The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Your new games, homebrews, mods and ideas. Forum games go here.

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Twoy » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:09 pm

Oops. I did not mark those two units as ranged in my notes, but I see they are in your original post.

Well, I will look through the rest of the posts. I'm still not sure about the concept of allowing the archers to get in shots at units that are not attacking them. What's good for the goose might be even better for the gander. In this case, the gander is the guy who is defending his capital city.
Twoy
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Nihila » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:15 pm

Twoy wrote:Well, I will look through the rest of the posts. I'm still not sure about the concept of allowing the archers to get in shots at units that are not attacking them. What's good for the goose might be even better for the gander. In this case, the gander is the guy who is defending his capital city.
Effectively, this just allows some units to ignore the rule about "fliers and ranged must engage ranged stacks first," but at a high cost. As long as fliers or ranged units engage at least one ranged stack in a hex, they receive no extra retaliation.

So, example time. A stack of Decrypted Uniepegataurs attack a hex with 3 stacks of Faun Archers. The Faun Archers that the Uniepegataurs attack--and only the Faun Archers that the Uniepegataurs attack--get their hitsies in first. Then, the Uniepegs attack that stack. The Uniepegataurs only take damage from one stack.

If there was also a stack of Thunder Bats, and the Uniepegataurs engaged those, the Uniepegataurs would be attacked 3 times before engaging the Thunder Bats, almost certainly dusting the entire stack of Unies before even scratching the bats.

Edit: If the ranged units have already been engaged, they do not engage the fliers or ranged units, as per the normal rules. Think of them as focused on the troops that attacked them, rather than the archers or dwagons attacking the infantry around them. If I need to explain this later, I will add another example.
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Twoy » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:33 pm

zilfallon wrote:So...moving as 1 strong column is a stupid idea, because it doesn't matter at all if we are together or seperate.


I don't agree with this statement. If your units are scattered around the map, the best units to engage the surviving attackers might be too far away to track them down and kill them.

Right now, we don't know exactly where the stack of 5 dwagons is, but if they are close enough to our main forces, we can croak them all.
Twoy
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby zilfallon » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:38 pm

Twoy wrote:
zilfallon wrote:So...moving as 1 strong column is a stupid idea, because it doesn't matter at all if we are together or seperate.


I don't agree with this statement. If your units are scattered around the map, the best units to engage the surviving attackers might be too far away to track them down and kill them.

Right now, we don't know exactly where the stack of 5 dwagons is, but if they are close enough to our main forces, we can croak them all.


After Nihila answered my questions, I don't agree with that statement either. But even if we aren't scattered too much, we should have more than 1 columns, each consisting of archers,infantry and fliers. And...we just lost all our archers. So, our pop points should be used for,

1)Commanders for Nawnia, naturally.
2)Archers
3)A few more scouts
rkyeun wrote:Roses are red.
Violets are blue.

Image
User avatar
zilfallon
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:47 am
Location: Magic Kingdom

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Twoy » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:45 pm

I agree with commanders, archers and scouts.

Here is the point layout for everyone to spend:
Narnia: 40+6 from last turn.
Thundermen: 40+2 from last turn.
Avewnus: 40+3 from last turn.
Generica: 80+5 from last turn.

High King Peter sends a thinkagram to CPT-GEN Genericus:
CPT-GEN Genericus, Please pop only archers this Turn as I will be sending King Edmund to the battle, and he can handle the base camp for a couple of turns while we build up enough Nawnian forces for him to lead a stack into battle.
Twoy
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Twoy » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:46 pm

Nawnia Turn 2 unit pop:
King Edmund
Move: 3
Hits: 5
Att: 8 Ranged
Def: 5
Special: Lvl (Need a GM roll here)
Cost: 45
Twoy
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Siralus » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:49 pm

The Thundermen of Thunderia pop: -

1 Thunder bat (22)
1 Thunder infantry (13)
35 points spent, 7 remaining.
User avatar
Siralus
 
Posts: 98
Joined: Wed Sep 01, 2010 5:54 pm
Location: London, U.K

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Nihila » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:52 pm

Edmund is still a Level 3, with 3 XP points. I'll let him keep his TBfGB XP. I'll be nice here, given that I killed his siblings. :twisted: Though in Nawnia, that might be a rather temporary thing...
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby zilfallon » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:54 pm

(Another thinkagram is sent by Agrach:)

-Hmm, King Edmund! So you are the replacement chief warlord from Nawnia? Then, "Chief", what do you want summoned, from Avewnus? We can summon 3 imps or 2 Ewinyes. Of course, I'll give those Ewinyes under your direct command, to stack with other archers, if you choose them. Also, please be careful, It would be sad for Nawnia to lose 3 warlords in first 2 turns. And Nawnia required direct intervention of their High King to coordinate? I was not aware that this battle was this important for Nawnia.



(((A reminder:

Imp: Move 5, Hits 1, Attack 1, Defence 1 + Scout >> 14 each
Ewinyes: Move 2, Hits 4, Attack 6, Defence 2 + Ranged >> 16 each)))

Edit: Twoy, you typed your factions name wrong. What is Narnia? Earth has stupid names for things :P
rkyeun wrote:Roses are red.
Violets are blue.

Image
User avatar
zilfallon
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:47 am
Location: Magic Kingdom

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Twoy » Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:57 pm

I'll give you my 1 pop point left and you can pop 2 Imps and an Ewinyes.
Twoy
 
Posts: 814
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 4:55 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby zilfallon » Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:01 pm

-Very well. Summoning is complete. Ewinyes is yours to command. Imps are on stand-by at base hex, ready for scouting.

Avewnus pops 2 Imps and 1 Ewinyes
rkyeun wrote:Roses are red.
Violets are blue.

Image
User avatar
zilfallon
 
Posts: 565
Joined: Sun Nov 08, 2009 3:47 am
Location: Magic Kingdom

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Crovius » Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:12 pm

So are flyiers with ranged Fliers AND Archers? Cause they seem to be using the best rules of both and worst ruels of neither: the weakness to infantry archers face is negated, and the disadvantage from ranged is negated because they can kill the target ranged unit first. Th eonly counter for Flying Archers eems to be flying archers, and then it's all down to who kills the other first. In other words, flying archers are horribly broken. Ranged units should see their enemy incoming and be able to retaliate. And if I have 100 stacks of ranged ina hex and 1 stack of fliers with my commander and you swoop in to swat him out fo the sky, my archers should have the common sense to fill the airspace you're occupying with arrows, Ranged Flier or not. A Ranged unit should ALWAYS get a chance to fight back. First strike is a cheap move that White players from Magic: The Gathering use (and that system involves Endurance so the best way to killa first striek is to be tough enough to take the first hit and then smack him back.)

End Rant

Sorry, just voicing all of this because honestly number wise what those dwagons did, well, if this was a computer game anyoen rating it would have called the AI out for being a Cheating Bastard.
Crovius
 
Posts: 682
Joined: Fri May 29, 2009 11:51 am

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Nihila » Sun Sep 12, 2010 5:23 pm

Crovius wrote:So are flyiers with ranged Fliers AND Archers? Cause they seem to be using the best rules of both and worst ruels of neither: the weakness to infantry archers face is negated, and the disadvantage from ranged is negated because they can kill the target ranged unit first. Th eonly counter for Flying Archers eems to be flying archers, and then it's all down to who kills the other first. In other words, flying archers are horribly broken. Ranged units should see their enemy incoming and be able to retaliate. And if I have 100 stacks of ranged ina hex and 1 stack of fliers with my commander and you swoop in to swat him out fo the sky, my archers should have the common sense to fill the airspace you're occupying with arrows, Ranged Flier or not. A Ranged unit should ALWAYS get a chance to fight back. First strike is a cheap move that White players from Magic: The Gathering use (and that system involves Endurance so the best way to killa first striek is to be tough enough to take the first hit and then smack him back.)
Okay, you make a good point. Maybe if Ground Archers are defending against Flying Archers, the Ground Archers get first strike. I'll make that a rule, as well. It doesn't affect the most recent combat, though, where Ground fought Ground and Flying fought Flying.
Crovius wrote:Sorry, just voicing all of this because honestly number wise what those dwagons did, well, if this was a computer game anyoen rating it would have called the AI out for being a Cheating Bastard.
And, they lost a Dwagon and the high level Warlord. Full disclosure: my highest level Warlord now is a 2. And Dwagons are so cost-ineffective, I can pop 2 a turn, against 3 Griffon Riders a turn if all points go to Nawnia. In a war of attrition in the skies, I lose.

Edit: Basic Division is beyond me, edited with the aid of a calculator.
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby LTDave » Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:19 pm

Pop 3 Archers at Base Camp. Leaving the Generics with 4 Archers at Camp.
(4 points remaining)

I imagine it is our turn - King Edmund {the redeemed}, where would you like our Outriders to scout, so that we may cwoak that wascally dwagon?
Last edited by LTDave on Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
LTDave
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby LTDave » Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:21 pm

Nihila wrote:Full disclosure: my highest level Warlord now is a 2. And Dwagons are so cost-ineffective, I can pop 2 a turn, against 3 Griffon Riders a turn if all points go to Nawnia. In a war of attrition in the skies, I lose.


Don't give away too much, Nihila - ignore the ranting. It makes life so much more entertaining.
User avatar
LTDave
 
Posts: 2379
Joined: Sun Aug 23, 2009 7:53 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Sun Sep 12, 2010 6:39 pm

LTDave, how come we never realized there was an issue here with ranged fliers? Was it just because you never used THAT many of them?
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Sihoiba » Sun Sep 12, 2010 7:23 pm

WaterMonkey314 wrote:LTDave, how come we never realized there was an issue here with ranged fliers? Was it just because you never used THAT many of them?


The MCC had an entire attack wing (stack) of ranged fliers, it's just GB had a lot of high defence units, and generally hitting and staying to be hit back for the XP was deemed more valuable than hit and run attacks.
Sihoiba
 
Posts: 584
Joined: Wed Mar 17, 2010 12:50 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Nihila » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:09 pm

Siralus wrote:The Thundermen of Thunderia pop: -

1 Thunder bat (22)
1 Thunder infantry (13)
35 points spent, 7 remaining.
Siralus, 1 Thunder Bat costs 11. 2 Thunder Bats cost 22. I'll assume you meant to pop 2 until further notice.
LTDave wrote:Don't give away too much, Nihila - ignore the ranting. It makes life so much more entertaining.
But you don't know if I meant before or after I popped new units... :twisted: It wouldn't be a lie, per se. I could have 6 Level 5 Warlords now, for all you know. Or I might not have popped any new Warlords. But you don't know. What you know is that at some point, I had a Level 2 Warlord as my highest leveled Warlord. And that I got the same number of pop points as you. And that I'm following roughly the same rules as you, without Scouts.
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby WaterMonkey314 » Sun Sep 12, 2010 9:50 pm

Nihila wrote:
Siralus wrote:The Thundermen of Thunderia pop: -

1 Thunder bat (22)
1 Thunder infantry (13)
35 points spent, 7 remaining.
Siralus, 1 Thunder Bat costs 11. 2 Thunder Bats cost 22. I'll assume you meant to pop 2 until further notice.
LTDave wrote:Don't give away too much, Nihila - ignore the ranting. It makes life so much more entertaining.
But you don't know if I meant before or after I popped new units... :twisted: It wouldn't be a lie, per se. I could have 6 Level 5 Warlords now, for all you know. Or I might not have popped any new Warlords. But you don't know. What you know is that at some point, I had a Level 2 Warlord as my highest leveled Warlord. And that I got the same number of pop points as you. And that I'm following roughly the same rules as you, without Scouts.


Er... Nihila, does that mean that you're rolling for your new commanders' levels? Are we supposed to do it that way?
WaterMonkey314
 
Posts: 798
Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2010 9:40 pm

Re: The Battle for {Insert Name Here}

Postby Nihila » Mon Sep 13, 2010 6:00 am

WaterMonkey314 wrote:Er... Nihila, does that mean that you're rolling for your new commanders' levels? Are we supposed to do it that way?
Well, technically, I'm not. They just pop at Level 1. But I've never let facts get in the way of intimidation. :D Presumably they would have realized that at some point, but it would have been nice to keep the suspense going for longer...

Also, just so that this post has a purpose, remember that all units pop at the end of the Scout Phase, not the beginning. At least I think that's how we did it.
"The Infantrymen of Erfworld have nothing to lose but their chains. They have Erfworld to win. Infantry of all sides: Unite!"--Kawl Mawx, Master-class Moneymancer
Nihila
 
Posts: 750
Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 5:09 pm
Location: Probably totally lost.

PreviousNext

Return to Your Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Grand Diplomat, Th Revanchist and 1 guest