Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Radio Controlled]

I'd like to second both the fact that this game is a lot of fun, even when just following, and to cut down on the complaining. Not saying one can't state his case, but let's not forget it's just a game in the end. None of this is of great importance, so let's instead focus our energies to try and creatively screw over the other side (those assholes, am I right)

[Roboson]

Or, for that matter, steam engine-powered ironclads?

5 Actions.

5 Actions, and the design still occasionally explodes, still sinks easily, and still breaks down if you look at it wrong.

Also, they're not Ironclads. They have no armor at all.

...hmm.

You get bonuses to inventing completely new designs, while we get to deal with -3 penalties to just marginally improve upon our cannons.

Marginal improvements like rifling? Rifling may be a marginal improvement, but it is complicated AF.

But such is the nature of the game, coming up with clever ways of doing powerful things.

The problem is, if we try something clever, or even something simple, we get a -3 penalty.

From what the GM has said, you actually got bonuses on this design, which is absurd beyond the point of ridicule.

Hmm. You got to know how to word things. I don't know what sort of designs you are getting -3 penalties on, but I would guess it involves some complicated, borderline implausible developments.
Whereas we worded flying carpets as combining several fields we already had experience in, in a relatively simple way. We didn't get a bonus to the design, or rather we did, but it was countered by an equivalent penalty, so the net effect was +0.
...seriously, what did you try to do that got you a -3 penalty?

Our problem seems to be that we're inventing technology that wouldn't come about for hundreds of years. Whereas you all are inventing technology that doesn't actually exist. Which means it's easier to make a magic engine that just "works because magic" (flying carpets) than a real engine that runs on magic (steam engine). As a result, we get a lot of minuses.

Magic boat that moves water with magic: 1 design, 0-2 revision if unlucky.
Steam engines: around 3 designs and an unholy number of revisions, and still not done.

They both do the same thing, but one ends up costing a whole lot more. And that's sort of the crux of our issue Over here.

[evictedSaint]

Moskurg got several penalties that were negated by bonuses, resulting in [0, 0, 0] modifiers.

Arstotzka got several penalties that were partially negated by bonus, resulting in [0, -2, -1] modifiers.



Thank you, guys.  I'm aware I sometimes make mistakes, but I put a lot of thought into this round and I'm confident this was appropriately balanced. 

[Taricus]

See the thing is that we're relying on magic to do the impossible things to make them possible. Whereas you're relying on mundane things to do the plausible. Needless to say it's going to be that much more difficult on your side since you need to actually do the engineering for it as well.

[NUKE9.13]

Our problem seems to be that we're inventing technology that wouldn't come about for hundreds of years. Whereas you all are inventing technology that doesn't actually exist. Which means it's easier to make a magic engine that just "works because magic" (flying carpets) than a real engine that runs on magic (steam engine). As a result, we get a lot of minuses.

Magic boat that moves water with magic: 1 design, 0-2 revision if unlucky.
Steam engines: around 3 designs and an unholy number of revisions, and still not done.

They both do the same thing, but one ends up costing a whole lot more. And that's sort of the crux of our issue Over here.

...um. Yes, obviously? It's a game about designing magic. If mundane means were better at doing things than magical ones, why would we bother with magic? This would just be "Medieval Arms Race, Except You Get To Design Things Hundreds Of Years Ahead Of Time"

[evictedSaint]

I would like to point out that both sides have done mundane designs to great effect.  Armor, halberds, ballistas, horse breeding...

[10ebbor10]

...seriously, what did you try to do that got you a -3 penalty?

Apply ore bonus and increase range, nothing more.

[andrea]

We took the wrong path, from an action economy point of view. GM was kind to let us take some actions and innovations, but ultimately it seems very harmful in the long run.
We create very powerful stuff, yes, but it takes a lot more than we can afford.

@ebbor we also applied a spell we already had on the steam engine.

[evictedSaint]

Ebbor, you know there's more to it than that.  I'm not going to post all the stuff you put into it here to respect Arstotzkan state secrets, but that's extremely misleading.

[10ebbor10]

@ebbor we also applied a spell we already had on the steam engine

Nope, that was done beforehand, not in this design.

Ebbor, you know there's more to it than that.  I'm not going to post all the stuff you put into it here to respect Arstotzkan state secrets, but that's extremely misleading.

There isn't.

This is the design proposal.

Or, as the summary says : Cheap + Range.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Our regained plentiful metal supply make the construction of the AS-HA1 Onslaught an easy task. High-quality metal is able to be used for every construction task and standardized construction equipment given to every craftsmen drastically reduces the time to manufacture. Ideally, these improvements should radically decrease the price of the AS-HA1 to a point where we can wheel them out en masse throughout the fields.
The range is increased via much longer barrels and [other way of increasing range].

.

[Andres]

So Moskurg, how did you like our new ultra-long range artillery piece?

Glory to Arstotzka.

[Taricus]

Ah, easily dealt with by carpet bombing

[Chiefwaffles]

I'm just annoyed that it seems like our designs are being looked at from both the historical perspective and balance perspective, yet both are independent from each other.

We spent 2 designs (and likely some number of revisions) making steam engines that just barely worked. And this produced literally nothing that was immediately useful. When we spend another design putting it into a boat, we get a boat that just barely matches yours in speed yet is extremely delicate in every way.
I get that steam engines should be hard to make for historical reasons, and I get that steam engines should be hard to make for balance reasons. But then once we finally actually use them, they don't provide benefit that's at all proportional to the effort that took to implement them. If it took more effort and was just straight-up better in at least speed compared to Moskurg boats, sure. If it actually had an advantage instead of spending 3 design actions and multiple revisions to just kind of bring up a few ships to parity with Moskurg's entire fleet. I know rolls are in fact a thing, but this is still annoying to me.

And I'm the one who proposed our new artillery. It explicitly had 3 goals: Higher range, cheaper, and a classified element. The classified element was in fact purposely ignored by Evicted because he felt it was too out of scope. This is fine, but it means the artillery piece which we took massive penalties on was only planning on improving in range and expense. And it was a design action.

[Azzuro]

Just to add my two cents' worth of salt, I think it's unfair that Moskurg was able to develop a functional bomber within a single turn. They may have experience in wind magic, but prior to this turn said wind magic was never used to put and keep something in the air, rather than propel it further and faster.

Overall, I gotta agree with Roboson here, Arstotzka has been getting penalised because our designs are realistic. They may be anachronistic, but if we'd invented "Battlefield Fireball Projectors" that did the exact same thing there'd be much less bitching about it. Moskurg has an advantage insofar as their designs are all fantastical, and thus less easy to raise objections or think of complaints against.

EDIT: Nuke, how did you know our cannons use rifling?

[Taricus]

To be fair it took both the design and revision to actually get something that 'floats', and a expense credit to get it to expensive. The actual movement is provided by spellpower. And as the turn demonstrated, they aren't exactly fast or mobile.