103 The Battle for Gobwin Knob, Page 93

[Felkethar]

Perhaps this has already been said somewhere before but I am going to take my stab at a theory of how this is going to pan out.

I believe that Stanely is NOT heading to FAQ to start another side. He is walking the path that the Titans have chosen for him and the same quest he has been on since the story started... he is going after another arkentool. The only other person besides Ansom who owns an arkentool (that we know of) is Charlie, who has a maximum of 15 units (amazing though they are), 3 of which Stanely is well aware of thier position. What he does not know, that we do, is that not only are those 3 there but more are coming, and will not be at home to defend when The Tool shows up.

My defense for this multi-fold:

1) The mountians around FAQ do not appear nearly as high, steep, or snow covered as the ones Stanely is flying through. The ones Stanely is flying through appear to resemble the mountians around Charlie much more closely.

2) It is a completely in-character move for Stanely. He doesn't like Charlie, Charlie has an arkentool (perhaps the same argument), and it is a totaly brute force show of overwhelming power, much like he engaged in when he was a warlord (if the images are anything to go by). The odds are also not really too bad when you think about it either, 1 Overlord and his natural bonus + 1 artifact bonus + 24 dwagons + 3 knight class units vs probably about 9 archons (assmuing that they are ALL at home and not out on missions of thier own) and 1 artifact which probably only gives marginal battle bonuses since it is centered around thinkamancy.

3) The Plot. Basically this puts all the pieces in just the right places. Stanely is out of the picture so Parson can do his thing, Stanely is also out of harms way as he is no where near the coallition air units, and the coallition air units are not at Gobwin Knob so Parson can grind the coallition ground troops into a shell of thier former selves.

The result of all of this is that we dodge the whole question about 'what if Stanely croaks?', all of the characters that have had so much effort put into thier development get to stick around, and we don't loose any of the nice tension in Parson's life as once Stanely realizes that Gobwin Knob has not fallen he will come back, arkendish in hand, claiming the divine will of the Titans is being fullfilled. Not to mention the coalition characters don't get let off the hook from thier emotional problems either and we get to see where THAT ball of wax leads us.

Ok just my two cents,

Felk

[teratorn]

It will continue to be painful for me until I see Jillian skewer the little jerk on her big giant sword, at which point, my heart will be sated.

Nah, no sword, she should pull a Wanda on Ansom, the very hard way.

[zeropsm]

[offtopic mode="ON"]

I miss erf updates

[offtopic mode="OFF"]

[Taross]

Just to note, people have been joking around with the Grease references a lot, but I don't think this is a trivial 'flavor' change of costume.

Remember that there was a warning that there might be battle-dancing?

I do so definitely want to see what the fight between Stanley and his KISS versus Grease will look like.
It's Metal vs Pop, bets anyone?

[El_Chupacabra]

Just to note, people have been joking around with the Grease references a lot, but I don't think this is a trivial 'flavor' change of costume.

Remember that there was a warning that there might be battle-dancing?

I do so definitely want to see what the fight between Stanley and his KISS versus Grease will look like.
It's Metal vs Pop, bets anyone?

Hm... Dance is highly subjective. If there's an external judge, moshing might be at a disadvantage. But I'd not want to be in a KISS mosh pit otherwise.

[Ben]

I find your theory quite interesting... there are two aspects of your argument that I find flawed, though.

1) We don't know how many units Charlescomm has. The way I read it, the 15 listed were the ones committed to Ansom's alliance; there could be many others at the base (and, if Charlie's half as smart as he's supposed to be, ie at least average, there will be).

2) Who says the plot requires Stanley's side to win? Parson is very good, but he's not the Overmind people seem to think he is. For all the talk of Vinnie being the voice of reason who allowed Ansom to fight back against Parson's genius, Vinnie's plans were to either run away or make their stand, and all sucked. It was Ansom who made the daring hunt-the-dragons move that was such a decisive victory (destroying as many dwagons, proportionally, as Parson destroyed siege). He still has the overwhelming force, and Parson has some clever ideas, but no Kobayashi-Maru, think-outside-the-box tactic that will allow him to do more than slow Ansom down (IMHO). Maybe he should sneak some bad acid over to the enemy camp.

The plot is not known to us, otherwise it wouldn't be very interesting, now would it? Maybe the plot will have Parson captured by Jetstone, maybe he escapes and survives because he's from another universe, maybe he pulls some Deus-ex-machina victory out of somewhere... or maybe he dies. I just hope that whatever happens, it makes for a good story.

Perhaps this has already been said somewhere before but I am going to take my stab at a theory of how this is going to pan out.

I believe that Stanely is NOT heading to FAQ to start another side. He is walking the path that the Titans have chosen for him and the same quest he has been on since the story started... he is going after another arkentool. The only other person besides Ansom who owns an arkentool (that we know of) is Charlie, who has a maximum of 15 units (amazing though they are), 3 of which Stanely is well aware of thier position. What he does not know, that we do, is that not only are those 3 there but more are coming, and will not be at home to defend when The Tool shows up.

My defense for this multi-fold:

1) The mountians around FAQ do not appear nearly as high, steep, or snow covered as the ones Stanely is flying through. The ones Stanely is flying through appear to resemble the mountians around Charlie much more closely.

2) It is a completely in-character move for Stanely. He doesn't like Charlie, Charlie has an arkentool (perhaps the same argument), and it is a totaly brute force show of overwhelming power, much like he engaged in when he was a warlord (if the images are anything to go by). The odds are also not really too bad when you think about it either, 1 Overlord and his natural bonus + 1 artifact bonus + 24 dwagons + 3 knight class units vs probably about 9 archons (assmuing that they are ALL at home and not out on missions of thier own) and 1 artifact which probably only gives marginal battle bonuses since it is centered around thinkamancy.

3) The Plot. Basically this puts all the pieces in just the right places. Stanely is out of the picture so Parson can do his thing, Stanely is also out of harms way as he is no where near the coallition air units, and the coallition air units are not at Gobwin Knob so Parson can grind the coallition ground troops into a shell of thier former selves.

The result of all of this is that we dodge the whole question about 'what if Stanely croaks?', all of the characters that have had so much effort put into thier development get to stick around, and we don't loose any of the nice tension in Parson's life as once Stanely realizes that Gobwin Knob has not fallen he will come back, arkendish in hand, claiming the divine will of the Titans is being fullfilled. Not to mention the coalition characters don't get let off the hook from thier emotional problems either and we get to see where THAT ball of wax leads us.

Ok just my two cents,

Felk

[Kian]

I was reading along, and noticed a lot of people mentioning that Parson might disband if Stanley croaked. Looking around, I found this cited as source: http://www.giantitp.com/comics/erf0087.html

Now, I read that differently. Parson asks "When the city fell. Shouldn't you have disbanded?" This would imply, to me, that it is not losing the leader of a faction that causes units to disband (after all, leaders dieing is a something to be expected, and sides don't last only as long as the leader does, they have heirs), but that losing your capital is what kills you. It might even be a combination of factors.

Lose both leader and capital, and your side is dead. The side dieing kills all the remaining units of that side.

One would expect that if you lose your capital, but your leader survives, the side can still fight. Indeed, that's what Stanley planned to do at the very beggining, and only hired Parson because losing the city lost him the treasury anyway.

Likewise, if your leader dies, but you still have the capital, the heir takes over. You wouldn't expect heirs to have to rebuild their own kingdoms up from scratch.

We have two examples of capital cities falling together with the leader of the faction. Saline in GK and Faq. In both examples, certain units survived because there was a heir still alive, but the side stopped existing. Stanley started a new tribe, but Jillian didn't.

We also know what happens if a capital falls but the leader survives, from Stanley's plan at the beggining.

We are dealing now with an example that has no precedent from what we've seen. What happens when a leader of a faction falls, but the capital doesn't. Normally, a heir takes over. Stanley doesn't have an heir, but from a certain perspective, he CANT have an heir, because he's not royal. Heirs are a royal thing. Stanley was only a heir designate, and GK can't produce any more nobles or royals. One posibility is that, if Stanley dies and there is no heir, the following highest ranked unit becomes leader. In this case, Parson.

So, there is no reason to believe that Stanley HAS to survive. Stanley could die, and one of the possible results, given what information is available to us now, is that Parson becomes Overlord.

This is what I'm hoping will happen.

[fendrin]

...snip...

Except that Parson is not Stanley's heir. As far as we know, he has no heir.
If we assume some sort of default heir status, it is just as likely to be Sizemore (highest ranked member of the same tribe) as Parson.

EDIT:
We also don't know whether or not a unit popped as an heir might have the same benefits as if popping under a royal overlord. Considering the anti-commoner sentiment, it is quite possible that no one knows that the 'royal advantage' really has to do with heir status at time of unit creation, rather than who orders the unit to be popped.

[lamguin]

All right. A few things from me today.

1. Ansom's toast. He may as well have announced that he was one case away from retiring from the force.

2. Stanley will know the moment that a new side is formed. As part of the natural thinkamancy that is tied to being a leader, or because the actual Thinkamancer will send him the message when she finds out, I can't say. The first seems more likely to me.

3. If he does the smart thing, Stanley will start his own new side to counter the double move tactic of the new alliance. The questions this brings up are: Who gets control of GK when Stanley cedes? I don't see him caring enough to appoint an heir, so it's left between, in my mind, Parson as Warlord, Wanda as chief caster, or Sizemore as the highest ranking remnant of the Plaid clan.

[Krelon]

The smart thing for Stanley would be to return to GK while the alliance air units are away and Ansom tries to take the city anyway. But, did he ever do the smart thing?

I mean, he could have croaked Ansom, Vinnie, 3 Archons and Jillian over the lake.

[Lamech]

1) We don't know how many units Charlescomm has. The way I read it, the 15 listed were the ones committed to Ansom's alliance; there could be many others at the base (and, if Charlie's half as smart as he's supposed to be, ie at least average, there will be).

Depending on how much Charlie reallies on that dish, he might have just one. Charlie himself. The dwagons and the archons should leave, as soon as the tools cancel each other. At the very least there should be confusion during which Stanley can sneak in using the foolamancer to take out Charlie. Then he can attune to the dish, or call in the dwagons.


On a side note the term "artifact" for something not made by mortals, bugs me and might have potential implications. Artifact means (definition from a old Webster dictionary)
1) any object made by man especially to view with a subsequent use

Now I'm sure that "man" means human the dictionary is just a little old and has been made politically correct. Now the Erfworld definition doesn't necessarily conflict with this one; the native erfworlder are not human, but does that mean the maker of the arkentools was really a human from earth? And what does this mean for the things Parson brought from earth and the things he popped?

Or maybe the erf language isn't really English

[teratorn]

If he does the smart thing, Stanley will start his own new side to counter the double move tactic of the new alliance.

But he could only do that in the morning after. By then Jillian will be already in position. He's not heading a coalition, he only has a capital, so he can't play the "change the alliance" game, he would lose GK and become a barbarian

There must a penalty to pay when forming a new side, since Ansom didn't try to do it when in the dwagon trap. My guess is that you only recover the move (and get healed) in the turn of the side where you spent the move (and got your injuries). If Jillian can move now and in the morning then the donut of doom thing doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Ansom would only have needed to tell his troops in the column to split into hexes according to their banner, and then form a new side with the air support. He could then finish easily the dwagons with Jillian, Archons, and all the gwiffons.

[SteveMB]

There must a penalty to pay when forming a new side, since Ansom didn't try to do it when in the dwagon trap. My guess is that you only recover the move (and get healed) in the turn of the side where you spent the move (and got your injuries). If Jillian can move now and in the morning then the donut of doom thing doesn't make any sense whatsoever. Ansom would only have needed to tell his troops in the column to split into hexes according to their banner, and then form a new side with the air support. He could then finish easily the dwagons with Jillian, Archons, and all the gwiffons.

The simplest explanation is that he couldn't use the exploit of having his units ally with Transylvito because he had no way to communicate with Don King -- alliances presumably require the agreement of all parties.

[teratorn]

The simplest explanation is that he couldn't use the exploit of having his units ally with Transylvito because he had no way to communicate with Don King -- alliances presumably require the agreement of all parties.

Why ally with Transylvito? What he needed was to get himself and the gwiffons into the hexes with siege (just a question of putting warlords there to avoid fighting), and maybe to leave the archons with Tarfu, Vinny and the gumps. Charlie is easy to contact, and Jill is a mercenary.

[TheTurnipKing]

...so, basically, parson has broken the coalition?

....like he intended to?

No. Nothing Parson did broke the coalition. This is a reaction to Stanley fleeing Gobwin Knob.

[reignofevil]

But the coalition is broken yes? That means his goal is complete, even if he didnt do it himself.

[SteveMB]

But the coalition is broken yes? That means his goal is complete, even if he didnt do it himself.

The coalition isn't broken, but Parson has played Ansom to the point of snapping at Vinny. That suggests that the cracks might start forming and spreading, if Ansom has any similar confrontations with other Coalition leaders.

(The fact that Ansom simply tries to put the incident behind him, but is apparently too proud and/or angry to actually apologize, does not bode well for him in this regard, methinks....)

[raekuul]

(Hate to derail, but does anyone know if the next update is coming?)

Ansom's found the exploit Parson was hunting desperately for. If there is no penalty for rearranging alliances within a coalition except for reduced firepower on Ansom's part, Stanley's as good as croaked.

I bet Stanley wishes he hadn't linked Misty, Maggie, and Foolamancer (especially Foolamancer) right now.

Also: Pyrite the Foolamancer is my guess.

[fendrin]

Ansom's found the exploit Parson was hunting desperately for. If there is no penalty for rearranging alliances within a coalition except for reduced firepower on Ansom's part, Stanley's as good as croaked.

It may be an exploit, but it's really not as ground-breaking as people seem to think, and it does have it's own disadvantages. All it does is allow Vinny's crew to act prior to the GK forces. because of the timing, yes, they get to act twice, but because combat in Erfworld is real-time, that's not a huge advantage. It largely just allows for more positioning. You can really only do it once, though, or you risk fragmenting your forces to the point that they get into each other's way (and possibly attack each other). Also, if you undo that split, you grant your opponent the same advantage you yourself already gained.

It also eliminates the effectiveness of non-magical communications (unless you want to use warlords as messengers). Thinkamancers seem to be rare (otherwise Charlie's rates wouldn't be so high), and other magical forms of communication require the sharing of valuable magic items.

I bet Stanley wishes he hadn't linked Misty, Maggie, and Foolamancer (especially Foolamancer) right now.

Stanley doesn't really seem like the sort for that kind of introspection.

Also: Pyrite the Foolamancer is my guess.

Nah, so far the caster's names don't seem to have anything to do with their specialties.

[Kian]

Except that Parson is not Stanley's heir. As far as we know, he has no heir.

I know, that's why I said

We are dealing now with an example that has no precedent from what we've seen. What happens when a leader of a faction falls, but the capital doesn't. Normally, a heir takes over. Stanley doesn't have an heir,

If we assume some sort of default heir status, it is just as likely to be Sizemore (highest ranked member of the same tribe) as Parson.

Part of my point, however, is that Stanley is an Overlord, not a King. The difference being, a King is royalty, and royalty has heirs. An overlord wouldn't have an heir, because the whole deal with the line of succession is tracing back the Titanic Mandate Ansom holds so dear. An Overlord has no such thing to trace back, so he doesn't have heirs either.

EDIT:
We also don't know whether or not a unit popped as an heir might have the same benefits as if popping under a royal overlord. Considering the anti-commoner sentiment, it is quite possible that no one knows that the 'royal advantage' really has to do with heir status at time of unit creation, rather than who orders the unit to be popped.

I didn't understand your point here. From what we've seem, it appears cities with royals and nobles have some chance to pop nobles and more rarely other royals. However, a King can auto pop an heir simply by choosing to. An heir is a royal, and gets the same benefits other royals get. I'd imagine if the leader of a faction was a noble, his heir would be a noble too, and get the bonuses nobles get.

A king couldn't pop more than one heir, because heirness is given to the firstpopped and should stay with him until he dies.

Anyways, back to my point. The rules of the game seem to be elaborate enough to make distinctions between Overlords and Kings. Charlie and Stanley are Overlords, while Ansom is a prince and his leader is a King. Given this, one could expect that the rules governing how leadership is transferred are different as well. Stanley may not be able to have an heir. He may be able to designate a succesor, but in the event that he didn't, there might be rules in place that determine who becomes Overlord, without disbanding his side's troops if the capital doesn't fall.

It doesn't matter if it is Sizemore or Parson or whoever. So long as a succesor appears, Stanley's survival is not necessary for Parson to continue to exist, which opens possibilities a lot of people have been discarding because of the belief that Parson is tied to Stanley's fate.

[Ubiq]

The coalition isn't broken, but Parson has played Ansom to the point of snapping at Vinny. That suggests that the cracks might start forming and spreading, if Ansom has any similar confrontations with other Coalition leaders.

This especially becomes more likely seeing as how Ansom has sent off the one person diplomatic enough to smooth over further incidents of this sort. As is, he's left with the people that seemed shocked by his comments and that will likely view any setbacks as refuting his statements about the divine quality of his leadership.

The most critical issue at this point is whether or not the Archon reported the conversation back to Charlescomm HQ and how that information would be recieved.

[fendrin]

I know, that's why I said

From what we have seen, the only evidence that a capitol is anything more than just the city that the overlord/king rules from is that one comment from parson, which is much more likely to have been just Parson speaking generically (a little more polite than 'when Saline IV was croaked') or incorrectly than Parson being specific because a slightly different phrasing would have been inaccurate. To be frank, Parson just doesn't know enough about Erfworld to make that distinction. As far as I can tell, the only way to not be disbanded when an overlord/king is croaked is for the overlord/king to have an heir.

Part of my point, however, is that Stanley is an Overlord, not a King. The difference being, a King is royalty, and royalty has heirs. An overlord wouldn't have an heir, because the whole deal with the line of succession is tracing back the Titanic Mandate Ansom holds so dear. An Overlord has no such thing to trace back, so he doesn't have heirs either.

Anyone can have an heir. I'm an heir, but I'm not royalty. You probably are too...

If an overlord couldn't produce an heir, there would be no point in promoting a unit to 'heir', because that would just delay the destruction of the tribe for a 'generation'. There must be a way for Stanley to produce an heir... if only he weren't so paranoid.

I didn't understand your point here.

My point is that our knowledge of Erfworld royalty and nobility comes exclusively from biased sources. It may be that any unit popped as an heir (even if their production was ordered by a non-royal Overlord) has an advantage in stats. That sort of information would be kept quiet by the royals, as it undermines a large part of their authority. Considering that it is common for royals to gang up on non-royal overlords, it is possible that such a scenario has never actually come to pass (and if it has, there easily could have been a genocide to cover it up).

From what we've seem, it appears cities with royals and nobles have some chance to pop nobles and more rarely other royals. However, a King can auto pop an heir simply by choosing to. An heir is a royal, and gets the same benefits other royals get. I'd imagine if the leader of a faction was a noble, his heir would be a noble too, and get the bonuses nobles get.

It seems to me that it is not 'random' for a royal or noble to pop. An heir popped by order of a King (or Queen) would be a royal. Royals are likely nobles that are also an overlord/king/queen or heir. More on this in a moment...

A king couldn't pop more than one heir, because heirness is given to the firstpopped and should stay with him until he dies.

Eh, I don't buy it. My guess is that an heir is only an heir until the King/Queen/Overlord designates a new heir. Just like in the real world. In fact, Nobles are likely popped in order to act as regents over cities other than the capitol. Also, should an heir be killed, there might not be enough time to pop a new heir, so a royalty-conscious King/Queen could simply designate a noble heir, at which point they would be considered royalty. Again, just like the real world. Actually, in the real world, a commoner declared an heir would be considered royalty, even though they can't trace their ancestry back to King Arthur (which almost all of the medieval European royal families could... based on false documents, of course)

Anyways, back to my point. The rules of the game seem to be elaborate enough to make distinctions between Overlords and Kings. Charlie and Stanley are Overlords, while Ansom is a prince and his leader is a King. Given this, one could expect that the rules governing how leadership is transferred are different as well. Stanley may not be able to have an heir. He may be able to designate a succesor, but in the event that he didn't, there might be rules in place that determine who becomes Overlord, without disbanding his side's troops if the capital doesn't fall.

It's impossible (at this point) to tell if the distinction between a King/Queen and an Overlord is grounded in the 'rules' of Erfworld, or are purely a sociological construction.

It doesn't matter if it is Sizemore or Parson or whoever. So long as a succesor appears, Stanley's survival is not necessary for Parson to continue to exist, which opens possibilities a lot of people have been discarding because of the belief that Parson is tied to Stanley's fate.

Except that they are not heirs. The only reason Banhammer popped Jillian is because the predictamancer foretold the King's demise. The only way to protect one's tribe from extinction is to have an heir before croaking. Like in chess, when the King falls, the game is over...

[SteveMB]

From what we have seen, the only evidence that a capitol is anything more than just the city that the overlord/king rules from is that one comment from parson, which is much more likely to have been just Parson speaking generically (a little more polite than 'when Saline IV was croaked') or incorrectly than Parson being specific because a slightly different phrasing would have been inaccurate. To be frank, Parson just doesn't know enough about Erfworld to make that distinction.

He knows enough about Erfworld to realize that the question arises in the first place. Presumably he surmised it from incidents described in those history books); of course, we don't know how specific they were on this point (how common is it likely to be that the king/overlord or the capital, but not both, are lost?)

My point is that our knowledge of Erfworld royalty and nobility comes exclusively from biased sources.

True.

It may be that any unit popped as an heir (even if their production was ordered by a non-royal Overlord) has an advantage in stats. That sort of information would be kept quiet by the royals, as it undermines a large part of their authority.

Every warlord and caster can see unit stats. That makes it a bit difficult to keep something like this secret.

[fendrin]

He knows enough about Erfworld to realize that the question arises in the first place. Presumably he surmised it from incidents described in those history books);

That is a possibility.

of course, we don't know how specific they were on this point (how common is it likely to be that the king/overlord or the capital, but not both, are lost?)

True.

Every warlord and caster can see unit stats. That makes it a bit difficult to keep something like this secret.

Unless once can mathematically derive a unit's starting stats, it would be impossible to determine if higher than baseline stats are from special status or from advancement. Many games have a certain amount of randomness built into their advancement (such as adding 1d4 points to each attribute at each level up). Trying to determine starting stats could be like trying to figure out a D&D character's level based on their class and their hit points; i.e. you can get an idea, but randomness makes it difficult to be certain.

[Kian]

There's no evidence that would suggest a conspiracy of royals and nobles to hide the fact that their better stats are acquirable by anyone. For one part, Stanley is a non-royal and would thus know if it was true, as he'd know if he got better stats from becoming an overlord. And would have mentioned this at some point, so Sizemore would have explained it to Parson. So, no conspiracy. Royals and Nobles are better, statwise, than regular units.

We have no evidence that a side depends on their leader not dieing or having an heir to continue. Previous examples had both the capital and the leader die to kill the side, but units were saved anyway because there were heirs. The simple fact that they recognize a city as a capital in the first place means it has meaning. The king is as mobile an unit as any other, and it's doubtful that the capital changes every time he goes for a walk, or indeed that the side is without a capital while he is in transit. Erfworld is a game, and in a game the names of things have meanings. Particularly where they are used to distinguish things.

I make a distinction between King and Overlord. You say there isn't one. However, if Noble status was transferable, Stanley would by right be a King, as he was the heir designate of a King. He isn't. Clearly then, the game doesn't allow for non-nobles to be kings. They are overlords. And if the distinction is in place, the game will have different rules for handling them. The first rule difference, apparently, is that they are called different things.

Also, where did you ever see that an heir could be changed? Unless you planned to kill him, you are stuck with the heir you got, because the whole deal with lines of succesions, as I said, is tracing back the lineage. If you say someone isn't a good enough heir, you're undermining the base of your authority, as you're admiting that some thing other than blood matters, which means that if someone was found to be more fit to be king than the actual king, that person should be king.

[fendrin]

There's no evidence that would suggest a conspiracy of royals and nobles to hide the fact that their better stats are acquirable by anyone. For one part, Stanley is a non-royal and would thus know if it was true, as he'd know if he got better stats from becoming an overlord. And would have mentioned this at some point, so Sizemore would have explained it to Parson. So, no conspiracy. Royals and Nobles are better, statwise, than regular units.

Except that Stanley wasn't popped as an heir. He was promoted to heir. There is a big difference. After that distinction, the rest of your argument falls apart.

We have no evidence that a side depends on their leader not dieing or having an heir to continue. Previous examples had both the capital and the leader die to kill the side, but units were saved anyway because there were heirs. The simple fact that they recognize a city as a capital in the first place means it has meaning. The king is as mobile an unit as any other, and it's doubtful that the capital changes every time he goes for a walk, or indeed that the side is without a capital while he is in transit. Erfworld is a game, and in a game the names of things have meanings. Particularly where they are used to distinguish things.

...and London is the capital of England even if HM the Queen travels abroad. We recognize a capital regardless of whether or not the ruler is currently there or not. Why must Erfworld be different? Erfworld is not just a game. In fact, it may not be a game at all. It may just be a world that resembles a game.

I make a distinction between King and Overlord. You say there isn't one. However, if Noble status was transferable, Stanley would by right be a King, as he was the heir designate of a King. He isn't. Clearly then, the game doesn't allow for non-nobles to be kings. They are overlords. And if the distinction is in place, the game will have different rules for handling them. The first rule difference, apparently, is that they are called different things.

I actually do draw a distinction. I think that 'King' and 'Queen' are titles reserved for overlords that happen to be royals. Just like I think that royals are nobles that are overlords or heirs. Creates a nice little hierarchy. No proof, but it makes more sense to me than 3 unrelated categories that just happen to overlap slightly in function/role.

Also, where did you ever see that an heir could be changed? Unless you planned to kill him, you are stuck with the heir you got, because the whole deal with lines of succesions, as I said, is tracing back the lineage. If you say someone isn't a good enough heir, you're undermining the base of your authority, as you're admiting that some thing other than blood matters, which means that if someone was found to be more fit to be king than the actual king, that person should be king.

Actually, I feel this is justified by the comic. The very fact that you can promote a unit to heir and not just pop an heir. If it you had to just deal with the heir you've got, why would the titan's create an alternative method to have an heir?

[Lamech]

There's no evidence that would suggest a conspiracy of royals and nobles to hide the fact that their better stats are acquirable by anyone. For one part, Stanley is a non-royal and would thus know if it was true, as he'd know if he got better stats from becoming an overlord. And would have mentioned this at some point, so Sizemore would have explained it to Parson. So, no conspiracy. Royals and Nobles are better, statwise, than regular units.

A royal does not have automatically better stats than every non-royal for their level, their is some randomness involved, so I'm assuming that is just an average. If this was not the case Jillian's stats would have been to high for her level, and Ansom would have immediately known she was a royal/noble.

Also since promotions can up unit stats (making a unit a warlord adds leader ship) it is possible making someone a heir gives a stat boost that is equal or bigger than, the royal bonus, and if it doesn't stack the royal bonus can be gained by anyone if the ruler pays excessive amounts of money.

[Arkenputtyknife]

(Hate to derail, but does anyone know if the next update is coming?)

(Yes. When is a different question entirely, which I will not attempt to answer.)

It may be an exploit, but it's really not as ground-breaking as people seem to think, and it does have it's own disadvantages. All it does is allow Vinny's crew to act prior to the GK forces. because of the timing, yes, they get to act twice, but because combat in Erfworld is real-time, that's not a huge advantage.

If it makes the difference between being able to attack and not being able to attack, or if it makes it possible to bring stronger and slower forces to bear, it's a huge advantage.

[Lamech]

If used well this two-turn-in-a-row is pretty broken, and I'll show you how

First, the attacker takes units already in range (preferably faster than the enemy units) moves, attacks, and withdraws to minimize casualties. Then, the attacker, plops right outside the enemy hex and takes the second turn and repeats the hit and run, finally retreating to a safe distance. Of course, to make matters worse the victim doesn't get to heal in between hit and runs, but the attacker does. Its possible the free kills and damage might make it possible to completely wipe out the enemy.

That is a major exploit; if Parson had done that with the dwagons he would have been able to hit team Ansom twice, with ALL the dwagons. Ansom would have lost ALL the siege on turn one (assuming the dwagons are equally strong) then Parson could have taken some free shots on injured units before wandering off. That would have been game over for Ansom.

[Kian]

Except that Stanley wasn't popped as an heir. He was promoted to heir. There is a big difference. After that distinction, the rest of your argument falls apart.

Let's get a few basic premises we can agree on. According to Parson, who got his information from Sizemore, nobles are on average better than commoners, and royals are better than nobles, statwise. We can't argue this, without also placing doubt on EVERYTHING we know about erfworld mechanics because it requires thinking that the characters that provide the information could be wrong.

And if we doubt everything, the argument is reduced to what we want the rules to be like.

So unless you can point to ANY evidence that there is some conspiracy, other than you think it would be convenient, I'm not discussing the possibility.

Stanley was heir designate, yes. Saline had no heir, so under the circumstance a heir would need to be designated. He could have had an heir popped, but he liked Stanley. Apparently Saline wasn't as concerned with nobility and the titanic mandate as Ansom was.

None of this alters the fact that being promoted to heir didn't make Stanley either royal nor noble. He remained a commoner, despite being heir. Your conspiracy theory claimed that anyone promoted to heir becomes a royal. This doesn't happen, clearly.

...and London is the capital of England even if HM the Queen travels abroad. We recognize a capital regardless of whether or not the ruler is currently there or not. Why must Erfworld be different? Erfworld is not just a game. In fact, it may not be a game at all. It may just be a world that resembles a game.

YOU said that a capital is the same as any other city, and only marked where the leader governed from. The leader can govern from where he pleases, which would mean the capital can change. If the capital remains a capital despite the leader moving, then there is a specific quality of the city that sets it appart from the other cities. That it is a CAPITAL. Choose an argument and stick with it.

I actually do draw a distinction. I think that 'King' and 'Queen' are titles reserved for overlords that happen to be royals. Just like I think that royals are nobles that are overlords or heirs. Creates a nice little hierarchy. No proof, but it makes more sense to me than 3 unrelated categories that just happen to overlap slightly in function/role.

There is no overlap. You have three kind of units: commoners, nobles and royals. Unrelated to this, factions have one single leader and succesor each. Being the leader or the heir doesn't give you any bonuses that we've been told about. It applies a set of rules to you, but your base type of unit doesn't change. You can believe otherwise, but there's no evidence and I don't argue belief.

We have observed that the rules that being leader or heir apply to you are different depending on your base type. The most obvious difference is that a royal is a king or prince, while a commoner is an overlord or heir designate instead. There may be more, but we know this distinction at least exists.

Actually, I feel this is justified by the comic. The very fact that you can promote a unit to heir and not just pop an heir. If it you had to just deal with the heir you've got, why would the titan's create an alternative method to have an heir?

As I said before, Saline didn't have an heir. Why he chose not to pop one, we cannot know. Faq only popped Jillian because he feared he'd fall, so it's not strange for leaders to not have a succesor. In any case, lacking a heir, selecting one is a simple choice. Why the titans decided for this to be possible? No idea. Why did they dress as elvises? The motives of the titans are mysterious.