Book 2 – Page 72

[Kreistor]

In other words, if you can pop a dozen pikes per turn and one dwagon in 6 turns, 72 pikes should be able to destroy the dwagon in a straight up fight

nah - I reckon it would take 73 pikers in a straight up fight against a Dwagon, otherwise it would be mutual destruction :p

We know from Parson's attack on Siege that it takes Archers to hit flying dwagons. 10000 pikers couldn't kill a dwagon without a Warlord telling them to pick up rocks and throw them at the dwagon... which likely wouldn't do squat anyway.

[Anias]

Question for the rules-lawyers, regarding the head-through-the-portal-only: are we taking that to mean that Jack hasn't left his hex? Which presumably would mean that he can't use Foolamancy in the Magic Kingdom hex to help Parson. Or is that already a moot-point as Foolamancy can't be done off-turn?

Well, I'm not a sufficiently skilled rules-lawyer to tell you whether or not Jack's left his hex, but if memory serves, Foolamancy can be used off-turn (Jack putting a "cheap baffle" on the fliers comes to mind).

edit: Actually, it occurs to me that Parson entered the Magic Kingdom off-turn, so certainly it's possibly to go from somewhere through the portal to the Magic Kingdom off-turn. And, if I recall correctly from Parson's discussions with Misty, move drops to zero off-turn (technically, I think they said "at night," but I suspect the effect is the same). So, assuming that this is true, Parson was able to enter the MK at a time when he had no move, and we know move is required to cross hex boundaries (like the archons not being able to leave the airspace to help Ansom in Book 1, or Jillian only being able to cross from airspace to tower after Kingworld). So that would suggest that the portals somehow bypass hex boundary rules...which would mean that Jack should, theoretically, be able to enter the MK and cast there, should he choose to.

[drachefly]

Wait. So you're seriously saying that taking a strategy that amplifies losses when you do have them has nothing wrong with it?

I'd see your saying and raise you "Thou shalt not bank on an uninterrupted string of success"

Whatever gave you that impression?

Well, then, what does 'thou shalt not bank on failure' actually mean?

[Kreistor]

Question for the rules-lawyers, regarding the head-through-the-portal-only: are we taking that to mean that Jack hasn't left his hex? Which presumably would mean that he can't use Foolamancy in the Magic Kingdom hex to help Parson. Or is that already a moot-point as Foolamancy can't be done off-turn?

Well, I'm not a sufficiently skilled rules-lawyer to tell you whether or not Jack's left his hex, but if memory serves, Foolamancy can be used off-turn (Jack putting a "cheap baffle" on the fliers comes to mind).

edit: Actually, it occurs to me that Parson entered the Magic Kingdom off-turn, so certainly it's possibly to go from somewhere through the portal to the Magic Kingdom off-turn. And, if I recall correctly from Parson's discussions with Misty, move drops to zero off-turn (technically, I think they said "at night," but I suspect the effect is the same). So, assuming that this is true, Parson was able to enter the MK at a time when he had no move, and we know move is required to cross hex boundaries (like the archons not being able to leave the airspace to help Ansom in Book 1, or Jillian only being able to cross from airspace to tower after Kingworld). So that would suggest that the portals somehow bypass hex boundary rules...which would mean that Jack should, theoretically, be able to enter the MK and cast there, should he choose to.

There's another consideration. Clearly, casters in the MK can cast at any time, regardless of Turn position, or state of their side. The MK seems to be a special zone where Casters are not bound by their normal rules that restrict casting to on-turn or in imminent danger only. Now, the presence of Barbarian Casters may put all casters in the zone into a constant "Imminent danger" setting, so that's not a certainty.

Which explains at least one odd rule for Casters. Without the Commander rating, Casters in the MK would be forced to attack each other, because the vast majority will not be allies. All Casters are Commanders so that Casters can choose not to kill each other in the MK.And tis is why pseudo-casters like Archons cannot enter. Those without Leadership would be forced to attack every Barbarian Caster in the zone.

[sleepymancer]

In other words, if you can pop a dozen pikes per turn and one dwagon in 6 turns, 72 pikes should be able to destroy the dwagon in a straight up fight

nah - I reckon it would take 73 pikers in a straight up fight against a Dwagon, otherwise it would be mutual destruction :p

We know from Parson's attack on Siege that it takes Archers to hit flying dwagons. 10000 pikers couldn't kill a dwagon without a Warlord telling them to pick up rocks and throw them at the dwagon... which likely wouldn't do squat anyway.

lol, Good point. try and be facetious and it comes right back at you!! :p :p :p

Regarding the casters in MK, those seem good points to me. Alternatively (and see above regarding facetiousness), maybe the whole MK is owned by a hippiemancer wielding the Arkenfriendshipbracelet* who simply keeps everybody peaceable...

With Jack's head stuck through but not the rest of him, I'm guessing he is still in the city hex. I agree entirely that he could cross whether it is on turn or off, but think he has chosen not to for some reason. Maybe there's a limit on how many times you can cross through a portal in a turn - seems VERY UNlikely to me, but they do have juice-boxes underneath...

* seriously, that would be dire. where those just a thing when I was in school? or is the desire to plait the damned things something that pops in a twelve/thirteen year old's mind/body regardless of time, culture and context? :p

[Kreistor]

With Jack's head stuck through but not the rest of him, I'm guessing he is still in the city hex. I agree entirely that he could cross whether it is on turn or off, but think he has chosen not to for some reason. Maybe there's a limit on how many times you can cross through a portal in a turn - seems VERY UNlikely to me, but they do have juice-boxes underneath...

It's an end run around the convention against attacking through Portals. If Jack steps through, he cannot return without attacking through a Portal and breaking convention. But so long as his feet stay in Jetstone, he hasn't moved, and so technically isn't breaking convention. It's a loophole that will likely be closed relatively soon.

[Sieggy]

In the US, it is always US vs. Them.

Thanks for the correction, it was a few years ago. I remember the surrounding circumstances. Checking again my sources, I noticed that some refer to the F-117 as a fighter, and others as a bomber. For what it is worth, it was making a bombing run when it was shot down.

Yup, it's technically a 'fighter' because it's flown by a single pilot, and not a crew, though as a fighter it could be charitably compared to an airborne brick. If it had to engage another aircraft in open skies, it would be easy meat. In dark / cloudy conditions it could conceivably escape, but would have virtually no chance of winning the engagement.

And yes, in the US, we tend towards the "White hats, Black hats" duality wherein we can do no wrong, our motives are pure and just, and God is putting the quarters in our coin slot. Our enemies, of course hate us for our values, are envious of our lives, and want to kill us all because they just can't stand the fact that we are so obviously superior to them in all respects . . . Watch Fox News, you'll hear that message delivered constantly by Rupert's Repetitive Robots.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Whatever gave you that impression?

Well, then, what does 'thou shalt not bank on failure' actually mean?[/quote]

It means, don't have failure as the default assumption. Or to make that clearer, unless you have tangible reasons to suspect you will in fact fail, don't bet on failure. Warning, this doesn't mean you should not prepare for the worst, watch out for possible weaknesses, keep an exit strategy handy etc- all that is supposed to ensure against failure or mitigate its consequences. But if you do all that, and still think failure is the likely outcome, why fight at all?

Instead, thou shall bet on winning. Buy War Bonds! Your country needs You(r cash)!

[Oberon]

We know from Parson's attack on Siege that it takes Archers to hit flying dwagons. 10000 pikers couldn't kill a dwagon without a Warlord telling them to pick up rocks and throw them at the dwagon... which likely wouldn't do squat anyway.

That's quite a nit you're picking there. If the dwagon is ordered to attack the pike, there is a combat. And one which I would expect the dwagon to lose, for the game balance reasons I stated previously. Unless you're suggesting that a single dwagon is able to attack and destroy any number of melee ground units by virtue of having the flight special? Comical.

[MarbitChow]

That's quite a nit you're picking there. If the dwagon is ordered to attack the pike, there is a combat. And one which I would expect the dwagon to lose, for the game balance reasons I stated previously. Unless you're suggesting that a single dwagon is able to attack and destroy any number of melee ground units by virtue of having the flight special? Comical.

It may be comical, but it's not without precedent. In the game Age of Wonders: Shadow Magic, for example, a unit with the Flight special can only be attacked by units with spells or ranged weapons, or by other flying units. When they attack a ground unit, the unit they attack gets a counter-attack (if it is able to), but no other ground unit can harm the flyer with melee attacks. A single powerful flying unit can wipe out whole stacks of grounded melee-only units. Granted, the game isn't really carefully balanced, but I'm not convinced that Erfworld's Titans had balance in mind, either (and I'll cite the Arkentools and Linked Spellcasters to support my non-balanced thesis ).

[Kreistor]

Unless you're suggesting that a single dwagon is able to attack and destroy any number of melee ground units by virtue of having the flight special? Comical.

I'm not "suggesting" it. It's proven in the comic in Parson's attack on siege. It's proven when the Yellow's drop dumps from high above onto units in the Atrium. Sylvia proves it every time her dwagons breath, demonstrating an infinite use range weapon on a flying unit.

Try it slightly differently. How about Archers mounted on Unipegataurs. Would pikers be able to kill them, 100 feet in the sky as the arrows rain down?

[drachefly]

Warning, this doesn't mean you should not prepare for the worst, watch out for possible weaknesses, keep an exit strategy handy etc- all that is supposed to ensure against failure or mitigate its consequences.

Well, that's all that is required to consider equipping your basic infantry with magical weaponry to be a Bad Idea.

[Swodaems]

Unless you're suggesting that a single dwagon is able to attack and destroy any number of melee ground units by virtue of having the flight special? Comical.

I'm not "suggesting" it. It's proven in the comic in Parson's attack on siege. It's proven when the Yellow's drop dumps from high above onto units in the Atrium. Sylvia proves it every time her dwagons breath, demonstrating an infinite use range weapon on a flying unit.

Try it slightly differently. How about Archers mounted on Unipegataurs. Would pikers be able to kill them, 100 feet in the sky as the arrows rain down?

You're forgetting something: With the exception of yellows, all dwagons apparently have to get close to the ground to use their weapons. During the fight above the lake, we saw dwagons with pre-existing damage from the attack on the seige that does not look like something caused by an arrow.

And while the pikers may not be able to kill the archers 100 feet in the air, once the archers run out of arrows, the flying archers have to either approach to do melee or flee. The pikers can win the fight simply by spreading themselves out and making themselves harder targets. If yellows do not have infinite crap, then they will run into this same problem.

[Kreistor]

You're forgetting something: With the exception of yellows, all dwagons apparently have to get close to the ground to use their weapons. During the fight above the lake, we saw dwagons with pre-existing damage from the attack on the seige that does not look like something caused by an arrow.

No, I'm not forgetting. It goes, "Archers get their hitsies." If everyone got their hits in, then that statement makes zero sense.

Dwagon weapons have their limitations. You're right in that. Yellows can't hit forward with their "breath" weapon. Others can't hit down. But i don't need all dwagons to be able to kill from on high with impunity. Yellows do the job all by themselves. The point is that you can be attacked without being able to attack back.

And while the pikers may not be able to kill the archers 100 feet in the air, once the archers run out of arrows,

[/quote][/quote]

Got a quote that tells you that archers run out of arrows? We're in a game world that trivializes a lot of realistic details. Infinite quivers isn't beyond the realm of possible in Erfworld. It would just be Natural Stuffamancy.

All through Artemis' story, not once does she concern herself with how many arrows are in her quiver. And neither does Archer, and after significantly more combat than Artemis, he still lacks such concern.

But that's one of those things that, if true, will never be mentioned. Infinite quivers would not be remarkable in Erfworld if they are normal. Arrow capacity will only be mentioned when it becomes important, so we could get to the end of the comic and never know either way.

[Swodaems]

You're forgetting something: With the exception of yellows, all dwagons apparently have to get close to the ground to use their weapons. During the fight above the lake, we saw dwagons with pre-existing damage from the attack on the seige that does not look like something caused by an arrow.

No, I'm not forgetting. It goes, "Archers get their hitsies." If everyone got their hits in, then that statement makes zero sense.

As I read the story, the Warlord led dwagons flew over a hex containing archery in the process of getting to a hex with seige in it. The dwagons avoided extended combat with the majority of troops in order to hit targets of their choice, but at the cost of a few archers getting in a few attacks where the dwagons could not counter attack.
When the dwagons did decide to attack their targets, they had to decend to attack.This placed them in range of melee capable ground units. Panel 8, we see a dwagon being hit by a spear wielding marbit.

Got a quote that tells you that archers run out of arrows? We're in a game world that trivializes a lot of realistic details. Infinite quivers isn't beyond the realm of possible in Erfworld. It would just be Natural Stuffamancy.
All through Artemis' story, not once does she concern herself with how many arrows are in her quiver. And neither does Archer, and after significantly more combat than Artemis, he still lacks such concern.

Nothing that says it in exact terms like a formal rule, but there is a lot of evidence for it.
his ranged attacks plus her leadership would allow them to drop as many targets as they had arrows. And then...well, they could gather more arrows.
We'd waste a lot of juice and arrows before we could shoot down that many."
Artemis only fired 5 shots throughout her story. (3 misses on Sylvia, 1 dead red, and 1 hit to Archer's shoulder if memory serves me right.) She simply never got to the point it was a problem
Also why aren't Jetstone's tower archers still firing if they have infinite quivers? I'm guessing because they are "arrow-spent"

[Sieggy]

Then why aren't the archers on top of the Tower laying fire into the Atrium and sniping at the airborne units? If Slately was serious about collecting the bounty on croaked Archons, given the number of archers up there, he should have been able to clear the skies by now and have a nice credit built up with Charlie already. Also, looking at the art, I'm seeing archers with bows (and very sad expressions) but no arrows.

If they have Quivers of Infinite Capacity, then not maintaining fire is sheer bungling idiocy; simple plunging fire could have croaked any number of Dwagons & Hobbo heavies by now, and direct fire taken out many Archons as well. If they don't, I've previously wondered why no one had been running sheafs of arrows up to the top, it would've made an awful lot of sense to do so. If the Archers are out of ammo, then it's almost criminally stupid to leave them there in harms way unable to either attack or defend. Unless they're there to act as damage sponges, which to my mind is even worse.

I just finished reading Cornwell's 'Azincourt', which went deeply into the subject of archer tactics - given the numbers topside and the rate of fire they should be able to maintain, there's no reason for ANYTHING to be alive either in the airspace or the Atrium

[BLANDCorporatio]

Warning, this doesn't mean you should not prepare for the worst, watch out for possible weaknesses, keep an exit strategy handy etc- all that is supposed to ensure against failure or mitigate its consequences.

Well, that's all that is required to consider equipping your basic infantry with magical weaponry to be a Bad Idea.

I really don't believe that's all there is to it.

Imagine that manufacturing Magic Items, en masse, is no issue* (so as to remove what I think is the obvious problem, just for argument's sake)- for ONE of the sides involved in a war. All else equal, who's more likely to win battles, the Normals, or the Pikers with Magical Pikes of Piking**? And if the Magikers do lose a battle, some Normals get Magic weapons- but not all, since in this version of the scenario they cannot make them; you'd need a Caster for that, which they lack. So on the off-chance that the Normals may capture a few Pikes which would at best even the odds item-wise for a few engagements, should the Magikers say no to providing their troops a consistent bonus?

What if BOTH sides can make Magic Items (again, let's assume Manufacturing is not an Issue*)? I think this is the classic "Red Queen" situation- run as fast as you can just to stay in one place. Both sides will field all bonuses that they can, lest the other outbonus them. And that would include, under the MinaI* assumption, items.

*: "Manufacturing is not an Issue" means some Caster(link) of the side can produce lots of items, for very little cost, a-la Dioxin of Croakamancy fame. I don't think this is true; I think that Casters need to spend some time/juice on items that have a hope of being useful, and as such, these items are few and reserved for elite troops.

**: and the Archers with Magical Arches of Arching etc. I'm not talking about a Piker-only side of course

[Kreistor]

As I read the story, the Warlord led dwagons flew over a hex containing archery in the process of getting to a hex with seige in it.

Unlikely.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F049.jpg

Panel 6, marbit shown with siege in background.

"Near hex, second stack is where we start."

This suggests the first stack is the archers, placed there to defend against Air. Scouts can tell if ground assault, which has lower Move, is even possible. You don't defend against the impossible.

Then "Archery gets their hitsies," then "Let's descend to attack."

Since no mention of a hex edge occurs between the stack selection and descent to attack siege, the idea the archers are in a different hex isn't consistent. Further, archers in a different hex cannot defend off-turn, while in the same hex can defend as long as the attack proceeds..

When the dwagons did decide to attack their targets, they had to decend to attack.This placed them in range of melee capable ground units. Panel 8, we see a dwagon being hit by a spear wielding marbit.

He is also in combat with the Marbits in question, not with siege. Under orders, he could be directed away from the marbits, so what this lone green is doing is against orders. This can occur when a Warlord is lost. Unled stacks must attack any enemy they can.

I have already conceded that different dragon breath weapons have different limitations, Gweens can attack siege without engaging in melee with groudn troops (panel 10), so something different has happened to put the dwagon in Panel 8 off plan.

Nothing that says it in exact terms like a formal rule, but there is a lot of evidence for it.
his ranged attacks plus her leadership would allow them to drop as many targets as they had arrows. And then...well, they could gather more arrows.

That's good enough for me. Only needed the one. Archers have limited quivers.

Then why aren't the archers on top of the Tower laying fire into the Atrium and sniping at the airborne units?

Range and cover. The archons are mentioned as being far fromt he Tower, which implies that range matters to archery, and they can put buildings between themselves and the tower while still remaining in airspace. (Such as the tall atrium walls.)

I just finished reading Cornwell's 'Azincourt', which went deeply into the subject of archer tactics - given the numbers topside and the rate of fire they should be able to maintain, there's no reason for ANYTHING to be alive either in the airspace or the Atrium

Going to have to read that. Saw a really good documentary on that, and one of the few Arms vs. Armor comaprisons that I cite from such documentaries, because for once, someone did it right.

The host found a bodkin arrowhead in the soil (you can still find them at Agincourt) and demonstrated that it was straight iron. He found period armor, and demonstrated carbon content (steel, not iron) and thickness. He then had a breastplate made, arrows made, and fired them at bow strengths consistent with bows found in that wreck whose name isn't coming to mind.

The arrowheads bent. Soft iron bends against hard steel.

And that's not inconsistent wiht other tets against real armor. Last night, I watched a brand new Mythbusters, where they fired 1700's pistols at Chinese iron armor, and the rounds bounced. Real armor is a lot better defense than the flat steel a lot of documentaries test weapons against. And armorer I saw interviewed explained that the act of bending the steel hardens it, and tempering it hardens it further, making real steel armor far more effective than a flat steel plate.

Anyway, I wonder how Cornwell saw the defeat of the knights. My documentary suggested that once the horses were shot from under them, the mud caused steel shod feet to sink deep, but the archers' leather shoes would walk quite well (deomsntrated in the Agincourt soil, by wetting the soil into mud and trying to actually walk on it), so he thought the archers simply let the knights exhaust themselves, then they just walked out and slit their throats... which would have had the reported effect of enraging more knights to charge in and get slaughtered. Dying to arrows might not have caused that.

[Balerion]

Then why aren't the archers on top of the Tower laying fire into the Atrium and sniping at the airborne units? If Slately was serious about collecting the bounty on croaked Archons, given the number of archers up there, he should have been able to clear the skies by now and have a nice credit built up with Charlie already. Also, looking at the art, I'm seeing archers with bows (and very sad expressions) but no arrows.

If they have Quivers of Infinite Capacity, then not maintaining fire is sheer bungling idiocy; simple plunging fire could have croaked any number of Dwagons & Hobbo heavies by now, and direct fire taken out many Archons as well. If they don't, I've previously wondered why no one had been running sheafs of arrows up to the top, it would've made an awful lot of sense to do so. If the Archers are out of ammo, then it's almost criminally stupid to leave them there in harms way unable to either attack or defend. Unless they're there to act as damage sponges, which to my mind is even worse.

I just finished reading Cornwell's 'Azincourt', which went deeply into the subject of archer tactics - given the numbers topside and the rate of fire they should be able to maintain, there's no reason for ANYTHING to be alive either in the airspace or the Atrium

Wanda waited for the archers to run out of arrows before the mass decrypt is my memory. So the archers on the tower are out of ammo. Also, where would be more out of harms way? the top of a tower, which has all of your infantry massed behind its doors, or anywhere else?

As to why no one is running arrows to the top, it has been maybe 3 mins since they ran out of ammo would be my guess; at the same time, the warlords were all busy getting the infantry ready to defend the tower gates, so no one was ordering people to go out into the atrium, filled with GK troops, and try to gather arrows. Also, given that Trem got blasted by the siege while inside, the odds of safely running arrows to the top in quantities likely to matter are pretty minimal.

As to why they don't have an armory full of quivers, my guess would be that arrows are like juice and restore to the archers at turns start, but if you find ones that missed lying about you can reuse them. Otherwise they are a pretty overpowered unit; they don't need to be engaging another stack to get shots at it, and have infinite shots per turn?

[BLANDCorporatio]

Last night, I watched a brand new Mythbusters, where they fired 1700's pistols at Chinese iron armor, and the rounds bounced.

That's very cool, which episode was that? I went looking for it (on youtube ... yeah ...) and found one in which they compared paper armor to what they said was steel. One of the tests was pitting the armours against a 1750s flintlock pistol, and both provided protection against the bullet.

I think I saw the documentary on Agincourt that you mentioned, and yeah, that was certainly a surprise to me. I thought the longbow would have imparted enough energy to the bodkin to pierce the steel but apparently nope. (And soft water can pierce hard steel when it's thrown at it fast enough, the OCC guys use a cutting machine based on that principle). What about pistols though, would the steel plate armour be able to deflect the ball from one?