|
Post by X-Nemeth on Jun 2, 2016 18:38:11 GMT
Beyond Blessings (fairly standard for birthright), GLFs summons, ToBs undead, and a missing relic, what realm magic have we actually seen? The most notable powerful example I can think of is the Pirate King's max-prosperity & loyalty magic, but he is secondary to the story at any rate. As far as the summons go, I was lead to believe they were very expensive and had little effect beyond decimating HTOGs knights. So cost-wise, it evened out, albeit in GLFs favour. It seems to me that the primary over-use of magic, if any, has been the constant reliance on spells in adventures and role-play, even though they're not strictly speaking necessary from a practical point of view (skill + attribute bonus is ultimately what determines success, not spells). Well as far as I know, totally out of character, Nemeth has been targeted with no less than 4 non blessing realm spells turn 4+5 so far. That is on top of the mind control incident and the TPK attack. So yes, there are plenty of realm spells flying around, that you might not know about. As for research, you are guaranteed 1 success towards the spell per research action. If you succeed then you get two.
|
|
|
Post by Aethor of Helna (ST) on Jun 2, 2016 18:48:04 GMT
Yes, but none of them have been decisive in any manner. They haven't done anything that couldn't have equally (or was equally) accomplished by regular non-magical actions (or attempted/considered actions). In fact, they've likely been more expensive than non-magic actions in terms of both actions spent and GB/RP expended. (and as a Guild, it's generally reasonable to assume I know a lot about what's going on). The most decisive use of magic thus far has been GLFs summons (but GLF can't levy or muster) and ToBs undead. Plus, an event causing a pirate attack is not exactly magical in nature, so TPK remains irrelevant
|
|
|
Post by X-Nemeth on Jun 2, 2016 21:14:52 GMT
Yes, but none of them have been decisive in any manner. They haven't done anything that couldn't have equally (or was equally) accomplished by regular non-magical actions (or attempted/considered actions). In fact, they've likely been more expensive than non-magic actions in terms of both actions spent and GB/RP expended. (and as a Guild, it's generally reasonable to assume I know a lot about what's going on). The most decisive use of magic thus far has been GLFs summons (but GLF can't levy or muster) and ToBs undead. Plus, an event causing a pirate attack is not exactly magical in nature, so TPK remains irrelevant Again, I must inform you that they have been quite decisive, and they have all accomplished something that would have been far more expensive to do without magic. Some of which is not even possible without magic. I will continue to give you the benefit of doubt and continue to assume you know nothing of what is going on.
|
|
|
Post by Aethor of Helna (ST) on Jun 2, 2016 21:36:53 GMT
I admit I'd be curious to know what, if anything, would appear to be so decisive. I'll wait patiently to figure out later if I missed anything.
With the exception of HTOGs loss in Elmet due to GLF summons, and the inconclusive war vs Lothia due to the undead hordes, it appears that everything either has occurred or would have occurred without magic, based on everything I know both in-game and out-of-game. Maybe magic has been used as the reasoning sometimes, but it doesn't negate that it would have happened one way or another based on either planned or carried out actions.
The greatest abuse of magic I've seen has been in adventure/roleplay threads, where the use of magic has ultimately been meaningless in terms of results, even if it was used in roleplay. In other words, the DO results (the important part) and consequences end up being the same.
Which does actually point towards summoning magic being quite powerful in a combat setting. However, from a cost-effective perspective, I must agree with ToG and NSE: If they could levy or muster troops, they'd be able to achieve the same, at an equivalent cost to summoning spells in terms of actions and GB/RP costs, based on what GLF likely spent in Elmet.
Edit: If there are any spells, regardless of circumstances, that would be capable of doing something a regular action isn't, then I've started a new thread to discuss that here: birthrightalbion.freeforums.net/thread/527/magic-use-lack-thereof
Simply put, I don't buy it that there's much, if any, magic that can do anything that regular actions cannot already accomplish.
|
|
|
Post by Godfred Thraw BayardsKing(GT) on Jun 2, 2016 22:30:27 GMT
The greatest abuse of magic I've seen has been in adventure/roleplay threads, where the use of magic has ultimately been meaningless in terms of results, even if it was used in roleplay. In other words, the DO results (the important part) and consequences end up being the same.
I agree with Aethor lot of things are possible without magic, but i think that the cost to recruit regular unit is too expensive with our cheaper incomes ... Maybe a reduction of 1/3 prices(prizes) of recruitment could compensate for it... Or the easier and cheaper recover... I rest(support) Queen Ursulla when it has the impression that small kingdoms have to content with having an army OR(WHERE) with developing their kingdom;) But master(teacher) is always right:) (lick boots)
|
|
|
Post by Aethor of Helna (ST) on Jun 2, 2016 22:37:33 GMT
Recruit costs are very high indeed (at a glance, appears to be about 2x the usual cost), especially for the realm sizes and considering that upkeep is always at full price.
And ships are certainly not exempt from the recruit/upkeep cost quandary, although there's reasonable in-game reasoning for that.
|
|
|
Post by Godfred Thraw BayardsKing(GT) on Jun 2, 2016 22:46:15 GMT
in the same time we don't want Camelot and his 10 units Knoghts so .... go for militia
|
|
|
Post by Maelgwyn ap Cadwgan (TOG) on Jun 3, 2016 15:00:10 GMT
On the NPC realms, personally I do not find they have been over the top. If you look at your starting domain assets and imagine they have kept them mostly as treasury, they would have the funds. With the amount I invested in the start of the game in a Monastery, Shrine, Fortified holdings and the Knights instead kept for my first year I'd have been able to pull of quite some things myself. Just as any of us could have. I think the biggest difference is that the NPC realms, just because they are NPC, are more able to focus on specific goals than we are. This combined with a possible treasury makes for some strong moves. @bayard certain of the higher tier units are indeed very expensive. Myself, I lean towards making recovery cheaper instead of lowering the base price. That way we do not get flooded with units. (I assume that last is why Linde has made them so expensive to start with.) But a easier/cheaper recovery (when you take the actions) would certainly be good for the game. That way one at least dares using your expensive units
|
|
|
Post by Aethor of Helna (ST) on Jun 3, 2016 15:46:55 GMT
Ah. Well... I didn't. Not even close. I've been doing alright though.
Plus, I had ships.
|
|
|
Post by Mercia(andreas) on Jun 3, 2016 16:16:45 GMT
I didnt pregame spend any gold thus allowing me to develop my realm at quite a decent rate
|
|
|
Post by Linde (x-GM) on Jun 4, 2016 21:23:03 GMT
Thanks for the feedback. I will look it over closely after the 10th
|
|
|
Post by Caerleon (Tristan) on Jun 6, 2016 2:00:33 GMT
On summoned units, when you compare them to their equivalent mustered unit you get the following (upkeep only, assuming a 4RP:1GB equivalent).
Spell Level | Summoned Unit Upkeep | Mustered Unit Upkeep | Spell 1/Unit 1 | 4 RP = 1 GB | 1 GB | Spell 4/Unit 2 | 12 RP = 3 GB | 1.5 GB | Spell 7/Unit 3 | 36 RP = 9 GB | 2 GB | Army of the Damned (5)
| 10 RP = 2.5 GB
| 2 GB
|
Personally I'd never use (or want to use) the Summon variants for level 2/3 units as for the number and cost it is more effective to the level 1 units, they are cheaper and you get more of them.
Army of the Damned is under costed in terms in terms of RP, the units that it summons (Undead Guards) are better than the summoned equivalent (Natures ally 3) because they have a cheaper maintenance (1/3 cost), better morale and summons extra units (Undead Legion) based on casualties done.
Overall the big benefits with summons are: - you can resummon to get them back with full HP. - the "surprise" factor, a 1 day casting time means that they can just show up for a battle. - higher average morale than most other units. - no muster cost.
I think the cost level 2/3 summons is excessive in terms of their benefit, I think Army of the Damned is under costed. In terms of "fixing" summons I would: - reduce the cost of level 2/3 summons to 8/12 RP per unit. - increase the spell casting time (of all summons) to 1 War Move to reduce (but not remove) the surprise factor. - increase the cost of Army of the Damned to 16 RP per unit to represent their effective combat power. - add a 1GB per unit cost that only applies to the initial casting (but not subsequent casting to continue the duration) to discourage re-summoning to reset HP damage.
In terms of pursuit damage and the Defensive trait, I'd suggest a couple of changes: - make the Defensive trait negate opposing cavalry for the purposes of determining if a side gains the Cavalry benefit. I.E. Side A has 3 Cavalry units, Side B has 3 Defensive Units and 1 Cavalry. Side A has 3-3=0 effective cavalry vs. 1 cavalry. They do not get the Cavalry benefit. Side B has 1-0=1 vs 3 cavalry. They do not get the Cavalry benefit. Basically Defensive stops the enemy from getting the benefit but doesn't help you. - make the defensive trait divide pursuit damage by 3 rather than 2. - make cavalry count as 1/2/3 units for movement 4/5/6 when pursuing (makes the light cavalry more vicious in a pursuit and keeps the heavy cavalry as is).
On chit draw vs. general skill. I think something needs to be worked out that gives high Warcraft skilled generals insight into their enemies movements, to represent scouting and terrain knowledge giving insight into the options the enemy could choose. Options I can think of include: - a contested Warcraft Roll to influence chit choice. The loser of the roll picks their chit randomly, the GM picks 2 random chits (+1 chit per 10/15/20 MOS - not sure what margin to apply) for the winning side and then uses the chit that gets the best result. - a contested Warcraft roll to influence dice rolls. The winner of the roll can force the loser to reroll 1+ dice rolls that the winner lost during combat. I.E. Side A wins the contested Warcraft roll, in round 1 of combat Side B rolls a 5 and Side A rolls a 3. Side A can force Side B to re-roll. Possibly extra force re-rolls per 10 MOS.
On multiple commanders: - add commander units that cannot be assigned HP damage but have 4/5/6 morale (depending on level/skill ??) for each sub-commander. Adds extra damage to represent the her units (sub-commanders) attached to units and increases average army morale. - allow all blood abilities present for general and sub-commanders to be used (assumes the general places people with blood abilities sensibly).
|
|
|
Post by Maelgwyn ap Cadwgan (TOG) on Jun 6, 2016 13:53:56 GMT
On chit draw vs. general skill. I think something needs to be worked out that gives high Warcraft skilled generals insight into their enemies movements, to represent scouting and terrain knowledge giving insight into the options the enemy could choose. Options I can think of include:
- a contested Warcraft Roll to influence chit choice. The loser of the roll picks their chit randomly, the GM picks 2 random chits (+1 chit per 10/15/20 MOS - not sure what margin to apply) for the winning side and then uses the chit that gets the best result. - a contested Warcraft roll to influence dice rolls. The winner of the roll can force the loser to reroll 1+ dice rolls that the winner lost during combat. I.E. Side A wins the contested Warcraft roll, in round 1 of combat Side B rolls a 5 and Side A rolls a 3. Side A can force Side B to re-roll. Possibly extra force re-rolls per 10 MOS. On the chit draw, I agree that it would be good if a high warcraft general would have possibility of gathering insight into his enemies options. Though, if I am not mistaken, Linde already did something along those lines during the war with stating the two preffered tactics of TOB and Lothia each. An actual option would be good however. Out of your suggested options, the first one is not exactly in line to my thinking or feeling. As the conception is to make a general's skills more important, forcing one to just have a random draw does not seem right. It would force one side into relying on pure chance. Essentially his battle could boil down to a crappy roll after a crappy roll and that's that.. I've played a game where the GM went for a system more like that and it took all the fun out of the battles. Losing on a wrong choice is educational, losing on random rolls just sucks. The second suggestion seems more in the right direction for me. Along the line of that one, one could say instead the winner of the first roll gained a +1 (+x for higher MOS) to add to a phase of the battle of his/her choice. Alternatively something could be thought up were the winner of the original roll may prepare two strategies and allow him/her to switch to the second after the first battlephase. Representing a highly skilled general's ability to throw of his enemies by placement of troops or the ability to respond rapidly and an excellent control over his overal unit commanders.
|
|
|
Post by Godfred Thraw BayardsKing(GT) on Jun 6, 2016 20:34:47 GMT
1) I think that you should not too much complicate ...
2) I think that only the officers with warfare must be considered ... the others not bringing particular bonus ... except for their fates which are thrown (other effect)
3) I think that every officer should be located in a unity and brought a bonus surcharge to the strength of the unity according to his own scores of Warfare + Of given damages and less of taken.
4) Warfare of the General in more (to give bonus to his unity) confronting as said previously so that there is winner's camp: that there being able to choose 2 tactics and choisisant who to bring into conflict once that of the chosen opponent ..
|
|
|
Post by X-Nemeth on Jun 6, 2016 22:23:23 GMT
On summoned units, when you compare them to their equivalent mustered unit you get the following (upkeep only, assuming a 4RP:1GB equivalent).
Spell Level | Summoned Unit Upkeep | Mustered Unit Upkeep | Spell 1/Unit 1 | 4 RP = 1 GB | 1 GB | Spell 4/Unit 2 | 12 RP = 3 GB | 1.5 GB | Spell 7/Unit 3 | 36 RP = 9 GB | 2 GB | Army of the Damned (5)
| 10 RP = 2.5 GB
| 2 GB
|
Personally I'd never use (or want to use) the Summon variants for level 2/3 units as for the number and cost it is more effective to the level 1 units, they are cheaper and you get more of them.
Army of the Damned is under costed in terms in terms of RP, the units that it summons (Undead Guards) are better than the summoned equivalent (Natures ally 3) because they have a cheaper maintenance (1/3 cost), better morale and summons extra units (Undead Legion) based on casualties done.
Overall the big benefits with summons are: - you can resummon to get them back with full HP. - the "surprise" factor, a 1 day casting time means that they can just show up for a battle. - higher average morale than most other units. - no muster cost.
I think the cost level 2/3 summons is excessive in terms of their benefit, I think Army of the Damned is under costed. In terms of "fixing" summons I would: - reduce the cost of level 2/3 summons to 8/12 RP per unit. - increase the spell casting time (of all summons) to 1 War Move to reduce (but not remove) the surprise factor. - increase the cost of Army of the Damned to 16 RP per unit to represent their effective combat power. - add a 1GB per unit cost that only applies to the initial casting (but not subsequent casting to continue the duration) to discourage re-summoning to reset HP damage.
In terms of pursuit damage and the Defensive trait, I'd suggest a couple of changes: - make the Defensive trait negate opposing cavalry for the purposes of determining if a side gains the Cavalry benefit. I.E. Side A has 3 Cavalry units, Side B has 3 Defensive Units and 1 Cavalry. Side A has 3-3=0 effective cavalry vs. 1 cavalry. They do not get the Cavalry benefit. Side B has 1-0=1 vs 3 cavalry. They do not get the Cavalry benefit. Basically Defensive stops the enemy from getting the benefit but doesn't help you. - make the defensive trait divide pursuit damage by 3 rather than 2. - make cavalry count as 1/2/3 units for movement 4/5/6 when pursuing (makes the light cavalry more vicious in a pursuit and keeps the heavy cavalry as is).
On chit draw vs. general skill. I think something needs to be worked out that gives high Warcraft skilled generals insight into their enemies movements, to represent scouting and terrain knowledge giving insight into the options the enemy could choose. Options I can think of include: - a contested Warcraft Roll to influence chit choice. The loser of the roll picks their chit randomly, the GM picks 2 random chits (+1 chit per 10/15/20 MOS - not sure what margin to apply) for the winning side and then uses the chit that gets the best result. - a contested Warcraft roll to influence dice rolls. The winner of the roll can force the loser to reroll 1+ dice rolls that the winner lost during combat. I.E. Side A wins the contested Warcraft roll, in round 1 of combat Side B rolls a 5 and Side A rolls a 3. Side A can force Side B to re-roll. Possibly extra force re-rolls per 10 MOS.
On multiple commanders: - add commander units that cannot be assigned HP damage but have 4/5/6 morale (depending on level/skill ??) for each sub-commander. Adds extra damage to represent the her units (sub-commanders) attached to units and increases average army morale. - allow all blood abilities present for general and sub-commanders to be used (assumes the general places people with blood abilities sensibly).
As it is right now cavalry is pretty shit. Mainly because outriders die first, and the other two units have a shitty cost for their benefit (I am disregarding exotic units). They really only shine if you win the fight, and can use the dice roll modifier (DRM). Remember it caps at +/-1. General scores, cavalry and castle all contributes to DRM. The whole point is that you do not need to pay the spell cost each round. You prepare it once, and then keep it in your spell slot for free until you need it. For instance you could degrade a lvl 2 spell slot to lvl 1, and use 12 rp to prepare 3 summons (let us say i have a 3/3/4 general). In spell slot 3 you prepare battle fury for 4 units, which cost 8 rp. Now you effectively have two spell slots less, but you are ready if someone attacks. If you fight in a province with a castle, you will very likely win since you have superior morale, a decent general and castle table bonus to negate enemy unit advantages. It costs 20 RP to be ready, or 5GB equivalent. If you only expect to be attacked once a year, this will be many times more cost effective than paying upkeep for normal soldiers (which is 5gb+ for just one unit, who will spend all his time recovering). Add a 3.5 morale unit with some trait, which has higher mortality than your summons and you have a super strong defense that costs 1.5GB and a wage war per turn, along with 2 actions and 20rp to prepare. The only downside is that you risk dispel magic. But that is no different from an espionage action to steal troop payments so they revolt....... The cost for lvl 2 or 3 summons is fine. They reflect how much better higher morale is (it really is that good!). This is also why the great blood powers that grant morale are the best. I would rather argue that some of the morale granting realm spells are over the top, but then again, the cost/effectiveness is reduced for large battles. Having more commanders does not mean you have better commanders or that the overall skill of your side increases (in many cases the opposite will be true - more commanders will lead differently giving friction). However I do like the idea that you can attach them to units to grant them a morale bonus, at the cost of being at the front of the battle taking guaranteed damage. That is an interesting mechanic, that adds options to the player.
|
|