Print

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

[Roboson]

revision
4 - (Chiefwaffles)Revise Large-scale Plant Growth: Chiefwaffles, Roboson, RAM, Tyrant
0 - (RAM)Refined Steam Engines:
0 - (RAM)Summon water:
1 -(10ebbor10) Anti Lucky strike charms

Credit
1 - (Chiefwaffles)Expense credit for Anti-magic bombs: Chiefwaffles
2 - (10ebbor10) Expense credit on longboats : 10ebbor10, Roboson
1 - (RAM) Myark: RAM

I'm changing my vote for the expense credit. Longships would be better off being less expensive, especially if we can ever get steam-engines viable.

[Chiefwaffles]

Anti-magic bombs would be the way to win in the Jungle, and would significantly help us in any land scenario.

I say once we secure the jungle, we should then focus on the sea with regular designs and revisions. Anti-magic bombs could even help us there, since they do have wizards on their boats, their wizards do use magic, our anti-magic bombs explode with magic, and cause fires.
Cheaper anti-magic bombs help us in land and at sea. Cheaper longboats just help us at sea.


Also, RAM: What's the expense credit on Myark supposed to mean?

[10ebbor10]

Anti-magic bombs would be the way to win in the Jungle, and would significantly help us in any land scenario.

No, they're not.

All they do is kill the enemy mages. It does nothing else. It's useless against normal infantry, against cavalry, and against their siege weaponry.

If the enemy uses their wind spell, they're useless. If they improve their anti-magic, they're useless. If they get more shields, they're useless (if we don't know behind which shield the mage us hiding, we can't shoot it).

They're not the  wunderwaffe you think they are.

I say once we secure the jungle, we should then focus on the sea with regular designs and revisions. Anti-magic bombs could even help us there, since they do have wizards on their boats, their wizards do use magic, our anti-magic bombs explode with magic, and cause fires.

If we lose the Sea, we won't secure the Jungle or hold it for long.

The enemy is attacking us from beyond our longbow range. Our anti-magic bombs can never reach them. We will not gain any benefit from arrows at  sea., just as we didn't get anything from fireballs.

Extra ships could outflank them and cut them of, forcing them into fireball range.

[Roboson]

Anti-magic bombs would be the way to win in the Jungle, and would significantly help us in any land scenario.

I say once we secure the jungle, we should then focus on the sea with regular designs and revisions. Anti-magic bombs could even help us there, since they do have wizards on their boats, their wizards do use magic, our anti-magic bombs explode with magic, and cause fires.
Cheaper anti-magic bombs help us in land and at sea. Cheaper longboats just help us at sea.


Also, RAM: What's the expense credit on Myark supposed to mean?

Yeah, but if we start using them on the general population, then they could recover some and easily reverse engineer them. If we revised them to explode after a duration instead of on a magic trigger (which means they're just exploding arrows not anti-magic arrows and can be used on their entire army), then I could get behind it. But as it stands, only our anti-mages need to use them so we don't have to make them cheaper. In other words, they only have so many mages, so we only need so many arrows.

Plus someone goaded the GM into making them not explode in anti-magic zones (which I personally disagree with as anti-magic zones are sustained by magic and thus any arrow that enters these zones should explode upon passing through the magical border that keeps other magic out), and since we already know they're looking into anti-magic, it would be pointless to waste it on something that will just be made obsolete.

[10ebbor10]

Yeah, but if we start using them on the general population, then they could recover some and easily reverse engineer them

Reverse engineering is not a thing in this game.

No worry about that.

I agree with the rest of the argument.

[Roboson]

Yeah, but if we start using them on the general population, then they could recover some and easily reverse engineer them

Reverse engineering is not a thing in this game.

No worry about that.

Honestly I'm not to sure about that. I really doubt they could disrupt our crystal weapons unless they at least got ahold of some for testing. Its highly suspicious that our anti-magic doesn't dissolve them, but theirs does and over a much wider area.

Edit: Especially as we spent at least one revision stabilizing them.

[RAM]

Also, RAM: What's the expense credit on Myark supposed to mean?

I do not know. But it makes Myark more common, right? Maybe control a tower and shoot fireballs from it? Maybe he splits into two like a bacteria? Perhaps he gets those mountain magic cards he always wanted and the extra morale helps him fight... I started with the idea of more apprentices, then decided that just wasn't meta enough...

One reason I am avoiding longboats like the plague, is that we will hopefully be building a steamship next turn, so the longboats are about to be redundant. That and they already can't catch the enemy, so it is not going to win us the fight so much as play delaying tactics. I mean, sure, more boats means more encirclements and such, so it is not totally wasted, and they may well be planning a big push there, but they are still at least two turns from making a push and if we really strangle the jungle this turn then we can focus on the sea next.

All (antimagic bombs) do is inconvenience the enemy mages. It does nothing else. It's useless against normal infantry, against cavalry, and against their siege weaponry.

They can counteract the aim bonus, presumably at greater than shortbow range. They probably counter the heroism wand, not that they are using it much. There may be some other buff spells that we don't know about. Bringing in more of them gives them numbers enough to allow us to block magic not just at the source, but also at the target...

If the enemy uses their wind spell, they're useless. If they improve their anti-magic, they're useless. If they get more shields, they're useless (if we don't know behind which shield the mage us hiding, we can't shoot it).

They are effective against wind, wind deflects, bombs affect an area. It helps, but is no immunity. The antimagic would need to be permanent around their mages, which would render them useless, unless they were immune to their own antimagic AND could do something else while fielding enough to protect themselves. They can't cast at us without showing themselves, either they give up on antimagic, which means our fireballs are free to see how tough those shields really are(helpful hint: the wizard is behind the shield that cancels out the fireballs and is doing nothing other than that, there were common archers behind the shield-shaped craters in the ground) and can't use anything directed at our forces, or the front-lines for that matter.
 The bombs shut down a mage long enough to make an attempt to deal with them. It is not perfect, but it helps a lot.

The enemy is attacking us from beyond our longbow range. Our anti-magic bombs can never reach them. We will not gain any benefit from themat  sea.

True enough, but we can disrupt counter-offensives with them as the enemy won't do much if they forgo everything except their boulders.

Extra ships could outflank them and cut them of, forcing them into fireball range.

Agreed! But they are not exactly designed for agile flanking manoeuvres. I don't doubt that it would, indeed, help, but it doesn't seem that it would be vital in the immediate term nor best capitalising on the longship's strength.

[Chiefwaffles]

We still don't know how their anti-magic stuff works, right? Because as far as I know, our anti-magic just "absorbs" magic, and since that's the same thing our anti-magic bombs use, so it makes since our charms stop our bombs. But I would assume their anti-magic fields are still based on magic. Evicted was somewhat vague when he said they didn't work with anti-magic, and I didn't see anything noting interactions between the bombs and their anti-magic in last combat report, so I guess we don't know?

And the idea behind equipping our normal forces with it is simple: Overwhelming the enemy. Anti-magic bombs, if handled properly (and they will be handled properly, based on what Evicted said), will still work just as well as regular arrows against mundane enemy forces. But their effectiveness is drastically increased against enemy mages, which aren't exactly uncommon - see below - are greatly increased.

At the start of the game, it is assumed that you can put out one wizard (probably an apprentice) per five squads, so spells will take effect accordingly.

And it's a safe assumption that they'll have mages next to their ranged units in order to enchant the arrows or whatever it is they do, helping us greatly.

We don't have to worry about finding where their mages are because we wouldn't need to when all our forces are equipped with anti-magic bombs. You either shoot someone and it acts like an arrow, or you get a bonus and they explode in addition to being shot at, starting fires.
Again, I'd like to emphasize that managing forces equipped with cheap anti-magic bombs is explicitly not a problem.


We need to actually secure the jungle first. Worst case scenario is we lose the western sea this battle report, then we focus on winning it back for a bit. How would losing the western sea cause us to also lose our advantage in the jungle in the same thread? The anti-magic bombs probably won't help with the sea too much. So if they do help, then we don't lose the sea. If they don't, then we lose the sea.
But regardless: Like I said, losing the western sea is not the end of the world. With another design and/or revision for the steam engine we can greatly increase our effectiveness at sea without having to waste the expense credit on cheaper longboats.

And if people are set on using our expense credit to simply make longboats cheaper, I would like to point out that that's at most a stop-gap measure. At most. Cheaper longboats would help but it doesn't fix the core problem that we're just out-ranged.



@RAM who really needs to stop ninjaing my posts: I agree completely. Except for the Myark thing. I don't reaaally think that's how expense credits work. The longboat thing is a really good point, so I'll emphasize it too!
Longboats are about to be obsolete! We shouldn't bother making them cheaper or revising them when we're about to completely outclass them next design phase.

[10ebbor10]

but they are still at least two turns from making a push and if we really strangle the jungle this turn then we can focus on the sea next.

Capture is imminent.

We lose a few ships before Moskurg retreats, but it's not quite enough to force us to give up a section of coastline.  Another year like this and we'll be forced to give up ground.

They can counteract the aim bonus, presumably at greater than shortbow range

The enemy upgraded their bows to be equal to ours long ago.

They probably counter the heroism wand, not that they are using it much

Al-mutriqa is out, so no hero wand.

One reason I am avoiding longboats like the plague, is that we will hopefully be building a steamship next turn, so the longboats are about to be redundant

That steam ship is going to be bloody expensive. We will need other stuff to support it. They will not be obsolete, barring ridiculous rolls.

True enough, but we can disrupt counter-offensives with them as the enemy won't do much if they forgo everything except their boulders

And that is enough to beat us back inch by inch.

Agreed! But they are not exactly designed for agile flanking manoeuvres. I don't doubt that it would, indeed, help, but it doesn't seem that it would be vital in the immediate term nor best capitalising on the longship's strength.

It is. Being flanked by Sea in the Jungle will collapse our front.

will still work just as well as regular arrows against mundane enemy forces

They use gemstone arrowheads. That can not punch through armor. Without explosion, you may as well be shooting nerf darts.

ow would losing the western sea cause us to also lose our advantage in the jungle in the same thread

I'll look it up later, but controlling the Sea gives a big advantage to land combat.

Fluff wise, they may land enemy forces destroying our frost tower or supply lines.

And if people are set on using our expense credit to simply make longboats cheaper, I would like to point out that that's at most a stop-gap measure. At most. Cheaper longboats would help but it doesn't fix the core problem that we're just out-ranged.

The arrows are no less of a stop gap measure, and don't even adress a problem.

We do not face arrow shortages. We need arrows only for mage hunters, and the mage hunters have all the arrows they need.

[Roboson]

Longboats will in no way be obsolete. Oars will be obsolete. We are not going to build an entire new fleet of ships for our steam engines, were going to put steam engines in our existing longboats.

[Chiefwaffles]

Ebbor. Stop making things up.
The design and combat reports both suggest anti-magic bombs are as effective as regular arrows. 

[10ebbor10]

On a side note, a question.

Do we know how our anti-magic arrows interact with Moskurgian anti-arrow wind spells?

Ebbor. Stop making things up.
The design and combat reports both suggest anti-magic bombs are as effective as regular arrows. 

No they don't.

They only describe the arrows as used against mages, where they explode. Their normal effect is never mentioned, so we can only extrapolate from the fact it's made of Quartz. Not the worst arrow material, but worse than iron. Neolithic weaponry against modern armor is going to fail.

That said, this discussion is pointless, so before it starts.

GM : Do our anti-magic arrows work as well as normal iron/steel arrows against normal targets, where they will not explode?

Not that it matters. Instant logistics means our forces will use normal arrows as needed.

[Roboson]

*Cough* We could easily make arrows that just explode upon impact, thus solving this debate *Cough Cough*

[10ebbor10]

Not in a revision.

[Roboson]

Not in a revision.

Not arguing that we can.