Zzzzzz....

Its all WOK here.

Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus, Egbert

Would you like measures to be taken so that sleeping becomes less effective whithout making +LEV obsolete? (Don't care?=>Don't vote!, Don't know?=>Read the arguments, then vote.)

Yes
6
86%
No
1
14%
 
Total votes: 7

User avatar
Vortan
Commander
Commander
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
Contact:

Post by Vortan » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:03 pm

Well I do like both ideas - I also like Yondallus's idea - see xgames - but bearing in mind what Trewqh said regards army healing perhaps a lower percentage say 20% would make this more acceptable.

As for levelling armies, the system as proposed is good but as Saladin says making it too small an increase later would actually be taking away player choice so perhaps slightly increase the later stage amounts - SLIGHTLY I said. This way if they can afford to have their armies sat on their laurels then good for them. I will be kicking butt however with my healed and experienced ARMY - thats one, okay kor?

*NOTE VORTAN BEING POSITIVE AND UNARGUEMENTATIVE TODAY*
Now WHY did it do THAT!

If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!

Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!

User avatar
Saladin
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1652
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: The Netherlands

Post by Saladin » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:11 pm

How much would a wok add to an armies level then Korexus, could you give some examples?

With the getting your injured players back. If they just get half their armies back that seems like a bit too easy and too much. Suppose it's a 100 against 100 war and you win with just 2 armies left. Than you get 49 back and the other has lost all armies.

More realistic but still the same principle would be to give an army unit 'health' from 0 (death) to 100. And give wok another aim namely 'healing'. No idea how it will work though. :D
"Never attribute to malice what can satisfactorily be explained away by stupidity."

"To speak ill of others is a dishonest way of praising ourselves."

User avatar
trewqh
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings

Post by trewqh » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:16 pm

ARGH! Leave it for WoK VII or VIII even :wink:

And cut it out with this 'realistic' argument, applying this way of thinking to WoK would change it into a table-top role-playing game ultimately. :P
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:22 pm

trewqh wrote:
korexus wrote:As I see it, sleeping should still be a viable strategy, but not the best in every game. To be honest, I think we're already pretty much there. People do win games without sleeping after all...
I know I used the word pointless in my previous post, but I don't actually think my proposal would make sleeping pointless. It's difficult to predict (or maybe even impossible to say) what kind of modifiers would make both tactics 'equal'. But I DO want to reward fighters for fighting, so I DO want fighters to have an edge. I believe now sleeping is more effective, but you still can opt for not sleeping adn if you're good you'll win. I want it to be the other way round; fighting is the better option, but you can choose sleeping and still win if you're a good sleeper.
I don't think it's possible to make it 50/50. The game is far too complex. I'd prefer that both options have strengths and weaknesses, so a player would look at his starting position and decide which is the better option in that game. Also, I question your line on being able to choose sleeping and win. This is one of the main advantages an agressive approach has over sleeping, you *can* always choose to attack people. You can only choose to sleep if your opponents let you.
ALSO, this argument (sleeping becoming pointless) could be brought up against ANY change discussed in this topic. My proposal does not make sleeping any more useless than rewarding fighters by retruning ARM. (At least we won't know this until we try different options out)
Agreed. Returning armies is more of an X-game idea than every game. I don't think it would encourage steamrolling (you'd still have a weaker army immediately after a fight) but it would make the game EASIER. :P
korexus wrote:I still like the idea of bigger armies being harder to level up. It has to be easier to train a group of 5 into a crack troop than an army of 100! It would also be quite balanced - the 5 high level armies could wade through far more low level groups than would seem fair, but they'd be massively vulnerable to missiles.
What I like about this idea is that it leans towards changing results of player choices not results of luck dependant factors. I discussed this in my previous post.

And similarly to my proposal, this idea would require more planning from the player. That's nice! (Giving armies back just makes the game easier :P)

Do you remember the formula for that one, kor?
The formula would be pretty simple:
[Constant] * [Number of Workers] / [Number of Armies]

Quite what that constant should be is up for debate (and would, of course, be GM editable) but this has the advantage over your system of being easy to calculate, at least roughly. I think it would also have the same general effect. - If we put the constant as an entirely arbitrary 0.072, then a province full of workers could get 12 new armies up to 1.75 in one turn (ie re-creating the starting armies) which would be fine for attacking neutrals or as a scout force, but could only raise the level of a group of 100 armies by 0.09. This is probably knocking +LEV too hard, but it illustrates the point.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Vortan
Commander
Commander
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
Contact:

Post by Vortan » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:26 pm

I would say kor that this supposed example would be good. Of course it would be possible for players to set multiple provinces on level and split the armies among them.
Now WHY did it do THAT!

If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!

Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:39 pm

Vortan wrote:Of course it would be possible for players to set multiple provinces on level and split the armies among them.
I have no problem with that. If you're going to devote two whole provinces to +LEV then you deserve to get more out of it (currently you don't) However, you'd have to have a lot of resources to be able to put 250 WOK on +LEV...


Just noticed that 0.072 has another thing going for it. It's exactly the number which would allow 125 workers to train a single level 1 troop into a level 10 super-soldier. I don't know if that would be used, but the ability to shoot out single commandos could be a lot of fun (so long as your opponent doesn't hit them with missiles...)


korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Vortan
Commander
Commander
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
Contact:

Post by Vortan » Sun Jun 24, 2007 5:42 pm

To quote an American TV dude called Ty Pennington:

LETS DO IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This has got to go down as one of the most productive brainstorming sessions EVER.
Now WHY did it do THAT!

If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!

Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Sun Jun 24, 2007 6:00 pm

I'll encorporate it into my open x-game. That way we can test the idea without having to wait too long. Also, being able to see other people's reports will allow us to judge the effect more easily.


Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
TBert
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Denver, CO
Contact:

Post by TBert » Mon Jun 25, 2007 8:17 am

I'm running out of excuses not to join that game. Uhm... my cat ate my surge protector?
pro libertate eos occubuisse - "they died for liberty"

Clan Head - Valn Ohtar

SGT - US Army

23-year-old father of 3 - really needs a beer

User avatar
Vortan
Commander
Commander
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
Contact:

Post by Vortan » Mon Jun 25, 2007 8:19 am

Go on TB you know you want to!
Now WHY did it do THAT!

If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!

Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!

User avatar
TBert
Veteran
Veteran
Posts: 279
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Denver, CO
Contact:

Post by TBert » Mon Jun 25, 2007 3:34 pm

... fine ...

::TBert sulks out of the room::
pro libertate eos occubuisse - "they died for liberty"

Clan Head - Valn Ohtar

SGT - US Army

23-year-old father of 3 - really needs a beer

User avatar
trewqh
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings

Post by trewqh » Mon Jun 25, 2007 6:55 pm

korexus wrote:Just noticed that 0.072 has another thing going for it. It's exactly the number which would allow 125 workers to train a single level 1 troop into a level 10 super-soldier. I don't know if that would be used, but the ability to shoot out single commandos could be a lot of fun (so long as your opponent doesn't hit them with missiles...)
That is why I have a feeling it's not balanced well at this rate and will be hard to balance. Whereas in my proposal... :wink:

Good thing you applied it to your X-game, though! :thumbsup:
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Mon Jun 25, 2007 7:21 pm

I don't think that it's unbalanced. 1 level 10 troop is equivalent to 19 level 1 troops if EFFs are equal and DEF is ignored.

125 workers can produce 31 missiles which will usually kill about 18 troops plus some other stuff, so you get about the same result from either aim, just in different ways.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
trewqh
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1877
Joined: Mon Dec 09, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Bialystok, Poland clan: The Vulkings

Post by trewqh » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:25 am

OK, check out this link.

You'll find there a... spreadsheet :P and two images for those who can't view an Excel file. One of the images shows what happens when there are 60 workers, the other when there are 125 workers.

Looking at this data I think that this is the solution which makes sleeping pointless/obsolete, while mine only made sleeping less effective.

I know that the highlighted border of 24 ARM does not have to matter in this game as it's more important to relate to what other players are doing with their ARM and WOK rather than trying to relate to your habits or intuitions from regular games. And relating to what other players are doing is made very easy in this X-game. Let's hope this will quicken the learning process and will prevent exercising habits which are useless.
trewqh
the gleefully aggressive Vulking

User avatar
korexus
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2827
Joined: Tue Nov 12, 2002 8:00 am
Location: Reading
Contact:

Post by korexus » Tue Jun 26, 2007 7:45 am

Please remember that 0.072 was a number picked wildly from the extreme ends of the ether. I did say at the time that it would probably knock sleeping too far.

We could easily double the value to 0.144, making 48 the equivalent number of armies for sleeping, I don't think that would overpower smaller groups even then.

I'd like to see the style of play TBert suggests become more prevalent. - Instead of sitting still and sleeping or putting all your resources into one chunk and attacking crazily, using one set of attackers while building up a strong group too. It seems more of a sensible strategy somehow...



Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Vortan
Commander
Commander
Posts: 588
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar, English Office
Contact:

Post by Vortan » Tue Jun 26, 2007 9:41 am

Inclined to agree with you there kor. I think I see a lot in TB's sh ... Top Secret ... playing style that I would be tempted to employ and your levelling system would certainly make it a viable proposition.
Now WHY did it do THAT!

If at first you don't succeed - give up and have a coffee!

Yes I am on the transplant list for a new sense of humour!

Post Reply