Erfworld Game

[Ehbobo]

Make it 10, so that zones of control don't overlap.

[Kaed]

Fair enough.

[Azgrut]

I like the royal warlord idea. Just a slightly better warlord unit .

Normal warlords should still be able to become heir designates though.

[Kaed]

The problem with the Royal Warlord thing was that the whole concept of Royals was part of the plot of the comic itself. "Royals" could pop slightly stronger units than other sides. In this all the sides are supposed to be roughly equal. Maybe next game we can implement a chance to be a Royal side at start. There will probably be some separate benefit for not being one though.

[Twoy]

From what I can tell, the sides in Erfworld generally seem to be Royal. Most of the sides have a king and/or royal warlords. The only exceptions I know of are GK, Charlescomm, Hyatt and Jitterati.

Both GK and Hyatt were, until recently, Royal sides.

[Twoy]

I went back to the first page of this post to check what the "goal" of the game is, and here is what Kaed posted that seems to stick out as the goal of what you guys want to do.

The following is going to be an ongoing project for a more complex game. That adheres as strictly as possible to the rules within Erfworld.

I posted that because I think it bears directly on the question of whether the game should have Royal Warlords. Erfworld has Royal Warlords; therefore, a rule should be in place to pop Royal Warlords. Alternatively, we could say that all Warlords are Royal Warlords, then we don't need to have a special rule for them.

To change the subject:

There are some questions that need to be answered before a set of rules can be completed. These are the two biggest questions I can think of at the moment.

1. How long will a game last? That is... how many months of play and how often does a new turn start? (The answer to this can vary from game to game, but we need to have a general guideline in order to create rules for the game).
--200 turns with a turn every two days would last 14 months irl? 100 turns with a turn every week would be two years?
2. What are the win conditions? (Also can vary from game to game, but there should be some options listed in the rulebook).
--Last overlord standing? First overlord to build 3 Level 5 Cities? First player to defeat another player?

Question 1 is important because if the game is going to last 100 Turns, then having 60 rounds to pop a Designated Heir is way too long. Also, it will take at least 200 turns under the current system to level a caster to 10 which means we either need to lower the level 10 spells to something reachable within the time frame of the game or we need to level the casters faster. On the other hand, if the game is supposed to last forever with sides getting wiped out or players quitting and new players continuously waiting to come into the game, then we need to know that as well.

Question 2 is important because it will allow us to determine our end state for each individual game. We might need to consider developing a point system to help determine a winner.

Here are some other questions. Not really important for creating the rules, but fairly important for running the game.

3. What happens if a player misses a turn, two turns or 10 turns?
--1-2 Turns: Earns gold, units continue last known/standing orders; 10 turns: Player's cities and units turn to barbarian and a new player is allowed into the game?
4. Can new players come into an ongoing game and how will that be handled?
--If a game is on round 50 and a new player comes in does he have to start with a Level 1 Overlord and a Level 1 City, or can he start with a Level 5 Overlord and two Level 3 Cities?

[Ehbobo]

Questions 3 and 4 I can answer. 1 and 2 are for Kaed.

3. What happens if a player misses a turn, two turns or 10 turns?
--1-2 Turns: Earns gold, units continue last known/standing orders; 10 turns: Player's cities and units turn to barbarian and a new player is allowed into the game?

No turns are missed, there is an established turn order and nobody goes until everybody else has. If somebody just goes inactive for a week or two and doesn't give a reason, someone else could come in.

4. Can new players come into an ongoing game and how will that be handled?
--If a game is on round 50 and a new player comes in does he have to start with a Level 1 Overlord and a Level 1 City, or can he start with a Level 5 Overlord and two Level 3 Cities?

No new players will come in mid-game (excepting the above circumstances), partly because of obvious disadvantage and partly because managing this game is time consuming.

[Kaed]

1. How long will a game last? That is... how many months of play and how often does a new turn start? (The answer to this can vary from game to game, but we need to have a general guideline in order to create rules for the game).
--200 turns with a turn every two days would last 14 months irl? 100 turns with a turn every week would be two years?
2. What are the win conditions? (Also can vary from game to game, but there should be some options listed in the rulebook).
--Last overlord standing? First overlord to build 3 Level 5 Cities? First player to defeat another player?

Question 1 is important because if the game is going to last 100 Turns, then having 60 rounds to pop a Designated Heir is way too long. Also, it will take at least 200 turns under the current system to level a caster to 10 which means we either need to lower the level 10 spells to something reachable within the time frame of the game or we need to level the casters faster. On the other hand, if the game is supposed to last forever with sides getting wiped out or players quitting and new players continuously waiting to come into the game, then we need to know that as well.

Question 2 is important because it will allow us to determine our end state for each individual game. We might need to consider developing a point system to help determine a winner.

These are some excellent questions, and before I answer them I would like to point something out about the current game:

It is in no way complete or whole, because our understanding of Erfworld is not complete either. This is an alpha version of the game, and everyone seems to be having fun so I think it will be worth it to continue work on it. Some issues have already begun cropping up. For instance, there have been rolls where I am determining who gets casters and when, and I will roll up something like a Weirdomancer. While some people HAVE drafted some spells up for Weirdomancers, I have been erring on the side of caution and rerolling for that kind of results. All the rules currently up are subject to change or even removal if need be.

That said, we'll move onto the questions.

Question 1 ties into Question 2. By default, the game will end when someone 'wins'. Generally this means he has consumed all the other forces present. However, alternative means of victory may exist - if all moderators present agree that a side has a such an overwhelming advantage that it would be impossible for someone else to bring them down we may offer to let other people surrender themselves and thus lose. This generally has to be a unanimous consensus. If one or more people refuse to surrender we will discuss in private with them how they plan to attempt to turn the tide. If they do not have a feasible answer (See Volcano Spell and Lateral Thinking) then they will be declared to have lost anyway. Perhaps if a player can bully everyone into accepting them as supreme leader we might end the game there too.

Something to keep in mind about this game also - This will eventually (hopefully) be a large scale effort. Right now we are running a small test game of five players with 2 GMS on a fairly minimalistic map that I just grabbed off a site somewhere. By its very nature it is an immutable game board and can only support a small number of players, and new ones cannot be added.

In what I would hope eventually becomes the final draft, we will have a plethora of assistant GMs working together with me and the players (I may myself become a player at a later point and allow another GM to manage my turns while I take on someone else's), though we may need to move away from this forum for it due to the mass amounts of PMs going around and into something more formal. The map will not be a little premade thing grabbed somewhere, but will be custom tailored and expandable depending on if new players want to be added and can be managed with the current GMs working. In this finalized format new sides WILL be able to be formed mid-game, and it will probably be done in groups - a GM will be assigned 2-3 budding sides and a whole new section of map for them to play around in. But it will be connected to the rest of the map as a whole and total interaction would be possible.

You may notice this seems to be in stark contrast to what I just said about victory conditions. How can anyone win if new players keep coming in? Well, they can't. But, I'm trying to keep a realistic view here. What I said above would be the ideal end point for the Erfworld game, and it would play out more like something Maxis and Firaxis created (i.e. it doesn't end, people just croak eventually and you make more), but that is kind of a lofty goal and I don't expect to really get enough manpower and interested players to go that far into world building. Even if there is no winning point where the game ends, I'm sure being the dominant power can have it's own interesting benefits.

So, to wrap up your questions - games will continue until they end, and winning may not actually be an important point.

[Twoy]

I agree with your final sentiments that if the playing is fun, the winning is not particularly important.

What I'm thinking we need is one set of rules that can work for 1. a 20-turn game simliar to LTDave's Battle for Gobwin Bump, 2. a 100-200 turn game with a "limited" win condition, and 3. a neverending-story game that lasts as long as players have interest. That makes designing the game more challenging.

I'm also thinking that once the rules are finalized, it might be possible to support more than one game at a time.

I have thoughts on a number of different rules, but I will place them in a separate post.

[Crovius]

I agree with your final sentiments that if the playing is fun, the winning is not particularly important.

What I'm thinking we need is one set of rules that can work for 1. a 20-turn game simliar to LTDave's Battle for Gobwin Bump, 2. a 100-200 turn game with a "limited" win condition, and 3. a neverending-story game that lasts as long as players have interest. That makes designing the game more challenging.

I'm also thinking that once the rules are finalized, it might be possible to support more than one game at a time.

I have thoughts on a number of different rules, but I will place them in a separate post.

The battle for Gobwin bump is not gonna end in 20 turns. The rate at which we lost units compared to how long it takes to get enough points to make units means that after every turn combat occurs it'll take at least 2-3 turns for a side to replenish troops, and obviously Gobwin Bump can do it better. So ultimately the game can only end with the coalition loosing at this point.

[Twoy]

The battle for Gobwin bump is not gonna end in 20 turns. The rate at which we lost units compared to how long it takes to get enough points to make units means that after every turn combat occurs it'll take at least 2-3 turns for a side to replenish troops, and obviously Gobwin Bump can do it better. So ultimately the game can only end with the coalition loosing at this point.

I recognized the problem with gobwin bump fairly early in the game. If you could just find a Thinkamancer, Croakamancer, Dirtamancer and a Volcano, you might have a chance.

The key for a GM when designing a good 20-turn game is to set conditions so that the players will eventually win, but try to figure out how to make it as painful as possible in those 20 turns. If the players win in 15 turns, you made it too easy. If it takes 25 turns, then so be it. If the GM wins... FAIL!

[Crovius]

Except we're playing the coalition... So yeah..

[Ehbobo]

I agree with your final sentiments that if the playing is fun, the winning is not particularly important.

What I'm thinking we need is one set of rules that can work for 1. a 20-turn game simliar to LTDave's Battle for Gobwin Bump, 2. a 100-200 turn game with a "limited" win condition, and 3. a neverending-story game that lasts as long as players have interest. That makes designing the game more challenging.

I'm also thinking that once the rules are finalized, it might be possible to support more than one game at a time.

I have thoughts on a number of different rules, but I will place them in a separate post.

I think you underestimate the work that goes into GM'ing this game. Between trying to keep straight who's gone, accurately copy the world map from paint into the hexmap program, and keep track of everybody's stats/juice/xp/position on the map... it can take a while to translate someone's orders into a cohesive turn. Add on to that the effort of coordinating this stuff between two GM's, and it will be damn tough to run multiple games at a time.

Furthermore, your 20-turn game idea is impossible. Nobody even stumbled across another player until a few turns before that. The only way to run a short game such as that is to have a tiny map, a clearly identified enemy/goal, and start with an established side. This could be done, but it would twist the game beyond recognition and besides, forging an identity for your side is half (if not much, much more) the fun.

[Twoy]

I imagine it would be difficult to GM more than one game, but it should be possible to GM one game and play in a second game.

[Crovius]

You mean a different GM per game? That's plausible... if you can find a large enoug group of players to do it.

[Azgrut]

Who is it we are waiting for btw?

[Kaed]

Me. >.> I'll finish your turns by tonight, sorry I've been so slow lately :<

[Ehbobo]

If you want, I could handle one more person.

[Twoy]

I have not seen any rules on upgrades that warlords get when they raise levels. I assume the rules exist, but have not yet been posted.

These are just some ideas. Also pulled stuff from the wiki and from already proposed rules.

For specials: Leadership, Overlord, Heir, Heir Designate, Chief Warlord, Royal, Dance-fighting, Rock out fighting, Special-Caster (limited), Remote Visual Link, Flight, (Water, Mountain, Forest, Desert)-Capable,

Leadership: Grants combat bonus to Warlord's Stack.
Overlord: +4 HP, +2 Attack, +2 Defense. (Removes all Upkeep Costs)
Heir: +4 HP, +2 Attack, +2 Defense. (Upkeep +200). 60 Turns to pop. Casters never pop in place of an Heir. Side may have only one Heir or Heir Designate.
Heir Designate: +4 HP, +2 Attack, +2 Defense. (Upkeep +200). Costs 25,000 Schmuckers, and must be performed in a capital city of at least Level 4. Side may have only one Heir or Heir Designate.
Chief Warlord: Confers Leadership Bonus to all Units in a City he or she occupies; Confers a partial (1/3) Leadership Bonus to all Units in the same Side; Confers (1/2) Leadership Bonus to all Units in the same Hex; Confers (100%) Leadership Bonus to all Units in the same stack.
Royal: Grants +2 HP, +1 Attack, +1 Defense. (Upkeep +100) 15 turns to pop. Casters never pop in place of a Royal Warlord.
Dance-Fighting: Leadership +1 at Level 1; Leadership +2 at Level 3; Leadership +3 at Level 5; Leadership +4 at Level 7; Leadership 5 at Level 9; Leadership +6 at Level 11. (Upkeep +100)
Rock-Out Fighting: Same as Dance-Fighting, but not as elegant. (Upkeep +100)
Special-Caster (limited): These would be the same specials that units can have from Moneymancy, Dirtamamancy, Rhymamancy, Dollamancy, and other specials that may be added to units in the future. (Upkeep +100)
Remote Visual Link: (Upkeep +100)
Flight: Unit can fly. (Upkeep +100)
Water, Mountain, Forest, Desert-Capable: Unit can move across selected terrain as if on plains. (Upkeep +0)

Here's your basic warlord.
-Warlord (x1) - 10 turns, Upkeep 100 +50 per level above 1. Warlords begin their life popped at Level 1 - HP 10, Attack 4+1d4, Defense 4+1d4, Move 5, Special - Leadership 1. There is a 5% chance that a Warlord will naturally pop with the Dance-fighting ability.
--Each time the warlord raises a level Upkeep increases by 50, adds +2 HP, +1 Attack, +1 Defense, +1 Leadership, +5% to gain Dance-fighting, Rock-Out fighting, Special-Caster (limited), Flight, (Water, Mountain, Forest, Desert)-Capable.

Casters are commanders and can also gain specials. Casters can also produce resurces.

I'll be out of town for the next three days, but I do have more suggestions to post.

[Crovius]

Specials don't increase the upkeep of units. We already worked that out. Special units have a pool of points that can be spent on them. Some specials cost more than others. These points would normally be used to increase HP, attack, defense, and move, but instead they'd be spent on the special bonus.