Dark Matter wrote:
oslecamo2_temp wrote:Would it really? If Wanda wasn't around, then there would be another warlord, who may have foreseen the ambush, spoted the attackers, or simply be the extra leadership they needed to watch over the siege stack.
You're expecting a lot from a level one warlord, especially since Wanda's side *already* had the spare leadership to do what you're suggesting.
An extra warlord would be an extra tactical mind that may have just offered that sugestion.
And heck, a lv1 warlord costs the same as a lv1 mancer. If Wanda can raise dozens of troops right away at first level, a 1st level warlord would be no laughing matter either.
Dark Matter wrote:
oslecamo2_temp wrote:He just had 20 troops, against clearly much bigger numbers. He could've disengaged after inflicting some casualities, but instead choose to fight to the deah, so it was a suicide attack from the start to destroy as much siege as possible.
From the moment the engagement started? Sure. But we shouldn't assume perfect knowledge here. The Plan doesn't *have* to result in losing the warlord, but what happens depends a lot on local factors (like how many troops are in that hex) which weren't predictable when the plan was created.
We're talking about attacking siege units camped out in the open, not assaulting a dark castle filled with creatures of the night. The lv4 Warlord came out of the tunnel, saw a LOT of enemy siege, and decided "screw this, I'll charge them anyway." Which means he believed the sacrifice of an experienced leader was worth slowing down the enemy.
Dark Matter wrote:
oslecamo2_temp wrote:Then why send expensive diggers when you could've sent some expendable infantry instead? They had plenty of time to set up, so after the tunnels were made they could've put cheaper troops to perform the ambush and retreat the diggers to sap another day.
We also shouldn't assume unlimited resources, or that there aren't rate limiting steps here. How big a tunnel can we build in X turns, and how many units can we hide in it? Further it's possible that they did exactly this. I.e. Wanda's guys had more troops than expected (or hoped), so the local warlord had to take everyone and make it a suicide run.
From the update:
“Our croaked guys and their croaked guys here all have the digging special, right?”
All of the attacking units were diggers.
BLANDCorporatio wrote: Dark Matter wrote:
oslecamo2_temp wrote:Foolamancer ability to hide cities is very, very invaluable. In games of this kind, the enemy not being able to spot your frontier cities is worth pure gold. Dittomancers seem able to double a lot of stuff, no reason they can't double one or other city characteristic.
Yeah, agreed. On the other hand I wonder how good a Foolamancer you have to be in order to hide a city.
I wonder how you get to be a Foolamancer that is so good that you can hide cities (hint- battlefield exp is one way).
We've confirmed there's veils of diferent levels. A begginner foolmancer may get his first levels simply making your main city harder to spot at a big distance.
Foolmancy also seems quite handy at making maps and simulations, so I bet it can be used to help warlords make battle plans and help intellegence operations.
Not to mention from all the mancers in the frontline, Jack has easily been the less useful so far:
-Prevented Stanley from engaging Jillian... But for all we know Stanley may have smashed trough her just like he smashed trough Caesar. A lot of dwagons still died to fully cover the escape.
-Made a group of troops displaced, only to be easily disrupted by archers, leaving the archons, Warlord and Wanda to do all the hard work.
-Distracted an enemy warlord for some moments to pull a healomancy scroll on Wanda, and then she would've died anyway if said warlord didn't get killed by their own side.
So in the tick of battle Jack can at best provide fleeting distractions, which just pale in comparison to army-wiping nukes, making the enemy fight for you, doubling your troops, hit-and-run from underground, colapsing cities over the enemy, etc, etc. And Jack's a freaking master foolmancer! What do you think a begginer could exactly acomplish in the heat of battle?
BLANDCorporatio wrote:Also, the ability to hide an army as it marches towards the heartland of a nation is itself pure gold. Trying to hide a border city may make it ignored by the enemy, hiding your army as it does a capital strike may win you the war (as it almost did for GK just recently)*. I'd think that this skews Foolamancy strongly towards battlefield oriented (and that Faq's use of it was an anomaly, possible by an already high-level Foola helped by a Pred).
Except you're not fighting a single enemy, but multiple ones. One of the main challenges on this kind of strategy games with multiple sides it's that you never know when your next neighbour comes knocking out of nowhere. Hiding your army is good against one enemy. Hididing a frontier city helps you against multiple enemies.
BLANDCorporatio wrote:*: then surely hiding your capital, located deep inside your empire, by Foolamancy is even more precious, right? Nope. Not unless you expect the opposition to magically go through your defenses undetected- covered by Foolamancy. A defense against an attack that will never come is useless. However, a good offensive power is better, because attacking is your initiative; you don't have to wait for the enemy to make a move to prove your investment was worth it.
Again, this isn't a 1x1. In a free for all with multiple sides and possible alliances/betrayals, you need to watch your back, front and center all the time
And that's why keeping your mancers at the capital is so damn popular in Erfworld. You don't want all your elite forces to be in some far away war when some other enemy pulls a sneak attack on your capital.
Formerly oslecamo2, unable to acess old acount.