MarbitChow wrote:Caesar originally planned to attack w/ Charlie's Archons as well, so that he'd have superior odds in his favor. When that fell through, he gambled that he'd still have enough to win, using superior tactics against more powerful units.
And he failed, because he was wrong. Everyone assumes Stanley is an idiot for some reason, but Stanley keeps winning. When you assume someone that is actually talented is an idiot, you're placing yourself at a disadvantage by underestimating your opponent. And a talented person that understands that effect can reinforce that false belief in order to raise his chances of victory. (Someone around here quotes Sun Tzu, "War is deception." There's another one, "Fail to know your enemy and you will only win half the time." A smart commander makes people think he's less capable than he really is.) And what's best is that when the fool loses, he'll call the hidden talent lucky, otherwise he would have to accept that he was actually wrong in his evaluation of his opponent... and lots of people cannot accept that they are wrong in their analysis of other people, even in the face of death. Keep calling him "Stanley the Worm" folks... because if you ever showed him any respect, you might actually beat him.
Jack ended the fight before we knew for certain who would emerge victorious, but even though Stanley had better units, as well as a number of modifiers in his favor, he was losing.
Maybe. Maybe not. Like you said, we couldn't know who would win because Stanley fled, so you shouldn't be saying that you think he was losing. (You're trying to have your cake and eat it too. Saying he was losing but couldn't be certain of losing is hedging your bets, but it's also indicates you're unsure in your position.) What was clear was that continuing to FAQ wouldn't achieve Stanley's purpose of restoring his Side in secret, because they obviously knew where he was headed. Stanley didn't necessarily flee because he was losing. Oh, hey, and here's one... notice that Jack didn't tell Stanley to flee. While Units can understand the intended orders without the Warlord speaking them, Warlords do not read the minds of their charges. For Stanley to escape using Foolamancy, Stanley had to have the idea and order Jack to perform the spell. It couldn't have been Jack's idea. Stanley did exactly what the RCC exected... charging through Jillian like an overconfident idiot... but it was a fake-out from the start. Exactly when and where the Foolamancy started has always been a matter of debate. What we do know is that Jillian did not kill Stanley's dwagon, because the armored red escaped. Tactical retreat in the face of superior forces is evidence of an experienced commander that recognizes the no-win scenario, and someone that is willing to accept the embarrassment of defeat in order to fight again another day. Stanley created a plausible scenario that preyed upon the Royals' arrogant disrespect of his ability, and used that conviction they couldn't be fooled to escape in the direction they were convinced he never would... back towards GK.
BTW, if there was any use in continuing to FAQ, and if Stanley was a blunt thinker like you suggest, Stanley could have used that Foolamancy to get close to Caesar and finish him off, eliminating that massive Chief WArlord bonus, instead of just escaping Jillian. Sound good? Sorry, it's not. Don would promote the next highest Unit in the Hex, so that all he could achieve is reducing the Chief Warlord bonus, not eliminate it.
One simple tactic could have changed his odds dramatically: appoint the highest-level knight class unit with him to Chief Warlord, so that he got the in-hex Bonus that Caesar was capitalizing on. But he just bum-rushed, and busted out the hammer.
Can't. Hobgobwins are Natural Allies, and not a part of GK Side. The only candidate was Jack, but he has no Leadership bonus to give Dwagons.
And again, you do NOT know what Stanley's Tactics were, unlike Caesar who gets a long description. No one describes Stanley's (beyond Jillian stating that Stanley had a stack of dwagons), but that doesn't mean he didn't have any tactics at all.
I assert again that Stanley is at best mediocre at tactics.
Again you propose solutions that fail basic Erfworld mechanics. Sorry, the only mediocre tactician around here is you.
My first draft of the above included the statement that we could assume that Stanley was always in attacking forces. I knew I should have left that in. Simply assuming that Stanley is always part of the assault force, especially after he has had some success, negates the total loss issue.
That decision is out of Stanley's Chief Warlord's hands. You can't choose to put someone in a position where he won't be attacked. All Units in range of attacking others are fundamentally in range of being attacked. When you Move a Stack into range to launch an Attack, the target, if it of the same type, can attack you on its Turn which comes before you can launch that attack. You're proposing Stanley survived a lot of offensive battles, while somehow avoiding all defensive ones. That's just a desperate attempt to find any plausible explanation for your position. That something is plausible is not evidence that it happened. It's not even evidence that it was the most likely explanation.
So the odds of a Stanley-like figure emerging from 'pure luck' are even greater than I estimated them. I'm glad we agree.
Pointing out the favoritism in your mathematics is not anywhere close to agreement on the issue under discussion.
So, over time, the odds of a decent piker leveling up are even greater than my original estimates, if we go with your assumptions. This is again an argument in favor of Stanley being lucky instead of skilled.
1. We do not know Stanley's level at the time of Promotion to Warlord. You assume he was high, but you lack evidence and so that is an assumption.
2. We do not know how many enemies one must kill to reach any level, so we don't know how many battles he must survive. Leveling is proportional to kills, not battles. Sizemore leveled twice in one battle. It does not necessarily take a lot of battles, only a lot of kills, to gain high level.
3. We don't know what an exceptional level for an Infantry Unit is.
4. That you can reduce survival to a probability is not evidence that someone is lucky. That's like saying, "Hockey players have a 7% chance of scoring on each shot, so Wayne Gretzky must have been the luckiest hockey player ever, because he had only a tiny chance of scoring a record number of goals in that many shots." Wayne Gretzky was talent personified, and the evidence of his extraordinary goal count is evidence that he was supremely talented, not lucky. Exceptional results suggest exceptional ability.
Kreistor wrote:Except you lack any evidence. Show me a description of Stanley configuring his army in any battle. Show him making a glaring mistake. Show us how he glaringly failed, and could only win with the advantages of Arkenhammer and dwagons overcoming his deficiencies.
MarbitChow wrote:]There's no need to cite such an example. We're not trying to disprove his exceptionalism, because that's not the default position.
"We" aren't trying to do anything. "You" are trying to counter my statements that Stanley has talent on the Battlefield beyond the Arkenhammer and dwagons (which definitely made things easier). If you feel your opinion is all you need to impress me, you are grossly incorrect.
As for the idea of "default position"?HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Oh, you're funny. The very idea of a "default position" is absurd.
Kreistor wrote:Another point to consider: not only did raising Stanley cost more than popping a Warlord, that Warlord would have been Noble or Royal. Saline was Royalty, and he forewent a potentially Royal Warlord to Raise Stanley. Just another layer on what was actually sacrificed to put Stanley in a Leadership position.
MarbitChow wrote:That assumes that it's better to have a level 1 royal warlord than to promote a level 5 to warlord status.
Short haul, yes. Long haul, no. We know the system is exponential, taking more kills to reach the next level as you gain levels. A Royal, who levels faster than non-Royals, not only will gain levels faster and so close that gap just by being lower level, will potentially pass and surpass the non-Royal because of his leveling advantage. He requires fewer kills per level, and so can wind up higher level on a lower kill count.