A Question(s) of Rules

Speculation, discoveries, complaints, accusations, praise, and all other Erfworld discussion.

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Sat Jul 06, 2013 5:43 am

Well, I'm still in what my professor might have called the 'paper' stage right now. I'm still working on getting rules that work out reasonably well before I go too far with actual programming, and I'm working out... crud, what was the proper term? flow chart type things for code, basically.

Never worked on a coding project with other people before (which likely shows how little experience I have at programming), but when I get to the point where actual code is flying around, I'll keep you in mind.
Taikei no Yuurei
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby sylventhe » Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:47 pm

http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F113.jpg

I was wondering if this description might further clarify, or complicate, the discussion. :-)
sylventhe
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Jul 12, 2013 1:39 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Fri Jul 12, 2013 5:32 pm

Main thing that shows is that they managed to have 'hundreds' of bats.

The way I'm kind of thinking combat works when broken out to mechanics is that any stack can engage any other stack that it wants, regardless of if the 'defending' stack is already in a fight with another stack (Less sure about that last part, not sure I can say I recall seeing any cases of 2 stacks v 1 stack, though the fights can look very chaotic). An already engaged stack however can't break off to fight someone else, though they can make an attempt to retreat (possibly using another stack as a screen). Once a stack has defeated an enemy stack or disengaged, they can rearrange their stack with units from other stacks that aren't currently engaged.

So essentially what you get is that you have a few different types of stacks: Assault, Defensive, Support, Reserve. Assault stacks try and pick out targets of opertunity among the enemy, such as unled stacks, casters, or high value warlords or whatever else they might deem is important. Defensive stacks instead focus on stopping Assault stacks from hitting their targets, basically acting as interceptors/walls. Support would be things like archers, healers, casters. They wouldn't directly engage, but would instead use their abilities in whatever manner they could. Finally Reserve stacks would basically be all excess unled stacks which are basically there for the sake of replenishing injured stacks. Technically any Reserve stack could also be a Defensive stack, but would kind of act as a last resort since an unled stack is more or less going to get slaughtered by anything led by even a low level warlord unless they are very powerful units to begin with.

This basically allows me to auto resolve combat in a turn based manner by having the people on each side set up what stacks are what kind, what the Assault stacks should prioritize attacking, what the Defensive stacks should prioritize protecting, what their support stacks should be doing, and the reserve stacks basically just hang back.

Main problem with this is that I feel like you would have a huge snowball in battles, with them basically being determined by who's main warlord lost a fight first. Then again, that would encourage having a large number of warlords (along with them being a means of getting casters), which seems to be the case, given that every other person in the Jetstone army seemed to be a warlord. Being able to disengage might help prevent the snowball, but would diminish the value of multiple warlords quite a bit. I'll have to put some consideration into it.

Oh, and if there is no leadership in the hex at all (barring a few specials and magic) basically all stacks are treated as Assault stacks or Support stacks (in the case of archers)
Taikei no Yuurei
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby mortissimus » Sat Jul 13, 2013 4:59 am

I thnink that gets the spirit of how Erfworld battles are described.

Including the snowball effect, remember the battle for Warchalking - http://www.erfworld.com/book-1-archive/?px=%2F001.jpg ?
mortissimus
 
Posts: 381
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:04 am

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Sat Jul 13, 2013 5:22 am

Hmm, very true. I do worry about how it'll work out as far as enjoyment as an actual game goes if someone loses their entire army in one fight because of an unlucky warlord, but I think I'll go with how I have it for now. As I said, having multiple warlords will alleviate that, and make for more effective assault/defense squads. Good to have that basic of combat mechanics settled at least. Now I need to work on how exactly the stats will interact. A big observation I've had from the comics is that leadership and such is only ever stated to raise combat, not defense. I wonder if this is intentional, and fights between two stacks with high leadership are supposed to be highly deadly, or if there is some other mitigating factor that prevents that. Perhaps combat doesn't work as a raw attack vs defense, but instead as a combat vs combat to determine if a hit is scored, then the difference between those numbers vs defense is the determining factor in actually dealing damage.
Taikei no Yuurei
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby SNfinity » Tue Jul 23, 2013 9:30 pm

I just found a reference to a maximum stack size. This is almost definitely relevant to leadership bonuses and combat.

http://www.erfworld.com/book-2-archive/ ... -05-01.png
SNfinity
 
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun May 20, 2012 6:17 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Wed Jul 24, 2013 5:36 am

I think max stacks have been mentioned a few times actually, but I always took it to mean max as in the normal max of 8 for the full bonus as opposed to the literal maximum number of troops that can be in a stack. That might not be right though. I think the more telling thing is a few pages later where Wriggly and his stack attacks the level 1 warlord's stack. It is mentioned that they kill at about a 3:1 ratio, which overall would seem to indicate that they had significantly more than 8 units in the stack. Perhaps when Ford said that all the other troops were to be in two groups, it was really two stacks?

It also gives some indication for how much a difference there should be between led and unled stacks. Both seemingly had regular stabbers of presumably similar level stabbers. The difference was that the GK stabbers had Wanda's +2 bonus only, and maybe a +1 bonus from Parson. The Jetstone stabbers meanwhile would have had a +1 from their warlord in stack and a +3-4 from Tramennis as their CW in hex. I'm sure with a little testing that could be telling of how the combat system might work. Or at least give something for the systems to work towards.
Taikei no Yuurei
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Mikalyaran » Wed Jul 24, 2013 8:09 am

Taikei no Yuurei wrote:I think max stacks have been mentioned a few times actually, but I always took it to mean max as in the normal max of 8 for the full bonus as opposed to the literal maximum number of troops that can be in a stack. That might not be right though. I think the more telling thing is a few pages later where Wriggly and his stack attacks the level 1 warlord's stack. It is mentioned that they kill at about a 3:1 ratio, which overall would seem to indicate that they had significantly more than 8 units in the stack. Perhaps when Ford said that all the other troops were to be in two groups, it was really two stacks?

It also gives some indication for how much a difference there should be between led and unled stacks. Both seemingly had regular stabbers of presumably similar level stabbers. The difference was that the GK stabbers had Wanda's +2 bonus only, and maybe a +1 bonus from Parson. The Jetstone stabbers meanwhile would have had a +1 from their warlord in stack and a +3-4 from Tramennis as their CW in hex. I'm sure with a little testing that could be telling of how the combat system might work. Or at least give something for the systems to work towards.


If you really want to figure out the bonuses id take a look at the book one summer updates. I recall Ansom going over his bonus with Wanda in decent detail. At least enough given our other knowledge to mathamancy it out some. I'll see if I can find the actual link when I get to work. Time to finish breakfast!
User avatar
Mikalyaran
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 285
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 1:03 am

Re: A Question(s) of Rules

Postby Taikei no Yuurei » Wed Jul 24, 2013 3:03 pm

That would be this page here I believe: http://www.erfworld.com/summer-update-2 ... mWanda.jpg

Presuming that Wanda didn't level up between that update and the fight in question, we know that Wanda gives a +1 to all decrypted on her side. If parson is CW at this point (the update comes after his promotion, but this and his promotion both happened right after Ford's death), he likely gives an additional +1.

We know that the level 1 warlord should be giving +1 to her stack, and Tram should be giving half his level to the entire hex. Only problem is that we don't know what level he is. I'm guessing somewhere in the 6-8ish range, meaning he would be granting +3-4, with the 3 sounding more likely since most of his time has been spent as a diplomat, not a proper warlord so his level is likely to be low.

So we have a full stack of stabbers with +1-2 bonus vs a full stack of stabbers + warlord with a +4-5 bonus. Overall the lower bonus ones are killing at a 3:1 ratio, but Wriggly also manages to get lucky and take out the warlord. So, I have some ideas for how I'm going to model combat, and hopefully I can work it out both on combat and on unit stats that those numbers line up reasonably similarly. Not going to go crazy trying to match it, but if I get similar numbers for similar situations, I'll be happy that I have a reasonable simulation. My game will end up requiring a few differences from actual Erfworld anyway to make it winnable and avoid exploitation. Might take out the 'make it winnable' part if this was some kind of MMO or something where everyone had a day to do their turn and it was intended to be persistent, but right now I'm going more for something that is actually winnable. I do however have some different mechanics in mind to prevent people having a ton of level 5 cities churning out massive numbers of troops and schmckers.
Taikei no Yuurei
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
Tool + Erfabet Supporter!
 
Posts: 494
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2013 7:55 pm

Previous

Return to Everything Else Erfworld

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests