BattleMaster Community
BattleMaster => Locals => Dwilight => Topic started by: ^ban^ on October 23, 2012, 05:26:54 PM
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H91rPIq2mN4
-
This seems fun.
-
At least they have Balance retreat.. Right?
-
How.... curious.
-
Apparently Solaria are poor alchemists...
-
At least they have Balance retreat.. Right?
They do, yes. I have the other 12 regions.
-
They do, yes. I have the other 12 regions.
Not quite. I still have Tranquil.
-
Not quite. I still have Tranquil.
You're in the wrong realm!
-
Most unexpected war results ever.
-
So why the hell did that happen?
-
So why the hell did that happen?
That's the million dollar question.
-
So why the hell did that happen?
Several reasons, all of which will remain IC and may be freely discovered by any and all who ask, IC. It's this new thing I'm trying, because this act is setting off a few people, OOC. Some of it involves people from SA, some of it involves people in Aurvandil, some of it involves people in LN, and some of it people in Solaria.
-
Several reasons, all of which will remain IC and may be freely discovered by any and all who ask, IC. It's this new thing I'm trying, because this act is setting off a few people, OOC. Some of it involves people from SA, some of it involves people in Aurvandil, some of it involves people in LN, and some of it people in Solaria.
Out-of-Character from [person in D'Hara]
Message sent to everyone in your realm (27 recipients)
I thought friendly realm-mergers are a no-no?
Do we have any Devs or Magistrates here who can clarify?
Would you care to provide a response to the question of rule-breaking at least?
-
The original realm is still standing, it was only a duchy that switched. Therefore, it is not a realm-merger.
-
It was a capital duchy that switched. I was under the impression that was impossible.
Regardless, the allegations that have been brought forward are retarded. (seriously, sevastian working with aurvandil? Thats f***in laughable) There is no other term for it.
I must give credit where credit is due, the people fabricating the reasons for this situation are damned talented.
-
I have no real IC reason to go poking around Lurian affairs, but I wanna know what's going on in that party D:
-
I have no real IC reason to go poking around Lurian affairs, but I wanna know what's going on in that party D:
Hell, I'm directly involved with it, but the only thing I've heard is allegations from Fulco that Sevastian is working with Aurvandil.
You figure it out, let me know.
-
Would you care to provide a response to the question of rule-breaking at least?
In any realm where two duchies and the potential for a new capital exist, it isn't breaking the rules to realign one of the duchies. If it *is*, then it's a bug, and that needs to be clearly communicated. If we learn that it's a bug, I'll move the duchy back, pronto.
-
In any realm where two duchies and the potential for a new capital exist, it isn't breaking the rules to realign one of the duchies. If it *is*, then it's a bug, and that needs to be clearly communicated. If we learn that it's a bug, I'll move the duchy back, pronto.
I still don't understand how the duchy holding the capital could be transferred. I was under the impression that capitals cannot change their allegiance. Now, had the capital been transferred to BR prior to the switch, I could see it being completely legal.
/me has confusion.
-
Dukes of the capital region cannot secede to form a new realm but they can pledge allegiance to another realm. He exception being if it is the only city in the realm.
-
The original realm is still standing, it was only a duchy that switched. Therefore, it is not a realm-merger.
If I put all of my realm into the same duchy, and then create a second one-region duchy out of a dinky townsland, and organize myself for a badland to join the dinky duchy and for the townsland to then join the main one, and then switch that duchy to another realm, effectively moving all regions except for the badland. Would this not be a realm merger?
-
If I put all of my realm into the same duchy, and then create a second one-region duchy out of a dinky townsland, and organize myself for a badland to join the dinky duchy and for the townsland to then join the main one, and then switch that duchy to another realm, effectively moving all regions except for the badland. Would this not be a realm merger?
a) You can't do that, because the game requires at least one city or stronghold to remain with the realm.
b) Do you not get the difference between stealing the main duchy out from underneath its outraged ruler and deliberately planning the total merger of two realms?
-
a) You can't do that, because the game requires at least one city or stronghold to remain with the realm.
b) Do you not get the difference between stealing the main duchy out from underneath its outraged ruler and deliberately planning the total merger of two realms?
a) good to know
b) if such was indeed the case. I can't say one way or another, I wasn't there. In any case, I'm happy for reduced tax efficiency and a new capital farther from the front lines. I'm sure that'll make the Lurias so much better against us.
-
a) good to know
b) if such was indeed the case. I can't say one way or another, I wasn't there. In any case, I'm happy for reduced tax efficiency and a new capital farther from the front lines. I'm sure that'll make the Lurias so much better against us.
Indeed it was the case Chénier. Sevastian knew nothing about it until after it was done.
For the first time, you and I are both happy about the inefficiency that will be plaguing Luria.
-
Indeed it was the case Chénier. Sevastian knew nothing about it until after it was done.
For the first time, you and I are both happy about the inefficiency that will be plaguing Luria.
You'd think the people with that power would be more than able to, you know, rebel and take power instead of switching allegiance...
-
You'd think the people with that power would be more than able to, you know, rebel and take power instead of switching allegiance...
How is that fun?
Also, he's a priest. He can't be ruler.
-
How is that fun?
Also, he's a priest. He can't be ruler.
He sure as hell can be ruler.
I've been ruler many times as priest. Machiavel was the longest-reigning Prime Minister, and he has been a priest since long before the reforms.
-
He sure as hell can be ruler.
I've been ruler many times as priest. Machiavel was the longest-reigning Prime Minister, and he has been a priest since long before the reforms.
Oh, I thought for sure that was a prohibition somehow. Maybe it changed, although I guess it wouldn't have. I guess only infils are still prevented from being ruler or is that also not true?
-
Malus was ruler before, while still a priest. I don't know where the idea that priests can't be rulers came from, but that is rather silly.
Theocracies ring a bell?
-
You'd think the people with that power would be more than able to, you know, rebel and take power instead of switching allegiance...
Apparently having Fulco as ruler is a more attractive idea than ruling yourself :P
-
Malus was ruler before, while still a priest. I don't know where the idea that priests can't be rulers came from, but that is rather silly.
Theocracies ring a bell?
Years ago, before the elections by the referendum mechanics, priests couldn't be elected in government positions. A restriction that always outraged me.
-
Must have been some time ago. I can't recall a time in my tenure where priests have been unable to rule. Then again, I'm not fond of the priest game, so I don't pay very close attention to it.
-
Must have been some time ago. I can't recall a time in my tenure where priests have been unable to rule. Then again, I'm not fond of the priest game, so I don't pay very close attention to it.
Less than four years ago, more than two years ago would be the vague timeframe I'd set, for I'm pretty sure the new election mechanics came after the creation of Dwilight.
-
Less than four years ago, more than two years ago would be the vague timeframe I'd set, for I'm pretty sure the new election mechanics came after the creation of Dwilight.
Nope. It was actually about a year before Dwilight opened that referenda were first implemented.
-
Nope. It was actually about a year before Dwilight opened that referenda were first implemented.
Really?
How long did Dwilight take to be published, after being announced? Because I specifically remember making plans for Dwilight with this restriction in mind.
Oh wait a moment... Dwilight had this special election mechanic way before everyone else did, didn't it?
-
Really?
How long did Dwilight take to be published, after being announced? Because I specifically remember making plans for Dwilight with this restriction in mind.
Not sure. I'd have to dig through my D-list archive, which I'm far too tired to do right now ;)
It opened in early 2008, though, if you have a D-list archive to look through for comparison.
Oh wait a moment... Dwilight had this special election mechanic way before everyone else did, didn't it?
I don't think so (I think all of testing got it at the same time) but I wouldn't swear to it.
-
Well, Solaria is dead.
Sevastian is done with Dwilight.
Time to listen to the voice of reason (Bedwyr).
-
How does that happen? I didnt think last duchies could secede.
-
Bug exploit?
Delete Luria!
-
How does that happen? I didnt think last duchies could secede.
Secession and changing allegiances are two different things, but it's already being discussed in the case topic about the same thing.
-
We really should move this discussion over to the Lurias thread.
-
You can secede now! Free capital!
-
You can secede now! Free capital!
Would actually be cool to have a realm based in balance retreat, its a nice central location yet its lands unwanted by all neighbours as they can't hold it.
-
Would actually be cool to have a realm based in balance retreat, its a nice central location yet its lands unwanted by all neighbours as they can't hold it.
A lot of people have had this idea, and I just have to say that purely by the numbers it's a terrible idea. Travel times, no gold, no food. I applaud people for trying. The RP value is certainly there, but RP won't usually protect you from starvation, invasion, or monster outbreaks.
-
A lot of people have had this idea, and I just have to say that purely by the numbers it's a terrible idea. Travel times, no gold, no food. I applaud people for trying. The RP value is certainly there, but RP won't usually protect you from starvation, invasion, or monster outbreaks.
D'hara is still there.
It is possible, perhaps most players feel unactracted by the idea of having to import food all the time.
I don't think it will be any hjarder then running D'hara.
PS, how much is alley of swords producing in food?
Tranquil produces almost 500 and flying hngrs(or something) about the same.
-
D'hara is still there.
It is possible, perhaps most players feel unactracted by the idea of having to import food all the time.
I don't think it will be any hjarder then running D'hara.
PS, how much is alley of swords producing in food?
Tranquil produces almost 500 and flying hngrs(or something) about the same.
Dhara is in the desert. You're suggesting a realm made up, potentially, of BR, the Divides, AoS, Tranquil, and maybe a couple other regions. It's something like 80 hours to cross the divides under the best of circumstances. AoS produces around 200 bushels, IIRC. BR and the divides produce a combined total of maybe 40 food and maybe 400 gold. You'd need a city to support the mountains, and you'd need plenty of rurals to feed the city or a willing trade partner.
-
D'hara is still there.
It is possible, perhaps most players feel unactracted by the idea of having to import food all the time.
I don't think it will be any hjarder then running D'hara.
PS, how much is alley of swords producing in food?
Tranquil produces almost 500 and flying hngrs(or something) about the same.
D'Hara may not have lots of food... but it has GOLD. And a crapload of fortifications. And until recently, few entry points. With the new system, it makes things different, but still hella hard to invade, and nowhere for monsters to come from.
BR doesn't run a food deficit, but it also doesn't produce a great surplus to sell, nor does it make any nice amounts of gold. Only the central region can be fortified, and leaving it to defend any other region takes forever (at least rogues don't instant-travel anymore, though).
Not the same thing at all. Sure, D'Hara needs to pay a heck of a lot of attention to food. But it's rewarding. There's nothing rewarding in BR...
-
You are mistaken about the fortifications. The mountain regions surrounding BR can have palisades.
But for the most part, yeah, nothing rewarding in BR.
-
You are mistaken about the fortifications. The mountain regions surrounding BR can have palisades.
But for the most part, yeah, nothing rewarding in BR.
Can they really?
This is something I never remember properly. Can they still build those or are mountain palisades remnants of when one could build palisades in any region?
-
Nope it goes like this:
Stronghold: infinite (or level 10? Pretty much the same but I heard that somewhere recently)
Cities: level 5
Townslands: level 2
Mountains: level 1
Rest: nothing or really old remnants. :)
-
Nope it goes like this:
Stronghold: infinite (or level 10? Pretty much the same but I heard that somewhere recently)
Cities: level 5
Townslands: level 2
Mountains: level 1
Rest: nothing or really old remnants. :)
I think we were told, for strongholds, that we could build as much as we wanted, to then be precised that 10 was the (very hard to reach) limit.
-
I think the highest anyone has ever gotten is lvl 9.
-
Is level 9 noticeably more difficult to breach than level 5, out of curiosity?
-
Is level 9 noticeably more difficult to breach than level 5, out of curiosity?
I would hope so, but I'd like to know by how much as well.
-
Well, I know that lvl 7 is a bitch. I can only imagine how bad 9 would be.
-
Is level 9 noticeably more difficult to breach than level 5, out of curiosity?
Dear gods, yes, yes it is.
I can't imagine anyone fielding the force you'd need to break level 9 walls anymore.
-
So the question becomes, how many blocks for level 9 fortifications?
-
So the question becomes, how many blocks for level 9 fortifications?
I seem to recall needing 40 to get to level 7?
-
I seem to recall needing 40 to get to level 7?
and at that point do you remember how much a single block costs? Or a rough estimate ?
-
Is level 9 noticeably more difficult to breach than level 5, out of curiosity?
According, once again, to The1exile's numbers, you (very roughly) need a twenty percent CS advantage per level of walls. And that's assuming your CS is, as it should be for a fortification assault, in heavy infantry. Archers get discounted, and cavalry is almost completely useless. Light infantry is also less useful. This was without SE's, but with lots of banners.
Based on that math (which only went up to level 5, and I'm wary about extrapolation given Tom's fondness for non-linear progressions), you would need nearly three times the CS with proper heavy infantry.
-
According, once again, to The1exile's numbers, you (very roughly) need a twenty percent CS advantage per level of walls. And that's assuming your CS is, as it should be for a fortification assault, in heavy infantry. Archers get discounted, and cavalry is almost completely useless. Light infantry is also less useful. This was without SE's, but with lots of banners.
Assaulting high walls without SEs is folly. Especially when you start getting up into the higher numbers. Attacking heavily defended Lvl 5 walls without SEs? Better bring more than a 3:1 advantage.
Also, if you have enough SEs, you could potentially breach the walls in a single round. That will let your cavalry join the battle quickly, albeit without the charge bonus. Which makes it pretty much equivalent to infantry.
-
Also, if you have enough SEs, you could potentially breach the walls in a single round. That will let your cavalry join the battle quickly, albeit without the charge bonus. Which makes it pretty much equivalent to infantry.
Fancy a 400 hour pleasure cruise through the mountains? Come see the scenic Divides!
-
Assaulting high walls without SEs is folly. Especially when you start getting up into the higher numbers. Attacking heavily defended Lvl 5 walls without SEs? Better bring more than a 3:1 advantage.
That is just not true. I've had crushing victories with sufficiently heavy infantry at a 2:1 ratio and effectively nonexistent SE's (we had five between all the armies for over a thousand troops). It depends a lot on what troops you have attacking vs what they have defending. If you have 90% of your CS in elite heavy infantry, and most of their CS is in crappy archers, I'll bet you could have a lot lower ratios.
SE's do make it much easier, though. Arcaea sacked Niel once with, what was it, 8K to 6K with sufficient SE's for all the troops, and they had high walls, and we still butchered the defenders.
-
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Siege_of_Valkyrja (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Siege_of_Valkyrja)
72 SEs against level 7 fortification 8)
-
http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Siege_of_Valkyrja (http://wiki.battlemaster.org/wiki/Siege_of_Valkyrja)
72 SEs against level 7 fortification 8)
That is a great thing to have on the wiki. Dear lord, I enjoyed that. Thanks Zaki.
-
That is just not true. I've had crushing victories with sufficiently heavy infantry at a 2:1 ratio and effectively nonexistent SE's (we had five between all the armies for over a thousand troops). It depends a lot on what troops you have attacking vs what they have defending. If you have 90% of your CS in elite heavy infantry, and most of their CS is in crappy archers, I'll bet you could have a lot lower ratios.
When I'm talking ratios of attackers to defenders, I'm only counting infantry. Theoretically you could win with a lower CS forces if the attacker is pure infantry and the defender is pure archer. Something like that happened the last time the NA sacked Barad Gardor. The duke had packed his militia with almost all archers behind his level 5 walls. We marched in with a force that was barely bigger than the defender, had less than 10 SEs, and racked up a crushing victory.
Also, with low CS forces (<10K or so on both sides) each individual unit counts a lot more. A large infantry unit with low cohesion that retreats early can make a huge difference, and throws off any predictions.
-
When I'm talking ratios of attackers to defenders, I'm only counting infantry. Theoretically you could win with a lower CS forces if the attacker is pure infantry and the defender is pure archer. Something like that happened the last time the NA sacked Barad Gardor. The duke had packed his militia with almost all archers behind his level 5 walls. We marched in with a force that was barely bigger than the defender, had less than 10 SEs, and racked up a crushing victory.
Also, with low CS forces (<10K or so on both sides) each individual unit counts a lot more. A large infantry unit with low cohesion that retreats early can make a huge difference, and throws off any predictions.
Not sure which battle you're talking about, but it certainly wasn't the last attack on Barad Gardor. I had just been made Margrave of the city and used every gold piece I had to recruit infantry. I just didn't have enough gold and the attackers hugely outnumbered what militia I could recruit.
-
I don't remember who was lord at the time. We were just walking by, not intending to sack it, when we noticed that the militia was almost all archers, and the Corian army was nowhere near. *sack* Bye bye walls, too.
-
It was a great hit.
-
Still, the 20% advantage rule is good to know. But as said, it does depend on troops and morale heavily.
Militia doesn't get the leadership or captain's bonuses that a noble's unit does, but they may get some from a marshal's/lord's leadership (I'm fairly unsure of this though). The archer disparity is pretty much normal, they tend to either win through firepower (which seems to be about 1/4 of an infantry unit's hitting power per turn, depending on wind), or lose a lot when in melee.
It would be interesting to know just how well an archer unit does in melee if it still has high stats and banners. Is a 75/85 archer unit with banners, high morale/cohesion/training just always bad at close combat, because they're archers? Or are they an average infantry unit with a bit of ranged punch as well?
Possibly the wrong thread for the question, but it does link into the above posts.
There's an strange situation of semi-stalemate right now in Dwilight, where neither side really wants to attack due to superior fortifications on both sides, compared to mobile CS available. Which is good in a way, it forces diplomacy and strategic rather than tactical warfare.
-
Captain's bonus... was it ever actually implemented?
-
Captain's bonus... was it ever actually implemented?
Yes. Years ago.
-
Yes. Years ago.
What does it do?
-
What does it do?
I think it aids battle performance in some manner.
Not sure, but I've had my +15 captain leading 800 cs of cavalry beat 1500 cs of monsters in one cavalry charge. (with a lot of casualties to my cavalry though)
-
I think it aids battle performance in some manner.
Not sure, but I've had my +15 captain leading 800 cs of cavalry beat 1500 cs of monsters in one cavalry charge. (with a lot of casualties to my cavalry though)
Cavalry deal a lot in the first strike, monsters retreat easy. 800 cs of cavalry beating 1500 cs of monsters is impressive, but not surprising.
What stat does the captain influence? Leadership score? Cohesion?
-
Cavalry deal a lot in the first strike, monsters retreat easy. 800 cs of cavalry beating 1500 cs of monsters is impressive, but not surprising.
What stat does the captain influence? Leadership score? Cohesion?
I believe it increases a character's leadership score, by the amount shown. Leadership, in turn, influences a number of things, many of which I'm unsure of, but I believe that it does have a small effect on cohesion. I have also heard that leadership increases a unit's general fighting ability, which I would like to have confirmed or denied, if anyone is willing to share that with me.
-
Cavalry deal a lot in the first strike, monsters retreat easy. 800 cs of cavalry beating 1500 cs of monsters is impressive, but not surprising.
What stat does the captain influence? Leadership score? Cohesion?
I believe leadership though I would not be surprised if it provided a bonus to cohesion too.
-
Cavalry deal a lot in the first strike, monsters retreat easy. 800 cs of cavalry beating 1500 cs of monsters is impressive, but not surprising.
The monsters didn't retreat. They were killed.
I would love confirmation about what leadership helps though.
-
I believe leadership though I would not be surprised if it provided a bonus to cohesion too.
I've seen it explicitly said that captains only directly influence leadership.
-
I've seen it explicitly said that captains only directly influence leadership.
though it has also been said leadership may provide a bonus to cohesion.