Titanic Mandate vs. Elder Gods

[LTDave]

We really do need a decision on combat, since the Isoceleans now have a city within a turn's march of a Cthulhu city.

I suggest:
Eliminate the 65% thing before casualties. I don't understand this at all.
Stacks can have any number of units, with the bonus going down to 0.1, and with a cap on the max attack and defence of any stack - say, 200.
Also, can a single stack attack any number of times each turn? So a stack of 8 Dwagons could theoretically destroy a million stabbers in 100,000 stacks?

[LTDave]

Oh, and to the Allied players:

The Isoceleans now have a level 4 city within spitting distance of the enemy.

All powers are invited to send units to help me hold "Pointy End" and prepare to attack the Elders.

And if you could have dispatched them 4 turns ago, have done that. Thanks.

[Twoy]

Also, can a single stack attack any number of times each turn? So a stack of 8 Dwagons could theoretically destroy a million stabbers in 100,000 stacks?

If the 8 Dwagons were fliers and ranged, yes. If they were not both flying and ranged, then the stabbers would croak them on the first phase, though I'm sure the dwagons would take a few stabbers with them.

As to the max cap, I definitely do not agree with 200. Eight Shoggoths would have an attack of 416 without any magical items or leadership.

I have been thinking about limiting the number of volleys a ranged unit can make in a turn. The limit would be 10 for a field unit and 10 x (city level) for a unit defending a city. That means the hypothetical stack of 8 dragons could only croak 10 stacks of stabbers while in a field environment. Though if you divided the eight dwagons into two stacks of 4 each, they could probably take out 20 stacks of stabbers.

I suggest:
Eliminate the 65% thing before casualties. I don't understand this at all.
Stacks can have any number of units, with the bonus going down to 0.1, and with a cap on the max attack and defence of any stack - say, 200.

I started writing this long post, and I left it at the bottom just so everyone can see what led me to this conclusion.

The rules should be written in a way so that during combat it will almost always be a tactical advantage to have units in stacks of eight.The only time this might not be true is when you have a large swarm of very cheap/weak units and an incredibly high-level chief warlord.

So, let's say you can make a stack whatever size you want, but all units behind the first eight do not add their attack or defense bonus or their hits to the stack.

That means there really is no value to creating a huge stack except to keep a certain unit alive. And that would not really be a good strategy because generally, many stacks of eight would effectively have more attack and defense than one ginat stack.



ORIGINAL POST I WAS WRITING:
___________________________________
The reason I like the 65% rule is because I dislike how (in the earlier rules) the units seem to be lined up single file so that only one unit can be injured at a time. In a melee, or when a squad receives massed enemy fire, they normally don't get injured one at a time, and after the first unit dies the next unit can be injured.

The 65% rule only causes problems when someone wants to stack dozens of units in one stack. With smaller stacks it does not become an issue. And with very small stack bonuses, it is really not an issue.

How about we say that the maximum stack size is 24, and at 24 the stack bonus is x.1. That means 24 shoggoths would have an attack vs. ground units of 62, whereas 8 shoggoths would have 416.

The defense of 24 shoggoths would be 14. The defense of 8 shoggoths would be 96.

Three stacks of 8 archers could croak the 24 shoggoths in two phases (maybe, but it would be a tough battle). Three stacks of 8 archers would all have to attack the same stack of 8 shoggoths to even hope to do any damage.

24 pikers would have a 17 defense.
16 pikers would have a 112 defense.
8 pikers would have a 112 defense.

24 pikers divided into 3 stacks of eight would each have a 112 defense ...

[LTDave]

Also, can a single stack attack any number of times each turn? So a stack of 8 Dwagons could theoretically destroy a million stabbers in 100,000 stacks?

If the 8 Dwagons were fliers and ranged, yes. If they were not both flying and ranged, then the stabbers would croak them on the first phase, though I'm sure the dwagons would take a few stabbers with them.

Yes, but even if it was hand to hand - a single stack of Pikers, with a defence high enough to absorb all the attack of the enemy stacks could destroy an entire army, just by attacking it one tiny stab at a time. This will become extremely tedious for the GM, and the players.

[Twoy]

Yes, but even if it was hand to hand - a single stack of Pikers, with a defence high enough to absorb all the attack of the enemy stacks could destroy an entire army, just by attacking it one tiny stab at a time. This will become extremely tedious for the GM, and the players.

The way I understand it, when two stacks engage in Erfworld, either the attacker withdraws or one of the stacks destroys the other stack. If a situation comes up where Stack A is completely unable to damage Stack B, but Stack B is able to occasionally do damage to Stack A on a a good roll, I rule that Stack B is the winner of the combat.

[Twoy]

Still need input from Minititans and Koopa Kingdom.

Also need feedback on the combat stacking issue.

[BLANDCorporatio]

What seems to be the problem, exactly?

My take on the issue is that Attack and Defense should work as they do in Heroes, but that would need bigger reworks. Which includes guaranteeing that no matter how large the disparity in Attack and Defense between the two stacks, some damage is always dealt. Though as expected, high Defense vs. low Attack is very survivable, but after a while, increasing Defense (while Attack of the opponent stays constant) will have no effect.

Again, reserve the Heroes system for a future time.

Apart from the possibility of having Uber-Hi-Def stacks that would be virtually impossible to kill, what are the problems with the combat system?

[LTDave]

Apart from the possibility of having Uber-Hi-Def stacks that would be virtually impossible to kill, what are the problems with the combat system?

I'm pretty sure that's the entire problem.

I'd prefer something like:
Total Attack / Average Defence = Hits

So even very high defence stacks will still take some casualties from even the weakest attack.

But all this is no reason for two players not to send orders!

Also, I have a question about Walls and Air Defences, as in, what do they actually do?

[Twoy]

Walls can only be attacked by units with siege, unless the wall has no defending units on it in which case infantry can scale and take the wall. Ranged units can attack units stationed on the hex, non-flyers cannot enter walled hexes).

Air Defenses may only be used by a commander in the tower. A commander may use some or all of the air defense points in an attack against enemy flying units in the city’s air space. A caster may add his attack bonus to the air defense or may add a Hadoken spell to the attack. Casters using air defense increase the damage of the air defense as if they had leadership and the air defense was a unit.

[Twoy]

Apart from the possibility of having Uber-Hi-Def stacks that would be virtually impossible to kill, what are the problems with the combat system?

The other problem is that the rules need to be written so that stacks of eight units will almost always be the best tactical option in combat.

When I created the extended stacking bonus chart (out to 16 units) I had not considered that someone might stack 90 stabbers in the same stack to create a stack that had Att: 270, Def: 90. Even that is not really a problem, but when you consider the Elder Gods stacking 90 pikers for a def of 630, the Allies would never be able to conquer even one EG city.

I think I can live with Total Attack/Average Defense, but I think I still want to extend the stacking bonus chart out to 24 so that stacks of 24 or more units would have a stacking bonus of .1. That way we should not see any problems with side stacking their overlord behind a stack of 200 pikers.

Thoughts?

[BLANDCorporatio]

Total Attack / Average Defence = Hits

So even very high defence stacks will still take some casualties from even the weakest attack.

Assuming you round up, of course. Because one may have an average defense of 20, fighting against and Attack of 1. 1/20 is 0 if you round down.

Hm, let's see. Total Attack is the same as Average Attack times number of units. So the damage dealt is number of attackers times (Avg. Attack/Avg. Defense). Which can be interpreted as that number of minicombats going on between units in the battle, with avg. Attack/avg. Defense a measure of how the damaging goes.

Sounds ok. Keep?

I think I can live with Total Attack/Average Defense, but I think I still want to extend the stacking bonus chart out to 24 so that stacks of 24 or more units would have a stacking bonus of .1. That way we should not see any problems with side stacking their overlord behind a stack of 200 pikers.

I assume the 0.1 applies to both Defense and Attack. I think it's ok, maybe even overkill.

Suppose the stack bonus (which would also affect Defense) can go below 1, in this example, to 0.1. This effectively increases the damage the opponents can do 10 times. One could stack more Pikers, so that the extra Hits absorb this damage (since the stacking bonus floors at 0.1). But if one does so, they'll lose Pikers with abandon.

The point is, you might make a stack where the Overlord is hidden behind tons of units and impossible to kill, whether you have 0.4 or 0.1 minimal stack bonus (it's easier if the min bonus is 0.4). BUT, said stack would be very huge either way, very costly, and very fragile- as units will be easy to kill.

So yeah, ok. Get the stacking bonus (which also applies to Defense) below 1 for stacks beyond a certain size. Should merit trying.

[Twoy]

1. Total Attack / Average Defence = Hits
2. Stack modifier out to 24.
3. Archers, Scouts, and Courtiers defense needs to increase to 1, so that we are not dividing by zero.

All players need to add 1 point to the defense of your Archers, Scouts, and Courtiers. I will post version 0.39 of the rules.

Updated rules: I have added a few rules that were penciled in on my copy.
Archers, Scouts, and Courtiers have base defense of 1.
Courtiers are commanders without the leadership ability.
Roads may be built outside a city’s zone of control.
Swamp: Scouts have line of sight in adjacent hexes.
Tundra: Scouts have line of sight in adjacent hexes.
Water: Scouts have line of sight in adjacent hexes.
Altruist and Lofty Elves have an upkeep of 200.
Spidew stats are: 12/9/3/16.
Added formula for calculating juice cost of magic items and modified the table slightly for clarification. (Formula: Level^2 x 15=Juice Cost.)
Changed magic items useable by from 6 types to 3 types: Light Unit (non-mount), Heavy Unit (non-mount), Mount (Light and heavy)
Clarified (with minor changes) costs for casting Benedict spell. Base cost of spell is for units engaged in battle. Half juice cost for units that are captured.
Deleted Mine Cart spell.
Link: https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B6CKjN ... UwYTE5YTNk

Koopa Kingdom and MiniTitans need to post their Turn 14 input before Saturday. If you believe you will not be able to continue, let me know and I will offer your slot to someone else.

Edit: I am starting EG turn 15, but since I have only a short time today, I will have to finish it tomorrow. If Nihila and Marshalkowski want to post their Turn 14 soon, that would be great.

[LTDave]

Any movement with those two players?

What are the alternatives?

[Twoy]

I have not heard from them at all. I received a message from a new player, Hollywierd, and I just now sent him a message telling him to create a new side. I will put hollywierd in the southeast corner of the map with a few cities and some armies to get him started.

[BLANDCorporatio]

Warning, I'll be gone from Friday till Monday. I don't expect to have online access.

There were some orders for Turn 14 that waited on some conclusion on the MT situation. I don't think I can send Turn 15 orders for now (mostly because they'll involve some accounting beforehand), but will do so Monday evening GMT.

In any case, said Turn 15 orders will include sending some Flying units over Isocelean airspace. I expect a full stack of 8 of my units to be available to park themselves on an Isocelean city.

[Twoy]

I'm finally getting back to running Turn 15 for the Elder gods and realized that I lost last turn's changes to the map. So today I am trying to fix the map. When I post it next time, please look it over carefully to help me catch anything I may have missed.

Note to Hollywierd: I thought when you sent me an e-mail that you wanted to play. Please post a side or will offer your space to someone else.

[Exate]

Submitted for review and approval:

Spoiler: show

Side: Aesthetica
Preferred Terrain: Mountain

Ruler: Pierre-Leonardo Brunelleschi: 10/8/8/10, Rider, Leadership
Heir: Pablo van Monet: 10/4+/4+/10, Rider, Leadership
Caster: André Fénéon: 6/3/3/8, Turnamancer
Warlord: Edgar Kandinsky: 10/4+/4+/10, Rider, Leadership

Stabber class: Liberal: 5/4/4/10 (30)
Piker class: Sculptor: 7/2/5/8, Garrison, Builder (30)
Archer class: Starving Artist: 5/7/1/8, Garrison, Flight, Ranged (40)
Scout class: Bohemian: 3/0/4/20, Flight, Scout (30)
Knight class: Beret: 10/7/7/10, Rider, Simple Hat Magic (90)
Special A: Renaissance Man: 6/3/4/10, Surveyor, Fabrication (40)
Special B: Method Actor: 6/3/9/10 (40)
Special C: Superstar: 6/5/5/16, Leadership, Dance-Fighting (80)
Special D: Copycat: 21/18/6/16, Heavy, Mount, Ranged, Sonic Breath, Simple Dittomancy (250)
Siege Tower: Circus: 17/0/11/5, Heavy, Siege (100)
Sloop class: Newspaper: 6/2/5/12/8, Water-Capable (60)
Galley class: Magazine: 8/11/3/10/16, Water-Capable, Ranged (90)
Galleon class: Imagination: 10/10/10/30/32, Water-Capable, Ranged (130)

[Twoy]

Submitted for review and approval:

Spoiler: show

Side: Aesthetica
Preferred Terrain: Mountain

Ruler: Pierre-Leonardo Brunelleschi: 10/8/8/10, Rider, Leadership
Heir: Pablo van Monet: 10/4+/4+/10, Rider, Leadership
Caster: André Fénéon: 6/3/3/8, Turnamancer
Warlord: Edgar Kandinsky: 10/4+/4+/10, Rider, Leadership

Stabber class: Liberal: 5/4/4/10 (30)
Piker class: Sculptor: 7/2/5/8, Garrison, Builder (30)
Archer class: Starving Artist: 5/7/1/8, Garrison, Flight, Ranged (40)
Scout class: Bohemian: 3/0/4/20, Flight, Scout (30)
Knight class: Beret: 10/7/7/10, Rider, Simple Hat Magic (90)
Special A: Renaissance Man: 6/3/4/10, Surveyor, Fabrication (40)
Special B: Method Actor: 6/3/9/10 (40)
Special C: Superstar: 6/5/5/16, Leadership, Dance-Fighting (80)
Special D: Copycat: 21/18/6/16, Heavy, Mount, Ranged, Sonic Breath, Simple Dittomancy (250)
Siege Tower: Circus: 17/0/11/5, Heavy, Siege (100)
Sloop class: Newspaper: 6/2/5/12/8, Water-Capable (60)
Galley class: Magazine: 8/11/3/10/16, Water-Capable, Ranged (90)
Galleon class: Imagination: 10/10/10/30/32, Water-Capable, Ranged (130)

Side: Aesthetica
Preferred Terrain: Mountain

Ruler: Pierre-Leonardo Brunelleschi: 10/8/8/10, Rider, Leadership
Heir: Pablo van Monet: 10/7/6/10, Rider, Leadership
Caster: André Fénéon: 6/3/3/8, Turnamancer
Warlord: Edgar Kandinsky: 10/6/5/10, Rider, Leadership, Ranged

Everything looks fine except your galleon-class ship.

Spoiler: show

Stabber class: Liberal: 5/4/4/10 (30)
Piker class: Sculptor: 7/2/5/8, Garrison, Builder (30)
Archer class: Starving Artist: 5/7/1/8, Garrison, Flight, Ranged (40)
Scout class: Bohemian: 3/0/4/20, Flight, Scout (30)
Knight class: Beret: 10/7/7/10, Rider, Simple Hat Magic (90)
Special A: Renaissance Man: 6/3/4/10, Surveyor, Fabrication (40)
Special B: Method Actor: 6/3/9/10 (40)
Special C: Superstar: 6/5/5/16, Leadership, Dance-Fighting (80)
Special D: Copycat: 21/18/6/16, Heavy, Mount, Ranged, Sonic Breath, Simple Dittomancy (250)
Siege Tower: Circus: 17/0/11/5, Heavy, Siege (100)
Sloop class: Newspaper: 6/2/5/12/8, Water-Capable (60)
Galley class: Magazine: 8/11/3/10/16, Water-Capable, Ranged (90)
Galleon class: Imagination: 10/10/10/30/32, Water-Capable, Ranged (130) (Your galleon has two points too many.

[Exate]

Galleon class: Imagination: 10/10/10/30/32, Water-Capable, Ranged (130)

(Your galleon has two points too many.

Does it? The base Galleon is 10/5/5/10/32 + 20, so I've allocated 0/5/5/10/0 here. Unless my math is very wrong or I'm using the wrong version of the rules, I think it's right.

[Twoy]

Galleon class: Imagination: 10/10/10/30/32, Water-Capable, Ranged (130)

(Your galleon has two points too many.

Does it? The base Galleon is 10/5/5/10/32 + 20, so I've allocated 0/5/5/10/0 here. Unless my math is very wrong or I'm using the wrong version of the rules, I think it's right.

And two points for ranged.