Print

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

[milo christiansen]

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (0)
Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (1) Milo

[milo christiansen]

Ok, questioning and calculating reveals the following information about our core crystals:

Some terms for convience:
Basic core == mk1 core
Itshana basic core == mk2 core
Itshana select core == mk2 select core
Itshana basic + Ikusasa core == mk3 core
Ikusasa select == mk3 select core

For any given size:
1 mk2 core == 1.15-1.25 mk1 cores, say 1.2 for easy figuring.
1 mk2 select core == 2 mk1 cores
1 mk3 core == 1.7 mk1 cores
1 mk3 select core == 2.1 mk1 cores

The sizes are:
VS == 0.25 S cores
S == the basis size, all others are calculated from this
M == 4 S cores

We cannot make anything but mk3 or better M cores.

1 mk3 M core is equivalent to:
6.8 mk1 S cores
5.7 mk2 S cores (rounded)
3.4 mk2 select S cores
4 mk3 S cores

Shroud strength is calculated a bit differently than crystal power. The following size multipliers are used for shroud (expressed as shots to hole/buckle):
XS: 1/3
S: 4/12
M 12/50

Shroud strengths:
1 mk1 VS core == 1/3
1 mk2 VS core == 1.2/3.6
1 mk2 select VS core == 2/6
1 mk3 VS core == 1.7/5.1
1 mk3 select VS core == 2.1/6.3
1 mk1 S core == 4/12
1 mk2 S core == 4.8/14.4
1 mk2 select S core == 8/24
1 mk3 S core == 6.8/20.4
1 mk3 select S core == 8.4/25.2
1 mk3 M core == 20.4/85
1 mk3 select M core == 25.2/105

All cores of a given size cost the same amount of crystal.

Cost:
VS == 3
S == 6
M == 20

Shroud strength per 1 crystal cost for mk1 cores:
VS == 1
S == 2
M == 2.4 (notional)

Pure speculation beyond this point!

Assuming that a M core would cost 24 crystal with average rolls (it rolled 5 on cost), a notional mk1 L core could have the following stats:
Power: 8-16 S cores
Cost: 48-192 crystal

If power is linear and cost is exponential the result would be 8/192, but we do not have enough data to be sure of any of this.

(I hope I got all that right...)

[10ebbor10]

From the description of the Skyskiff we know that mk1 XS can protect against 1 concentrated hit, or 3-4 scattered hits.

[Jilladilla]

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (0)
Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (2) Milo, Jilladilla

To be honest, Cautious Advance has suffered so many edits that it's become a bit of a mess. Sometimes, one just needs to follow the K.I.S.S. principle (Keep It Simple Stupid). And Assault PLACEs is simple and should work out well

[Madman198237]

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (0)
Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (1) Madman
 - 2 dice: (2) Milo, Jilladilla

Try it and see what happens, I want to mix THIS in while we still have the new core crystal project uncompleted.

Paperwork Examination Authority Review for Superior Helpfulness And Proper Exploitation of Designs: Ikusasa Review
A review of the filed paperwork and scientific peer examination of the Ikusasa core crystal project has lead to the all-important question: Can the technology be applied to other crystal types, and how hard will it be to do so? Allowing the PEA group to review the paperwork and consult the scientists on the results should allow for proper prep-work to be done before the actual work can begin. Also, it allows the scientists to get a head start on the paperwork. The morale boost ALONE should be enough to achieve ANYTHING.

[10ebbor10]

Anyway, I must encourage everyone not to vote for Assault Place. For 2 big reasons :

A) It's entirely redundant. We already have Crossbow Corridors of Carnage and anti flanking
B) It's overly complex. Tactic revisions need to be simple, short and focused. Ie, shoot the enemy general, run away and fire backwards, or advance cautiously. Not the convoluted mess of simultanously trying to be anti-flanking, anti-grenade, anti-ambush, anti-sniper tactic.

[milo christiansen]

A) It builds on both those tactics, and adds "don't be lured into ambushes you idiots" as the main new thing. A very valuable new thing.
B) Not at all. It focuses on effective infantry and cannon use, building on previous work to make a single assault tactic that is a simple improvement on what we have already.

[10ebbor10]

A) Considering enemy ambushes consist out of long range attack, your supposed defense will only increase casualties.
B) It's overly complex. Tactics should consists out of small pieces we can fit together at will, not out of monolithic wholes.

Anyway, here is my proposition.

PIN DOWN

Our forces are divided into two broad categories. Those with lighter firepower, and those with heavier fighter power. When encountering an enemy that is in cover or a hard position for their weaponry to reach, the lighter forces will aim to pin down the enemy rather than waste ammunition by futilely trying to breach their cover. Under this covering fire, forces with heavier firepower can move into position to eliminate the enemy. The principle also works in defense. Light, rapid fire units delay the approach, until heavy firepower can kill the enemy.

This tactic, simply, should kill the enemy "snipe and run" tactics dead in their tracks. They'll either be stuck waiting for PLACE to move into position, or they'll have to run through a barrage of venom and gauntlet shots.

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (1) 10ebbor10
 - 2 dice: (0)
Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (1) Madman
 - 2 dice: (2) Milo, Jilladilla
PIN DOWN
 - 1 die : (1) 10ebbor10

Save 1 die (1)10ebbor10

[Madman198237]

Ebbor, you're voting for THREE THINGS, somehow.

I want to do PEARSHAPED---the sooner we learn about our chances, the better, and if whatever tactic we choose does not work we can utilize a different one.

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (1) 10ebbor10
 - 2 dice: (0)

Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (2) Milo, Jilladilla

PIN DOWN
 - 1 die : (1) 10ebbor10

PEARSHAPED
1 die: (1) Madman

Save a die: (2) 10ebbor10, Madman

After a bit of Discord discussion, I think our best bet is to land (putting us at 1/4) and just hold out (Leaving us at 1/4). The more casualties we cause, the better our chances, especially if we can get the grenadiers killed---should be fairly easy, if you think about it---they run right at the guns and now we have enough guns to shoot in every direction. We only need to use the anti-ambush technique that we already have.

[Draignean]

Hum, seems like you guys could use a bit more time on the vote.

Edit: Also, Ebbor, two dice, two votes.

[10ebbor10]

Cautious Advance:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (0)

Assault PLACEs:
 - 1 die: (0)
 - 2 dice: (2) Milo, Jilladilla

PIN DOWN
 - 1 die : (1) 10ebbor10

PEARSHAPED
1 die: (1) Madman

Save a die: (2) 10ebbor10, Madman

[Tack]

Can I get a TLDR on the differences between pin and pear?

[Madman198237]

PEARSHAPED isn't a tactic, it's a proposal to test our abilities to apply Ikukasa to other crystal types (For a greater boost to standard crystals). Oh, and the acronym is MUCH cooler.

[Tack]

... don't we automatically get other Crystal types when we... finish the design?

[milo christiansen]

No. "Someone" thought it was a good idea to only upgrade core crystals.

Anyway, PEARSHAPED is a cool acronym for a bad idea. A revision to see if we can do something that common sense says we can do in the hopes it gets us a bonus.