PDA

View Full Version : Everyone Out To Get You Is A Good Thing?



fractal
2009-04-24, 03:00 AM
Back in comic #32, http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0032.html , Stanley informed Parson that "When everyone is out to get you, you must be doing something right." Now, Parson dismissed that at the time, as did all of us - obviously getting invaded by a huge coalition is not generally a good idea. However, thanks to the turn system of Erfworld, maybe Stanley hit upon an acorn of truth (probably through the blind pig method).

We have been informed that you can only act (particularly cast) on your own turn. However, it turns out that there is an exception to this rule - if someone else attacks you on their turn, you can cast then too. This effect is potentially quite powerful. "Yesterday" on GK's turn, Sizemore used up all of his juice healing his golems and blocking the tunnels. Similarly, Wanda uncroaked a couple thousand units. However, then the RCC attacked. Both Sizemore and Wanda cast several more spells on that new turn, including collapsing the entire city and then uncroaking a volcano. This suggests that they received a new charge of energy for the new side's turn, since I certainly didn't have the sense that they could still have done that during GK's turn.

If casters get a fresh energy charge for each side's turn, but can only cast then if attacked, there could be a tremendous strategic advantage in fighting many small-scale simultaneous wars. Sizemore and Wanda could potentially make several times the standard quantity of golems and uncroaked. The Eyemancers could produce Eyebooks a lot faster as well.

Stanley might have had a pretty good thing going... right up until everyone teamed up and attacked him with a massive combined force in a single allied turn.

zz_tophat
2009-04-24, 03:28 AM
The main problem I see with this is that Units apparently don't heal until the start of their turn. For every additional side attacking you have that much less health to carry you through to your turn.

Aside from that casters do seem to have an excellent advantage when used defensively but you can't win a war on the defense. (cities produce cash every turn so winning by attrition is not possible).

BLANDCorporatio
2009-04-24, 04:46 AM
(cities produce cash every turn so winning by attrition is not possible).

That may be so, but winning by insane level-up is.

fractal
2009-04-24, 09:20 PM
The main problem I see with this is that Units apparently don't heal until the start of their turn. For every additional side attacking you have that much less health to carry you through to your turn.

Aside from that casters do seem to have an excellent advantage when used defensively but you can't win a war on the defense. (cities produce cash every turn so winning by attrition is not possible).
Sure, but these aren't wars you're trying to win, and you don't intend to lose much health or many units. The point is just to carry on small border skirmishes that get you, in effect, "extra turns" for your casters (and any other units or abilities with similar limitations).

The idea here is that being at war with extra sides is a competitive advantage, so long as you don't actually lose many units fighting them.

zz_tophat
2009-04-25, 02:36 AM
The trouble is that you do lose units and against multiple sides not only do you lose more units but your enemies also produce more (your city does not get multiple turns). This would not seem to be a to much of a problem if not for the fact that casters, in general, need units to support (act as meat shields for) them.

A further problem is your enemy, let's assume the they are not morons. In the case of them not being morons any attack they level against you is going to be at enough not to lose. since casters seem to gain the ability to cast again when they are attacked more attacks sounds dandy ...Until your non-moronic enemy does attack and they do so with a force large enough to win the fight (general rules in attacking is go for a 3 to 1 advantage). So not only are you under attack by multiple enemies you are under attack by multiple enemies that are going to win.

Remember that it was stated early on that Stanley lost every engagement since the start of the war.

Kreistor
2009-04-25, 10:02 AM
Remember that it was stated early on that Stanley lost every engagement since the start of the war.

Not exactly true. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0005.html) "Since you began questing for the other Arkentools, we have not won a battle." This tells us that:
a) Wanda worked for Stanley before he began questing for the Arkentools
b) Stanley won battles before he began questing for the Arkentools

We don't know how long that period of time was before the quest, nor do we know how long Stanley was Ruler without Wanda's presence.

Oh, and one last thing... this is Erfworld. Do you really think you can point at a date and say, "They had peace there, so the 'war' started on this day"?

A. Hamster
2009-04-25, 11:01 AM
Oh, and one last thing... this is Erfworld. Do you really think you can point at a date and say, "They had peace there, so the 'war' started on this day"?It would be in the Intro movie and cutscenes, but not part of active play. Most of these games will talk about the enlightened civilization at peace that is overturned by the awakening of the great EVIL that was thought sealed away forever. Now that all is war and destruction, that's where the game starts. Assuming a similar beginning for Erfworld, that would be backstory to justify the claims of people like Ansom for how the world order should be, and why people like Stanley the Worm are a threat to the system.

Kreistor
2009-04-25, 11:06 AM
Not sure if you're trying to be funny or serious.

If the latter... I don't make that assumption.

zz_tophat
2009-04-25, 12:16 PM
Not exactly true. (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0005.html) "Since you began questing for the other Arkentools, we have not won a battle." This tells us that:
a) Wanda worked for Stanley before he began questing for the Arkentools
b) Stanley won battles before he began questing for the Arkentools

We don't know how long that period of time was before the quest, nor do we know how long Stanley was Ruler without Wanda's presence.

Oh, and one last thing... this is Erfworld. Do you really think you can point at a date and say, "They had peace there, so the 'war' started on this day"?

I stand corrected but my point still stands.

And as for that last thing i am curious myself, the recent conversation leads me to believe the world is at a constant state of war. Is anyone ever at peace or is the closest thing to peace sides being allied against someone?

That makes me wonder about the magic kingdom, they seem to get along (peace?), could it be that is why they resent warlords so much?

Kreistor
2009-04-25, 01:06 PM
I stand corrected but my point still stands.

You have a point? I just read your previous posts, but I don't actually see a statement of belief. Mind clearly stating your point?

zz_tophat
2009-04-25, 02:01 PM
You have a point? I just read your previous posts, but I don't actually see a statement of belief. Mind clearly stating your point?

Despite the supposed "advantage" of having casters being able to cast multiple times per turn Stanley was still losing all of his engagements.

Kreistor
2009-04-25, 02:51 PM
How could that have made a difference? You'll note that Stanley's casters were in Gobwin Knob. Ansom didn't bring any to the battle against GK, relying solely on Charlie's Archons which arrived only when RCC were getting close to GK. Klog 10 talks about how valuable casters are, and why they don't lead stacks.

So, what makes you think any casters were with Stanley's forces at any of the battles?

zz_tophat
2009-04-25, 03:04 PM
How could that have made a difference? You'll note that Stanley's casters were in Gobwin Knob. Ansom didn't bring any to the battle against GK, relying solely on Charlie's Archons which arrived only when RCC were getting close to GK. Klog 10 talks about how valuable casters are, and why they don't lead stacks.

So, what makes you think any casters were with Stanley's forces at any of the battles?

I don't think that. I was responding to the thread starter and saying that no, being under attack by multiple enemies is not a good thing even if it does let your casters cast more than usual.

T-O-E
2009-04-25, 03:15 PM
Ansom didn't bring any to the battle against GK, relying solely on Charlie's Archons which arrived only when RCC were getting close to GK. Klog 10 talks about how valuable casters are, and why they don't lead stacks?

Technically, he did bring healomancers.

ishnar
2009-04-25, 05:40 PM
Technically, he did bring healomancers.

No, those were altruistic elves, they were healers, not healomancers.

Kreistor
2009-04-25, 07:20 PM
No, those were altruistic elves, they were healers, not healomancers.

Danka. Saved me the trouble of figuring that out.

dr pepper
2009-04-25, 08:35 PM
Sure, but these aren't wars you're trying to win, and you don't intend to lose much health or many units. The point is just to carry on small border skirmishes that get you, in effect, "extra turns" for your casters (and any other units or abilities with similar limitations).



Bad idea. The extra turns only occur in hexes entered by the enemy. So you'd have to put your casters out on the borders.

valce
2009-04-30, 10:11 PM
We have been informed that you can only act (particularly cast) on your own turn. However, it turns out that there is an exception to this rule - if someone else attacks you on their turn, you can cast then too. This effect is potentially quite powerful. "Yesterday" on GK's turn, Sizemore used up all of his juice healing his golems and blocking the tunnels. Similarly, Wanda uncroaked a couple thousand units. However, then the RCC attacked. Both Sizemore and Wanda cast several more spells on that new turn, including collapsing the entire city and then uncroaking a volcano. This suggests that they received a new charge of energy for the new side's turn, since I certainly didn't have the sense that they could still have done that during GK's turn.


Did they use up their spell reserves? I thought they hadn't...