Forum    Members    Search    FAQ

Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ] 
 
Author Message
 Post Posted: Fri Jan 12, 2018 5:06 am 
This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
Offline
Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
Posts: 266
Hungirly awaits wrote:
Are there any news regarding the project?

It's been seven months. I hate to say it, but it's been a while since last I thought this project might still be alive.

_________________
My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Tue Jan 16, 2018 12:38 am 
    User avatar
    Battle Crest Pins Supporter Print Book 2 & Draw Book 3 Supporter This user is a Tool! Year of the Dwagon Supporter This user was a Tool before it was cool Shiny Red Star Pin-up Calendar and New Art Team Supporter This user posted the comment of the month This user is a part of Erfworld canon! Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit Erfworld Bicycle® Playing Cards supporter Won Mine4erf for the Gobwins Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Tue Aug 02, 2011 9:52 pm
    Posts: 4438
    Location: Morlock Wells
    I have to ask for everyone's forgiveness here. A project of this magnitude requires a lot in the way of logistics, and that is a big ask for any team. We were fortunate enough to have several very generous folks with professional experience volunteer their time; but as the saying goes, "life happens". I've never pretended to be a game design expert, I'm just a guy who loves Erfworld more than might be healthy. So with the loss of some sorely needed professional talent, the idea of sailing a ship alone (rather than just steering it) was more than I bargained for, and I froze up.

    I cannot make any promises for the future, but the effort put into this project by numerous volunteers has yielded some awesome ideas and a lot of groundwork. I have every confidence this work will resume someday, but for now we need to hit the pause button and reassess our resources and strategy. I can only apologize that it has taken me so long to share this message; my silence was motivated by fear and I have no excuse. I realize I have let a lot of people down, but I'm committed to making up for it going forward. This wonderful community deserves better, and I'll make sure you get it.

    Humbly, Zero

    _________________
    "I'm afraid I don't understand. And also afraid that I do."
    GJC wrote:
    Two guys with basically the same name in a discussion about a character getting cloned.
    There's gotta be a good joke in here somewhere.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Fri Jan 19, 2018 4:38 am 
    This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
    Posts: 266
    No worries, mate. Life does indeed happen.

    So, uh, what is your assessment of resources and strategy?

    _________________
    My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
    I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:13 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    This thread seems dead, and it makes me sad. So I sat down for an hour to write this. Sorry for the long post, but I don't know how to edit the wiki, and this is also more visible. So, this is my take on an Erfworld system. This is mostly just the basics plus some of combat, I will try to add more later.

    Overview
    This system is aimed more towards grand strategy games, but most mechanics could be used in a true Tabletop RPG. This system needs fleshing out, and the last section details some of my vaguer ideas. I will hopefully be able to update this system in the future, and maybe even test it.

    Core Mechanics

    All results are determined by rolling one or more d6’s, opposed by either the d6’s of an opposing unit, or a threshold.
    The number of d6’s is determined by the score in the relevant stat, plus or minus any modifiers.

    The basic stats for very unit are:
    Combat
    Defense
    Hits
    Move

    Units may also have one or more Specials, which do various things.
    The most common specials are (For more details see Specials in the Combat section):
    Archery
    Leadership
    Flying
    Terrain Specialisations:
    Forest
    Dessert
    Mountain
    Swamp
    Casting

    A roll of 4 or above is a Success.
    An action is successful if the number of successes exceeds either the threshold, or the number of success rolled by the opposing unit.
    During Combat, actions are taken by spending Action Points.

    Combat

    A combat begins when a unit or units enters a hex occupied by units of an opposing side.
    Combat is divided into rounds.

    During each round, players take turns moving units using a number of action points equal to the combined Leadership scores of all units in the hex.
    Those actions can be any of the following:

    Attack - 1 Action Point - A unit taking the Attack action makes a check using its Combat stat, contested by the Defense stat of the target unit. On a success, subtract from the target unit’s

    Hit stat the number of success more the attacker had. The target unit must be adjacent, unless the attacker has Archery or some other Special.

    Move - 1 Action Point - A unit taking the Move action may move a number of hexes equal to their Move stat.

    Stack/Unstack - 2 Action Points - A unit taking the Stack action may form a stack with up to 7 other units (For additional information, see Stacks).

    Cast - ? Action Points - A unit taking the Cast action must have a Casting Special, and the necessary Juice as described in the spells description. Follow the instructions of the spell to determine effect and Action Point cost.

    Specials:

    Archery - A unit with the Archery Special may attack units up to 10 hexes away, and may target Units with the Flying Special.

    Flying - A unit with the Flying Special can ignore most terrain based movement penalties, and cannot be targeted by units without the Archery Special.

    Terrain Specialisations - A unit with a Terrain Specialisations can ignore penalties conferred by the type of terrain their Specialisation is in.

    Casting - A unit with a Casting Special has Juice, and can use it to cast spells.

    Leadership - A unit with Leadership has a Leadership Score. This score is used to determine Action Points, and confers bonuses on units in the same stack.

    Stacks:
    Units in a stack attack with the average Combat score of the units in the stack, with a bonus equal to the number of units in the stack, and the same goes for Defense. This bonus goes to a maximum of 8.
    A stack without a unit with the Leadership Special moves to the nearest enemies and auto attacks.
    A stack moves at the speed of its slowest unit.
    Units with the Casting Special in a stack can still cast, but other specials can only be used when every unit in a stack has it.
    Stacks with a unit with Leadership get a bonus to Combat and Defense equal to the Leadership score of the unit.

    General Ideas/Incomplete Thoughts

    Juice and Hits refresh at start of turn.
    Juice starts at 100 and spells have an associated Juice cost.
    Stacks could have different formations, and bonuses based on composition. For example, a stack of units carrying shields would get a shield wall bonus, and have more Defense.
    Each unit could have bonuses to their natural stats from equipment.
    Leveling up in the comics seems to be somewhat random, so instead of choosing new attributes, you might role on a table of possible benefits at every level, though that could just be an optional rule.
    Need some way to differentiate classes of units.
    Specific exceptions to these rules could be listed alongside their use cases. For example spells don’t necessarily need very many overarching rules, just descriptions in the spells themselves.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:20 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    More thoughts and questions to consider:

    Shockmancy can be cast by all units with the Casting Special, and would function like archery, and you would spend two juice for each die rolled.

    How to portray stacks on a hex map? Here's don't lend themselves to groups of eight, seven is much easier, but eight is canonical. Perhaps have stacked units bunch together more. Perhaps have two in the middle when in circular formation.

    How many points to change formation, use move or Action Points? Probably action points as the leader needs to command them. Or both?

    How big would a strategic scale hex be inside? They have to be wore partner to hold a city. Assuming 5 foot small hexes, perhaps 1000 hexes to make it nearly a mile? That seems too large, but less is unrealistic. Perhaps an intermediate tier of hexes is required, though it isn't canonical.
    Is a Stabber called that because of their equipment? Should it be possible to change after popping?

    Are units with Leadership automatically warlords? Could a Stabber get Leadership by leveling? Would they still be a Stabber?

    Most importantly, do people want a grand strategy game, or an RPG?

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 08, 2018 10:51 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    I've been keeping at it, and this is what I've concluded:

    After more thought, I think the smallest scale you could feasibly get to work be having players be Warlords in charge of stacks. Any lower and the stack system breaks down. The highest would obviously be Overlord/Ruler.

    The first priority therefore, is get to a point where players could roleplay a barbarian force similar to Jillian's in book one.

    So, players choose the load out of their stack, then battle it out on a hex map.

    I think I should homogenize the abilities of the units of the stack, and not control the units entirely as individuals.

    Need to do:

    Work out how formations would work, based on unit composition.
    Make some units.
    Work out how tile types affect things.
    Ponder: if at the strategic level hexes have a definite type, how much variation should there be inside the hex?

    More thoughts and questions for the future:

    Spot checks are clearly a thing in the comic, how should they work? Another Stat?
    How would linkups work? Talking with your GM? A list of specific spells for every possible combination?
    Should major exploits be left in once discovered in order to let people play like Charlie?

    Also, a first pass at Tile Types:

    Forest:
    Flyers can't be targeted by anything in a forest, except for other flyers.

    Dessert:
    Units suffer a -2 movement penalty while on a dessert hex, and mounted Units suffer -4. Flyers are immune.

    Mountains:
    Units suffer a -2 movement penalty, and mounted Units can't move at all.

    Plains:
    Nothing special.

    Lakes/Rivers:
    Lakes/Rivers are an additional part of other tile types, only flyers can move over them.
    Rivers can be crossed at Bridges and Fords.

    Additional notes:
    New Special: Riding - allows you to ride a mount.
    New Special: Swimming - like a Terrain Specialty in Lakes/Rivers, but calling it Swimming sounds better.
    New Action: Mount/Dismount - 2 Action Points - get on or off of a mount.
    Things to ponder:
    Mounts should confer a movement advantage on plains, combined with a lane, maybe give new Action: Charge, move ten hexes in a straight line and get a +4 to Combat? Or something similar?
    How to level, and what that gives you, also calculating experience points.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:52 am 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    Some Unit Stats, need to be tested for balance:

    Units

    Ground:


    Warlord
    Needs to be customizable at this scale. Character creation?


    Stabber
    Combat - 4
    Defense - 3
    Hits - 3
    Move - 12


    Piker
    Combat - 3/5 against Mounted Units
    Defense - 4
    Hits - 3
    Move - 8


    Scout
    Combat - 4
    Defense - 2
    Hits - 2
    Move - 24
    Special - Scout


    Knight
    Combat - 5
    Defense - 5
    Hits - 4
    Move - 10
    Special - Riding
    Special - Scout


    Archer
    Combat - 2/4 ranged
    Defense - 2
    Hits - 2
    Move - 12
    Special - Archery
    Flying:
    Bat
    Combat - 1
    Defense - 1
    Hits - 1
    Move - 24


    Gwyffon
    Combat - 4
    Defense - 3
    Hits - 3
    Move - 48
    Special - Rideable


    Megalogwyff
    Combat - 6
    Defense - 3
    Hits - 12
    Move - 36
    Special - Rideable

    Additional Thoughts/Things to Ponder:

    New Special - Rideable - Lets a unit function as a Mount.


    New Special - Scout - Lets a unit function as if it had a unit with Leadership in it’s stack, even if it doesn’t. Still cannot lead other units.

    Dwagons are an obvious omission, simply put: Do you need the Arkenhammer to use Dwagons? Also, how should breath weapons work? AOE in general?

    Should armour be seperate from Defense at this stage? Damage Reduction or bonus Defence?

    Would all of this be playable/understandable?

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:52 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    This is a new addition/replacement for the Knight Unit, the old Knight Unit no longer exists.

    New type of modification: Promotions


    Knight - Can be given to any Unit.

    Changes them into a Knight Class Unit:

    Piker → Lancer

    Lancer
    Combat - 5
    Defense - 5
    Hits - 4
    Move - 6
    Special - Riding
    Special - Scout

    Stabber → Knight

    Knight
    Combat - 5
    Defense - 5
    Hits - 4
    Move - 10
    Special - Riding
    Special - Scout

    Archer → Horse Archer

    Horse Archer
    Combat - 3/5 ranged
    Defense - 3
    Hits - 2
    Move - 12
    Special - Riding
    Special - Scout

    Scout → Mounted Picket

    Mounted Picket
    Combat - 4
    Defense - 3
    Hits - 2
    Move - 24
    Special - Riding
    Special - Scout

    Additional Thoughts/Things to Ponder:

    Classes are not extremely important as a distinction at the moment, but besides the Knight Class, all other existing units are either Basic Infantry or Flying.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2018 11:40 am 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    This is a first pass at what Formations might look like. The solid circles are all Units.

    The circles with green Units mean that the Formation can be reoriented by spinning around the red Unit.

    The two circled Formations function the same, but look different enough that I made them both.

    Lower Left and Middle Left are defensive shield/spear wall type formations.

    The circled pair, and Upper Right are omnidirectional defensive rings/blobs.

    Upper Left and Center are arrowhead formations for charging.

    Top Center is sort of a multi purpose Phalanx. It could be a spear/shield wall, or it could be a wider arrowhead.

    Other formations are obviously possible, these are just the most general purpose ones I could think of. I am also beginning to make a sample hex for play testing in.

    Image

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:51 pm 
    This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
    Posts: 266
    @Kaizoy:
    Thank you for this, but we already have several mechanics proposals. The bottlenecks are in the rest of the project; things like coordination and playtesting, I believe.

    _________________
    My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
    I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Mar 11, 2018 11:01 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    Well all right then, I'm gonna keep working on this for a while though. I have a week or two with nothing to do. Right now I'm writing a Java program to keep track of all the numbers for me. The playtesting I've done is promising. I'll share my code as it should be adaptable for other rulesets.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 12:43 pm 
    Offline
    Joined: Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:49 am
    Posts: 11
    One thing I've noticed about several of the other proposed systems is that they require rolling five that don't exist, like d7's. That is all well and good for an online system, but it makes it impossible to play as a table top game.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 1:02 pm 
    User avatar
    This user posted the comment of the month Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit Mined 4 Erf This user got funny with a rodent This user is a Tool! Shiny Red Star Won Mine4erf for the Gobwins For when you need it most Was an active Tool on Free Cards Day
    Offline
    Joined: Thu Dec 05, 2013 9:33 am
    Posts: 1360
    Kaizoy wrote:
    One thing I've noticed about several of the other proposed systems is that they require rolling five that don't exist, like d7's. That is all well and good for an online system, but it makes it impossible to play as a table top game.


    Not entirely correct. For D5 you can roll a D10 and half the result rounded up. For D7 it would be a D8 and re-roll 8s.

    I do agree that sticking to standard dice would be preferable.

    _________________
    Occam's razor for dummies.

    Fear the would-be hero. For against the pangs of conscience, there is no more effective anesthesia than a righteous cause. And no one sees themselves as the villain, especially the villain.

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Thu Mar 15, 2018 8:30 pm 
    This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
    Posts: 266
    We're supposed to keep an open mind and not dismiss anything until we try it, but I have to assume those systems will get knocked out during playtesting. Depending on the stat curve, a WL at about level 8 with normal bonuses can get 21 combat, and I don't fancy emulating that.

    _________________
    My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
    I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 10:56 pm 
    User avatar
    Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner This user has been published! Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:14 pm
    Posts: 453
    I'm feeling a bit interested in doing something again. I've recently realized that I've been completely neglecting the role of upkeep has in unit balance. The basic system I came up with was 1 turn = 1000 smuckers worth of production. Therefore, if you can create one twoll, it costs 1000 smuckers to make. Upkeep would be a percentage of that. Currently I'm thinking 2%.

    Part of my problem with creating heavy and normal units, is trying to balance the two. If a twoll and a knight both take a turn to create, they should be roughly equivalent, but they really are not, I hadn't been able to think of good limits on a heavy unit. Heavy units are TOUGH. Even the best light unit is going to typically lose against them, one on one.

    Then there is the bigger problem of dwagons and megawiffs, that don't seem to take overly much time at all, comparatively, to build. Best guess is dwagons take 4-5 turns, and megas around 5-7. However, these units are just so unbelievably massive, so incredibly strong, and their hit point totals so large, that they are worth far more than 4-7 knights, or even 8-14 of them. I could nerf them, or make the build time really long, but I don't care for those options.

    However, if I just add a rule that takes into account size, then I can say that a twoll costs double upkeep of a knight, and something like a mega might cost 5-10 times, depending on the total hit points. That would be a significant offsetting disadvantage. It also gives me more room to play around with template builds. I can just add a rule that you can have an additional special, for a 50% increase in upkeep, and specials that increase with the level, like leadership, add 25% to base upkeep cost, or something. On the other end, a unit that is so small it only has a single hit point, would have its upkeep halved, making it really useful for a side like TV, that uses so many of them.

    I think there is a lot of potential here.

    Another thing I've been doing is playing around with damage types. Here is a thing; most small units use slash and puncture weapons, while most heavies use impact (at least for infantry). I also noticed that many heavies seem able to do siege attacks, they use impact weapons when doing so, and infantry do the same, using battering rams to break through fortifications.

    So, this gave me a concept. While I do think these three damage types should do the same amount on a hit, I feel like they can be specialized more.

    An advantage of impact weapons ignore the damage reduction of hard, inorganic materials, such as walls, and most golems. Slash and puncture, on the other hand, are better used against flesh.

    One way to reflect this would be the rules on criticals. Since a typical crit is accomplished by doing damage to brains or the heart, the easiest way to do this damage type would be puncture, with slash is somewhat harder, and maybe the rule is you can't even do a crit using impact. This could be why light infantry don't use clubs, while heavies do. They already to a lot of damage that they don't need to crit as badly, and it's extremely useful for them to double as siege units.

    Maybe a system like;
    Puncture gives enemy +1 to dodge, but they have double chance to crit on a hit.
    Slash has normal dodge and normal crit chance.
    Impact cannot crit, but DR is ignored for hard inorganic units/defences.

    I think this could be an interesting thing to work more on. Damage protection that is less effective against certain damage. So a rock golem is strong against slash and impale, while a cloth golem is strong against impact, and impale, as an example.

    Last thought was a thing on animal movement. I know the upper limit of land beasts is around 18, and I think a normal infantry can have around 6 move, and that's a normal infantry. I feel like there wasn't enough difference between their speeds. I finally thought up a battle mechanic. Beasts have the ability to forgo their attack in order to move a second time. This can only be done in hexes without a movement penalty. This gives them the kind of speed advantage I feel they should have in combat, while also following along with what I know from the comic.

    _________________
    The Imperfect Warlord
    Summery: Somehow I ended up being summoned to Erfworld instead of Parson Gotti. See how the events of book 1 change from my actions. Focus on Erf-game mechanics.
    http://www.erfworld.com/blog/view/46631 ... -chapter-1

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Fri Apr 20, 2018 11:25 pm 
    User avatar
    Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner This user has been published! Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:14 pm
    Posts: 453
    Kaizoy wrote:
    This thread seems dead, and it makes me sad. So I sat down for an hour to write this. Sorry for the long post, but I don't know how to edit the wiki, and this is also more visible. So, this is my take on an Erfworld system. This is mostly just the basics plus some of combat, I will try to add more later.


    It's extremely easy to make a new page on the wiki
    Just go up to the bar, and write something like
    https://rpg.erfworld.com/kaizoy's_RPG

    If you click on this link you will get to a new potential page. If that name is fine, all you need to do is hit the create button (find it in the upper right corner), and then start putting in the stuff you already wrote. If you don't like the name just change the bit after "com/", and you get a brand new page.

    The main hub of ideas for what sort of rules this RPG should follow are here
    https://rpg.erfworld.com/Category:Combat_Mechanics

    To link your article with this page, just copy/paste these lines, and add them on to the ending of your post.
    Quote:
    [[Category:Combat Mechanics]]
    [[Category:Proposal]]

    _________________
    The Imperfect Warlord
    Summery: Somehow I ended up being summoned to Erfworld instead of Parson Gotti. See how the events of book 1 change from my actions. Focus on Erf-game mechanics.
    http://www.erfworld.com/blog/view/46631 ... -chapter-1

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 1:41 am 
    This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
    Posts: 266
    My HC is that (non-flying) kts are intended as mounted raiders. Kts are ideal for this because they pack the most power into a saddle slot (and may or may not get a bonus while mounted). It's okay balance-wise if they're weaker than, say, twolls; they're worse as pitched fighters, but better at hit-and-run, which twolls are bad at because they're slow and can't ride. Kts only need to be strong enough to be worth the mounts they displace (viz if 4 kts riding 4 dwagons would beat 5 dwagons). Basically, it's a speed/power tradeoff, where kts count as fast because their mounts are.

    There's also the fact that, this way, one WL gives his bonus to 16 units, 8 mounts + 8 riders, which normally he can't without sacrificing the stack bonus.

    ~~~

    I've played around with the concept of units that are slow to pop but have lower upkeep. Unfortunately, I've never found a way to make it fun. The core problem is that it means you can get good value units, but you only have time to pop them if you're not fighting any (major) wars; so it effectively buffs turtling, which is almost never desirable. Not to say that it's not canonical, though.

    _________________
    My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
    I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 2:55 am 
    User avatar
    Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner This user has been published! Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:14 pm
    Posts: 453
    I have no problems with a twoll being stronger than a knight, and the rider thing is one of the balancing aspects I was looking at, but it just felt odd for it them to take the same amount of time to pop. It's fine on its own, but it didn't work out so good when I was trying to write down a unit creation model to follow. I think it would be neat for a player to create his own custom units, and I'm fiddling around with a creaton system, and, obviously, balance is a key issue for something like that. Else you get broken templates.

    I'm not quite sure if you are saying you disagree with my post or not. I think you are agreeing, because you said 'high value units that take a long time to pop, and also have low upkeep, don't work well'. I agree with this. My suggestion is multiply the upkeep of high value units (heavies), in order to make low value units more attractive, and I think I am keeping even the high value units to a fairly fast production rate? I'm not sure what you think is a fast rate, but I am keeping everything well under ten turns to pop, so I think that is fast enough? Am I understanding correctly?

    Of course, the easiest way to avoid high value units is just to keep the setting low tech. Just have a rule saying that no city can be higher than level 2. That gets rid of any of the really strong stuff.

    _________________
    The Imperfect Warlord
    Summery: Somehow I ended up being summoned to Erfworld instead of Parson Gotti. See how the events of book 1 change from my actions. Focus on Erf-game mechanics.
    http://www.erfworld.com/blog/view/46631 ... -chapter-1

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sat Apr 21, 2018 6:11 am 
    This user has been published! Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner Here for the 10th Anniversary Has collected at least one unit
    Offline
    Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2015 1:59 am
    Posts: 266
    I use role fulfilment rather than a build point model, so you've probably thought it through more than I have. That being said, I guess you want the constraints that a) heavies are stronger than kts; and b) massed infantry is better value than the cheapest heavies, so infantry rushes aren't completely feeble. One way of resolving both at once is to say that stat costs are normally superlinear, but heavy provides a constant-cost bonus that is good value for a sufficiently strong unit. Viz a city has 36 build points, a unit with n combat costs n(n+5), and adding heavy costs 12 and gives +2 combat; so we could have either 6 1-combat stabbers, or a 4-combat kt, or a 5-combat heavy.

    ~~~

    I assert that all poppable units should have a roughly equal upkeep:utility ratio. Otherwise, turtlers can take advantage of the cheapest ones. It looks like you agree with that. I also assert, and I should have said this but didn't, that all poppable units should have a roughly equal pop-time:utility ratio. It looks like you don't agree with that. Let me justify the second assertion:

    Suppose we have twolls and supertwolls, where a supertwoll is worth two twolls in a fight, has twice the upkeep, and takes equal time to pop. They have equal upkeep:utility, so there's no advantage to turtling. However, twolls have twice the pop-time:utility ratio; that is, they're twice as expensive in terms of city production. So why would you ever pop a twoll, when you could instead pop a supertwoll? That seems imba to me.

    In the case of heavies and kts, they have equal pop-time, so they should have equal utility, and should have equal upkeep. Much of a kt's utility is its ability to be in the right place at the right time; so if you compare them in a fight, you're tacitly positing a heavy that is also in the right place without needing to spend the build points, and it's an unfair contest. The kt absolutely should lose. To balance them, you actually need to balance a raiding strategy against a heavy push strategy.

    _________________
    My flagship fanfic is Ethereum.
    I'm writing a web original with a Patreon! Hype!

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
     Post Posted: Sun Apr 22, 2018 12:05 am 
    User avatar
    Armored Dwagon Monthly Winner This user has been published! Year of the Dwagon Supporter
    Offline
    Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2014 11:14 pm
    Posts: 453
    Twofer wrote:
    I use role fulfilment rather than a build point model, so you've probably thought it through more than I have. That being said, I guess you want the constraints that a) heavies are stronger than kts; and b) massed infantry is better value than the cheapest heavies, so infantry rushes aren't completely feeble. One way of resolving both at once is to say that stat costs are normally superlinear, but heavy provides a constant-cost bonus that is good value for a sufficiently strong unit. Viz a city has 36 build points, a unit with n combat costs n(n+5), and adding heavy costs 12 and gives +2 combat; so we could have either 6 1-combat stabbers, or a 4-combat kt, or a 5-combat heavy.


    I feel the build point model is important. I want it to stay relatively simplistic, but still complex enough to give players some control over designing their side. Otherwise, I think you would be just picking from a list of options, and it would damage replayability.

    Matchups are a bit complicated. You can pop 8 pikers in the time it takes to make one twoll. If you keep all pikers in a stack, they could put up a fight, maybe win. Unstacked, and with no additional bonuses though, they lose hard. In fact, a group of 20 pikers, which is too big to get a stack bonus, would die MUCH easier than a stack of 8.

    Likewise, knights are more able to handle heavy units, they are specifically designed to kill heavies, and about as likely as any unit to be able to do so, without magic, but they still lose one on one. In my current system, you'd probably need 3 knights to reliably kill a twoll, and you'd probably still lose one. However, a knight on a mount would crush the twoll. Knights are also smarter units, so you have additional options with them that you don't with twolls.

    So, I think the simple way of saying it is that I want heavies to be much stronger than normal units, but to give them offsetting disadvantages, so that they are not considered to be completely better. I've been considering ideas on that, and I feel that a sharp increase in upkeep would be one good method. It may seem obvious, but I just hadn't thought about it in those terms before.

    Quote:
    I assert that all poppable units should have a roughly equal upkeep:utility ratio. Otherwise, turtlers can take advantage of the cheapest ones. It looks like you agree with that. I also assert, and I should have said this but didn't, that all poppable units should have a roughly equal pop-time:utility ratio. It looks like you don't agree with that. Let me justify the second assertion:


    Sounds approximately right. Technically, it's that I want all poppable units that take the same amount of time to pop to be roughly equivalent. Which was the issue I was pondering. If I can make a heavy in one turn, then it should have equal utility with a knight. Twolls have much higher base stats than knights though, and strong combat abilities. I feel they seem a bit overpowered, so I've been thinking of other ways to go about it.

    My main method is through the use of specials. A light unit is allowed more special abilities, than a heavy one. Even if the light one is weaker, his specials can make up some of the gap, but then there is the question of how much is fine, and whatnot, and I'm not sure that it is still balanced, but then I realized I can just increase the upkeep as an additional measure, and having upkeep for just 1 twoll, as compared to 2 knights, makes both options more attractive. Although, the best combination is clearly knight plus mount, which I think is fair.

    Quote:
    Suppose we have twolls and supertwolls, where a supertwoll is worth two twolls in a fight, has twice the upkeep, and takes equal time to pop. They have equal upkeep:utility, so there's no advantage to turtling. However, twolls have twice the pop-time:utility ratio; that is, they're twice as expensive in terms of city production. So why would you ever pop a twoll, when you could instead pop a supertwoll? That seems imba to me.


    Well, my unit creation doesn't allow that specific scenario. If I made a 2-turn twoll, his base stats are the same as a 1-turn twoll. What the two turn twoll gets is additional specials. Therefore, you could make a knight class twoll in two turns, or a fire breathing twoll. That sort of thing

    My base concept is that time-to-pop doesn't determine base stats. Base stats are determined by the size modifiers. A light unit, for instance, maxes out at around 6 hp. Doesn't matter if he is a one turn unit or takes 5 turns to pop. For heavy units, there are three basic sizes. Twoll sized, dwagon sized, and megawiff sized. Each size has a maximum stat range. Let's say that each size increase triples the base combat stats.

    For the specific concept of making a super twoll, the only way to do it would be to increase the size modifier from from twoll sized, to dwagon sized. Currently, my main limiter for dwagon sized units is to limit them to level 3 cities, or higher (megawiffs are limited to level 4+ cities). There are some clear advantages to having a unit that can be built in any level 1 city, as opposed to ones that can only be built in a level 3. It also would probably take at least 3 turns to pop, so you could pop 3 twolls for one super twoll.

    Still, the larger point you are making is understood, and we have an actual cannon example of the super twoll, with gwiffens and megawiffs. Mega's are basically super gwiffens, As best I can tell, they are probably stronger than 10 gwiffens put together, but they seem to take only around 5-7 turns to make. Normally, only the level 4 capital can make megas, but I think the turnamancer allowed all cities to make them. Now you have a unit, that is stronger than 10 mega's being made in the time it takes to make 5 or so. Why make a normal gwiffen?

    It's certainly a good question, and I currently don't have an answer. I don't know how to properly balance such a thing at this time. Maybe it should be allowed, due to it normally being difficult to get level 4 cities, and it shows off the utility of the turnmancer class. I would rather focus on getting a good build on the level 1 units instead for now. If I can nail that, I might work out a good system moving onward.

    Quote:
    In the case of heavies and kts, they have equal pop-time, so they should have equal utility, and should have equal upkeep. Much of a kt's utility is its ability to be in the right place at the right time; so if you compare them in a fight, you're tacitly positing a heavy that is also in the right place without needing to spend the build points, and it's an unfair contest. The kt absolutely should lose. To balance them, you actually need to balance a raiding strategy against a heavy push strategy.


    I guess I don't necessarily want them to have equal utility. Knights are just a short hand for me to say I'm comparing a one-turn heavy unit against a one-turn light unit. I want heavies to be strong in physical terms. I agree that a knight vs a heavy should have the heavy win. Even if a normal unit takes numerous turns to make, I don't think that increases their physical strength. An archon can still die from a single arrow, just like any infantry, but she has all these special abilities, that allows her to avoid that sort of thing.

    I'm basically trying to define what a light unit is versus a heavy. I basically think of heavy as a unit upgrade, and any unit can become one. You want a heavy orly? Bam, just apply the special. I consider "heavy" as a template. Doing that means the following changes.

    HEAVY- Unit size grows to the large classification and is now 3 hexes; max damage is uncapped; Range increased by 1. +1 to attack and defense, +6 to hp, +2 to move.

    damage reduction: -2 to all injuries taken.
    damage: Increase damage to same as attack. Damage is one half attack if unarmed.
    cleave: if attack kills target, can attack again.

    It's a massive upgrade over being a light unit, and I have witnessed this stuff in canon, so I'm compelled to include it. I use bogroll as the example of a typical heavy unit. His attack is 5 and defense is 4, but he doesn't wear armour, so I rule that if you do wear armour, def is 5. I also added a slight increase in move, which is based on Jack's move, and the mention that high speed units max out at 18 move, and... I just think it's a reasonable increase. <shrugs>

    In terms of the specials listed. We see heavies taking unreal amounts of damage when hit by weak infantry, they frequently kill infantry in a single attack, and frequently can kill two of them while doing so. I want to be clear on this, this game is my attempt to quantify the comic. I want to make a decent game as well, but my primary interest is trying to look at what I have read, and try to have it make sense in terms of game mechanics, as much as I can, so the heavy upgrades are not really negotiable. I have no issues with you doing your own ground up system that isn't reliant on canon, but that's not my interest. Still, even though this is canon, as near as I can tell, it's unbalanced, and I want a balanced game. Therefore, I have to add in the weaknesses, that don't go against what I have seen in the comic.

    My current system is a 1-turn unit gets 3 specials. I base this on what I perceive to be the knight's power set. I believe a knight that has ride (stacks with mounts for free), scout (can withdraw), and armour ignore (ignores all damage reduction, which is why they are more effective against heavies than other units).

    A twoll, on the other hand, has a single special. Fabrication. The western giants also seem to have a single special, which is their ability to bat at balls (basically a throw special variation). From this, I determine that upgrading to heavy uses up two possible specials to do that. That's not really enough to justify the power increase though. That could possibly take care of the damage reduction, and damage increase, but there is still the rest. So, now I'm coming up with thoughts. Known issues are being unable to ride mounts or go underground, but that is minor.

    One concept is giving them a penalty to dodge when a small unit attacks, or to hit them. I also thought about giving them a damage type vulnerability, but it didn't seem enough, but if I double the upkeep, that makes things more balanced. Balanced enough? Not sure yet, but I feel that this is the first meaningful idea I've figured out in a good long while.

    -----------------------------------------

    I'm also working on how to increase production time by spending points. A max light infantry (knight) would have these stats.

    4 attack/ 4 defence/ 6 hit points/ 8 movement. I also add in a damage cap, currently set at 8.
    Players also get 3 specials to apply as they choose.

    My goal is to get from that to what pikers are, which is 8 per turn. Like with heavies, there is an initial cost of 2 specials to get more than one unit a turn. Additional units can be aquired by lowering stat values by half. That said, I also don't want the infantry to fall under a minimum value, so I just cut it off where I want. Looks like this.

    -2 specials = 2 per turn
    halve move (min 6) = 3
    halve hp (min 4) = 4
    halve att (2) =5
    halve def (2)= 6
    min att/def (1/1)= 7
    halve max dmg (4)= 8
    Piker/Archer= 1att/1def/ 4hp/ 6mv/ max dmg 4; 1 special

    -2 specials = 2 per turn
    halve move (min 6) = 3
    halve hp (min 4) = 4
    halve att (2) =5
    halve def (2)= 6
    stabber 2att/2def/ 4hp/ 6mv/ max dmg 8; +1 special

    I've changed this concept a few times. Not sure what the best way to decide what is worth an extra unit per turn. Originally didn't want them to have specials at all, but pikers seemed to have an extra ability, so I finally thought up ones for stabbers and archers.

    Archer: aim for 1 turn halves range penalties.
    Piker: +4 to attack when performing a readied action.
    Stabber: automatic initiative against unled units of the same move.

    Piker and archer specials can't be used without being ordered by a commander. Stabber special gives them extra power when going into a fight, making them a very good cheap unit. I'm pretty proud of that one. Just came up with it. I had to give it a lot of thought.

    _________________
    The Imperfect Warlord
    Summery: Somehow I ended up being summoned to Erfworld instead of Parson Gotti. See how the events of book 1 change from my actions. Focus on Erf-game mechanics.
    http://www.erfworld.com/blog/view/46631 ... -chapter-1

  • Tip this post

    Make Anonymous
  • Top 
       
    Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
     
    Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ] 

    Board index » Erfworld Things » Everything Else Erfworld


    Who is online

    Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

     
     

     
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot post attachments in this forum

    Search for:
    Jump to: