the thinkamancer there. It seems that all rulers (or tools) keep a thinkamancer at their capital and that's what allows them to send commands to any unit. So as long as Parson is with Maggie and she has juice, he can command them. Parson did this as well (using Maggie) to send command in the Battle for Gobwin Knob so I suspect this is the mechanic.
Only GK and TV have thinkamancers we've seen so far, but that might work in a limited sense, though it would probably drain the thinkamancer quickly - depending on the amount of battle management being attempted - simple, quick orders would make it last, but complex battle plans? Back in the summer updates Vinnie noted Jillian trying to show a lv 1 warlord some strategies and it going over his head. I can't imagine an unled unit of stabbers could be told via thinkamancer to do something more complex then "attack" or maybe "attack x".
DevilDan wrote:I'd say it doesn't even matter that he even stabbed anyone: It matters that he got to wield his spear in combat. He died in combat, not ignominiously executed without event seeing any action as his first life ended.
cdrcjsn wrote:But what does this accomplish? Is Trem going to be more hesitant about attacking Wanda's stack if a warlord is croaked unexpectedly?
I don't see why, he is a leader, he has to know losses will sometimes occur. He had to have know there would be some slight risk to the lv 1 warlords he put in command of the infantry stacks by themselves. They were only there because they might have the chance to lv, which meant they would have to be fighting and risking death themselves.
+ what ftl said.
MonteCristo wrote:in a way, i find a bit more significance in him NOT croaking the warlord...
Agreed, and your reasoning is good.
KeiranHalcyon31 wrote:No no, he meant, assuming Wrigley managed to kill a warlord, that Ford's plan resulted in a warlord's death.
Maybe, it just read to me like... well, "looks like Ford took a warlord with him after all" when it doesn't look like Ford actually took anyone with him. Apologies if I'm mistaken.
Plus his plan didn't really result in it, after the leaders were dead the leaderless stacks just did what they'd naturally do and might have killed a lv 1 warlord as a result.
In book 1 Webinar and her girlfriend don't have capes either. I support the theory that capes=high level warlords/units. Ossomer for example had a cape, as well as Ansom, both being the strongest princes of Jetstone, while Tramenis the diplomat probably sees little frontline action and thus must be just medium level.
I wasn't disagreeing, I was just saying we can't probably base it on Trem not wearing a cape since most princes/chief warlords have distinctive looks. Beyond the cape Ansom and Oss always dressed differently (Ansom had a few costume changes). Trem dresses very differently again, and none of them dress anything like the rest of Jetstone's warlords who all look similar (beyond the question of capes).
And I'm not sure about the lv thing - Trem is likely a lower level then his brothers, yes, but closer to a potentially capeless 1st lv warlord then them, Antium, I. Brows or any of the other number of caped individuals that were in Oss's stack? (I do like the idea of some really stuffy ceremony though where a warlord gains the right lv and is presented with a cape). And I don't know - he is also older then them. We only know that during much of the RCC time Slately had sent him off on a diplomatic missions, not that he has mainly been limited to diplomatic missions throughout his life (I'd be surprised if he was lower then lv 6).
And so my time with the Tardy Elves draws to a close, and I am let to ponder how the experience will... eh, I'll finish later. No need to rush.