noxharrington wrote:As has been mentioned - the notion of Archons wanting to do things beyond their strict set of orders has been observed. It seems strange that Parson has concluded that they are totally incapable of having their own desires.
warriortribble wrote:Well, it depends on their personality, and loyalty stat I think. If the Archons are like a prettier and eloquent version of Bogroll then yes, the notion of volunteering is foreign since all they'd want to do is serve.
mortissimus wrote:So having natural allies means you have an independent source for producing troops, as long as you can put more schmuckers into their treasury?
Simons Mith wrote:Y'know, it has belatedly occurred to me (about two fricking years late) that the Gobwin Knobbers cannot possibly be the bad guys in spite of Parson's assumption that they were ("I've always wanted to play the bad guys, which we obviously are.") The reason? Simple: Who ever heard of an evil side with a Guy in Charge as staggeringly stupid as Stanley the Tool? I rest my case.
Ah I see. It seems I misread your post.Megaduck wrote:It's the 'If' I'm not getting here. The Archons don't have a notion of volunteering, that's why parson had to explain it to them. It's the next sentence that I think explains why, they don't have the notion of volunteering before because they were never asked to.
Jack Payback wrote:First time poster, long time lurker. I was tempted to register last update just to further up the number but I didn't have much to add. Last night I found myself re-reading erfworld... Want to see something verrrry interesting that I came across that seems to possibly tie in with this update?
Pointyleaf wrote:Simons Mith wrote:Y'know, it has belatedly occurred to me (about two fricking years late) that the Gobwin Knobbers cannot possibly be the bad guys in spite of Parson's assumption that they were ("I've always wanted to play the bad guys, which we obviously are.") The reason? Simple: Who ever heard of an evil side with a Guy in Charge as staggeringly stupid as Stanley the Tool? I rest my case.
Apparently you've never read Atlas Shrugged - villains there are not only stupid but emo also.
Other thoughts: if exercise/food is related to weight, and weight is related to ability to ride a dragon, I wonder if Parson's dragon-riding abilities will change at some point? Probably not, but is possible.
Thus far, we've only seen casters/lords act voluntarily. These are also the only ones who can selectively engage in combat. Are Archons casters?
Lord Kasavin wrote:The "protagonists" the reader is suppose to identify with are amoral, aethesitc, and outright malignent.
HailGreen28 wrote:2. Marbits in the tunnels! I would be horrified if i were in Parson's place.
a. There is a naturally hostile force right under GW's noses / feet. Why hasn't Parson or Stanley ordered a Marbit extermination squad, like yesterday?
b. Sizemore deliberately wrecked Gobwin Knob once before by collapsing tunnels. What if the Marbits can do the same?
c. The mines are where GW's wealth of gems is! Are the Marbits robbing GW as we speak?
d. As an afterthought, yeah maybe the Marbits are keeping GW from popping Gobwins. Parson should consult with Sizemore and Maggie, ask the Bracer more questions to try nailing down the source of the Marbit threat, what ELSE might be down there, and what hostile force strength is down there. Then send enough troops to crush them immediately.
HailGreen28 wrote:Wow. Three topics are very interesting.
1. It really matters what questions you ask the Bracer. It doesn't seem to twist your question. Just answer EXACTLY what you ask, which has it's plusses and minuses. A Bracer that thought through your question and gave you the answer you NEED, not the one you ask, would be better. But still very good. And to figure the probability Charlie's involved? Yeah, the Bracer accounts for knowledge Parson and his allies don't have.
Decorus wrote:Parsons is actually both a strategic and tactical genius.
How ever Ansom is not a tactical genius he is a strategic genius.
At its heart, tactics is a shifting amalgam of psychology, physics, and statistics.
Ansom has no understanding of psychology, and no real knowledge of statistics.
Parsons is actually limited by his lack of understanding of the physics of Erfworld...
Hence Parsons dramatic improvements as he understands more about how Erfworld works.
raphfrk wrote:mortissimus wrote:So having natural allies means you have an independent source for producing troops, as long as you can put more schmuckers into their treasury?
It could be exponential. You give the unit schmuckers and there is a chance it will produce another unit. They went from 1 unit to 200 in 38 turns. That represents around a 15% population increase per turn.
Alternatively, it could be 1-2 knights per turn and 4-5 standard units.
Secret wrote:Darkside007 wrote:Secret wrote:A Lookamancer and/or a Findamancer.
The Lookamancer could look at the field/caves to see where they are and when linked show the Foolamancer.(same as how Misty Showed Jack the field so he could project it onto the table)
While Findamancer would just find them(however that works) and show the Foolamancer where they are.
Simple, well except for the linking part......
Gobwin Knob had that exact setup and it was 100% impossible to do it.
That's up for debate. I have always read that line as meaning they couldn't use the Eyemancer linkup for the table AND vailing a stack at the same time.
But whatever it might still be possible with a Findamaner linkup.
Also, and I know I'm going to be sounding like a mod but, could you please try not to make two posts in the same thread so soon after each other, I mean we have an edit button for a reason.....
Lord Kasavin wrote:
Ayn Rand is not a very good example. The "protagonists" the reader is suppose to identify with are amoral, aethesitc, and outright malignent. Plus...
BoopingCynic wrote:THe should just kill all the marbits then relay Wanda and decrypt them .
Users browsing this forum: Xellos and 4 guests