Erfworld 64, Page 58

[sihnfahl]

Unless they were previously distributed across the whole column and Ansom has decided to focus the remaining archers on the Siege.

Net effect, for Parson, is the same.
Parson will have 43 fully healed, and a lot of 'strong' dwagons to play with next turn.
Okay, he takes a few more hits when he attacks the siege. Will he take losses? Evidence is he'll either take no losses or minimal ones: three 'weak', fully healed dwagons took on 2 stacks of woodsy elves and won without a single dwagon lost. Next turn, each attack will have 6 dwagons and 2 warlords.
At that point, he returns the dwagons to GK, taking out targets of opportunity. The archers that had been in those hexes got shifted out to be in the siege hexes, meaning that Parson essentially gets free hits...

As I noted earlier, the key distinction is that the non-forest-capable archers in the column only get to shoot dwagons when Parson makes them available as targets -- when one of them is hurt badly enough to be in serious danger, it gets pulled out.

... which.... has nothing to do with what I was saying.

[WebMonk]

One of the points mentioned earlier about the number of markers on Ansom's map - each dwagon (unit) had its own mark, so it was assumed that each mark in the column was a single unit too. Bad assumption.

We know that the maximum combat efficiency is an 8-unit stack. But as stated earlier, it's a major pain in the butt to send out 10,000 sets of orders to all the stacks in the column, so Ansom has probably made some really BIG stacks - hundreds or even thousands of units per stack. These "super stacks" aren't the most combat efficient things, but they aren't meant for combat - they're meant for moving large numbers of units around. This agrees with Vinny's statement of losing "But we shoulda lost 5 or 6 whole stacks before we beat those guys." Those were really big stacks made of possibly hundreds of units, not the combat designed 8-unit stacks. After all, three dwagons have destroyed several 8-unit stacks.

The stacks of siege engines were much smaller. Perhaps only 2 to 8 siege units per stack. This is a fairly common thing to do in board wargames - a unit marker may consist of anything from a single unit to a couple hundred units.

The dwagons on the other hand are something else. Ansom is very interested in the precise make-up of the dwagon force distribution, so is representing each dwagon with a single mark.

[TheTurnipKing]

Net effect, for Parson, is the same.
Parson will have 43 fully healed, and a lot of 'strong' dwagons to play with next turn.
Okay, he takes a few more hits when he attacks the siege. Will he take losses? Evidence is he'll either take no losses or minimal ones: three 'weak', fully healed dwagons took on 2 stacks of woodsy elves and won without a single dwagon lost. Next turn, each attack will have 6 dwagons and 2 warlords.
At that point, he returns the dwagons to GK, taking out targets of opportunity. The archers that had been in those hexes got shifted out to be in the siege hexes, meaning that Parson essentially gets free hits...

I've said as much myself - the A Dwagons should be able to just about complete the decimation of the siege by themelves, but if the defence around them is stronger, he's going to have to weaken a lot more Dwagons than last turn, meaning he has less to use on other tagets of opportunity.

You know, I wonder about the air-cav being held "in reserve", and what that means under Erfworld rules.

[SteveMB]

You know, I wonder about the air-cav being held "in reserve", and what that means under Erfworld rules.

I'm guessing that it means that some units can finish their move (and combat, if any) while others wait and can use their move in accordance with the results (unless fog-of-war issues would prevent the "reserve" units from being informed).

[SmartAlec]

I took it to mean that Jillian's air-cavalry will be the last units moved this turn, because what they do will depend on what happens in the rest of the turn. I don't think it's a special rule or anything, I just think Ansom's holding back some units until after he sees how the turn's working out. Like playing The Battle for Wesnoth, another hex-based strategy game, I'd often keep a few high-move units behind the other units, ready to move in and finish off wounded enemy units, close gaps in my line caused by units of mine that died in my attacks, etc etc.

[sihnfahl]

You know, I wonder about the air-cav being held "in reserve", and what that means under Erfworld rules.

He's probably just putting them into a position where they could attack the dwagons if his assault fails.

If he moves them and his assault is successful, he's used move that could otherwise be employed in attacking the other dwagon stacks. If he moves them and his assault is unsuccessful, they can still attack the dwagons.

However... if he puts them in reserve and his assault is successful, he has enough move to attack more dwagon stacks than in option 1. If he puts them in reserve and his assault is unsuccessful, he has enough move to try another assault on the even-further-weakened dwagons.

[Azigen]

Is it me or does Ansom remind you of Evel Knievel meets Captain America ?

[TheTurnipKing]

and there we hit the crux of my question. Is he simply holding them back, or are there special rules applied to units which are designated as "reserves".

Time will tell, but finding out will be interesting.

[Lamech]

I saw someone claim that there were 110 siege units. How was that number gotten? On page 55 Parson claim that 50 siege units were destroyed. On page 56 we learned that they lost more than 40 percent of siege. So take 2.5 times both numbers and then more than 100 percent of their siege is 125.

[Narkis]

I saw a theory earlier on this thread that the central hex is a mountain or a lake, and Ansom can't attack it properly. But if that's the case, why would Parson not put all his dwagons in that hex? It was said in Ansom's map table that the forces he could put together wouldn't be able to croak 20 healthy dwagons with their warlords, even with the wood-unit support. Surely the flying units on their own wouldn't be able to croak them in a stack of 56, even with selective targeting.

[SteveMB]

I saw someone claim that there were 110 siege units. How was that number gotten? On page 55 Parson claim that 50 siege units were destroyed. On page 56 we learned that they lost more than 40 percent of siege. So take 2.5 times both numbers and then more than 100 percent of their siege is 125.

If 50 siege units is more than 40% of the original total, the original total is less than 125 (but presumably more than 100; if it were 100 the loss would have been described as 50%). Given that, 110 is the guesstimate that seems to have stuck.

Actually, Parson said "about fifty", so the numbers get a bit fuzzier.

[CNagy]

The stacks of siege engines were much smaller. Perhaps only 2 to 8 siege units per stack. This is a fairly common thing to do in board wargames - a unit marker may consist of anything from a single unit to a couple hundred units.

Judging by this, the siege stacks had 2 Battle Bears and a Tower.

and there we hit the crux of my question. Is he simply holding them back, or are there special rules applied to units which are designated as "reserves".

Time will tell, but finding out will be interesting.

From the way it was worded, being held in reserves seemed to mean that he would not bring her in for the attack. Instead, he would wait to see how combat was going and call her in if necessary. Ansom's turn doesn't end until he ends it (as far as we know) and he still has moves to make so long as his units have movement. We see that with the current assault; he sends in a stack, it gets wiped. He sends in another stack, it gets wiped. Now, they are going in mass; if things get bad and he needs more firepower, he calls in Jillian. If things go as desired, he repositions her and what air units he can to best protect the rest of the column from the rest of Stanley's Dwagons. Reserves is just a way to communicate that idea, I think, not an actual status.

[Stryyder]

[QUOTE=CNagy;2803662]Judging by this, the siege stacks had 2 Battle Bears and a Tower.



Did you miss the 50 or so Marbit in each tower and the sea of Marbits around them in the next page of the comic?

http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0056.html

[sihnfahl]

Surely the flying units on their own wouldn't be able to croak them in a stack of 56, even with selective targeting.

If Ansom's primary target were the dwagons. They're not. They're secondary.

He's after the warlords. Without them, the dwagon stacks become 'regular' fighting stacks. They go into combat and they have to stay in combat until they win (taking more damage) or they die. He knows he doesn't have enough air and archery units in place right now to handle a minimum of 24 dwagons (they had 27 in defense, and 3 are going to be croaked by the pushthrough). But if he can inflict more damage on them when they move... his own air units could mop up.

If every single dwagon and warlord was in a single hex, that wouldn't prevent Ansom going into said hex and selectively dusting the uncroaked warlords. Then, after dusting said uncroaked, he takes a page out of Parson's playbook, withdraws with minimal losses... and has dwagon stacks that can be whittled down at his leisure with the airborne units he's cycling into place.

[JazzManJim]

I saw a theory earlier on this thread that the central hex is a mountain or a lake, and Ansom can't attack it properly. But if that's the case, why would Parson not put all his dwagons in that hex? It was said in Ansom's map table that the forces he could put together wouldn't be able to croak 20 healthy dwagons with their warlords, even with the wood-unit support. Surely the flying units on their own wouldn't be able to croak them in a stack of 56, even with selective targeting.

Because Parson's new battle plan doesn't appear to be "hit a buncha siege and skeedaddle outta there, protecting all the Dwagons". If that were the plans, making a Dwagon Mega-Stack would be a fine strategy, if possible.

Since Parson's learned that Ansom has Fog of War problems, he's decided to lay some sort of trap. The trap is predicated on Ansom's not being able to see into the Hex O' Mystery and giving him reasons to believe there's something in there that's not only very much worth taking but also can be taken. We suspect, based on what we know thus far (though we could all be wrong), that Parson has suckered Ansom in and whatever is waiting for him there is nothing like he suspects.

[teratorn]

Those woodsy elves have to have been SOMEPLACE within the column. They were providing archery cover for the hex they were in. I doubt that marbit archers would immediately pop in the road hexes the woodsy elves left to provide the cover the woodsy elves could no longer provide.

You have all the archer stacks that were in the vicinity of the destroyed siege units. Those could be relocated to replace the woodsy elves.

Besides, these 100 or so woodsy elves 8-unit stacks are a very limited force. (Yeah I know, this is just artistic license and and there's no more than 10 or so 8-unit stacks there).

[sihnfahl]

You have all the archer stacks that were in the vicinity of the destroyed siege units. Those could be relocated to replace the woodsy elves.

... okay.
Ansom has a limited number of archer units. He can't get more into place quickly. By moving archery units into a hex, he's removing the archery units from another hex. Yes, he'll strengthen the archery cover for the siege, BUT he's weakening the archery covering another hex in his column. It's a cascade effect.
Once the siege is down, while the dwagons may be at lower health than if there were fewer archery units in place, they could AoO hexes that no longer have any archery units in them, or so few that there's no danger of a dwagon being croaked on the way back to GK.

[WebMonk]

Judging by this, the siege stacks had 2 Battle Bears and a Tower.

Did you miss the 50 or so Marbit in each tower and the sea of Marbits around them in the next page of the comic?

http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0056.html

Actually, I'm ignoring them because it doesn't appear that the dwagons are attacking them. They're focused on the bears and mobile structures. It appears that the units inside the structure are destroyed if the structure is destroyed, so they are only a bonus. That is always my fear when I'm moving units inside transport units - units inside the transport usually can't seriously help defend, and if the transport is destroyed then the units inside are too.

Neither are the stacks necessarily identical. Some siege stacks may have several bears and towers, or they may have only one tower and bears, or they could be carrying units, or not.

I still think the center hex is empty, the B dwagons make up the ring, the A dwagons are hidden away slightly further away where Vinny hasn't scouted, the ring (and the non-existent "prize" Ansom thinks is in the middle) is a distraction to keep Ansom from searching further and finding the hidden and wounded dwagons.

When Parson found out that Ansom has major FoW issues, he realized that he realized he could set up a fake bait. Parson was probably planning on doing fewer attacks per turn and moving the fort system further away so Ansom couldn't bring as many forces to bear. This would have worked well, but it would have taken a lot more turns, giving Ansom more time to react, and probably would have meant larger losses by the time Ansom finally arrive at GK.

Now, Parson realizes that the FoW lets him accomplish everything in 1 fell swoop (2 turns) that he had been thinking would take him 4 or 5 turns to accomplish through longer-distance hit and run attacks. He's distracting and pulling Ansom out of position with the pretend bait - the empty hex Ansom thinks contains almost-dead dwagons - so he can keep ALL his dwagons in position to totally mop up the the rest of the siege engines in a massive strike on the way back home with both the A and B dwagons.

[WebMonk]

Because Parson's new battle plan doesn't appear to be "hit a buncha siege and skeedaddle outta there, protecting all the Dwagons". If that were the plans, making a Dwagon Mega-Stack would be a fine strategy, if possible.

Don't forget about the warlords. Parson realizes that even in a mega-dwagon-stack that Ansom could selectively attack the warlords. I'm sure Ansom's forces would take lots of damage, but not enough to prohibit them.

Once Ansom dusts the warlords, the mega-dwagon-stack would be almost useless in destroying the siege units. Not useless maybe, but they would have to continue in their attacks until every unit in the hex is defeated, and thus take a lot more damage, and die relatively quickly, leaving plenty of siege units still standing.

Parson and Ansom both realize that the warlords are key to the plan working, and so a mega-dwagon-stack wouldn't work in any way.

[Airshark]

That's a lot of word-twisting and rules lawyering you're doing here. If they can burn down a farm (or whatever that scorched ruin was), why not a tree? No, there is no "ironclad" evidence. This is a speculation thread. But it stands to reason that trees burn, until proven otherwise.

Why doesn't Ansom just clear out the heavy woods between him and the dwagons, then?

I seriously doubt that woods can be removed by fire. Another thing: forest fires are far from certain, you know. It's actually pretty tough to start a blaze guaranteed to clear an area that may be miles across. And such destruction may take days.

[jazz1m]

What I would find really interesting, is if the eyemancers can't link up next turn. Parson already does have his plan in place, but with only 3 warlords and dwagons, how will he be able to see what's happening on the battle field and direct the warlords? Thus - Ansom croaks maybe one warlord (since they have no will and therefore no intelligence to come up with a great plan) but not without losing a significant number of stacks. Parson retreats, and figures out another plan of attack.

also, I didn't notice this before but when the archons are first introduced Erf 46 are they holding walkie talkies or guns (certainly looks like guns as it's a reference to Charlie's Angels)

By the way, nice to meet everyone :)

[Scientivore]

I just wanted to point out that if this world is loosely either.

1) A fantasy based on Parson's reality.

2) Or Parson's reality specifically his latest prepared war game was some how influenced by this world.

It is very unlikely that the forest hex contains either a mountain or water terrain as if either one of the two suppositions above were true mean that the terrain would match his prepared wargame.

You can see the majority of the terrain here:
http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0016.html
and
http://http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0014.html

In neither of thos pictures do we see a single hex of mountain or water surrounded by forest.

I don't see any water hexes on Parson's board and I see one on Ansom's so they're not exactly the same. It's covered by text on the page, but fortunately Rob gave us a blowup of it.

Ansom's tactical map from page 56:
800px wide 1200px wide

[jazz1m]

error message 404
blow ups not found

[Scientivore]

I'll host the one that I saved (the big one) until Rob gets it back up.

[tainsouvra]

My read on the causality involved is that Wanda locked onto Parson rather than any of the jillions of other possibilities because of the parallels between Erfworld and Parson's game (and possibly also becuase of parallels between Erfworld and Parson's psyche in general, explaining things like the pop-culture references and other random resemblances between Erfworld and Earth items).

That's rather compelling because some of these similarities were demonstrated before their paths crossed.

The most amusing part of this is that Stanley actually got exactly what he asked for, just not quite what he meant to ask for.
"I want a big guy." -- no explanation needed.
"a guy who'll shock and awe them" -- Vinnie sure looked shocked.
"just standing on the city walls, commanding the fight" -- ...because he's physically not able to do more than that...
"a guy who snacks on gwiffons and eats marbits for breakfast" -- a whole strip on that one ;)
wants to be summoned, obsessed with war, etc -- a couple strips on those too

Really, the amazing coincidence of Parson's life and what Stanley asked for is explained by the strip, as well...
PLOT
...and that's all we really need to know about causality. It's a plot device

[jazz1m]

thanks scientivore

[teratorn]

... okay.
Ansom has a limited number of archer units. He can't get more into place quickly. By moving archery units into a hex, he's removing the archery units from another hex. Yes, he'll strengthen the archery cover for the siege, BUT he's weakening the archery covering another hex in his column. It's a cascade effect.

Of course this will weaken the column, but it will all depend on how big the elvish army attacking the dwagons is, and if the column can shorten somehow since it now has less siege units. But I do expect a scenario like the one you propose. My guess is that if Ansom fails to get the warlords he'll concentrate everything that can damage dwagons around the remaining siege, including flyers and even a few lower rank warlords. Parson will have to fight hard for each siege unit, and he may even give up on some of them. But this is assuming everything goes according to plan.

[Calemyr]

Maybe it's just me, but what I see is Ansom pulling together a massive force of units that are strong against dwagons and dragging them away from the column. He is betting big on this play: if he can dust those warlords, he cut Stanley's warlord stable in half (or, more accurately, two thirds) and quite probably his dwagons by a non-trivial amount as well. If he can't, he effectively just gave Parson the rest of the column on a platter.

Ansom's not being an idiot though: he seems to be playing two hands at once.
1) If he has read Parson's formation correctly, then this is a very solid plan: take the warlords and nearly half of the participating dwagons off the field in one push. Without the warlords, the remaining dwagons will be fighting in a feral mode and unable to coordinate like before, rendering them ineffective against the column. Ansom, meanwhile, will have set up a well defended hex with a large chunk of anti-dwagon personnel, making attacking him a very painful proposition.
2) If he hasn't read Parson's formation correctly, and the central square is a trap, he has a potent combination of combat, communication, and transportation units on the way to attempt to turn the tide of battle or, if that fails, to evac a handful of high value units out of the trap.

The key thing here is that, even if this is a trap, Ansom has a very densely packed force of anti-dwagon personnel surrounding him. Ansom is in very, very limited danger using this strategy. Unfortunately I believe he's making the same mistake many readers are making: He's going in thinking that the Dragon Doughnut is a defensive strategy, or at worst a "slaughterhouse" trap intended to devastate invading forces. While a slaughterhouse trap is bad, they are built upon the belief that the trapsetter has the superior power. If this assumption is wrong (such as would likely be the case with Ansom's anti-dwagon forces), the trap can very easily be more harmful to the trapsetter than the trapspringer. What he's not expecting is a "containment" type of trap: manuevering Ansom to draw his best troops away from the target, force him to bundle them up into a defensive position, then leave them move-less and seperate from the target while the dwagons ignore them and decide to continue their offensive.

What interests me is how Parson plans to handle those three Dwagons stuck in Ansom's path. Part of Parson's goal here is to win a major tactical victory without any losses, cementing Stanley's favor and throwing the opposition into disarray. If he's sacrificed those three dwagons, that perfect score will be lost. Either the warlords are in the weak hex and able to escort them out of the fray, the potential rewards of the strategy worth the loss of the tactical victory, or Parson must have some ripper of a backup plan.

One final note. This is how overwhelming armies are beaten: that their faith is undermined and their easy victory denied. Choke them on their own arrogance and complacency and they will destroy themselves in their confusion.

[CNagy]

Part of being the perfect warlord is knowing when it is necessary to sacrifice a few lives. I believe those three Dwagons are toast. Stanley is already assuming loss when Parson makes his moves, three Dwagons will not be too steep for the gain.

[Krelon]

I wonder. Maybe you (as a warlord) can decide how big your units are.

For example Jillian croaked 1 Twoll, 3 skellies. Of course if you have 4 'men' it is only sensible that each one is a unit, because stacks get bonusses based on the number of units. Like each skellie is a unit with Strength??, defense ??, hits=1.
If you have 80 skellies you could package them in 10s to form 8 units, each unit would have the same strength and defense but 10 hitpoints.
This would also give the artists a bit more freedom for creativity about how many individual warriors really participiate in the conflict (counting every single skellie doesnt add much to the quality of erfworld).

Some very powerful individuals (dwagons,twolls,warlords) might be too special to be packaged so they are always "one-'man'-units".

Btw, what would be the size of a dwagon (assuming Parson is a giant and an uncroaked warlord is the size of an ordinary man)?
Dwagons seem to be the size of a heavy fighter / bomber airplane... and as lethal.

another thought: the siege. Let's say Ansom had between 100 and 130 siege. I'm sure that (in a typical strategy game) it is enough to put 1 siege engine into 1 stack to (partially or fully) cancel the fortification of a city, hence I'm pretty sure that before Parsons attack the alliance could have formed into 100+ stacks, all empowered by a siege bonus (bad news for Stanely). Since stacks can become very large, maybe that means that even with the remaining 60% it is possible to boost all units (by forming larger stacks) so Parson must take out most of the siege if GK is going to survive.

Probably the whole 3 weak dwagons gambit was ONLY to mess up Ansoms movement and troops coordination (no big endgame trap). I mean, as teratorn points out, it was an option that Ansom pulls siege together and masses archers, warlords and air cover with them. Sure there would have been losses for the alliance but at least a part of the siege would remain with high losses for the dwagons. With the hex-fort Ansom was offered a chance to get rid of the threat BUT this leaves his siege very vulnerable for the next turn because he does not have enough movement to get back to the column with a lot of units. This is the main reason I believe the middle hex is either empty or a terrain type that cannot be attacked by most alliance troops.