So was Stanley aka The Tool running away as a chicken actually a good thing?

I remember a lot of comics ago that a lot of people calling Parson a coward incopetent that left Hamster and most of his army to die.

However, this escape also meant that Vinnie was sent after him.

Vinnie the second main coalition leader.

Vinnie the only person on the world wich Ansom actually hears.

Vinnie the one who made sure Ansom kept his feets down on earth instead of performing semi-suicide solo attacks.

Sure, The Tool ended up losing most of his dragons, but if he hadn't run away, it probably would have ended much worst.

Vinnie and Ansom would have stayed togheter, and then they probably would have managed to outsmart Hamster, dwagons or no dwagons, specially when they would have Jillian dwagon-slayer backing them up.

So, perhaps the Tool isn't as incopetent as we tought. Stupid? Arrogant? Impetous? Yes. But not exactly incopetent. Stanley seems to have a true leader instinct. He realized that his only chance of sucess would be to run away, forcing the enemy to either divide their leadership to pursue him or let him escape. He demonstrated to be able to take hard decisions on hard times, and they proved to probably be the best. Hamster is a true solo comander that doesn't really need anyone counselling him, but Vinny and Ansom's power came from them balancing each other. Separate them and we have the Tool and Hamster cuting a swath trough the disorganized coalition forces.

Or his toolship is just damn lucky. But hey, that's also very important. It never hurts to be lucky.

I don't think Stanley intended on being chased. He was hoping to slip out undetected and get away, leaving Parson, Lord Hamster, alone to take the full attack. It wasn't a plan to divide the army at all.

It also didn't improve GK's survival odds; he and his dwagons were defeated because of the huge stack of warlords that were sent to intercept him. Without them, he would have demolished Vinnie, Wanda, and stack. Ergo, He and the dwagons at GK would have been a tremendous advantage for Parson.

As far as I can see, the split actually helped the Coalition.

Parson is not The Tool. Stanley is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dr pepper

Parson is not The Tool. Stanley is.

---

Thanks mate, that's what happens when I try to start a thread half-asleep.

Occasional Sage:Well, that's why I said it was a win-win situation for Stanely.

Scenario 1: Coalition doesn't pursue, I get to start new side in relative calm, hidden by my super foolamancer.

Scenario 2: Coalition sends forces to pursue, separating their leadership in half to get Stanley while the true Gobwin forces are still at the volcan, Hamster and the three magnificent mancers.

From all we've seen, the dwagons are good units, but they're just too easy to gank up with numbers and can't really go toe to toe with the enemy's finest. Also, dwagons are all but useless in tunnel fights, and Hamster plans suceeded thanks to intense tunnel usage.

However, with Vinnie out of the way, Ansom literally wasted his troops and his own life like candy, ending up killed in what was clearly a desesperate perfectly avoidable ambush. The coalition is now a disorganized horde wich can't make a proper organized attack to finish off Hamster before he pulls another combo. If Vinnie was still there he would probably have managed to prevent it or at least keep the coalition togheter for finishing off Hamster.

just because an action has a serendipitous result doesn't make the actor competent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Or his toolship is just damn lucky. But hey, that's also very important. It never hurts to be lucky.

---

Sure it's important. But while luck doesn't hurt, incompetence does. I need competence before luck becomes important to me. Stanley lacks the one but has the other; notice that he was beaten back to just his capitol and would have lost without the interference of an underling. You can call that "luck" too (since he brought her from FAQ) but a competent ruler would never have been in the position to NEED the luck in the first place.

You don't go from piker to Ruler by being incompetent. You get there by recognizing opportunities, creating opportunities, and being careful not to get caught.

ONce on top, Stanley has relaxed and gotten lazy. He doesn't need to hide his cruelty. His delusions tell him that he doesn't need to be intelligent because the Titans have a plan that puts you on top. His incompetencies are recent. Underestimate his potential at your own risk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kreistor

You don't go from piker to Ruler by being incompetent. You get there by recognizing opportunities, creating opportunities, and being careful not to get caught.

ONce on top, Stanley has relaxed and gotten lazy. He doesn't need to hide his cruelty. His delusions tell him that he doesn't need to be intelligent because the Titans have a plan that puts you on top. His incompetencies are recent. Underestimate his potential at your own risk.

---

However, valid your point may be, it does not relate to the op. Stanley didn't leave to deliberately allow Parson to "do his thing" and then come riding back in a moment of triumph. Which is what the OP is attempting to say.

Stanley got off what he saw as a sinking ship and switched to a backup plan, just as Parson would. That was competence.

The rest of it--about Vinny, Ansom's advisor, leaving Ansom's side, etc..--was serendipity, not planning. Thus luck not competence. And it doesn't allow for how much more effective Parson would have been if he hadn't lost a complete flight of Dragons. They could have used the air defenses then killed off a large portion of the wounded with the dragons. Just as one thought.

btw, re-read the op

Quote:

---

Hamster is a true solo comander that doesn't really need anyone counselling him,

---

Hamster has been counseled CONSTANTLY.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ishnar

However, valid your point may be, it does not relate to the op.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OP

So, perhaps the Tool isn't as incopetent as we tought.

---

You may want to re-read the OP yourself. I consciously chose not to involve myself in the entire theory, choosing to debate only one part of it. This may force a re-think of the theory, resulting in an approach from a different direction, rather than a complete elimination of the theory. It is not necessary to debate all theories into non-existence, because some goals do not require such drastic results.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

From all we've seen, the dwagons are good units, but they're just too easy to gank up with numbers and can't really go toe to toe with the enemy's finest. Also, dwagons are all but useless in tunnel fights, and Hamster plans suceeded thanks to intense tunnel usage.

---

no they are not easy to gank with numbers... the bats numbered in the hundreds and benefited from a serious number of bonuses... similar bonus may not apply in a fight above gobwinknob as coalition only had three warlords that could fly as opposed to 10 and a chief warlord... sure they have Ansom instead of Ceasar, but looking back at their plan of attacks, Ansom felt his leadership might be needed elsewhere leaving on the vinnie, jillian and possibly a few mounted warlords who could engage the dwagons... not to mention that vinnie was running low on bats himself

Second of all, While parson plans succeeded larger thanks to tunnel usage, his plans largely failed due to loosing the airspace to charlie... if Parson had the dwagons he would have been able to fight it out and possibly maintain control of Gobwinknob airspace instead of needed to pretty much surrender it to charlie... and it was the archons who prevented Parson from claiming the pliers and helped perform dance fighting for the infantry... he could have atleast worked down the archons numbers to the point that maggie could get rid of them and stop the dancing


not to mention that back at the failed pincer plan, Parson could have attacked Ansom's group with the dwagons he had making the doughnut... with only Ansom, Vinnie, Jillian and the archons, he might have been able to attack and finish them all... parson was insistent on needing to attack the next morning

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Occasional Sage

Sure it's important. But while luck doesn't hurt, incompetence does. I need competence before luck becomes important to me. Stanley lacks the one but has the other; notice that he was beaten back to just his capitol and would have lost without the interference of an underling. You can call that "luck" too (since he brought her from FAQ) but a competent ruler would never have been in the position to NEED the luck in the first place.

---

Well, still, he somehow managed to make his underlings really loyal to him, wich shows competence or at least great leadership skills. The four mancers have indeed helped him a lot, but they had plenty of oportunities to turn tail and flee. Yet they've chosen time and time again to fight by Stanley.

Also, like said above, Stanley managed to rise from a single pikemen to a powerfull and feared comander.

Those things really don't fit very well with Stanley's current character but well, read below for a possible explanation.

Kreistor:That theory has indeed crossed my mind more than once. Stanley has grown decadent with power(I control an army of dwagons so I'm invincible MUAHAHAH). He managed to become a powerfull ruler and at the same time get unquestionable suport from his lackeys. Stanely surely did grandious thins on the past, otherwise they wouldn't follow him to their graves like they're doing now.

However, there may be more than it meets the eye. Where we see several cities lost, Stanley sees a arkentool being carried to him in a silver plate. Perhaps a titan tool is indeed more valuable than several cities.

And now that's been cornered against the wall, I believe Stanely will finally awake from his torpor and show what he's really worth.

ishnar:Where some people see coincidences, other see carefull planning. The greatest plans are composed of a series of small and big maneuvers. We still don't have the whole picture of what's hapening, and I believe as the story progresses we'll see that Stanley wasn't as dumb as we were led to believe in the first dozens of strips, and that there were reasons for his aparently idiotic decisions.


slayerx:The archons are basically Mary Sues as far as we've seen. Wanda and his dolls pwned Ansom in combat, and then the Archons kicked her ass like she was nothing. If Jillian and Vinny were there to further boost the archons togheter with Ansom then I believe not even Stanley and his dwagons would stand a chance in hell of winning. Tunnel fighting, where the archons don't seem to be able to teleport instantly and Sizemore is lord and king, was Hamster's only hope from the begining.

It's hard to say. It drew away most of their air forces in turn but would their forces have been better used as defense? I'd say they would have been better off staying home. Stanley, while annoying and probably would have been yelling at Hamster the whole time, would have given huge bonuses to the troops. Plus imagine the possibilities parson could have had the foolmancer do. :smallamused:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Well, still, he somehow managed to make his underlings really loyal to him, wich shows competence or at least great leadership skills. The four mancers have indeed helped him a lot, but they had plenty of oportunities to turn tail and flee. Yet they've chosen time and time again to fight by Stanley.

---

Duty- forces units to not conspire against their lord aand to keep serving their leaders
Loyalty- can be effected by thinkamancy, and Stanely has a thinkamancer

Quote:

---

ishnar:Where some people see coincidences, other see carefull planning. The greatest plans are composed of a series of small and big maneuvers. We still don't have the whole picture of what's hapening, and I believe as the story progresses we'll see that Stanley wasn't as dumb as we were led to believe in the first dozens of strips, and that there were reasons for his aparently idiotic decisions.

---

But we know it wasn't careful planning...
Stanely considered the city forfiet, he planned early on that if he could not win he would leave and escape the city... he did not know that anyone knew about faq aside from him and wanda, and as such he did not expect anyone to be able to follow him; between the foolamancer and no one knowing where he was going, no one could follow... and if the Ansom had no idea where Ansom ran to, would he really split off any of his forces when they have extremely little chance of finding him? unlikely; he would have pushed forward and attack the city with full force and then tracked down stanely afterward... the only reason he approved Jillian's mission was because she actually knew where Stanely was going

Quote:

---

slayerx:The archons are basically Mary Sues as far as we've seen. Wanda and his dolls pwned Ansom in combat, and then the Archons kicked her ass like she was nothing. If Jillian and Vinny were there to further boost the archons togheter with Ansom then I believe not even Stanley and his dwagons would stand a chance in hell of winning. Tunnel fighting, where the archons don't seem to be able to teleport instantly and Sizemore is lord and king, was Hamster's only hope from the begining.

---

The archons would have to deal with enemy warlords on dwagons, and possibly stanely and parson himself who gives a major bonus between him and the hammer... furthermore, instead of using the defenses on generic air units, the air defenses would have been saved for the major air battle.

Hell if the archons are busy fighting for dominance over air space they would be in less of a position to attack wanda and stop her; not to mention that the dwagons would be able to pack her up and protect her from their attacks.

Even if the dwagons ultimately lost the battle the archon's numbers would have been reduced greatly. And with that reduction, Maggie could have used thinkamancy and scrolls on the remaining ones to keep them being able to help perform the dance fight... the reason why Parson did not have he use her own juice to attack them is because she did not have enough to take care of the dozens that were able to step in

there is even the possibility that charlie would come up with an alternate plan for getting parson, fore he felt that he could not so easily take the garrison with Stanely and the dwagons hovering over the airspace. He might have not offered to provide ansom more help; hell since Ansom would have still had his own force, he might have held back on calling in additional charlie troops, thinking that his own air units might have been enough; especially when he finds out that Hamster himself was the cost of the additional troops...

And if Charlie never took control of the airspace like he did and held back due to the dwagons, Ansom would not have been able to attack the uncroak like he did as the dwagons would be able to attack him and his own air units would not have been enough... in the end, the coalition might have been forced to wait extra turns which parson could take advantage of


All in all, the dwagons would have made things likely much better for Parson

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Kreistor:That theory has indeed crossed my mind more than once. [snip]

And now that's been cornered against the wall, I believe Stanely will finally awake from his torpor and show what he's really worth.

---

Possible, but it depends on the extent of his dementia. If he's too far gone, he'll see any success as proof of the correctness of his previous choices. It's not until they completely fall that they see that they have failed. Napoleon is a good example. After losing and exile to Elba, Nap0oleon does not give up, but instead returns to try again, finally losing at Waterloo.

Quote:

---

Tunnel fighting, where the archons don't seem to be able to teleport instantly

---

Teleport instantly? I don't think I remember seeing that. Would you care to demonstrate your evidence for teleportation?

Stanley running first destroyed Parson's chance to end it at donut of doom.

Secondly, it forced Parson to make deal with Charlie, which lead to Charlie's interest in Parson backed by *many* archons. An *interested* Charlie seems of a problem than a Vinnie.

IMO stanley may have helped in making situation so desperate that Parson was willing to try linking up the 3 casters to uncroak a volcano.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by multilis

IMO stanley may have helped in making situation so desperate that Parson was willing to try linking up the 3 casters to uncroak a volcano.

---

Well, the very core of the thread is if Stanely did these things intentionally... Did he leave knowing that he would be splitting up Ansom's forces and thus making it easier for Gobwinknob, or did he bugger off not giving the fate of gobwinknob a single thought...

If it's the former, than Stanely could be seen as a better leader than we give him credit for... if its the later, then he was just watching out for his ass and any possible benefit that might have come from his leaving is purely coincidental and unintentional...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kreistor

You may want to re-read the OP yourself. I consciously chose not to involve myself in the entire theory, choosing to debate only one part of it. This may force a re-think of the theory, resulting in an approach from a different direction, rather than a complete elimination of the theory. It is not necessary to debate all theories into non-existence, because some goals do not require such drastic results.

---

You can't quote a sentence beginning with "so" and leave all the preceding out. That's teetering close to a misquote. It's the stuff preceding "so" that I disagree with. The OP, as opposed to the title, doesn't just let the statment stand alone. He adds all this stuff about the oppositions actions and claims that the opposition's response justified Stanley's actions, but worse, attempts to make as if stanley projected the response and chose his action to evoke that response.

Quote:

---

ishnar:Where some people see coincidences, other see carefull planning. The greatest plans are composed of a series of small and big maneuvers. We still don't have the whole picture of what's hapening, and I believe as the story progresses we'll see that Stanley wasn't as dumb as we were led to believe in the first dozens of strips, and that there were reasons for his aparently idiotic decisions.

---

But they are not justifying this argument with logic. Instead the argument is nothing but a logical fallacy.

Quote:

---

this escape also meant that Vinnie was sent after him.

---

This is NOT something that Stanley could have planned.

Quote:

---

The Tool ended up losing most of his dragons, but if he hadn't run away, it probably would have ended much worst.

---

If stanley had stayed, then his dragons would have benefited from the full backing of Efedup's air defenses. If stanley had stayed, then DON would not have committed a significant number of warlords to help. If Stanley had stayed. If stanley had stayed, then Charlie would still only have 3 Archon's helping the war effort. So wanda could have neutralized the DDR manuver. Ansome would not have been so easily saved at the wall and Wanda might have kept the pliers. If stanley had stayed, then parson would not have made the deal he did with charlie.

I dunno, I see a lot more complications than benefits. Lets not forget that Parson wants stanley back. Parson wouldn't want Stanley and his dragons back if he couldn't make use of them.

Quote:

---

Vinnie and Ansom would have stayed togheter, and then they probably would have managed to outsmart Hamster, dwagons or no dwagons, specially when they would have Jillian dwagon-slayer backing them up.

---

Serendipity. Stanley didn't even know who Jillian is. He didn't know there would be someone that knew where he was going. So we can hardly claim that he did it to get Jillian to follow him. He was clearly working under the impression that Faq's location was still secret. He was running away to try to set up a new base. He was NOT running away in a bid to divide and conquer. Efed up was abandoned but allowed to remain for his own benefit. He did not run for the benefit of the ones left in Efedup.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ishnar

You can't quote a sentence beginning with "so" and leave all the preceding out.

---

Sure I can, since I did. I think what you're trying to say is that I "shouldn't". "Can't" means I am not capable of something. "Shouldn't" means that there are negative repercussions to what I did. You might want to bone up on "can't", "won't", and "shouldn't".

Quote:

---

That's teetering close to a misquote.

---

No, since anyone that's interested can go to the post and read it in its entirety, and it is clear that I did manipulate the post by reducing it to a single sentence, so there is good reason for a reader to track down the entire post. It's a waste of bandwidth to quote everything in a post that is only a scroll away: I don't keep anything beyond the minimum, especailly on this forum where it breaks so often. I can only misquote if I respond to the quoted material on its own: that is, if I treat the quote without that missing context, then I would be misquoting in order to embarrass the author on something he does not believe.

In this case, the underlying assumption of the OP was that Stanley was incompetent. The sentence I quoted was merely a part of that belief: alone, it was without context in my post, but I treated it with the context the sentence originally had; consequently, there was no malice in my action.

(See? I treated you as if you had used the word "shouldn't" instead of "can't". You misquoted yourself, but I got the intent and treated it the way you wanted; at least, in the end I did. Precision in language is vital when debating on the internet.)

Quote:

---

It's the stuff preceding "so" that I disagree with. The OP, as opposed to the title, doesn't just let the statment stand alone. He adds all this stuff about the oppositions actions and claims that the opposition's response justified Stanley's actions, but worse, attempts to make as if stanley projected the response and chose his action to evoke that response.

---

Let me get this straight: you're complaining that I didn't protest what you protested, so therefore I am off-topic?

Quote:

---

But they are not justifying this argument with logic. Instead the argument is nothing but a logical fallacy.

---

And you think that your tactics in dealing with me have left you the respect necessary for me to accept that claim? Frankly, you aren't qualified to make the judgment above. And I am perfectly capable of determining what is logical, reasonable, or plausible without you making that decision for me. I will come to my own conclusion. If your case is solid, you don't need to tell me what those conclusions should be.

-----------

Now that's how you take something out of context. It looks like that final response I quoted was intended for me, doesn't it? No, Ishnar was replying to Oslecamo. My points, though, are still reasonable, since they are generally applicable (if they are a little extreme, I apologize to Ishnar... I did this as an example). Whatever I responded to, none of what I said is technically false. But Ishnar's quote, without the context of Oslecamo's quote, looks aggressive and unjustifiable. It seems to flow out of the previous message to me, to be a continuation of Ishnar's train of thought, so you might not question the quote: there's no appearance of a context change to inspire investigation. That's the message to our readers. Always question the tactics of those that are posting. It is so easy to manipulate the intent of others, without even manipulating the words themselves. All I did was hit "Quote". I didn't remove the context, the forum's system did, as it always does to reduce bandwidth (it won't quote quotes for you). That's part of the problem with replying to multiple people in the same post. When someone quotes you in response, they get everything you write, not just the parts intended for that person. Anyway, just a lesson in internet forum debating, folks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kreistor

You don't go from piker to Ruler by being incompetent. You get there by recognizing opportunities, creating opportunities, and being careful not to get caught.

ONce on top, Stanley has relaxed and gotten lazy. He doesn't need to hide his cruelty. His delusions tell him that he doesn't need to be intelligent because the Titans have a plan that puts you on top. His incompetencies are recent. Underestimate his potential at your own risk.

---

"Incompetent" is a relative term (specifically, relative to the demands on you). Stanley could be a classic case of the Peter Principle, and rose from competence as a soldier and as a warlord to incompetence as an overlord.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

So, perhaps the Tool isn't as incopetent as we tought. Stupid? Arrogant? Impetous? Yes. But not exactly incopetent.

---

He did Parson a good turn by getting out from underfoot, at any rate. :smallsmile:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kreistor

You don't go from piker to Ruler by being incompetent. You get there by recognizing opportunities, creating opportunities, and being careful not to get caught.

ONce on top, Stanley has relaxed and gotten lazy. He doesn't need to hide his cruelty. His delusions tell him that he doesn't need to be intelligent because the Titans have a plan that puts you on top. His incompetencies are recent. Underestimate his potential at your own risk.

---

Peter principle: "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." Stanley was probably an awesome a combat-Warlord. But his style means he sucks as a strategist and an Overlord. All charisma, glorious charges and powerful combat abilities and so on make for a good warrior in the field, but for strategy, you need a different skill set. So yes, in his current position, he's incompetent. Parson might be incompetent too if he had to lead from the front... it's funny, but they'd probably make a formidable team if their roles were reversed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SteveMB

"Incompetent" is a relative term (specifically, relative to the demands on you). Stanley could be a classic case of the Peter Principle, and rose from competence as a soldier and as a warlord to incompetence as an overlord.

---

That could be true; however, Wanda tells us that the problems didn't start with his rule, but with the direction of his rule. Stanley began losing when he started hunting Arkentools Page 5.6. Stanley was competent as a ruler before, but his problems began with his conviction that he had a particular destiny. This implies it is his megalomania that made him appear incompetent, and that is not consistent with the Peter Principle.

At worst, King Saline IV had accepted Stanley as Chief Warlord, and had enough confidence in him there that Stanley was made heir. He was at least competent to lead armies. We know from the early comic that the Ruler can run turns: Parson doesn't run one until his second full day in Erfworld, and even then, Stanley was planning on running that one, Things may have gone differently if Stanley had payed closer attention to the choices of his Chief Warlords, but if you go back to my previous statements, the delusion of destiny inspires the lack of need for intelligent choices. Detsiny cannot be avoided, so you don't need to pay attention to things you don't want to.

If Parson succeeds, Stanley may get the evidence he needs to put PAID on that bill. He can safely ignore Parson and continue with his own tasks. Ironically, this delusion works when you actually have an overcompetent Chief Warlord. And with the training wheels off, Parson runs rampant across Erfworld. Stanley may actually become increasingly incompetent, but it will be irrelevant, since Parson will win for him anyway. Of course, if old Stanley sits up and pokes himself, Stanley may return to competency and actually make Parson's chances a whole lot better.

Ok, time for a new theory:

Stanley's obsession is the result of a planted suggestion from Charlie. Maggie did not detect it because 1) She spent most of her waking hours in the link and 2) Stanley once ordered to stay out of his head.

Why did Charlie do it? Breaking down an 11 city empire creates a lot of work for mercenaries. So does the aftermath when the coalition breaks up and the now separate sides fight over the spoils.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kreistor

That could be true; however, Wanda tells us that the problems didn't start with his rule, but with the direction of his rule. Stanley began losing when he started hunting Arkentools Page 5.6. Stanley was competent as a ruler before, but his problems began with his conviction that he had a particular destiny. This implies it is his megalomania that made him appear incompetent, and that is not consistent with the Peter Principle.

---

Hmm, this leads me to an old theory I had tought off but had forgoten.

Parson isn't really that incopetent, it's the rest of the world that's conspiring against him.

We have a piker who binds himself to an Arkhentool. And then becomes an overlord. And then proceeds to get himself a powerfull 11 empire city.

Royal Ansom can't have any of that! He uses his sick charisma to rise up a coalition against Big Evil Bastard Stanley and crush his empire before it gets too strong.

At the same time, Stanley's luck runs out. His warlords are killed one after the other in a series of unpredictable incidents. We see that the last one in particular is one shoted by a lucky bolt due to a axemen squad wich is only there because the Marbits found a titan ruby out of nowhere.

And like dr pepper sugested, Charlie could probably be pulling strings in the back scenes all this time! He implants visions of grandeur in Stanley, making him do some stupid decisions wich cost him dearly. He makes Stanley put his thinkmancer working on the map thingy so she can't detect the mind manipulation.

So Charlie gets to make a fat profit while probably geting several pieces of nice loot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Parson isn't really that incopetent, it's the rest of the world that's conspiring against him.

---

Well, Parson seems to be doing great so far considering how little he knows what he can do and the resources he's been given.

He also has Ruthlessness now, so he's gonna be even scarier, is my bet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Parson isn't really that incopetent, it's the rest of the world that's conspiring against him.

---

Obviously, you mean Stanley, not Parson.

That's actually told to us in the comic. In Klog 10, Parson tells us that Royalty like to gang up on any non-Royal that gets too powerful. With an Arkentool, a side, and a fleet of dwagons, Stanley was certainly that. Jillian tells us on Page 83.4 that Stanley had pissed off a lot of sides, so he was throwing his weight around. That's enough to make the Royalty thing kick into gear.

But I'll give odds that Stanley pissed off Ansom himself, somehow. Stanley doesn't seem to know exactly why, or at least doesn't feel it was important. If so, we'll never know how far he could have gone before the Royals deemed him too powerful. Note that Charlie bears many of the same features of Stanley -- Arkentool, own side, unique units (Archons). It's not enough to go after him, though.

Quote:

---

His warlords are killed one after the other in a series of unpredictable incidents.

---

Why "unpredictable accidents"? That's hardly necessary. They died because they fought in war, and it seems that warlords lead from the vulnerable front in Erfworld. Attrition amongst the leadership has always been high, in fair fights.

Quote:

---

And like dr pepper sugested, Charlie could probably be pulling strings in the back scenes all this time!

---

Again, hardly necessary. There is no shortage of wafare in Erfworld. Jillian lives by it without manipulating sides. And Stanley was ambitious from the time he advanced from Piker, or at least it seems that way. He was at least ambitious when he (probably) stole Saline's throne. That sort of ambition doesn't go away, so what does Charlie need to do in order to get Stanley attacking his neighbours? Diddly squat. Why risk Stanley's ire when he's already doing what you want him to do? Charlie doesn't take risks unless he has to... any conspiracy involves risk, because it involves other people that can be turned against you, become an enemy, or get magically interrogated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Well, still, he somehow managed to make his underlings really loyal to him, wich shows competence or at least great leadership skills. The four mancers have indeed helped him a lot, but they had plenty of oportunities to turn tail and flee. Yet they've chosen time and time again to fight by Stanley.

---

They are forced to believe in their leader by the laws of erfworld. they don't have a choice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by The Rose Dragon

Well, Parson seems to be doing great so far considering how little he knows what he can do and the resources he's been given.

---

I'm sorry, I meant Stanley back there. Parson has indeed been doing a fantastic job with the resources he has.

Kreistor:In case you forgot, Charlie made deals with Hamster behind the Coalition's view. Doing business with the guy you're being hired to destroy it's conspiracy as far as I remember.

Charlie purposely rised his prices to stop Vinnie from being able to hire him, wich meant the vampire team hadn't enough firepower to take down Stanley once and for all, wich translated into a lot more bloodshed, and a lot more profit for Charlie.

And then Ansom asks for his help again when he's surrounded by the uncroacked, and Charlie presents him with a outrageous deal. Followed by not moving a finger when Charlie walks to his Bog-rolled doom. Yep, a really trustworthy guy.

Charlie is the strongest thinkmancer in the whole Efworld as far as we know, and he seems to live in some hidden fortress in a really inacessible place. He can mess with people a lot whitout fear of repercussion, because nobody knows where he lives, so he can't be ganked. And even if they knew, good luck defeating the mary sure archon airforce wich can pretty much do anything, including attacking your capital city and razing it down before you can cry for help. You don't want to make Charlike angry no matter what.

EDIT- I picture it goes something like this:

Random faction leader:Charlie is a m********* conspirator that's taking...
Archons pop in, disintrigate random faction leader, then wave their hands
Archons:Charlie is a very nice trustworthy guy.
Viewers: Yes, Charlie is a very nice trustworthy guy...drooollll...
Archons pop out


Xondoure:Units can betray their leaders. Saline was betrayed by the hobgobwins. And people believe Stanley also betrayed Saline. Specially captured units like Wanda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Kreistor:[/B]In case you forgot, Charlie made deals with Hamster behind the Coalition's view. Doing business with the guy you're being hired to destroy it's conspiracy as far as I remember.

---

I didn't forget. But did you forget why Charlie wouldn't turn against the RCC? Charlie doesn't take risks that might reveal treachery. All Charlie did for Parson was set his price too high. There's nothing in that for the RCC to suspect, since he's a merc and they always think his price is too high: it's part of negotiating to claim the other side is too expensive. It's unprovable that Charlie was doing this to not get hired: he may have felt that RCC's need was simply higher than it appeared.

What you're trying to demonstrate is an aggressive Charlie, who risks everything to hide that aggression. I cannot agree with that interpretation, not without solid, irrefutable evidence. Such a plan ultimately can not succeed: no one can hide behind lies forever. Charlie knows that, and that is why he is unwilling to actually help Parson through any kind of action. Inaction that results in increased chances of being hired? That's just mercenary.

Quote:

---

Charlie purposely rised his prices to stop Vinnie from being able to hire him, wich meant the vampire team hadn't enough firepower to take down Stanley once and for all, wich translated into a lot more bloodshed, and a lot more profit for Charlie.

---

Charlie, however, didn't know that. He was not privy to how much firepower either side had. Even then, it was such a close run thing. How could Charlie have known that Jillian would awaken Jack, which was vital to Stanley's survival? You're setting this out as if that result was intended by Charlie, but no one could predict that outcome without full disclosure of their past, and knowledge they would encounter one another. Basically, you need to prove omniscience.

Quote:

---

And then Ansom asks for his help again when he's surrounded by the uncroacked, and Charlie presents him with a outrageous deal. Followed by not moving a finger when Charlie walks to his Bog-rolled doom. Yep, a really trustworthy guy.

---

Charlie's Archons do not have Charlie's knowledge. Charlie didn't prevent Ansom's death because Charlie is some large number of hexes away and can't tell what's happening so he can't choose to interfere. Note that it is the Archons that decide whether to tell Ansom about the veil, not Charlie: there is no discussion of Charlie at all. They have a contract, and they obey the contract, not Charlie's whim. If Charlie's whim was responsible for their actions, Jaclyn could not have told Jillian about the lack of a mind affecting spell on Wanda: if Charlie had made that choice, the Archons would blame Charlie for telling Jillian, not Jaclyn. The Archons have free will: claiming that their actions are Charlie's actions is quite a reach.

Quote:

---

Charlie is the strongest thinkmancer in the whole Efworld as far as we know,

---

Not exactly. He has greater mastery over Thinkamancy tahn a Master Thinkamancer, thanks to his Arkentool. That does not automatically mean he is a Thinkamancer as well, though it could. It's a subtle difference, but what it means is that if Charlie is not a Thinkamancer, then he has access to powerful Thinkamancy-like abilities, but without the full suite or insight of a true Thinkamancer. He can do specific, powerful things extremely well, but he might not be able to form a link, for instance. What exactly he can do is up in the air, yet. Think of this type of ability as a 300 lb baby with a big hammer vs a 115 lb adult with a rapier. The baby can hit really really hard, but without finesse. The adult can do many things with elegance and flair, but lacking the raw power of the baby. Which has mastery? The baby, because if they ever come to a fight, the baby is going to kick butt. But it still isn't capable of doing more than hitting hard.

Quote:

---

and he seems to live in some hidden fortress in a really inacessible place. He can mess with people a lot whitout fear of repercussion, because nobody knows where he lives, so he can't be ganked. And even if they knew, good luck defeating the mary sure archon airforce wich can pretty much do anything, including attacking your capital city and razing it down before you can cry for help. You don't want to make Charlike angry no matter what.

---

Really? All that power, and he is just a merc? Seriously, no. if he was that powerful, he would not be pretending to merc status.

First, we do not know for certain that the Archons can teleport. Parson rises to find them in airspace already: we do not see a scene with no archons, then poof and lots of archons. The "Ta da" sound effect does not automatically mean a spell effect went off. Frhter, we do not know that it was teleportation. IT could have been summoning. There were Archons in that area. They may have summoned others to themselves, in which case the ability cannot be used as an offensive weapon in the way you present. With a summoning, the Archons can only be brought to wher other Archons have already gotten to. That means they aren't going to be popping all over the world whenever they want. One of them still has to fly to the destination first, and if that destination is armed against them, going alone is suicide.

Further, we have not seen the Archons face serious offense yet. They are casters (is anyone out there still going to argue they aren't at this point?). Typically casters are very soft, so they may be extremely vulnerable. We've seen archons kill wounded dwagons, but we've seen Jillian kill unwounded dwagons. 30 Archons might take the garrison of 1000 infantry (in the same way I would hope 30 dwagons would stomp 1000 infantry), thanks to their long range attacks keeping them out of harms way (in the dwagons case, their thick hide prevents most damage and high HP hopefully allows each to kill 33), but you have to consider that GK has precious few archers. A prepared army, knowing of the Archons, would ensure archers were available, and that would put paid to the Archons. War is, often, a matter of rock, paper, scissors: in games, the RPS game is often increased in effect, though often obscured through myriad stats. (If you've played RTS's, these are all about RPS. One unit is strong against another, but weak against a third, average against a fourth, slaughters a fifth, and dies horribly to a sixth. That's RPS at work.) There is something that will kill Archons, and it is just a matter of figuring out what it is. Being monotonic units (that is, seemingly with identical strengths and weaknesses), placing all your hopes on scissors when the enemy has rock, paper, and scissors is a bad choice.

Besides, if the Arkentools are reasonably balanced as they should be in a good game, the Archons are going to be on par with the dwagons. 60 dwagons did not give Stanley an automatic victory over the world. That means Charlie's 30 (minimum) Archons could not do what the dwagons couldn't.

Quote:

---

EDIT- I picture it goes something like this:

Random faction leader:Charlie is a m********* conspirator that's taking...
Archons pop in, disintrigate random faction leader, then wave their hands
Archons:Charlie is a very nice trustworthy guy.
Viewers: Yes, Charlie is a very nice trustworthy guy...drooollll...
Archons pop out

---

First, we have only seen Charlie hack into the Eyebooks. Given the nature of his Arkentool as a communication device, peering into wireless communications makes a whole heap of thematic sense. (A satellite dish is, after all, a radio receiver, and wireless comms are radio signals. By thematic similarity, the Eyebooks are "radio" devices, and the Arkendish a "radio" receiver. No surprise if it hacks the Eyebooks, then?) Being able to remotely view any conversation anywhere, anytime, in any meidum (sound being a different medium from radio)? That cannot be justified by extension, either thematically or by game balance with other tools (no other arkentool has such awesome power, so if the Dish can, it's far more powerful, breaking game balance). It's simply too much power compared to the Arkenhammer. It isn't the Arkensatellite, after all.

You are giving Charlie powers unproven in order to make him godlike. I do not believe that was ever the intention of the author. Charlie is afraid for his position, in ways Stanley should have been. He doesn't want to piss off the Royals to inspire their "Royalty only" clause. Fear indicates weakness. Charlie has fear, so he must not be as powerful as you claim.

Besides, if the Archons could do this type of teleportation, they would have popped right onto Parson and kidnapped him, instead of offering the net. They didn't, ergo they can not. Something is wrong with your assumptions as to what they can do. I know what I think they can't do...

Quote:

---

Xondoure:Units can betray their leaders. Saline was betrayed by the hobgobwins. And people believe Stanley also betrayed Saline. Specially captured units like Wanda.

---

Hobgowins were natural allies, not Saline's own units. It means that they were easy to get to sign into his alliances, but normally they would be their own side. That means they have loyalty to themselves, not their allies. Allies can disagree, protest, and change their minds, as seen when the Sofa King commander tries to leave the RCC. In other words, they have Obedience to your orders (which is how Ansom forces Sofa King to continue fighting for him... apparently you can't break alliance until the end of a turn, or Sofa King would have been gone), but Loyalty and Duty are to their own Ruler and side. All it takes for the Hobgowins to hit Saline is for there to be no alliance for one turn.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Oslecamo

Kreistor:[/B]In case you forgot, Charlie made deals with Hamster behind the Coalition's view. Doing business with the guy you're being hired to destroy it's conspiracy as far as I remember.

---

Charlie is a true businessman/lawyer... he knows the rules well enough to know how to find loopholes around them without ever breaking them, and he knows how to exploit his position without doing anything wrong in a legal sense

Charlie is a merc, he can set whatever prices he see's fit... while he is under contract he will not break that contract and will abide by it to it's full extent... however if the contract is ever canceled he is then free to do whatever the hell he wants including jacking up his prices to fit the changing circumstances, or making deals with opposing sides... it's all within the rules

in otherwords, so long as you have him under contract and KEEP him under contract, then he will fight as hard as for what you payed for... and it would also help to hire a very shrewed lawyer

Quote:

---

Followed by not moving a finger when Charlie walks to his Bog-rolled doom. Yep, a really trustworthy guy.

---

This however assumes they were actually capable of helping ansom in such a position... had Ansom payed for the magical security though, they would have warned him about the veil; as they pointed out

Quote:

---

Charlie is the strongest thinkmancer in the whole Efworld as far as we know, and he seems to live in some hidden fortress in a really inacessible place. He can mess with people a lot whitout fear of repercussion, because nobody knows where he lives, so he can't be ganked. And even if they knew, good luck defeating the mary sure archon airforce wich can pretty much do anything, including attacking your capital city and razing it down before you can cry for help. You don't want to make Charlike angry no matter what.

---

first, from what i recall i don't think it's ever been said that no one knows where charlie lives...

Second, just take a look at how many archons charlie need to to take GK's Garrison... But we must consider that Gk had basically no air force and had used most of their air defenses, which i think means mainly only long range units can attack the archons; afterall they attack from the air from long range and as such don't come near the melee units... and finally those were the number of archons needed to take the garrison BEFORE Parson uncroaked over 2,000 additional troops... Parson made have had those archons outnumbered, but very few of his troops could be considered as powerful, and very few could fight them; this is part of why the dwagons were such a huge loss for him as they are some of the few units that could measure up to the archons AND fight them

I had a somewhat lengthy post that argued in favor of Stanley not leaving when I suddenly realized that I was dead wrong.

The reason I was wrong is simple. You guys are missing the single, most crucial factor in Parson's upcoming win. The volcano.

If Stanley hadn't left, he wouldn't have had the link broken.

No broken link, no chance to form a new link to uncroak the volcano. No volcano and the chances of a win go way down. Maybe it could have been done but if Parson really WAS trapped in his " no win" scenario, then it's unlikely.