Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Page by page discussion of the comic.

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Fri Apr 13, 2012 11:07 pm

Karadan wrote:
drachefly wrote:
Once he reports back, and is ordered to attack the city, he is no longer a scout but a besieger.


That has got to be the silliest distinction drawn in... I don't know. A large patch of spacetime. Can we just accept that a unit with the scout special could be ordered, "go check out that city, and, if no one happens to be there, attack it." Nowhere did it say scouts can't initiate combat...

I have to agree here. The question was not "Can a unit that is scouting accidentally capture a city." The question was "Can a unit that was scouting capture a city." Any attempt to make a distinction between a scout and a unit attacking a city in this context is utterly ridiculous. You may as well declare that a caster can't fight because once they enter a fight they are no longer a caster, but a unit fighting in a fight.


It isn't important? Are you sure?

What happens to the scout when the city is defended? Rules say unlead units must attack the enemy, so if you're right, the vast majority of the time, that scout must attack the walls, because he can penetrate, and die uselessly to the defenders, instead of doing his job and returning to his Warlord to report.

A scout can only report an occupied city if he can't actually get in. If he can't get to the defenders (ie. not attack), then he can leave.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby BLANDCorporatio » Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:20 am

Fascinating.

Spoiler: show
Image


Utterly fascinating.
The whole point of this is lost if you keep it a secret.
User avatar
BLANDCorporatio
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
Tool + YOTD Supporter!
 
Posts: 3446
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 5:24 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Karadan » Sat Apr 14, 2012 5:05 pm

Kreistor wrote:It isn't important? Are you sure?

What happens to the scout when the city is defended? Rules say unlead units must attack the enemy, so if you're right, the vast majority of the time, that scout must attack the walls, because he can penetrate, and die uselessly to the defenders, instead of doing his job and returning to his Warlord to report.

A scout can only report an occupied city if he can't actually get in. If he can't get to the defenders (ie. not attack), then he can leave.


I get what you're saying. An unled unit must attack any enemy that they come across, and a scout is an unled unit, thus must attack any enemy unit it comes across. However, we've seen evidence that this doesn't occur with scouts. Jillian did not get attacked by the high elf scouts for example, though that could have been because they weren't ranged units and her entire force was flying. More likely though scouts count as being led, or otherwise don't suffer from the auto attack rule, as it would basically make scouts pointless, because they would never be able to scout anything, because they'd be too busy performing suicide charges.

What I don't get is how that is relevant. How does a scout being forced to attack, or not being forced to attack, have anything to do with their potential ability to take a city? Also, how does that have anything to do with your original statement of a scout magically transforming into some other unit and disqualifying it from being a scout if it starts attacking a city?
Karadan
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:43 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Sat Apr 14, 2012 8:58 pm

Karadan wrote:Jillian did not get attacked by the high elf scouts for example, though that could have been because they weren't ranged units and her entire force was flying.


If you can't attack, you aren't forced to commit suicide.

What I don't get is how that is relevant. How does a scout being forced to attack, or not being forced to attack, have anything to do with their potential ability to take a city?


I'm approaching from the other direction. I've shown that scouts cannot attack a city while scouting without orders, and so can't take the empty city. But if we could determine that the scout could theoretically penetrate into the city, does sending out scouts that are forced to suicide make any sense at all?

You may be right. There may be a "Scout" special that permits flight from battle. Don King's bats in Jetstone should have been forced to attack Wanda et al. when they entered the city, because they are not led. But they don't and stay to scout.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Balerion » Sat Apr 14, 2012 9:30 pm

Before we get too far down this path... do we have any evidence that there actually is a scouting special? Every unit we have seen used to scout is a combat unit that happens to be scouting. Is there anywhere we have been told there are actually unit types called scouts? The fact that Parson used archons, not trying to build a scout unit, says something about that to me. Why keep a decent chunk of archons at the capital just to be scouts if you can build scouts. The doombats that Kreistor mentions were in direct contact with a thinkamancer, which I assume can override the normal suicide urge. But maybe i missed something...

I would assume the scouts didn't attack Jillian because they weren't forest capable, and her force was in a forest hex. Kreistor's answer makes sense there.

But as to the scouts that have to commit suicide, we see that happen; in book 1, Vinny sends in doombats to get munched by the dragons for the purpose of scouting. And the scout dying does give you information, even if that information might just be "I now need to send something with leadership there". Or it might be a reason to have leadership special scouts.
Balerion
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:12 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby cheeseaholic » Sat Apr 14, 2012 11:02 pm

I'd like to point out that Obedience, Loyalty, and Duty are all stats. As in they are in a scale. If a king orders a unit to seppuku the unit might be forced to, or the roll might fail. If it fails the unit might do it anyway or not. Or it might make the order seem like a good idea or create a desire to commit suicide but one that can be beaten. Simply the existence of a stat doesn't imply that it's complete mind control. Parson didn't have a choice, but his Loyalty was magically maxed (or was it just enforced? I forget and either way he was also magically compelled to obey).

I've seen far too many people in this forum assume that the existence of a loyalty or obedience stat makes disloyalty and disobedience all but impossible. While that may be true it's far from proven.
cheeseaholic
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Lamech » Sat Apr 14, 2012 11:17 pm

We see a bunch of examples of scouts doing special things:
1) Doombats send Vinnie pictures. In addition Doombats don't auto-attack.
2) Goblin scouts were used to lead units into GK stuff. Again the scouts don't auto-attack.
3) Haggar used "multi-level scouts", this is later mentioned as maximum viel spotting.
4) The marbit stack that was attacked by GK, reports back when they die.

So we have lots of examples, of scouts with special powers. One example of viel spotting, a couple examples of reporting info back, and a couple examples of no auto attacking. But for example the doombats don't seem to have viel spotting. So there appear to be a couple flavors of scouts.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1450
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Balerion » Sun Apr 15, 2012 12:04 am

Lamech wrote:We see a bunch of examples of scouts doing special things:
1) Doombats send Vinnie pictures. In addition Doombats don't auto-attack.
2) Goblin scouts were used to lead units into GK stuff. Again the scouts don't auto-attack.
3) Haggar used "multi-level scouts", this is later mentioned as maximum viel spotting.
4) The marbit stack that was attacked by GK, reports back when they die.

So we have lots of examples, of scouts with special powers. One example of viel spotting, a couple examples of reporting info back, and a couple examples of no auto attacking. But for example the doombats don't seem to have viel spotting. So there appear to be a couple flavors of scouts.


1)Doombats seem to have some form of natural thinkamancy, but I agree that they need to be clarified a little more. Bunny being able to bring up a viewscreen of what they are seeing doesn't feel like a standard thing that can be done to just any unit, and we know that Vinny was able to bring those screens up as well, without even being a thinkamancer.
2) there was leadership in the hex when they did that, so not a valid case
3) That one I do find interesting. But not definitive; scout is used as in the case of the goblins and marbits, and can simply describe a function. But if I am shown wrong later, that is probably the piece that should have tipped me off :)
4) Knowing when units croak without being in the hex has been a common thing. I also find it likely that there was leadership in the tunnels at that time to coordinate the exploration. But if the marbits have actual scouting units, why was there no mention of their efforts when Ansom bemoans the lack of forward intelligence, and indeed mention the total reliance on the doombats?

We have seen lots of special units, but we have yet to see the Scouting special actually listed. Units doing exceptional things could be a form of natural-magical-school-x. Because we have the magic explanation, I feel we should default there before confirming we have a new special.
Balerion
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri May 13, 2011 1:12 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Karadan » Sun Apr 15, 2012 12:33 am

The last one in particular was "Only a main force stack would hit that hard." Basically all they knew was that the force was completely wiped out because they didn't report back. We've actually found that a side doesn't necessarily know when units have died. Ansom for example had no idea that he was losing all his siege during the dwagon raids. He had to wait for a more precise report to come back from the column. The knowledge of a unit's death seems to only extend to thinkamancers and rulers, as both have been shown to know when units die.

I also have to agree with the other cases. The transylvito warlords seem to have some sort of doombat related special that allows them to natural thinkamancy with them. Or it could be a function of doombats themselves. There is no evidence that this is because of a 'scout' special.

The goblin scouts were in a part of the city, and thus could be considered to be led by Stanley (or was he gone?), Parson, Wanda, Maggi, Sizemore, or any other warlords that might have still been around.

Haggar's is the most interesting. Multilevel scouts seems to indicate some sort of dedicated scout unit, but doesn't necessarily mean they have a scout special, or even if they do, it might be nothing more than a better chance to break a veil.

I still don't see how that is relevant.
I'm approaching from the other direction. I've shown that scouts cannot attack a city while scouting without orders, and so can't take the empty city. But if we could determine that the scout could theoretically penetrate into the city, does sending out scouts that are forced to suicide make any sense at all?

No, you haven't shown that scouts cannot attack a city while scouting without orders. All you've done is claim that is the case, randomly, with no proof of any kind.

The real question here basically boils down to the following: Can a lone unit without the siege or flying specials take a city with no defenders?

If yes, then it (helps) explain token forces, they're there to stop lone scouts or tiny scouting parties from taking cities. If no, then token forces are somewhat of a mystery, since they are big enough to represent a noticeable investment, but small enough to be nothing more than free experience for a serious threat.

You can make additional questions about "What is a scout?" or "Is there a scout special?" but they are really irrelevant to the larger question of a single unit with no particular ability to do so being able to claim an undefended city. Personally, given the nature of Erfworld as a game world brought to life, I would think that a unit would be able to based on that, before you even get into discussions about scaling walls or breaking them down alone or anything of that sort.
Karadan
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:43 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Sun Apr 15, 2012 1:36 am

Balerion wrote:The doombats that Kreistor mentions were in direct contact with a thinkamancer, which I assume can override the normal suicide urge. But maybe i missed something...


You did. They were in contact with Don King directly, and ONLY when he accessed them. It has been confirmed by Word of Titans that the Doombat carries the Special that transmits to its Warlord, not vice versa.

I would assume the scouts didn't attack Jillian because they weren't forest capable, and her force was in a forest hex. Kreistor's answer makes sense there.


No idea what you're talking about. I was referring to the Bat in Jetstone when its enemy, Wanda, entered hex with it. The only forest situation I can think of is the bats getting eaten by the dwagon trap. Fliers do not need the Forest special to enter forest, since FLier permits that. (That's on the back of a box of cereal, IIRC.)

But as to the scouts that have to commit suicide, we see that happen; in book 1, Vinny sends in doombats to get munched by the dragons for the purpose of scouting.


Technically, the bats did not attack the dwagons, since they may not have even spotted them. The dwagons do the attacking in that scene.

cheeseaholic wrote:I'd like to point out that Obedience, Loyalty, and Duty are all stats.


Only commanders have Duty, and so other units do not have initiative to act against Obedience. Scouts are not informed adequately on their Chief Warlord's plans and knowledge to be able to judge a "greater good" and so could not use the loopholes in Obedience to capture a city instead of reporting back that it is (seemingly) empty of defenders.

Balerion wrote:1)Doombats seem to have some form of natural thinkamancy,


They do. Confirmed by Rob in WotT. See Wiki for Word of the Titans.

We have seen lots of special units, but we have yet to see the Scouting special actually listed.


Correct, but we have no other mechanic that can explain the seeming violation of the "Thou shalt kill thy enemy" law. We need either a "Scout" order which permits flight without fight, or a Scout special. The former is clunky, and prevents complex orders being given, so I prefer the latter.

Because we have the magic explanation, I feel we should default there before confirming we have a new special.


INventing a Natural Magic is less complex than inventing a new Special? Definitely not. We don't invent new magical mechanics to explain something, partially because most schools are still undefined themselves. We have firm descriptions of how Specials work, even if we do not have a complete list of all Specials. It is simple and elegant. Magical explanations, especially those requiring we also define a school, violate Occam's Razor by requiring more invention than solutions that require less invention. A Scout Special is about as small an invention as we can make at this time. Note that Occam's Razor doesn't give us the final answer, only the most likely answer and therefore the one that should be used until more information becomes available.

Plus, arguments about undefined magic schools get highly speculative and argumentative. Magic is a bad direction to take these discussions, where simple alternates that do not require magic fit as well or better.

Karadan wrote:I still don't see how that is relevant.


Not my problem anymore. Read it until you do, since I have explained it twice. When the best my Opponents can come up with is "No", I'm not particularly impressed, and not interested in wasting time on them. You can say, "No," forever, regardless of whether you really do or do not understand. I've got better things to do than get suckered into that kind of argument. Explain why you think it is irrelevant, and I might have time for you, unless it's an old argument I already discussed.

No, you haven't shown that scouts cannot attack a city while scouting without orders. All you've done is claim that is the case, randomly, with no proof of any kind.


Yeah, I did. The description of "Duty" and "Obedience" in Klog 10.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F084a.jpg

I am not required to live up to your standard of what "proof" is, because you can choose to be disingenuous and lie about whether I actually succeeded in living up to that standard. Until you can demonstrate that unled scouts can choose to stop scouting at their own volition, Klog 10 stands by declaring 1) They must be obedient and 2) They don't have Duty to permit initiative.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby MarbitChow » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:06 am

Karadan wrote:The real question here basically boils down to the following: Can a lone unit without the siege or flying specials take a city with no defenders?

It depends on the city.

Transylvito: "The outer walls were almost ornamental, and would barely inconvenience an attacking infantry, a fact which technically made the city a Level 4." (1)

Faq: "The outer "walls" were useless against siege, even worse than Transylvito's. They consisted of a ring of stone teeth with a reflective coating of tin, inward-curving towers that terminated in spoon-like roosts for gwiffons and megalogwiffs. There was no gate." (2)

Cities with tunnels can be entered by light units or those with the appropriate special.

So, can an undefended city with no tunnels and a wall with closed (or no) gates be taken by a single infantry? Personally I'd say yes, but I don't think there's enough evidence to support such an assertion one way or another. If you assume Erfworld works like a game, though, moving any unit into any undefended city should always allow that side to capture that city; that would be something like a 'core' rule.
User avatar
MarbitChow
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Sun Apr 15, 2012 2:23 am

MarbitChow wrote:So, can an undefended city with no tunnels and a wall with closed (or no) gates be taken by a single infantry?


That's a different question, but a valid one. Your own examples actually suggest "No."

Transylvito: "The outer walls were almost ornamental, and would barely inconvenience an attacking infantry, a fact which technically made the city a Level 4."


Is double edged. While it states that Transylvito is nearly useless against infantry, the fact that needs to be mentioned tells us that other cities have walls that are effective against infantry.

So, it partly comes down to the specific question. You are answering the question, "Is there a city that can be taken by a single Infantry unit if there are no defenders and a closed gate?" not the question, "Can a single infantry unit take any city that has no defenders and a closed Gate?" That Transylvito could be taken (it actually couldn't, since he'd have to capture Garrison, and the Garrison has enormous walls, which MC stripped out of his quote... follow his link and read the entire paragraph) by a single infantry doesn't mean random city X could be.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby cheeseaholic » Sun Apr 15, 2012 10:57 am

Kreistor wrote:
cheeseaholic wrote:I'd like to point out that Obedience, Loyalty, and Duty are all stats.


Only commanders have Duty, and so other units do not have initiative to act against Obedience. Scouts are not informed adequately on their Chief Warlord's plans and knowledge to be able to judge a "greater good" and so could not use the loopholes in Obedience to capture a city instead of reporting back that it is (seemingly) empty of defenders.
.


I had forgotten this. Of course, my point wasn't that Duty would make the scouts take the city anyway, it was that the scout might decide to take the city anyway, if the scout thought it was a good idea. Not forced to take it. Decide. Not all scouts are animals and they have some measure of free will.

To put it in more simple terms, Obedience pushes a unit to do something (in this case orders), but we don't know how hard it pushes. And these are people.
cheeseaholic
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby MarbitChow » Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:02 am

Kreistor wrote:That Transylvito could be taken (it actually couldn't, since he'd have to capture Garrison, and the Garrison has enormous walls, which MC stripped out of his quote...

For completeness:
But the garrison zone was bigger and taller than some whole Level Fives, with their walls and all.

I read this as the garrison zone is larger than "level fives, walls and all", not that the garrison zone has walls.

Seems like kinda of a silly question, though. An empty city would have had to lose all of it's defenders at some point without the attackers moving in, which means it was razed, which means anyone can take it - it's got no walls, tower, or anything.
Queen Bea is the only example we've seen of a fully-functional, completely empty city, and her 'solution' would never occur to anyone who wasn't being subjected to the 'Pliers.
User avatar
MarbitChow
 
Posts: 2510
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 5:41 pm

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Sun Apr 15, 2012 11:51 am

cheeseaholic wrote:Not forced to take it. Decide. Not all scouts are animals and they have some measure of free will.


Yes, they are forced to obey orders. They do not have free will. Every time we see a Commander unit disobey orders, they have a justification. EVERY TIME. There is no "I feel like doing something else today" in Erfworld. Failure to Obey (which an informed Commander could do, but an uninformed Scout could not) can result in IMMEDIATE Disbanding, which is instant annihilation. Even if you don't like the fact this is Natural Thinkamancy, which influences your thought processes, that is a Death Sentence and pretty good inspiration to "Not be Stupid".

MarbitChow wrote:I read this as the garrison zone is larger than "level fives, walls and all", not that the garrison zone has walls.


The key, there, is "and taller". Walls are tall.

Garrison in GK had walls.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_129

You see Inner Walls fall in Panel 7. (The RCC had breached Outer Walls already.)

You can also see them here.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_4

It appears that Tower is actually integrated into the Inner Wall, but that is actually normal for Earthworld, too. One tower in a wall would often be built much taller than the others, giving it a commanding view in almost 360 degrees.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Karadan » Sun Apr 15, 2012 12:15 pm

Kreistor wrote:
Karadan wrote:I still don't see how that is relevant.


Not my problem anymore. Read it until you do, since I have explained it twice. When the best my Opponents can come up with is "No", I'm not particularly impressed, and not interested in wasting time on them. You can say, "No," forever, regardless of whether you really do or do not understand. I've got better things to do than get suckered into that kind of argument. Explain why you think it is irrelevant, and I might have time for you, unless it's an old argument I already discussed.

I'm coming up with much more than no, but you're ignoring anything beyond the first word, so please don't act like you're the one taking the moral high ground by not debating something properly. The original question was: Can a lone scout, AKA a unit which is scouting, capture an empty city? The presence or absence of a scout special is irrelevant to the question. It might add caveats, such as a unit with the scout special (if such a thing exists) being more or less likely to attempt it, but it does not change the answer to the question of can it happen.
No, you haven't shown that scouts cannot attack a city while scouting without orders. All you've done is claim that is the case, randomly, with no proof of any kind.


Yeah, I did. The description of "Duty" and "Obedience" in Klog 10.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F084a.jpg

I am not required to live up to your standard of what "proof" is, because you can choose to be disingenuous and lie about whether I actually succeeded in living up to that standard. Until you can demonstrate that unled scouts can choose to stop scouting at their own volition, Klog 10 stands by declaring 1) They must be obedient and 2) They don't have Duty to permit initiative.

No, I suppose you aren't required to adhere to my standards of what proof are, but you must at least adhere to some sort of standards. You never mentioned Obediance, you simply said that scouts couldn't attack a city without orders and left it at that. And even then, that ignores the basic Erfworld rule of 'unled units must attack enemies'. You fabricated the idea that a wall constitutes an inability to attack (It doesn't necessarily, a wall might be nothing more than a bonus to defender stats in erfworld, and its absence or presence may not indicate a physical inability to attack like flying does). It also ignores that Obediance includes a form of duty, in that Obediance may require a unit to disobey an order that is not in the best interest of that unit's ruler. AKA they do have some level of initiative, it just isn't nearly as great as that of a Warlord, mostly because they don't know as much as a Warlord. And once again, all this is irrelevant to the original question of a single unit taking an unmanned city. As above, it may add caveats about probability of of it being attempted, but won't change the yes/no answer.

My standards of proof really aren't that high. All I want is evidence of some kind that directly points to an answer. You've failed to provide this. And even more than that, you've failed to provide a link between what you're claiming (That "scouts" can't attack a city without specific orders to do so), and the actual question at hand (Can a lone "scout" capture an unmanned city?).

I mean, okay, lets say for a moment that you're correct. A scout will pass a city, any city, even a completely undefended one, to continue scouting unless it is provided with specific orders to do otherwise. That does not change weather or not a single unit can capture a city. The question behind this question was: Why bother with token forces? The possible answer was to prevent lone units claiming undefended cities, which in turn spawned the question: Can a lone unit claim an undefended city?

As for transylvito's and FAQ's walls, I take that to mean the bonus they provide wouldn't be a serious hindrance, as opposed to their ability to stop a unit outright. For example, maybe their poor walls only give a +1 bonus against ground units, which have a base stat of 5, making the +1 bonus fairly inconsequential. As opposed to GW's walls, which maybe gave a +10 bonus, making them super intimidating. Of course, in either case, if there are no units present to give the bonus to, it might not mater to a lone invading unit. Erfworld is built on game mechanics. A wall may be no more a barrier than the bonus it provides to units standing on top of it.

Taller on the Transylvito garrison could also refer to the city being built in a more New York style (tall buildings and such) and could have nothing to do with walls. Either way though, presence or absence of walls in the garrison is fairly academic. I have to agree that the question isn't could Transylvito be taken if it was undefended, but can a generic city or any particular level be taken if undefended. There might be some cutoff, like only a level 1 or 2 city can be taken by a lone unit with no specials while undefended, with level 3 or higher providing enough of a base defense even without units to stop something like that. In which cases there might be odd exceptions like Transylvito being able to be taken, while most level 4 cities couldn't, but that is an aside from the main question.
Karadan
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:43 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Kreistor » Sun Apr 15, 2012 3:48 pm

Karadan wrote:No, I suppose you aren't required to adhere to my standards of what proof are, but you must at least adhere to some sort of standards.


I'm an engineer. I deal with Proof every day of my life. I deal with insufficient information, methods of finding cause, identifying symptoms vs. cause... I have my standards, and I know mine work in real world situations.

Chief amoung that is IN CONTEXT quotes from the comic. Opinion does not trump a good quote.

You never mentioned Obediance, you simply said that scouts couldn't attack a city without orders and left it at that.


And you didn't go back and read the Klog, did you? Don't blame me for your ignorance. I am NOT your keeper. You want to play this game with me, then it is your job to start checking citations. Not just because you need to refresh your knowledge, but to make certain I am not lying. People do that. I appreciate that you trust me... but don't trust anyone.

And even then, that ignores the basic Erfworld rule of 'unled units must attack enemies'. You fabricated the idea that a wall constitutes an inability to attack (It doesn't necessarily, a wall might be nothing more than a bonus to defender stats in erfworld, and its absence or presence may not indicate a physical inability to attack like flying does).


Not fabricated. Parson has already demonstrated that basic Earthworld physics still operate (the question of the brick thrown from the wall), to a degree similar enough to our own that Parson cannot identify differences great enough to mention. Rob has stated that Erfworld is NOT a game, so it IS a real world with its own "physics." A wall may provide a bonus to the defender, but it is still a real wall that cannot itself be ignored. It is physical the same way as it is in our world, and it must be overcome in the same way a wall in ours must, not just with some die roll.

And clearly, since I mentioned it, I did not ignore that rule. I rely on it in the argument you don't seem to want to understand. A Scout that must attack what he can must attack any defended wall that he comes across, making scouts suicidal in the extreme. While Erfworld is not kind to its inhabitants, that seems counter to the intent of "scouting", since it reveals your own presence while ensuring you cannot find the enemy. The point of a scout is to FIND the enemy and report back without revealing your own existence. The "unled attack" rule ensures that a scout reveals his presence without reporting back the enemy deployment, the exact opposite of the goal of scouting.

It also ignores that Obediance includes a form of duty, in that Obediance may require a unit to disobey an order that is not in the best interest of that unit's ruler.


No non-Commander unit can make that kind of decision. You need direct knowledge of the purpose of your orders to decide if another choice has better interest. Obedience is, ultimately, what forces Units to do exactly what they are ordered to.

A Scout's job is to find and report, while keeping his own presence secret. In order to attack that city, the Scout violates every part of that order, keeping the knowledge of the existence of a city from his commander, reveals the existence of his forces nearby, and risks suicide against a hidden defense. There is no scenario I can come up with where a Unit could see such a gross violation of his Orders as even remotely desirable to his Ruler. The city is empty and not dangerous in any way, consequently what to do with it is a non-critical decision. Disobedience requires far more threat to the Ruler than that.

The only cases of Disobedience that we have seen so far are Commanders with intimate knowledge of their Ruler and the purpose of his orders. It is a SIGNIFICANT responsibility, and NEVER done lightly.

AKA they do have some level of initiative,


Only theoretically. Functionally, they lack the knowledge of their Ruler (by never having spoken to him) to decide what is good for the Ruler. We have not yet seen a single non-Commander Disobey, and those Commanders that have, have explained themselves directly to their Ruler when they did, with knowledge that the punishment may be Disbanding. You trivialize something that the comic has treated as a severe risk to the Unit's existence.

And once again, all this is irrelevant to the original question of a single unit taking an unmanned city.


No, the question raised was SPECIFICALLY a Scout, because it was viewed that only a scout would ever be sent alone into the wilderness. The idea was a Scout stumbles onto an empty city, because a lone infantryman simply never would, unless ordered to be a low-rent scout, which is still a scout. (But if there *is* a Scout special, a lone infantryman scouting could not determine the city to be empty, because he would lack the capacity to see through veils, mentioned in one of the quotes above. The lone infantryman could not attack the city without orders, because he can't be certain it is empty and not a trick.)

As above, it may add caveats about probability of of it being attempted, but won't change the yes/no answer.


The question did not inherently limit the breadth of arguments. A Scout being unable to attack the city due to orders was not restricted. The question followed the suggestion that the city being left ungaurded risked a lone Scout taking it, but if the lone Scout can't take the city because orders prevent him from doing so, then there was no risk as surely as the walls being too thick to dig through carrying no risk.

My standards of proof really aren't that high. All I want is evidence of some kind that directly points to an answer.


They *are* high. You are restricting arguments of a particular type, without examining the specifics of the original question. You are applying your own restrictions to the debate, but the question was never yours to limit.

You've failed to provide this.


I don't have to. It is up to the opposition to prove a scout could break down the walls. It is not up to me to prove the negative, that they cannot. Demanding proof of the negative is disingenuous, since evidence for it cannot exist. Only evidence that they can break the walls down can exist, if they can.

And even more than that, you've failed to provide a link between what you're claiming (That "scouts" can't attack a city without specific orders to do so), and the actual question at hand (Can a lone "scout" capture an unmanned city?).


Again, that is you applying restrictions to a question that was never yours in the first place. A mental inability to attack is just as effective a defense for the empty city as the scout lacking the capacity to break the wall down. You don't like that? You want only a physical capacity? Not my problem. You need to prove they can first. The burden is never on "proving a negative".

A scout will pass a city, any city, even a completely undefended one, to continue scouting unless it is provided with specific orders to do otherwise. That does not change weather or not a single unit can capture a city.


That was NOT the question we were considering. Please review the thread.

The question behind this question was: Why bother with token forces?


No, it was not. Please review the thread.

As for transylvito's and FAQ's walls, I take that to mean the bonus they provide wouldn't be a serious hindrance, as opposed to their ability to stop a unit outright.


Good for you. Again, the details of one city does not extend to all cities, especially when we know that the walls of another city (GK) were so enormously high you couldn't build a ladder tall enough to surmount it. Again, the question is not whether there is a city that one lone infantryman can capture, but "If you leave your walls undefended, are you vulnerable to a single Scout taking your city?" That you could do so with Translvito does not make the general case true, only say, "Some cities would be, if they constructed themselves such taht infantry can climb over the walls without siege."

Again, this goes to the Physics of Erfworld. Transylvito's walls are described as "ornamental" not functional. They are a real barrier, just ineffective at stopping anyone. Nothing there about a "bonus" to defenders, The description is physical in nature, and counters the idea of walls as only a bonus. As a bonus, the shape of the walls would be irrelevant... they would be just as effective if built 4 feet high as 400, since they are only a number, not a physical reality. Transylvito's walls being "ornamental" and ineffective tells us that walls are real barriers.
http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/TBFGK_1 Here you can find all comic pages written as text for convenient quoting.

http://www.erfworld.com/wiki/index.php/Erfworld_Mechanics The starting page for accessing all known Erfworld "rules".
User avatar
Kreistor
 
Posts: 1075
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 6:59 pm
Location: K-W, Ontario, Canada

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby cheeseaholic » Sun Apr 15, 2012 4:43 pm

Wanda killed a scout that was hiding with magic missile. It's possible it was a warlord scout, but that seems unlikely. So scouts likely can avoid auto-attacking.
cheeseaholic
 
Posts: 261
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2010 7:31 pm

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Lamech » Sun Apr 15, 2012 5:05 pm

Kreistor wrote:Again, this goes to the Physics of Erfworld. Transylvito's walls are described as "ornamental" not functional. They are a real barrier, just ineffective at stopping anyone. Nothing there about a "bonus" to defenders, The description is physical in nature, and counters the idea of walls as only a bonus. As a bonus, the shape of the walls would be irrelevant... they would be just as effective if built 4 feet high as 400, since they are only a number, not a physical reality. Transylvito's walls being "ornamental" and ineffective tells us that walls are real barriers.

Walls clearly do block units. Notice how they can't just walk through them. Now it is also possible they provide some sort of bonus. Such as the tower bonus to casters. Furthermore like the tower bonus if they did provide a bonus it would seem likely the shape of the walls affects the bonus. Remember how making the tower bigger boosted the bonus? It could very easily be the same principal here.

Or walls provide no bonus to defenders at all, but simply block units. That is also possible.
Lamech
 
Posts: 1450
Joined: Tue Oct 13, 2009 9:23 am

Re: Inner Peace (Through Superior Firepower) – Episode 029

Postby Karadan » Sun Apr 15, 2012 5:54 pm

I state again, you never mentioned Obedience originally, nor did you site the klog page relevant to Obedience before I called you on not having cited it. I went back, I read the arguments. They were as follows:
You - Once he reports back, and is ordered to attack the city, he is no longer a scout but a besieger.
Me (and a couple others) - That's a pointless and irrelevant distinction. Being a 'besieger' doesn't make it a different unit, it is still a scout as defined by a unit that was scouting.
You - No, it is not irrelevant, because if a scout is forced to attack a city, it is basically useless as a scout because it won't be able to report back on what it finds.
Me - I still don't see how that is relevant, because we aren't talking about the effectiveness of scouting, we're talking about if a single unit can take an unguarded city.
You - Scouts can't attack a city without direct orders to do so.
Me - That still has nothing to do with a single unit being able to take a city or not, and you've said nothing to back it up.
You - I don't like that you're disagreeing with me, it must be because you aren't reading what I'm saying. Also, obedience, check klog 10.
Me - No, I'm reading everything you're saying, I just don't see how "Does a scout require direct orders to attack a city or not?" is directly related to "Can a lone unit take an unguarded city?", also, you didn't mention Obedience before, which is why I said you had provided no proof.
You - You should read the klog I linked to you, not my problem if you can't do that. Also, I'll finally respond to your original objection of irrelevance in that the original question was a scout finding the lone city, as opposed to any other unit.
Me - (this post) - I hadn't read the klog before the post you mentioned the klog in, because it hadn't been mentioned before. Now I have, nothing new there, thanks though. Now I can finally respond to relevance of your 'scout can't attack' idea. Yes, if we meant scout spesifically as "A unit with some sort of scouting special that allows it to not attack enemy units while unled and is not itself a warlord to be affected by duty." you would almost have a point. However, there is nothing preventing the scout reporting that the city is undefended, and then the next turn (or even later the same turn, depending on the level of communication available, such as that provided by a thinkamancer or magic hat) being ordered to attack the city. Thus it may be unlikely that a scout wandering around exploring would under their own initiative attack the city (though not impossible. I'm sure that is exactly the sort of thing Stanley would have done when he was a rank and file troop, and what led to his promotions. Just because their is Obedience doesn't mean units don't disobey), but it does not speak to a single unit's, possessed of any sort of scout special or not, ability to capture an unguarded city.

I already made this exact argument in my previous post.

And yes, the original question was indeed why bother with token forces. I was the one that made it, and offered potential reasons. I do believe it was someone else that suggested it was to prevent a random scout capturing the city, which was the genesis of the question of can a random scout capture an unmanned city. I'm afraid you're the one that needs to review the thread. I can recite the exact flow of the discussion from the beginning if you wish, starting with the question of Jillian's real contribution to FAQ, progressing to mercenary work's profitability, to the 'necessity' of war, to the sustainability of a bubble side. It was this last part that lead to the question of token forces, and from there a scout being able to capture a city.

My standards of proof still aren't high. I just restrict arguments that are irrelevant to the matter at hand, as I still maintain your argument is, since the question is can a scout take an unguarded city, not will it do so automatically if it comes across an unguarded city.

As for the whole wall argument, I was just suggesting a possibility.

And finally, I'm not really trying to prove anything here. I'm trying to ask a question, which is if a lone unit can take an unguarded city. I'm not providing any proof, because there isn't any one way or the other that I know of.

@cheeseaholic - Good catch. That would very strongly indicate there is some form of scout special that allows units with it to not engage.
Karadan
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 12:43 am

PreviousNext

Return to Reactions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: AbuDhabi, Althernai, balder, Google [Bot] and 11 guests