Erfworld 67, page 61

[TiamatRoar]

It's possible that Stanley lost so much not just because of poor strategy, but because the entire world (or at least the entire eastern side of it) united against him. Lots of advantages can sometimes be overcome by sheer numbers (the ZERG strategy, if you will). But the fact that Parson alone was able to turn a lot of the tide (destroying almost half the opponent's siege) in just ONE TURN suggests that it was more likely due to Stanely's incompetence.

[Scientivore]

100% perfect military intelligence (against an opponent who has virtually nothing beyond a few scouts)

...which his opponent apparently doesn't know about, else Jillian's escapes would be preposterous instead of suspicious...

the ability to turn his troops invisible at will

...or at least his opponent's belief in that ability -- the Foolamancer might be too busy displaying things on the table now -- which is almost as useful...

and some of the greatest air units in the game

...who will defend him to the death, thanks to the Arkenhammer.

So, yes. I agree completely. In fact, when Parson said that Ansom thinks that Stanley is stupid and Sizemore said "Mm," I think that he barely managed to stop himself from saying, "Well of course he does, everybody thinks that."

[Caledonian]

Stanley's advantages throughout this war, that we know of, include 100% perfect military intelligence (against an opponent who has virtually nothing beyond a few scouts),

He only has that perfect intelligence because the three casters are linked together in a dangerous melange. Additionally, all three casters are in the same place only because they were salvaged from the remnants of an 11-city empire.

the ability to turn his troops invisible at will

No, that is NOT what we know Stanley to have. No spell is free. No spell is unlimited. And the troops aren't invisible, they're 'veiled'.

[tainsouvra]

Good, but not entirely definitive.
[...]
It does not convince me that it is not turn-based, it only serves to demonstrate the panels in question do not prove that it is.

It is, however, exactly what you asked me for...if you can think of something else that would be more convincing, just let me know where the new goalposts are.

Unless Pclips decides to post here, or gives us a Klog (which we really need for a lot of things) that situation is unlikely to change.

I agree. My point, however, was that it was neither indefensible that the game was turn-based, nor was there definitive evidence that it was realtime.

Finally, since it's a story about a game-like world, the presentation won't just be a literal, lock-step depiction of Erf physics.

This was going to be my next point, I'm glad someone brought it up--the authors have already demonstrated that they will happily misrepresent some of the details if it's artistically better and doesn't change the outcome. How combat is drawn is very likely to fall into that category.

[Fuzzy_Juan]

Look, until we get confirmation one way or another, I will likely think of combat in Erfworld as the Civilization model. They units move and do what they do on your turn, but they fight whenever they meet the enemy with both sides comparing attack and defense and effecting each other at the same time.

It could be a more complicated system with initiative and strict turn based combat...but who knows. It is damn near impossible to tell from the comic because each panel is a freeze frame.

Perhaps in the near future, the writer will publish another Klog in which Parson goes over some of the mechanics of actual combat in an internal style dialog looking for a combat exploit, or just recording a number crunching session with his new toy.

[DavidByron]

I think it's possible to see Stanley as a reasonably smart guy in this story. Certainly he is very successful. Let's consider a few facts we know about him.

(1) He used to be a grunt and now he's a king. Pretty good, huh?

(2) He came up with the idea of linking the three eyemancers even though he is not trained as either a mage or a warlord.

I've yet to see Parsons do anything as clever as either of those items.

He also managed to acquire and become attuned to an Arkentool. So far as we know, nobody else has managed this.

Now the main criticism of him as being a dummy is the bad handling of the war so far but Stanely hasn't been handling that -- his overlords have (overlords picked out by Wanda incidentally). I think this is misidentifying Stanely's weakness. It's not that he's stupid. He just isn't very interested in war. You could lose ten of eleven cities through stupidity alone but you couldn't lose ten of eleven cities and not even be aware of it through stupidity alone. Wanda comes to Stanely and tells him that he's about to lose his last city. His reaction is,

It's really that bad?

Somebody apparently wasn't paying much attention.

Stanely is interested in his destiny. He has squandered the resources of what must have been a very impressive empire once. He doesn't really care.

Even if the city falls I can take the Arkenhammer and get out

He really just wants someone else to deal with all the war stuff but unfortunately he doesn't have or didn't have someone like Wanda who he could just hand it all over to, nor did he take the trouble to find someone like that.

When judging if Stanley is stupid or smart think about it from where he used to be to where he is now and think about what is important to him and what is not.

[Divine Hammer]

Ansom's problem isn't so much that he thinks Stanley is stupid; it's that he thinks Stanley is a stupid, deceitful peasant. I think he could come around to the fact that he was tricked if Stanley was just some stupid, rebellious noble...

I can't find anything in the comic that supports this characterization of Ansom. In this very comic, Ansom points out that Stanley has "pulled a shrewd trick or two". He also asserts, correctly, that this sort of trick is beyond Stanley.

Remember that Stanley has been sending troops into battle for quite some time now. The book is out on his strategic ability, and Ansom has read it (Stanley, you magnificent bastard...). I see no reason to believe that his contempt for Stanley's military leadership is based on anything but Stanley's history of incompetence.

Ansom just doesn't see Stanley as a worthy adversary, so faced with the options that he was either completely outsmarted by such a foe or Stanley was hiding his forces, Ansom went with the choice that made the most sense to him.

Yeah, and Stanley doesn't appear to be a worthy adversary, at least in the realm of tactics. (He does have the brilliant innovation of linking his 'mancers to his credit, but we haven't heard about anything momentous he's done in the field.) As I said earlier, Ansom's desperate assumption may have been sheer brilliance if Stanley were actually in command. Imagine playing chess against Paris Hilton only to find that Ziiiiiiiiiiiiip! it's really Garry Kasparov!

[Ubiq]

Stanley's advantages throughout this war, that we know of, include 100% perfect military intelligence (against an opponent who has virtually nothing beyond a few scouts), the ability to turn his troops invisible at will, and some of the greatest air units in the game.

Well, in this case, perfect military intelligence basically amounts to Stanley knowing how outnumbered he is. The ability to give commands in real time isn't all that useful considering that his officers pool is pretty much gone. Early on, that might not have been the case, but Manpower the Temporary was felled by what was essentially Unintentional Divine Intervention. Who knows how the others died?

On the other hand, he might not have started with all that deep a pool of talent anyway; since he came to power from the ranks through regicide, he might have purged many of his predecessor's more competent people in the process. We only see him in action during one panel, but Manpower seemed at least competent at Warchalking, but we don't know how effective he really was. Considering that Stanley's earliest officers were lower ranked, he might well have promoted buddies from the old days regardless of skill. Impossible to tell unless we get a more detailed backstory down the road.

As far as veiling troops go, that might come with any number of disadvantages such as an inability to command units while they're veiled, some sort of defensive penalty, or even see them yourself until the spell is removed. So it's not necessarily a great advantage, especially if your opponent has a reason to suspect where they might be. The fact that nobody even bothered to mention it before now suggests that it's not a standard tactic and there has to be a reason for that.

Now, the dwagons, yes, they're powerful, but can still be overwhelmed by sheer force, which Ansom has in spades. Barring his warlords, they're probably the most expensive units that Stanley fields in terms of upkeep and replacing them is probably a great strain on Gobwin Knob's resources. So their sheer power may well be limited by the fact that Stanley isn't willing to risk them, especially far out in the field away from his base.

How is it possible to lose with those kinds of advantages? How is it possible to even go anywhere near losing with those kind of advantages?

For one thing, Ansom has sheer numbers of his side to begin and reinforcements throughout the entire campaign as new elves join. Ansom could afford to run attacks on multiple cities during his campaign at the same time while Stanley had to divide his forces to counter each attack.

For another thing, Stanley tended to promote people based on looks and attitude rather than ability. Who knows how many mistakes his warlords made prior to dying. Well, outside of Ensign Redshirt anyway. I doubt made many mistakes as I suspect that he was probably killed the instant he hit the battlefield... actually, that might well have been what killed him in the first place.

For a third thing, old-fashioned bad luck. The aforementioned Warchalking for instance. Without that Gem of the Titans, the Marbit axemen would not have been on the field and Manpower's counterattack might have been successful. That might not have made much a difference in the long run though, but it's still a loss that was because of something that Stanley had no control over.

Ansom has to protect every single unit he has against air attacks, 100% of the time, no exceptions, or Stanley sees it instantly on the table and swoops in to attack with powerful invisible flying units that he could have hidden anywhere. Stanley wouldn't even need any fancy strategy... he just has to hit wherever Ansom is weakest every turn.

There's no proof that veiling works that way though. If it did, Wanda would have suggested that turns ago.

Even then, there's no reason to assume that Stanley didn't essentially do that early on. That might be why Ansom insists on the convoy rather than hustling his fastest troops to Gobwin Knob to form a picket line around the city to make sure nobody escapes without him knowing. That would also explain the massive air fleet Ansom has cobbled together. Most likely, the vast bulk of his units are largely inferior to dwagons, but sheer mass can even things out.

Besides, Stanley might have employed such tactics early on, but Ansom just adapted his strategy. After that, it became too risky to use his dwagons to pick off units until Parson came along and put a new spin on it.

[Solharath]

Wait wait wait.... They can veil their troops? ErfWorld certainly has become ten times more interesting then when it started.

[DavidByron]

There's almost no doubt in my mind that the combat is turn based and not simultaneous. This is not because of the illustrations but because of the difference it makes to the combat results and because of what we are told by the characters in the story.

We are told that "archery gets their hitsies" which implies that the archers are not simultaneous with other combat. There is no chance that an attacker for example can kill an archer before the archer has a chance to shoot.

It appears that beyond archers shooting first, the attacker shoots / hits before the defender. This makes a huge difference to the outcome of combat. For example in the fight against the 3 dwagons the dwagons are clearly capable of doing a lot of damage in one round -- killing about two infantry each. The archers shoot first (both because they are archers and because they are attackers) but because they do no damage the dwagons get to attack at full strength killing six archers.

When Ansom attacks with his full strength the 3 dwagons do no damage at all. Not even one archer is killed. Why? Because they are all dead before their turn to attack. Advocates of simultaneous combat would have to explain why the dwagons suddenly can't kill even one archer.

Some people have asked how it is that there is such a big difference between Ansom attacking the 19 wounded A dragons and 3 warlords first, then being attacked by the B dwagons on the next turn vs being attacked by all dwagons at once. The main difference (equal with the fact that the A dwagons would be wounded if he attacks quickly) is that the attacker gets a huge advantage. With the archers striking first it's possible that all 19 dwagons would be killed before any of them get to attack at all. All dead for no damage to Ansom.

In fact if the A dwagons are NOT so badly wounded that they could be killed by a single volley of archer fire then Parson could have safely used them in another round of attack against siege units.

But if the wounded A dwagons attack simultaneously then it would be a very different story. Even just four dwagons took out Jillian on a gwiffon with a magic sword. She's probably the toughest unit in the game so far.

So if combat is not "attacker shoots then defender shoots" (or to be more precise ("attacker archers shoot, defender archers shoot, attacker non-archers shoot etc") then it is much harder to see how Ansom could have expected to survive an attack by the B dwagons after defeating the A dwagons.

[Ubiq]

I can't find anything in the comic that supports this characterization of Ansom. In this very comic, Ansom points out that Stanley has "pulled a shrewd trick or two". He also asserts, correctly, that this sort of trick is beyond Stanley.

Going by Vinnie's discussion on page 34 and Ansom's speech on page 22, I think he holds Stanley in far more contempt than simply for his perceived stupidity. On page 22, Ansom calls Tool a madman outright and then implies that he's a coward (which I'll definitely dispute, Tool doesn't come across as a coward, if anything, he's probably too willing to pick a fight for his own good) and totally incompetent.

On page 34, Vinnie notes that Ansom doesn't like the fact that Stanley was common infantry and not noble. Ansom denies it, but Vinnie obviously touches a nerve.

Now, Vinnie, who doesn't make a big deal about the nobility issue seems to come to grips that they were outsmarted by Stanley while Ansom wholly discards said notion as it having to be a trick to the extent that he waltzes into an even worse situation than they were already in. Vinnie is just as aware of Stanley's strategic deficiencies as Ansom, but doesn't seem to have a mental block to the notion that Stanley might have pulled one over on them. By comparison, Ansom appears to be getting a headache in the first panel even trying to comprehend such a notion.

Even after the uncharacteristically shrewd move the Tool's force just made when it comes to attacking their siege, Ansom still doesn't get that none of this is what they usually see out of the Tool. That points to a somewhat irrational hatred of Stanley on Ansom's part and that's best chalked up to the reasons gone over on page 34.

Remember that Stanley has been sending troops into battle for quite some time now. The book is out on his strategic ability, and Ansom has read it (Stanley, you magnificent bastard...). I see no reason to believe that his contempt for Stanley's military leadership is based on anything but Stanley's history of incompetence.

But again though, the last turn saw a very out-of-character strategy from his foe followed up by a fairly complex formation designed in such a way that he uses up most of his move to get to a weak point where he can receive little back up from his air forces and little help from his main column. By now, somebody ought to have noticed that something is up.

Yeah, and Stanley doesn't appear to be a worthy adversary, at least in the realm of tactics. (He does have the brilliant innovation of linking his 'mancers to his credit, but we haven't heard about anything momentous he's done in the field.) As I said earlier, Ansom's desperate assumption may have been sheer brilliance if Stanley were actually in command. Imagine playing chess against Paris Hilton only to find that Ziiiiiiiiiiiiip! it's really Garry Kasparov!

The past turn was nothing like the Stanley of old. If nothing else, that should be a sign that they should be cautious and wait for developments rather than plowing ahead. Ansom hasn't even considered that Stanley might have found somebody capable of leading his armies and that's who they're dealing with now.

[SteveMB]

Going by Vinnie's discussion on page 34 and Ansom's speech on page 22, I think he holds Stanley in far more contempt than simply for his perceived stupidity. On page 22, Ansom calls Tool a madman outright and then implies that he's a coward (which I'll definitely dispute, Tool doesn't come across as a coward, if anything, he's probably too willing to pick a fight for his own good) and totally incompetent.

Interestingly, our introduction to Stanley also gives the reader that impression ("Even if the city falls, I can take the Arkenhammer and get out." -- real profile in courage, that). However, after his rant at Parson about his Titans-ordained destiny, this seems more like determination to prevail no matter what than simple desire to save his own skin.

On page 34, Vinnie notes that Ansom doesn't like the fact that Stanley was common infantry and not noble. Ansom denies it, but Vinnie obviously touches a nerve.

Actually, a close reading shows that Ansom doesn't deny it at all -- if anything he confirms it by implying that Stanley's unsuitability to rule is something that nobles should just naturally take as a given ("You're a Count. You should know--").

Now, Vinnie, who doesn't make a big deal about the nobility issue seems to come to grips that they were outsmarted by Stanley while Ansom wholly discards said notion as it having to be a trick to the extent that he waltzes into an even worse situation than they were already in. Vinnie is just as aware of Stanley's strategic deficiencies as Ansom, but doesn't seem to have a mental block to the notion that Stanley might have pulled one over on them. By comparison, Ansom appears to be getting a headache in the first panel even trying to comprehend such a notion....

The above said, I basically agree that Ansom's preconceptions make it hard for him to wrap his head around the notion that Stanley has outmaneuvered him. (Of course, we know that it wasn't Stanley. Perhaps somebody (probably Vinny) will infer that Stanley got himself a genius warlord, or perhaps Jillian (if Wanda explained what the "monstrous Findamancy/Lookamancy thing" did, and allowed her to remember) will report it. I can picture Ansom responding to this discovery, or even this unproven guess, as the one thing that gets the world to make sense again.)

[kreszantas]

Interestingly, our introduction to Stanley also gives the reader that impression ("Even if the city falls, I can take the Arkenhammer and get out." -- real profile in courage, that). However, after his rant at Parson about his Titans-ordained destiny, this seems more like determination to prevail no matter what than simple desire to save his own skin.


Actually, a close reading shows that Ansom doesn't deny it at all -- if anything he confirms it by implying that Stanley's unsuitability to rule is something that nobles should just naturally take as a given ("You're a Count. You should know--").


The above said, I basically agree that Ansom's preconceptions make it hard for him to wrap his head around the notion that Stanley has outmaneuvered him. (Of course, we know that it wasn't Stanley. Perhaps somebody (probably Vinny) will infer that Stanley got himself a genius warlord, or perhaps Jillian (if Wanda explained what the "monstrous Findamancy/Lookamancy thing" did, and allowed her to remember) will report it. I can picture Ansom responding to this discovery, or even this unproven guess, as the one thing that gets the world to make sense again.)

Well I think its simpler than all this with Ansoms comment on he is simply not that bright in reference to Stanley in panel 2, all the prior information stated here just supports the statement.

Edit: to add on panel 9 where Parson gets cut off he could mean to capture Jillian again as well, or just the pliers by themselves, too many open variables to actually a complete a solid theory.

[Sappo7]

"Veiling" doesn't have to mean cloaking or stealth though, it's just a word that means obfuscation. Maybe it means you can use a foolamancer to conceal or falsify perceived unit stats, so that one of the original party platter theories (wounded dragons on the edge, healthy dragons in the middle, trap and a rout when ansom attacks) might actually have been a possibility if he'd been aware of all resources.

So maybe when he says "AHA! VEILING!", Ansom means "I bet the dragons in this ring are actually wounded ones under illusion, I shall uses my forces to break through their apparently strongest part because that means it is probably their weakest part!".

Cloaking and invisibility are pretty big news and you'd think even an idiot would be whoring that all over. He may not be worth much tactically, but stanley isn't completely stupid when it comes to using his resources.

I can't imagine even an idiot failing to use invisibility as you all are describing it if he had it; heck, I'd expect an idiot to use it so heavily that it would be functionally useless as a surprise tool.

Something relatively subtle and meta like hiding unit stats, that's something I could see a simpleton failing to exploit.

[ChowGuy]

QUOTE=DavidByron;2867899]Advocates of simultaneous combat would have to explain why the dwagons suddenly can't kill even one archer.[/quote]
No need to as yet.

Your argument is based on the premise that no archers are killed, therefore all the Dwagons must have been dead before they could attack, therefore combat must be turn based.

And, it follows that because combat is turn based, the Dwagons never had a chance to kill any archers. Otherwise how do you explain it?

Sounds logical, but... If the premises to an argument are faulty, any conclusion, however seemingly logical, remains unproven. You cannot use your conclusion (combat is turn based) to justify your premise (no archers were lost). That's called "affirming the consequent" and is a logical fallicy.

There is a saying that "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof." Your claim is that "Not even one archer is killed." but if you cannot demonstrate this is the case, the requirement to explain it vanishes, and with it the solidity of your conclusion.

And please do not use the excuse "None is shown being killed." You prefixed your post with the caveat "This is not because of the illustrations" so it is clearly your belief that the artwork does not reflect the entire story.

I agree. The story tells us that Ansom is committing "everything but [the] bats" to the assault. In the accompanying artwork, I count besides the three warlords 5 Gumps and a minimum of 15 Elves. This is far more then are shown in the combined vignettes on page 59. So where are the rest? Parson, again as part of the story, tells Stanley "And it [croaking the three Dwagons] cost him." Were there perhaps much to Ansom's (and your?) consternation, a great many archers killed somewhere "off-camera" before the Dwagon's dramatic demise? Despite the fact that, per your scenario, he would have had to have brought with him enough units to simultaneously attack and croak "as many as two dozen" Dwagons if he hoped to survive.

It has further been said that the pink Dwagon whose head is being ripped off by a Gump, has already lost his limbs. If that's so when do you propose that happened? Were there undepicted Gump rounds before this, interleaved with undepicted Dwagon rounds? If so you explain how none of those could have managed to do any damage.

=============

----- Part #1

It is, however, exactly what you asked me for...if you can think of something else that would be more convincing, just let me know where the new goalposts are

.
No change in goalpost. My criteria included

a unit... remains stock still while a unit from the other side moves to it (1)

Your example was that of units moving and attacking, however you fail to demonstrate (definitively) the the defenders are simply standing/perching there waiting. That was an important part of the the criterion.

However, if you require further clarification, the intent was ideally to produce a sequence in which the defender appears in a panel as the same panel(s) as an approching attacker, taking no offensive action (figiting is OK) and in (a) subsequent panel(s) in the same relative position/stance while being attacked. I considered requiring the attacker completing his move for damage, but thought that too severe.

This corresponds to the opposing criteria "Show me a single frame in which units of both sides are shown taking damage" (or would if I enforced the "does damage"). This I believe I did, particularly in the case of arrows in flight even as a skewering attack takes place. The fact that the arrows cannot be seen hitting/missing their target and thus "doing damage" does not, I think, preclude the interpretation that the action of firing them takes place in the same turn as the action of skewering. It is an attack, one intended to do damage, that should suffice. If on the other hand the arrows were simply shown protruding from the target, one could quite reasonably argue that they had been fired previously since the act of"hitting" is difficult to accurately convey on that scale within a single frame. Likewise if the bowmen were simply shown aiming and drawing it would not be unreasonable to suggest that they are simply waiting their turn to fire. Thus, "in flight" is a reasonable watermark in determining the distinction.

----- Part #2

BTW, your quoted snippage of my post infers a connection between "not entirely definitive" and "the panels shown" with the implication that "the panels" refered to are those you indicated. Don't know if that was the inference you meant to draw, but such was not my intention. Rather the "the panels" that section refers to are those in which Parson and Stanley and dicuss the term "realtime" and the implication as to Erfworld combat. I included both remarks in the same thread to avoid double posting. Not a biggie, and I'm certainly not calling ... (uhm, the rules aren't nUmbered, but it's the "editting" paragraph under "trolling") or anything. Just another clarification. Sometimes its hard in these meandering discussion threads to tell just what is being discussed.

----- Part #3

In any event, as we at least are agreed that the issue can perhaps never be resolved (definitively) to everyones satisfaction should of Elvisian revalation, and we've wandered waaaay off topic for the page in question, probably best we close the subject. Its becoming an almost ideological debate, with sides polarizing into quite rigid camps. I don't do ideological debates for exactly that reason nor do I allow them in forums I moderate, so to take part in one here would be shall we say, hypocritical? Or maybe hypercritical. I dunno. I jes dunno. Anyway I have lots of other controversial ideas (like the true nature of the Archons) that must likewise await further evidence. No need to waste all my rantergy now. :-p

[Scientivore]

I can't imagine even an idiot failing to use invisibility as you all are describing it if he had it; heck, I'd expect an idiot to use it so heavily that it would be functionally useless as a surprise tool.

I've been saying that maybe Stanley can't actually use veiling because of the Foolamancer being part of the IIImancer† now. Maybe Wanda was just telling Parson that Ansom might be assuming that Stanley can veil units because Jillian told her that Ansom knows that Stanley has a Foolamancer.

† I'm trying out a shorter neologism. It could be read as "triple eyemancer" -- like how IEEE is read "I-triple-E" -- or "threemancer" if you prefer.

Anyway I have lots of other controversial ideas (like the true nature of the Archons) that must likewise await further evidence. No need to waste all my rantergy now. :-p

No need at all -- especially if it could be alchemically transformed into jestergy with a silly spec thread or pointed (de)motivator.

[Jarawara]

"Waitwaitwait. Time out. We can *veil* our troops?"

Most everyone here is taking that as indication that Ansom is even more screwed than he was. Most everyone is taking that as a sign that Ansom is assuming that the Dwagons must be there, veiled, and therefore is charging on ahead, further booping himself up by going fully into the trap. There have been a few notable exceptions, but most everyone here is speculating on exactly what magnitude of booposity that Ansom has buried himself into.

Not me.

I am a wargamer. And the one thing I dread most in a wargame is that moment when I realize I did not understand the full implications of a rule. Because, if I'm just now learning about it, it's because someone else just handed my head to be by it.

It is Parson that is booped, not Ansom.

Parson is well and truly booped. We don't yet see why or how, but if I had to guess, I'm thinking it's the autoattack when not stacked with a warlord, and something that was missing off the stupid meals. Parson is truly booped, and this plan is going to go badly for him, real quick.

Let me examine 'veiling' for a moment. Hmmm... in most wargames, that concept simply doesn't exist. Most computer games do have it, but they aren't usually hex-based and turn-based, so let's assume Erfworld is a boardgame. Some board-wargames do have veiling, but of course you can't actually 'hide' a unit entirely, though you can put a 'army marker' down and then hide what's inside that army.

In most wargames with veiling, the veiling is done instead of moving. However, if that were true here, then Wanda wouldn't have suggested it at all, since Ansom knew the dragons had moved, and therefore could not have been veiled. So in Erfworld, you can move and then veil. Now, assumption time - so can Ansom. We don't know what 'mancers he's got, but with a 25:1 ratio of troops, I bet he's got a few of them at least. One or more foolamancers, and we got ourselves Ansom's army veiled and on the move, attacking the Dwagons. And Parson doesn't see it, as he only sees what is not veiled in the front. Parson doesn't see what kind of battle is upon him after all. So much for his near-perfect military intelligence, he's not got all the facts yet.

Now: Stupidmeals! We know from the stupidmeals that only air units can attack other air units over forest hexes. This of course is wrong, as we then learned that forest units can attack air units as well. Stupid stupidmeals! But we then look at that first criteria... 'Air units can only be attacked by other air units over forest hexes'. That implies that air units can be attacked by ground units normally, yes? From there, it then becomes a simple assumption that ground units cannot *initiate* combat with an air unit, while air units have no such restrictions... but that if combat is initiated, land units may very well be able to defend themselves, just as if they had been in open ground. Those dwagons have to come down below the treeline to attack, don't they?

As such, standard land units *can* attack the dwagons, and *can* kill the dwagons, but only if the dwagons attack first. And as Ansom's army is veiled, those standard land units did accompany him, and are available to fight.

And those warlords? They're off with the wounded dwagons, awaiting next turn, right? Without warlords, stacks of units are forced to auto-attack, are they not? Therefore, Parson's dwagons are going to autoattack standard land units, which can then counterattack, and the dwagons are going to be overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

It looks to me like Ansom stacked them all in one hex (maximum effect is 8 per stack, so you see alot of 8-unit stacks, but it didn't say what the maximum was, did it?), which means there's going to be a bloody mess on both sides as each of Parson's stacks attack in turn (nothing mentioned on whether each stack attacks simultanously or sequentially), and Ansom's force is not going to diminish with losses, as he's just got a bunch more with him. In the end, there's going to be bloody mayhem and bodies everywhere, but Parson's losing his entire dwagon pincher force.

That's at least my take.

One last thought. Besides being a wargamer, I'm also an amateur author. A pretty poor one at that, but it does give me some storyline insight. And I know that you don't have one big plan go right to end the story - it just plays out way too fast. It's just too early to 'win' this one now, and so therefore Parson's got to lose. He'll lose, then recover from the grim realities of the loss to find a new plan, so as to come back to win it later.

The only way, in fact, for him to win at this point in the story is if he then figures out that Stanley has to be stopped, and therefore must switch side and find a way to beat his now unbeatable dwagon army. I shall admit to that possibility, and therefore the possibility that Ansom truly is booped for the sole reason of 'storyline necessity'.

At least, that's how I see it.

Anyway, it's like 2 in the morning, and still 80 degrees, and I'm off. I await with unfettered anticipation as to what happens next. Someone's booped, and if I don't get my Erfworld fix, that someone's gonna be me!

[Freerefill]

I don't feel up for a full on rant about strategy and options so I'm just gonna say I love the dynamic poses and facial expressions in this Page. Vinny's expression of "grumble" in Panel 2, Ansom's expression of utter refusal to believe in Panel 4, Panel 6 where he puts his helmet back on, and speaking of helmet off, his helmet hair. Good stuff.

Oh, and isn't it cute how Tool has to stand on a box to reach the table?

[waynemcdougall]

I have a feeling of dread, prompted by Sizemore's "Mm" on Page 60.

My prediction: Dwagons don't heal over water.

Yup, I registered just to say that on page 8 of the thread.

Keep up the good work everyone.

[Dwagon]

I'm not sure Parson can veil units from GK.

Wanda needed to go uncroak Manpower herself. Sizemore needs to go down in the cesspits to create crap golems. The Eyemancers need to be at the table to operate the display Stanley has, etc...

So it seems probable that in order to veil units you need to send the foolamancer in the hex with the units. If that's true, and unless Stanley has another foolamancer, I don't see it happening.

[Renx]

We are told that "archery gets their hitsies" which implies that the archers are not simultaneous with other combat. There is no chance that an attacker for example can kill an archer before the archer has a chance to shoot.

No, they're just the only ones that can attack the dwagons.

When Ansom attacks with his full strength the 3 dwagons do no damage at all. Not even one archer is killed. Why? Because they are all dead before their turn to attack. Advocates of simultaneous combat would have to explain why the dwagons suddenly can't kill even one archer.

We don't know that. Just because we don't see any casualties in the attack doesn't mean there aren't any. Artistic license and all that crap. Also, at least one dwagon was killed by Gumps, who most certainly don't shoot arrows.

You're also not even touching at warlords affecting combat.

Some people have asked how it is that there is such a big difference between Ansom attacking the 19 wounded A dragons and 3 warlords first, then being attacked by the B dwagons on the next turn vs being attacked by all dwagons at once. The main difference (equal with the fact that the A dwagons would be wounded if he attacks quickly) is that the attacker gets a huge advantage. With the archers striking first it's possible that all 19 dwagons would be killed before any of them get to attack at all. All dead for no damage to Ansom.

Nnnno, they knew that they were going to lose troops (maybe a lot), but were willing to risk it because they have three uncroaked warlords, which Ansom's Arkenpliers can kill one-shot.

[Etheric]

Parson is well and truly booped. We don't yet see why or how, but if I had to guess, I'm thinking it's the autoattack when not stacked with a warlord, and something that was missing off the stupid meals. Parson is truly booped, and this plan is going to go badly for him, real quick.

[SNIP]

As such, standard land units *can* attack the dwagons, and *can* kill the dwagons, but only if the dwagons attack first. And as Ansom's army is veiled, those standard land units did accompany him, and are available to fight.

And those warlords? They're off with the wounded dwagons, awaiting next turn, right? Without warlords, stacks of units are forced to auto-attack, are they not? Therefore, Parson's dwagons are going to autoattack standard land units, which can then counterattack, and the dwagons are going to be overwhelmed by sheer numbers.

One last thought. Besides being a wargamer, I'm also an amateur author. A pretty poor one at that, but it does give me some storyline insight. And I know that you don't have one big plan go right to end the story - it just plays out way too fast. It's just too early to 'win' this one now, and so therefore Parson's got to lose. He'll lose, then recover from the grim realities of the loss to find a new plan, so as to come back to win it later.

Glad to see at least one person is thinking along the same lines as me. I have been banging on about something similar for a while now. Something is up. I don't think it is going to be a disaster for Parson as they are basically one disaster away from losing, but Ansom is up to something and we probably don't have enough information to work out what yet.

The next strip is going to give us more clues I think. If the next strip is a talk about how veiling works, combined with ansoms stack on the map board not moving again (and parson again saying something about not understanding that, he has one or two move left, why not croak one stack of dwagons? Then end turn and stanley getting excited. Note not showing Ansom AT ALL, or very very briefly.

If it is just something simple then we will see Vinny and Ansom talking about what to do next after their colossal blunder in the next strip. But I really really do not expect that.

I do find it interesting how the preferences of everyone here comes through. Vinny is popular, Ansom is not. Jillian I have not seen much about. Wanda is popular (but pretty evil I think), Parson ok is the hero. Stanley noone really likes, but is happy to have him rule the world if Parson gets to win too.

Not going to speculate any more, we do not have enough information to prove something more complicated is going on, so going to wait for the next strip.

[Krelon]

"Waitwaitwait. Time out. We can *veil* our troops?"
...
[snip]
...
Let me examine 'veiling' for a moment. Hmmm... in most wargames, that concept simply doesn't exist. Most computer games do have it, but they aren't usually hex-based and turn-based, so let's assume Erfworld is a boardgame. Some board-wargames do have veiling, but of course you can't actually 'hide' a unit entirely, though you can put a 'army marker' down and then hide what's inside that army.
[snip]

warlods which is a square-based turn-based game some mancers can cast invisibility. the stack is invis, cannot be found by scouts, only way to engage is to attack the hex it is in by guessing in which stack it really is.

problem in Erf that I see: Mancers are rare. Stanley only foolamancer is part of the linked eyemancers so I guess he cannot move around with stacks.
Ansom may know that Stanley has 1 Foolamancer so there is a chance he could be cloaking the wounded. As someone pointed out it's a straw which can be grabbed.
Even if there were cloaking possible, I guess it expensive (to cast and upkeep).

I am not a great fan of Stanley, still I feel compelled to defend him just a bit. People think he is really stupid, well I believe he is just an average guy (not a military genius, not even an average strategist) who somehow became chosen by a tool of the titans. Now he strongly believes it is his devine right.

So what does he do? Instead of giving up he levels himself to be the leader of an 11 cities nation and starts a war to get the other tools. His warplans are really simple: Put the best looking guy in command (great morale bonus) and fight it out. It COULD work (set the difficulty level to easy and give the player a few good units to start with) Unluckily his enemies just outnumber him and they are at least average strategists, so this tactic doesnt work, even with the control of dwagons, simple as that.

He really seems to me like a newbie wargamer who does not have the knack for it but somehow won the lottery free pass to play in the national online championships. Build good stacks, buy a lot of mancers, do simple moves, believe in your destiny.

[sihnfahl]

I do find it interesting how the preferences of everyone here comes through. Vinny is popular

He's likeable to gamers because... well, he has a sense when something isn't happening like it should. He's quick to realize when a situation is going sour. He's skeptical, cautious, forward-thinking and an excellent analyst. He makes a GOOD opponent for Parson. I'd prefer he survive and Ansom get captured so that Vinny has the opportunity to lead the Coalition and give Parson a -real- opponent.

Ansom is not

He's not very likeable. He's brute force. Get as many units together, spread them out, move on GK. Look at his tactical mistakes. His most important units in the attack on GK are the siege; he only protects them with some archery when he's in range of GK and its dwagons. His airforce is spread out to the point only 1 stack with any sort of chance against the most powerful air units on his opponent's side can reach. He's slow to realize traps, walks INTO one willingly... he makes for a -boring- fight.

Jillian I have not seen much about.

Mostly because she's being manipulated by Wanda. She's brash. She has little personality of her own beyond "I wanna fight!", "I want Ansom's company!", and "Oh, Mistress Wanda, I love you so, beat me again..." A bit of a flat character of what we've seen so far.

Wanda is popular (but pretty evil I think)

She's strong, self-assured, knows what she wants, knows how to manipulate people (particularly Stanley)... what isn't to like about her? Oh, and yeah, she is pretty evil. At best, amoral.

Parson ok is the hero.

I'm not so sure about Parson. Before he came to erfworld, he was... well, not doing much. Hit mall for food. Work low-pay job. Avoid college. Play games. Go home, play more games, eat. His car's got its Check Engine light on. His apartment's a mess, heavily stained and has trash carelessly strewn about.
Since getting to Erfworld, he's shown flashes of compassion here and there, and concern... but he's still a bit of a neutral. He's living his favorite type of game (turn-based) and he's latched onto it.

Stanley noone really likes, but is happy to have him rule the world if Parson gets to win too.

He reminds people far too much of certain... personages...
Of which the less said is better. Forum rules and all that.

[Thes Hunter]

This being page whatever, I doubt anyone will read this, however here is my opinion:


Along with many others, I feel that Ansom charged in because he believed the troops are veiled. Even though he is smart, he is still very prideful. Vinny is there to counterbalance that a bit, but doesn't always work.

This leaves Ansom in the center hex, with presumably no move. (Otherwise why wouldn't Parson think that Ansom wouldn't try to power through the 6 dragon stack to get back to the column, since that would be certainly a easier fight that whatever Parson could potentially throw at him next turn.)


I do not know how much time they have before sunset, i.e. end of turn, but it is still Ansom's turn.

We know he has flying units that can reach, but barely. We also have this mysterious Charlie. It is possible, though highly unlikely that he will use Jillian with the archons and/or Charlie to help him get out of the vice this turn. Because these flyers would either have to have enough move to circle around to the open backside, or would have to punch through one of the dragon hexs themselves, and then back out again. Then who knows if they have enough move to get him back to relative safety. This would still leave the gumps and the woodsy elves there to be slaughtered, but would take Ansom and Vinny's boops out of the vice. (And would Vinny even have boops? )

Now, if he doesn't find away to escape the trap before dawn, I like other posters feel that it is likely that Ansom and Vinny will be captured rather than croaked. Then Stanly can get the arkenpliers. But I also believe as other posters has pointed out, Parsons attack on Ansom will not go as well as planned, because of the Arkenpliers ability to destroy the uncroaked. Which it is very reasonable to assume Parson does not know about.

A side note, that I am sure others have noticed. Stanely has a chin swirl just like the Elvis Titans. I believe this is what makes him, more 'holy' and able to attune to the arkenpliers while Ansom can not.

And if Ansom is captured, I think we will see that Wanda's hold over Jillian isn't as complete as she would like to think. Jillian does have some feelings for Ansom, as shown by her considering coming to his tent in the final panels of page 8.

[mrocktor]

It is Parson that is booped, not Ansom.

Would you care to back that up with, say, 1000 shmuckers?

[sihnfahl]

This leaves Ansom in the center hex, with presumably no move. (Otherwise why wouldn't Parson think that Ansom wouldn't try to power through the 6 dragon stack to get back to the column, since that would be certainly a easier fight that whatever Parson could potentially throw at him next turn.)

Even more evidence against Ansom wanting to power his way back to the column? Starting from the 3-dwagon hex, he could have gone through the 4-dwagon hex and be back to the column in the same amount of move with less risk. Look at the map.

Going straight? Center hex, empty forest. Strong six-dwagon hex, forest. Empty grasslands. Road.

Go 'right'? Weaker four-dwagon hex, forest. Empty forest. Empty grasslands. Road.

though highly unlikely that he will use Jillian with the archons and/or Charlie to help him get out of the vice this turn.

Or make the possibility of an attack so expensive that Parson cannot risk the losses.

This would still leave the gumps and the woodsy elves there to be slaughtered

Why would Parson care about the woodsy elves and gumps on that turn? He'd far prefer Ansom and the siege. He wouldn't attack them this turn and use up move and hitsies if Ansom isn't there...

Parsons attack on Ansom will not go as well as planned, because of the Arkenpliers ability to destroy the uncroaked. Which it is very reasonable to assume Parson does not know about.

They dust most uncroaked according to Ansom. It's a plus, yes, but there's also a strong chance that the Uncroaked Warlords are resistant to the effect. Incomplete information on them. Ansom seems to believe they are effective, but whether they are or not...

[SteveMB]

Along with many others, I feel that Ansom charged in because he believed the troops are veiled. Even though he is smart, he is still very prideful. Vinny is there to counterbalance that a bit, but doesn't always work.

Agreed. It's the one possibility left to him that doesn't lead directly to the conclusion "Stanley played me like a fiddle" -- a concept he simply can't wrap his head around.

This leaves Ansom in the center hex, with presumably no move. (Otherwise why wouldn't Parson think that Ansom wouldn't try to power through the 6 dragon stack to get back to the column, since that would be certainly a easier fight that whatever Parson could potentially throw at him next turn.)

It's possible that Ansom himself has some move left, but most of his units don't. He can't return the way he came because that requires more move than he has; he can't plow straight through because whatever units have any move left are no match for six healthy dwagons.

I do not know how much time they have before sunset, i.e. end of turn, but it is still Ansom's turn.

It may be that "time" in Erfworld is a function of "the side whose turn it is has used all its move, or declared that it's finished moving" (possibly with a "chess clock" limit to prevent stalling or excessive dithering).

And if Ansom is captured, I think we will see that Wanda's hold over Jillian isn't as complete as she would like to think. Jillian does have some feelings for Ansom, as shown by her considering coming to his tent in the final panels of page 8.

Wanda acknowledges that her control does not extend to direct commands, particularly not direct betrayal of Ansom. Perhaps she intends to (or already has, via something like "post-hypnotic suggestion") influence Jillian to do something that undercuts Ansom in a non-obvious way -- if so, it might get interesting if she finds out despite its non-obviousness....

[Thes Hunter]

Even more evidence against Ansom wanting to power his way back to the column? Starting from the 3-dwagon hex, he could have gone through the 4-dwagon hex and be back to the column in the same amount of move with less risk. Look at the map.

Going straight? Center hex, empty forest. Strong six-dwagon hex, forest. Empty grasslands. Road.

Go 'right'? Weaker four-dwagon hex, forest. Empty forest. Empty grasslands. Road.

Ah, yes. My speech was inaccurate. He could go through a 5 dragon hex instead of the 6 dragon hex with the same movement to get back to the column. To go through the 4 dragon stack he would have to go through a dark green hex, a medium green hex, a light green hex, and then he would be at the column.

We do not know what "low on move" means. Nor can we predict how much safety the column would give him. There is simply not enough information.

We also do not know how many hits Parson could make next turn. In the previous turn, there was the sense that the dwagons had to move from some distance away to hit the column, and a sense that this time they would be closer which would leave them with move enough to come back to Gobwin Knob. So he could have more hits this turn than last. He could have enough hits for the left behind woodsys and gumps, and the seige, but we all are just speculating.

[WarforgedGoblin]

Hiya. Now, this may have been covered in the 8 pages of posts already, but I'm at work and don't have time to go through them all. What if Parson takes this route:

1. Veil the stacks of dwagons around Ansom.
2. Scatter said dwagons.

Yeah, it'll annoy the ever-living boop outta Stanley, but Ansom will have no idea what to do. Will he stay in the middle hex and await an attack that'll never come? Will he have Vinny make a bat and scout each hex, wasting turns and possibly other resources (I'm still convinced that Vinny takes damage when he produces a bat)? Will he waste Jillian's and the other fliers' movement in a futile effort to find out where they went? Will he cough up the schmuckers to pay for Charlie to find them?

Of course, Parson needs to know how veiling works. Does it only work when the unit is motionless? Does it break once another unit enters the hex? Does it cost anything to veil and un-veil? Parson may just veil the dwagons and obliterate the remaining seige engines. Again, Stanley will be right booped off, but I think if Parson lays the "humiliate then defeat Ansom" approach on His Toolness, Ansom may be non-croaked for a bit longer.