Coming up: Smart AOFs, WOK-ON defaults and Themed WOK

All about the online version of classic WOK games.

Moderators: Duke, trewqh, korexus

User avatar
gm_al
Creator
Creator
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Coming up: Smart AOFs, WOK-ON defaults and Themed WOK

Post by gm_al » Tue Nov 23, 2004 4:04 pm

Hi all,

in our neverending quest to improve your gaming experience within WOK I am happy to report a few of the upcoming developments and changes:
- Smart AOFs (SAOF) will help the n00bs as well as the experienced players to quickly input the orders needed for their next Turn. Pro users still can "hardcode" their commands, but the new options will also guide them through a dialogue for every order if they wish - you pick what you like !
- new WOK-ON defaults: WOK4 is over 5 years "old" now, so it is time to re-balance it a bit for the 21st century. Therefore the GM will have (besides the multitude of XGame possibilites) two pre-sets of variables to choose from: "classic WOK4" parameters or "new WOK-ON" defaults. The new values will be subject to a broader discussion of course and should ensure a more balanced and challenging game. (less "luck" for you, Nick) Just to make it clear - "classic WOK4" games will always be available, and the changes planned for "new WOK-ON" are PARAMETER changes (ie. make maximum number of armies 125 instead of 999 per Province), no RULE changes or new mechanics
- "Themed WOK-ON" - not less spectacular will be the enrichment coming with "Themes" introduced with WOK-ON. After all a big part of the excitment when playing comes from the text you read and "live", so this is where the Themes will kick in. Get ready for a much more fun Turn report to read...

More to come... WOK-ON !! :P

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:01 pm

I like it, keep up the great work Al. Although, unless the actual rules change in WOK 4 there's still too much luck for me. Missiles and full-player-data spying are what killed that game for me, fortunately both problems that were addressed with WOK 5. In any case the future looks bright for WOOKIE!!!! 8)
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
TK
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am

Post by TK » Tue Nov 23, 2004 6:44 pm

Decrease the power of +LEV and increase the bonus LEV for fighting. This is the only change that has ever been seriously considered over the last 5 years. Nick's personal crusades dont count. :wink:

All the other "parameters" should NOT be changed. At least not for scoring games. EFF of 150%? Are you serious?!


On that point, how will WOOKIE games be scored? If loads of new games suddenly open up, we are going to see an increase in the number of VPs handed out. Kaohalla will quickly become (even more) meaningless, and positions in the WOK4 HiScore could end up being determined (even more than now) by the number of games that people can manage to play within a year.

Also, as to the point above - the temptation is there to start a whole crop of "X" games which arent particularly "X" at all. How will they be dealt with?


Sorry to be the bearer of grim news, but we must look at the consequences of WOOKIE *before* it starts.


Time to be positive...

The most welcome change that WOOKIE will bring is allowing GMs to run more WOK5 games. :)

User avatar
Raw
Commander
Commander
Posts: 769
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Minneapolis, MN USA
Contact:

Post by Raw » Tue Nov 23, 2004 8:23 pm

No one should be allowed to cry about non existant games unless they actually take part in running them :roll: :p
It's not fast unless its got a fart can.

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

Post by korexus » Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:03 am

Ok, as the guy doing (almost) all the work here, I feel qualified to make a comment...

What I would *really* like is a sensible discussion on what people would like to change about WoK IV. This may be the amount of level made by workers, or the effects of tech trades, or the chances of succes in spying operations or anything else.
WoK Online will have an option to use the 'classic' WoK 4 settings, and I am more than willing to code another deafult setting for WoK Online including any updates players have decided on. What I'm not willing to do is make a default setup for every option a player happens to think will be cool. The game is customisable, GM's can do that sort of stuff themselves...

To answer TK's point, it may be worth a GM posting on the X-Game board if they're going to set up a game which is different from either deafult. - It's better to be over cautious in that respect. However, I do believe that if we can agree on a reasonable setup for WOOKIE games, GMs will normally stick to it and generally only change things as part of a larger X-game idea anyway...

On the scoring issue, it may be that lots of WoK online games will open, but that will only contribute WoK Online (4) VPs, yes they'll be added to Kaohalla, but I think most players now agree that kaohalla is more of a record of how long a player has been around than anything else... End result, people get more WoK 4/Online VPs. Good. Maybe it'll be easier to distiguish between them when it comes to the champs next year!

Chris/korexus.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Allister Fiend
Commander
Commander
Posts: 598
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Where you see smoke.....:-) The First Family

Post by Allister Fiend » Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:59 am

Not that my opinion really matters but I have a suggestion for a Wok4 change.

In relation to the Tech point trading:

The Tech points trading in part needs to be a sequence of events. Instead of the curent way which is you trade a certain amount and get one thing only(except for the 350 one). I think maybe it should be:

a. 100 tech pts = .2 DEF/prov :(
b. 200 tech pts = 2 spies/prov + a :?
c. 300 tech pts = 5 missles/prov + a and b :)
d. 400 tech pts = .4 level/army + a,b and c :D
e. 500 tech pts = 50% EFF + a,b,c and d :o
f. 600 tech pts = .7 level/army + a,b,c,d and e :shock:

In the missle scenario:
Allow the player to decide whether to aim them at material items such as:

Missiles 20%
DEF 40%
Tech pts30%
Level 10%

Or

Allow the player to aim at living things such as:

Armies(max 2 kills)10%
Workers(max 1 kill)20%
Pop(max 3 kills)30%
Spies(max 2 kills) 40%


Just thinking out loud.

Allister
Oh no!!! I'm out of those important papers.......

User avatar
Donut
Warlord
Warlord
Posts: 1041
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2003 7:00 am
Location: Brew Town, WI; USA - BoV
Contact:

Post by Donut » Wed Nov 24, 2004 3:40 am

If it ain't broke... don't fix it!

In my opinion WOK 4 may not be completely balanced with the missiles and such... but almost all players are aware and play the game accordingly.

I think that the suggested changes would be interesting... but I would suggest leaving the game as-is. I'm definitely far from an "old-timer" here... but WOK 4 is still the game I "Grew up" on and am not too thrilled about changing the basic concepts of it. K.I.S.S :P

Donut
The scars remind us that the past is real.

User avatar
gm_al
Creator
Creator
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post by gm_al » Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:42 am

Seems Allister didnt read the part where it says we will crunch NUMBERS but not change MECHANICS (such as Tech trading or what missiles hit). Old WOK vets may remember that there was some part of aiming with missiles at one point in WOK4, but the players back then only aimed at the same stuff all along so we put the results of missile targeting back to random. :roll:

Totally agree with Donut - we are not re-inventing the wheel, WOK4 is fine as it is, but it can need a little balancing. Regarding the grim bearer of news (aka the oldest WOK player himself - TK) I wouldnt fear competition coming from more games played, it will rather make the picture clearer on who merits to be part of the champs and who doesnt. An increase in the number of players and VPs given out shouldnt be seen as a bad sign, quite the contrary.

Now to some data crunching and suggestions I heard so far:
- decrease the worker power for +LEV: agree, same happened with WOK5 and it made sense
- increase bonus LEV for fighting: easy, but shouldnt be much, Will encourage fighting, so should be good.
- limit number of armies to 125 per province (same as worker): will have an effect on sleepers and hopefully make games more lively. TBD.
- TECH trade-ins: mabye make higher trade-ins a bit more attractive in numbers.
- DEF bonus for defenders: might be good to have a slight decrease there to help attacks.
- sabotage: thats one Id really like to see improve in effects. Its a fun feature and its use should be encouraged much more.

Fire off ! 8)

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

Post by korexus » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:10 am

Don't worry, Donut. Almost every conversation I have with Al includes the line "But be must keep the 'classic' WoK settings as a default." :)

Now then, as for people's suggestions.

I never played when missiles were aimable, so I don't know how the setup was. AF suggests being able to hit level, armies and def though. If the balance of how many a missile could kill was right, each of those could be viable in different situations.

The tech thing is a nice idea, there will only be 5 options though and it would be awkward to make the trades sometimes cumulative, sometimes not depending on a game setting. Worth keeping in mind though as it's certainly not impossible!

Decreasing +LEV from workers is a good way of reducing the effectiveness of sleeping. Watch out for the 350 tech trade too though.

Increasing the LEV for fighting will make fighting more attractive. It shouldn'tbe too hard to balance out some figures there...

Limiting the number of armies to 125 is a bad idea. It would make armies far too vulnerable to missiles. If everyone is fighting to raise the level anyway, there will be fewer armies around to begin with. If someone manages to get a large group of leveled armies, by whatever means, then they have played the game well and should have a decent shot at winning because of it.

Tech trades: If you make the +LEV/DEF trade more attracitve, you go back to encouraging sleeping...

DEF: I think the bonus is alright where it is, I'm open to convincing on this one though.

Sabotage: The main problem is that it has to be a neighbour, so you have to know where your border will be at the end of the turn and know that there will be MIS or DEF worth sabotaging there, and move your spies up. While letting the sabotage operations work anywhere on the map as per spy province would probably make them too powerful, maybe something along the lines of the missiles +-3 long range option would make the spies more usable?

Yes, I know I'm suggesting changing "mechanics" not "numbers" why not?


Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

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

Post by Saladin » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:21 am

gm_al wrote:- sabotage: thats one Id really like to see improve in effects. Its a fun feature and its use should be encouraged much more.
Darn you stole my idea! :D

I totally agree that it would be great to have your spies be able to do more things. I know it's available now already but to be honest it's pretty useless right now. How about making it so that spies can sabotage any province instead of just their neighbours? It would be a nice counter against those super powerful missiles. :D

I also agree on all other points you made Al.
"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
gm_al
Creator
Creator
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post by gm_al » Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:05 pm

korexus wrote:I never played when missiles were aimable, so I don't know how the setup was. AF suggests being able to hit level, armies and def though. If the balance of how many a missile could kill was right, each of those could be viable in different situations.
In theory yes, but practice has shown that players just target armies then. Why hit DEF or LVL when you can use all your 99 missiles to get rid of the armies anyways... believe me, we tried it.
korexus wrote:The tech thing is a nice idea, there will only be 5 options though and it would be awkward to make the trades sometimes cumulative, sometimes not depending on a game setting. Worth keeping in mind though as it's certainly not impossible!
Lets start to tweak higher tech trade-ins, imho this should do well.
korexus wrote:Decreasing +LEV from workers is a good way of reducing the effectiveness of sleeping. Watch out for the 350 tech trade too though.
I think we all agree on this point.
korexus wrote:Increasing the LEV for fighting will make fighting more attractive. It shouldn'tbe too hard to balance out some figures there...
Overall consensus on this point too it seems.
korexus wrote:Limiting the number of armies to 125 is a bad idea. It would make armies far too vulnerable to missiles. If everyone is fighting to raise the level anyway, there will be fewer armies around to begin with. If someone manages to get a large group of leveled armies, by whatever means, then they have played the game well and should have a decent shot at winning because of it.
Cant follow your reasoning to the end on this. There wont be fewer armies in game, but rather not one big mass of armies powerlevelling its way to the VPs.
korexus wrote:Tech trades: If you make the +LEV/DEF trade more attracitve, you go back to encouraging sleeping...
True, we either dont make them more attractive or change the outcome of what a player gets when trading Tech.
korexus wrote:DEF: I think the bonus is alright where it is, I'm open to convincing on this one though.
Id say -0.1 is all it needs there.
korexus wrote:Sabotage: The main problem is that it has to be a neighbour, so you have to know where your border will be at the end of the turn and know that there will be MIS or DEF worth sabotaging there, and move your spies up. While letting the sabotage operations work anywhere on the map as per spy province would probably make them too powerful, maybe something along the lines of the missiles +-3 long range option would make the spies more usable?
Have to go with Sal and you on this one - we should allow sabotage all over the map, but then at a reduced chance of success. It will make spying useful and be a good weapon against stalling sleepers. The -3/+3 solution is also feasible though, but not so much fun. :P

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Wed Nov 24, 2004 4:26 pm

I can't say that I remember missiles EVER being aimable, and I've been around longer than anybody but TK and Al. But if you say there was time, than I don't doubt it Al. I also don't doubt that missiles were probably used on armies most of the time. Guess what? So are GCAs in WOK 5, and I don't see that as a problem really. GCAs and missiles are the counter to high-level armies (or upgraded units, in WOK 5) that might not be able to be stopped any other way. However, I do have to say that in WOK 5 I have used GCAs to go after other GCAs and after DEF as well. Not as much as I do for armies, but I still use it. I just think random missile landings makes the game incredibly luck-dependant. If I shoot 20 missiles at you and take out all DEF and TEC, and you shoot 20 at me and hit a bunch of armies, you get the better end of the deal, and for no really good reason. Using Al's logic, I would expect him to want to stop GCAs in WOK 5 from being used as well, since they mostly target troops.

As for the full data player spy, that also really kills the game. Knowledge is power, after all. Being able to have access to a FULL slate of info on a player and not doing anything to deserve it (like spending a whlie cracking a spycode) is also bad news. I think it's way too powerful an option, and should be removed entirely.

Anyway, though, as Al said we are not changing any mechanics of the game, so both of those things will never go through. To be honest, with all that said, I don't really understand the point of updating the WOK 4 engine but still offering the old one? It's never been done that way before, and I think it would just lead to confusion. I COULD understand introducing WOK 4 "options" (like the bad weather/bridges, high/low OOP, and others in WOK 5), but I think setting up a system where some WOK 4 games would operate using a different value system for +LEV and such is just asking for confusion, and frankly, is totally unnessecary. I highly, highly doubt that having two versions of WOK 4 is going to cause more players to want to play, so why ask for the extra headaches?
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

User avatar
TK
Trooper
Trooper
Posts: 209
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2004 7:00 am

Post by TK » Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:33 pm

Dameon wrote:I can't say that I remember missiles EVER being aimable, and I've been around longer than anybody but TK and Al.
It was VERY old skool. 8)


Dameon wrote:I don't really understand the point of updating the WOK 4 engine but still offering the old one? It's never been done that way before, and I think it would just lead to confusion. I COULD understand introducing WOK 4 "options" (like the bad weather/bridges, high/low OOP, and others in WOK 5), but I think setting up a system where some WOK 4 games would operate using a different value system for +LEV and such is just asking for confusion, and frankly, is totally unnessecary. I highly, highly doubt that having two versions of WOK 4 is going to cause more players to want to play, so why ask for the extra headaches?
I agree 100%.

Lets just make the changes we have been talking about for years ( to reduce sleeping), and make this a more dynamic, FUN game. I might even start playing again if the best tactic is to DO SOMETHING!!!

Outsleeping the enemy is NOT fun. The only fun it might provide is the VP at the end of it. If we change that, we have a better game. It is still a playpen for the children not old enough to play WOK5, but at least it would be a FUN one!

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Wed Nov 24, 2004 6:52 pm

TK wrote:
I agree 100%.

Lets just make the changes we have been talking about for years ( to reduce sleeping), and make this a more dynamic, FUN game. I might even start playing again if the best tactic is to DO SOMETHING!!!

Outsleeping the enemy is NOT fun. The only fun it might provide is the VP at the end of it. If we change that, we have a better game. It is still a playpen for the children not old enough to play WOK5, but at least it would be a FUN one!
Wait, did TK just agree 100% with something I said? That's it, the day of reckoning is here! What's next, the Red Sox winning the World Series? :lol:

Seriously though, just because we haven't updated the WOK 4 engine in a dog's age doesn't mean we shouldn't NOW. An update keeps things fresh, reallly. I've been pushing for a WOK 5 update (mainly tribe stuff) for a while now but it's been on the back burner like forever. That's fine and well, but if we are seriously talking about updating WOK 4 to reward combat and make games quicker, then why even OFFER the old version?
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

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

Post by korexus » Wed Nov 24, 2004 7:33 pm

From a coding point of view, one set of defaults would be a whole lot easier. Espeacially if we're going to allow long range sabotage in some games - I'd far rather it was all or none...
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
gm_al
Creator
Creator
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post by gm_al » Wed Nov 24, 2004 9:54 pm

Hey, if you all can live with a set of updated WOK4 tweaks and dont look back to the old ones... fine with me ! I just wanted to avoid the "I want my old WOK4 back" threads. If you want rule changes and missile aiming - ok too, but I doubt everyone will agree there. It also means we have to add a parameter for what to target with your missiles for example. And it means breaking with the old WOK4 we had until now for good, be prepared.

Lets start to file some suggestions - plz refer to their number when posting:

#1: Workers on +LVL should add +0.003 instead of +0.005 as it is now
#2: the level bonus for fights should in return be increased to (0.005 x rounds of fight) instead of (0.003 x rounds of fight)
#3: trade 350 TECH to get +0.6 DEF in all Provs (same) and +0.750 level for your armies (up from 0.500)
#4: missilie aiming can stay EFF for short range and 3/4 EFF for long range, with some modifiers:
- DEF = same
- POP = -10%
- SPY = -15%
- WOK = -20%
- MIS = -25%
- ARM = -30%
Modifiers are deducted from current EFF right away ("hard" modifiers), and long range is then 3/4 of that number.
#5: sabotage can also have short and long range, with EFF and 3/4 EFF (same as for missiles, but no modifiers) Every spy used should either kill 6 missiles / destroy 0.1 DEF / steal 20 POP when successful
#6: spy full player data could treat EVERY province separately, with again EFF or 3/4 EFF chance to reveal the Prov data. This way a player will rarely get FULL data but rather see many/most Provinces if risking this operation (action must still be taken into a neighboring Prov to be triggered, just like we have it now). Chance could be 1/2 EFF + 2% per spy used (again, separately for every Province). That should make Nick happy after all those years ! :roll:
#7: to make the Aim DEF suitable again change the number of workers needed to 6 (from 8 now) to produce 0.1 DEF. Neutral Provs then start with 12 workers, player ones with 18. There would be no DEF bonus change needed for PDEF calculation then too.


FIRE OFF !

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

Post by korexus » Wed Nov 24, 2004 10:25 pm

Now we're getting somewhere. :D

reducing the workers' leving ability to 0.003 looks like a good starting point. It may take some playtesting to find a good balance, but things are easy enough to adjust now so that's no problem. Same thing goes for the increase from fighting.

Be careful on increasing the effect of tech trades. You may just redefine the sleeping strategy. The overall effect as you suggest would still be lss powerful than it currently is, so we may be ok (I don't want to kill sleepers completely!) I guess we wait and see on that one.

I'd like a lot of feed back on missiles before changing anything. Certainly in WoK 5 I missile at Def fairly often and GCAs when the OOP permits, but I've never fired at POP or WOK, why would you kill what you hope to take with your armies? However, this sort of system would keep the variance of missile deaths down, reducing the infamous "luck factor". If we can get the numbers so that the average deaths look good I'll do the changes, I just don't want to have to undo them next year!
On this subject, AF mentioned missiling LEV and currently missiles can hit TEC. Will these both fall by the wayside? I think TEC should still be an option - to try and reduce the number of attacks a player has...

Sabotage long range will be fine, if we can get some balanced numbers. Steal POP I'm less sure on. It coul have some nasty uses on turn 1...

The spy player data sounds doable. - A little like the unit report in WoK 5. I don't think we should remove this option entirely...

It would be fun to make provinces highly defendable by having workers on +DEF, and a strategy I'd like to see used, we just have to be careful that if we change missiles so they can target DEF, it's still viable to build it in the first place.


Lot's of play tests coming up it seems!


Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
Dameon
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1056
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Valn Ohtar Chapterhouse

Post by Dameon » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:01 pm

Progress! I think updating WOK 4 is long overdue, and these changes are sounding good. I do agree that the only things worth hitting missiles with are armies, defense, tech, and sometimes other missiles, and maybe (big maybe) spies, but then I don't see the harm in having the extra options in there either- maybe somebody will use them strategically someday, who knows?

As for the spy player data option, that's a good framework, but the success percentage of finding out a player's data needs to be changed from Al's suggestions. If a player has 95% EFF and he succeeds on the initial role, he then has a very good chance to get every single province's data, as long as he's doing it from a neighbor, not a difficult task. What I would suggest is either changing it so that a player has a certain percentage chance to get a provinces data, and that percentage should not be affected by EFF. Whether the entire attack suceeds obviously has to be based on EFF, but once that roll succeeds, I think there should be say a 50% chance for the data on an individual province.

Either that, or REQUIRE a larger number of spies to attempt a spy-full-data option. It only makes sense, after all, if you are trying to get data on more than one province you'd NEED more than one spy. Perhaps even something where you'd need to use 1 spy per province the player you were spying on had. So if you want to spy on somebody with 7 provinces, you'd NEED to use 7 spies, with the option still there to use extra if you want to improve you chances. That way players are required to sink significant more effort into getting another player's full data, which is as it should be.

The rest of the proposed changes sound reasonable to me and should make for more dynamic games, which is what we are all after in the long run.
"A Knight is sworn to valor, his heart knows only virtue, his blade defends the helpless, his might upholds the weak, his word speaks only truth, his wrath outdoes the wicked."

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

Post by korexus » Wed Nov 24, 2004 11:14 pm

So something like EFF/2 + 2 * Spies used as a chance to succeed, followed by each spy giving the information for one province in that empire at random?

Would you have 2 spies possibly giving the same province data - meaning you could never guarantee getting the complete set - or allow a large enough number of spies to get all the data if they succeeded?

That's all doable. Of course it's also doable to modify the chance per province as in Al's suggestion. Easier to :wink: How about EFF/2 + 2 * SPY chance to succeed, followed by SPY * 5 chance of getting the data on each province?

Just throwing out ideas here, don't ask me to back up the numbers! :D


Chris.
With Great Power comes Great Irritability

User avatar
gm_al
Creator
Creator
Posts: 1479
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2002 7:00 am
Location: Vienna, Austria

Post by gm_al » Thu Nov 25, 2004 8:53 am

Umm... - "EFF/2 + 2 * SPY chance to succeed" is just what I had suggested for sabotage, seems I didnt make myself clear there. There would be an initial roll to see if the action by itself is successful and then the SAME roll for every Province individually to get the data.

Would be easier to code too, as its done as a series of individual rolls just like if you would spy the Provs one by one, and look at the numbers:

90% EFF and using 10 spies to spy full data (10 spies is rather a lot):

90/2 = 45 + (2x 10) = 65% chance to get the data from a Province, so in the end you would still only see 2/3 of the other player's inventory. Makes sense to me.

Missiling aims... indeed TECH should be in there. Also misses how many units per missiles that hit are killed, so here it is again (SR/LR and modifiers still apply):
- TECH = same (1 missile kills 3 TECH)
- POP = -10% (1 missile kills 4 POP)
- SPY = -15% (1 missile kills 1 spy)
- DEF = -20% (1 missile kills 0.1 DEF) - changed the modifier here or otherwise its too easy to kill all DEF in a target Province
- WOK = -20% (1 missilie kills 2 WOK)
- MIS = -25% (1 missile kills 1 missile)
- ARM = -30% (1 missile kills 1 army)

Post Reply