Topics

1

Other Games / Runescape

« on: May 05, 2012, 06:53:50 PM »

If I've recommended Runescape to anyone, please allow me to un-recommend it.

It used to be a good game (boring in places, but good).

Now it's changed ownership and the new owners have thrown away much of the good principles of the old game-makers.  As a result, they have devalued the game through a series of updates to give away free in-game experience very easily, done too little to prevent bot/macro players using illegal software to get ahead and sell in-game benefits for real money, and, by far worst of all this last month, after years of saying that people shouldn't be able to get ahead in the game by being rich in real life, have now offered in-game free stuff in large quantities to anyone who is willing to pay extra.

A once good game has turned into a money-grabbing game where rich players can get ahead, as can those who are willing to illegally buy benefits from third parties.

So if you were considering playing Runescape, I would now suggest you consider other options where once I'd have encouraged you to try it.

2

Helpline / Where does the sun set?

« on: August 18, 2011, 08:28:36 PM »

I'm used to the sun setting in the west and rising in the east.

Is that true in the lands of Battlemaster (Atamara specifically on this occasion)?  Or does the Battlemaster world not mimic Earth in that respect?

3

Helpline / Box / Line / Wedge / Skirmish

« on: August 17, 2011, 08:36:46 PM »

Hello all,

Wondering if someone can help me understand this, since I'm finding the answer I expected is not true.

First off, the wiki says this:

Formation

Formation is the type of line your men deploy into once they are face to face with the enemy.
Line: Deploy in a wide line, usually 2-3 ranks deep depending on their number. This is the default setting.
 Normal melee attack
 Normal ranged attack
 Normal melee defense
 Normal ranged defense

Box: Deploy in a tight, box-shaped formation with more ranks. Box formations suffer fewer casualties and less disorder from a cavalry charge, and will generally withstand more casualties before panic strikes. The tightness of the formation makes them more vulnerable to archer fire. Due to a narrower front, they are less effective in offense.
 Low melee attack
 Normal ranged attack
 High melee defense
 Low ranged defense

Wedge: Deploy in a V formation, with sharp end of the V pointed at the enemy. A wedge formation will allow the unit to break into enemy ranks easier, doing more damage than other formations do. However, the unit is also easier to break up and will likely suffer more casualties itself.
 High melee attack
 Normal ranged attack
 Low melee defense
 Low ranged defense

Skirmish: Deploy widely, in a loose formation with considerable distance between the men. This makes them less prone to casualties from archer fire and other ranged attacks. However, a skirmish formation is not well suited for close combat and a skirmish unit engaged in melee will take horrible casualties.
 Low melee attack
 Normal ranged attack
 Low melee defense
 High ranged defense

So I'm going to assume for the moment that that is correct.

But it doesn't mention cavalry at all here.  And much as I'd love to add that information in, I don't know it, hence me coming to the forum to ask.


The reason I'm completely confused at the moment is because I know only a limited amount about formations in real life, but one thing I am absolutely sure about is that if you have a bunch of infantry, and you get charged by horses, you form into a box.  By getting into a box shape, facing outwards on all four sides, the approaching cavalry meet a wall of swords/spears/etc, and suffer greatly.  Whereas if you are in a line, the cavalry cut through the line, separating you from one another, and then ride around triumphantly hacking you down in pieces.

Yet I've just had a battle.  A relatively simple one:

Attacker:
16 Infantry (CS: 219, box, front)

Defenders
23 Angry Peasants (CS: 75, line, front)
4 Cavalry (CS: 129, wedge, rear)

What I would expect to happen in this battle is that when the infantry meet the peasants, the infantry would do more damage than the peasants because they have three times the CS value, but they'd not do tons more damage, because (a) the infantry are in a box so half of them can't reach the frontlines to attack, and (b) the peasants are in a line so they can all attack at once.  So three times the CS, take away a bit, maybe the infantry might do between 1 and 2 times as much damage.

And then what I would expect is that the cavalry, being in a wedge, would make a strong charge, but the infantry, being in a box, would be well protected from this.  Therefore the infantry, having a higher CS, would win.

But no.

Round One
Angry Peasants make 5 hits.
Infantry make 89 hits.
23 Angry Peasants become 19 Angry Peasants
16 Infantry remain as 16 Infantry
How did the infantry do 17 times as much damage? 

Round Two
Angry Peasants make 6 hits.
Infantry make 80 hits (14 on the Cavalry; 66 on the Peasants)
Cavalry make 299 hits.
19 Angry Peasants become 16 Angry Peasants
4 Cavalry remain as 4 Cavalry
16 Infantry become 5 Infantry
How did the infantry do 13 times as much damage as the peasants?
How did the cavalry do 3 or 4 times as much damage as the infantry?

Round Three
Angry Peasants make 4 hits.
Infantry make 57 hits (10 on the Cavalry; 47 on the Peasants)
Cavalry make 77 hits.
16 Angry Peasants become 14 Angry Peasants
4 Cavalry remain as 4 Cavalry
5 Infantry become 2 Infantry
How did the infantry do 14 times as much damage as the peasants, especially as they now have only a third of the number of troops to attack with?

Round 4
Angry Peasants make 4 hits.
Infantry make 20 hits.
Cavalry make 106 hits.
Infantry are destroyed.
Defender Victory!



So - there are really two questions here.

1) Why do the peasants seem to do so little damage for their CS?  The Infantry had approx 3 times the CS, but were doing between 13 and 30 times as much damage.  And it's not as if they were weak in attack but phenomenal in defence, for they died in similar numbers compared to the amount of damage taken.

Why especially did they do so badly, when the peasants were in the line formation which should allow them to do more damage than the infantry in their box formation.


2) Conversely, why did the cavalry do so much damage for their CS?  The Infantry had 70% more CS than the cavalry, and outnumbered them as well.  Yet the infantry, in the first two rounds, only managed 169 hits in total.  And the cavalry in their first attack managed 299 - nearly double the number.

Why especially did they do so well, when the infantry were in what must surely be the best possible formation for dealing with pure cavalry?


And I suppose almost a third one - given that the CS values were similar, I'd expect the battle to be close, but it wasn't.  My assumption is either that the game is wrong/bugged, or that the infantry picked completely the wrong formation.  So would there have been any formation the infantry could have used that would not have ended in their complete and one-sided destruction?

I'm baffled how the attackers can have had 219 CS in predominantly the right formation, and the defenders can have had 204 CS, in a formation that may or may not be the best one (I find it hard to tell since cavalry just seem to pick Wedge for everything and I have no idea how Wedge really helps them against a box or against infantry) - yet instead of a close battle that I would expect, possibly a slight win for the infantry who had higher CS and were well protected against the main defending force, it is a complete massacre of the attackers and the defenders barely get a scratch.


I can't work out if this is due to:
- cavalry charge being massively overpowerful
- CS ratings being incorrect and/or misleading
- my understanding of how good a box formation is against cavalry being wrong
- some sort of bug

I'd post the battle report for you if I knew of a way to do so.

Anyone able to help me understand that?

4

This Forum / Turning off replies to your posts on specific topics?

« on: August 17, 2011, 04:01:44 AM »

Hi all,

At the top of the forum, there's a link for "Show new replies to your posts".

I quite like that, it's very useful for keeping tabs on the threads in which I've been participating so I can keep track of them when I don't have lots of time.

But... there are one or two threads that I posted on once or twice, but now have no further interest in.  But a couple of them are popular threads so are getting many messages.  Obviously I can't delete my original posts from the thread, but is there any way to get it to stop displaying in the "Show new replies to your posts"?  Otherwise the feature becomes distinctly less useful.

Or am I using it wrong - should I be using some other sort of notification method for keeping track of particular threads of interest?

5

Development / The position of "Disband Unit" option

« on: August 01, 2011, 03:24:40 AM »

I've had reason to click on the "Abandon your unit..." link every turn for the last couple of days, and one thing is bugging me each time:

I don't know if it's just me, but when I click on the "Abandon you unit..." link, it takes me to the next page, and the "Disband the unit." link is in the exact same position on the screen as the "Abandon your unit..." link was.

Because of this, any accidental double-click (or anyone using a touchpad to move the cursor who accidentally prods it and does a click) will click both the "Abandon your unit..." link and then the "Disband the unit." in quick succession and before they know it they've just disbanded a nice unit they actually wanted to place as militia (or, for new players, they've just disbanded their unit, without quite knowing how it happened, and without the gold to buy a new one).

So - a simple request if possible please - please add a couple of blank lines on the Abandon.php page, so that the link to Disband is lower down the screen.  That way the double-click won't happen and I won't have a small panic every time I click on "Abandon your unit..." on a laptop with a slightly iffy touchpad.


For the record, I use Opera browser on a fairly normal-sized laptop screen, and I am a simple Warrior with no special abilities (ie I have the same number of order options as most newbies will have).  I've had the same problem on other computers, so I know it's not unique to my current setup.

6

Helpline / The Old D-List and RP-List

« on: July 31, 2011, 05:56:26 PM »

Do the old D-List and RP-List still exist in some archived form?

I'm pleased to see Tom finally caved in on letting us have a forum - an inferior substitute in many ways, but a much more inclusive one with formatting abilities.  But I find that I can't see the old stuff anywhere - and the links on the wiki to either of these old lists no longer seem to work.

Did they get archived when moving to this new forum?  Or have they been lost to the mists of time?