|
my dad posted:Gygjas! Since the projections keep the boosts the casters got from boosters before casting the spell as their baseline (but not the boosters themselves), they can actually pull it off. yeah, that would work. i was thinking more like sniping raiding thugs with hellbind heart or life for a life but a safe way to horror bomb is pretty drat cool
|
# ? May 6, 2024 12:38 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 10:13 |
|
also if you want to do the projection+gifts from heaven thing i feel like you could pull it off pretty easily with ea or ma celestial masters
|
# ? May 6, 2024 14:55 |
|
Cerebral Bore posted:also if you want to do the projection+gifts from heaven thing i feel like you could pull it off pretty easily with ea or ma celestial masters Yep. The Kailasa/Bandar Log/Patala line can also pull it off with their summons (or just recruitables because the Nagarishi is some loving bullshit), as well as late age Man with the Magisters Arcane.
|
# ? May 6, 2024 15:17 |
|
now that i've looked at it a bit more you can get the projection+gifts combo online really early too with ma celestial masters or nagarishis, all you need is evo5 and construction 5 as long as you have the glamour gems better hope you have fliers with magic attacks available if you fight someone who can pull this off with recruitable mages, i guess
|
# ? May 6, 2024 17:05 |
|
Does someone have the Dominions short story about a magic item crafter without legs being commanded by their pretender to wear leggings?
|
# ? May 6, 2024 17:15 |
|
Mister Bates posted:DF is actually an extremely good example of how to do the poo poo that Songs of Syx does in a gross and creepy way well rimworld implements a very crude version of this in one of the dlc. you can create your own religion and people outside of the religion will interact with you differently depending on how you set it up. its kind of boring because there are perks and obviously going the route of collectivization is way better than most other things you can do
|
# ? May 6, 2024 20:03 |
|
Songs of Syx does do scale better than pretty much any other city-builder of its type, a lategame city will have thousands of people in it and you eventually stop thinking about or really even noticing individual citizens at all, instead looking at entire demographic categories and broader trends it's also very committed to modeling a very specific type of municipal development - namely, fantasy trappings and weird race poo poo aside, it is modeling classical-era Mediterranean city-state development, and the gradual transition from city-state to capital of an empire. it's not just a fantasy city-builder, it's an Athens or early Rome simulator, and the mechanics are pretty much all designed with that in mind. Dwarf Fortress is an obvious and heavy inspiration for the game but there's definitely just a bit of the old Impressions city-builders in there too, especially with the new water mechanics. the one thing it's missing to complete that picture is some sort of political simulation, let me hold citizens' assemblies in the central plaza to debate trade agreements or war declarations
|
# ? May 6, 2024 22:12 |
|
Main Effort: The End The game has been called off due to mounting technical issues with Flashpoint Campaigns making it untenable. One of the worst issues that the game decided some units have withdrawn, despite them not only not being told to withdraw, but also physically remaining on the map. There were a few other issues, apparently. It is a shame, I was having a lot of fun. Let's look at the situation. First, I'll quote the umpire's narration to the spectators as the game went on, then add my own perspectives. The wording and paragraph breakdown will look a little weird, since it was copied from discord. umpire's commentary posted:The Recon Battle: Part 1 Now, my perspective. Let's look at the final state. It does look like bypassing through the south would have worked, although as discussed, betting on the enemy making a mistake is a bad gamble. It was also unnecessary, as we were smashing right through their main defenses, and that's before most of our forces had even entered the fray. The 45th in the north had pulled off a beautiful flank. Thanks to excellent use of smoke by the 45th commander, NATO had no idea where they were. The first sign they received was that a scout unit had been destroyed. The second sign was when a company of T-80s passed within a few hundred metres of an HQ that, luckily for it, was in the process of relocating. Down south, the 211th was my focus as DAG. We didn't know the extent of the forces they were encountering, but my use of smoke, as well as delegating nearly the entire DAG including Grads allowed a single company of 9 T-80BVs (they had already suffered one casualty) to achieve the following: While facing an L-shaped ambush formed by prepared fighting positions, Abrams, dismounts and TOW carriers, backed up by a Kiowa and an attempted but failed A-10 CAS run. Very respectable! So, the northern defenses were now flanked by an entire Guards Tank Regiment. The southern defenses were being smashed by another. An entire GTR and an entire MRR was going to smash into the remains shortly. The plan worked perfectly. The NATO plan was as one might expect: obsessed with "individual initiative" and far too many terms to "aid" that decision-making rather than having a coherent plan in the first place. I won't post the whole plan, but here is a tease. NATO plan posted:There is a layer of bullshit, however. After the game, I found out that the objectives were asymmetrical. So, our stated objective was to seize crossings by 21:00 at the latest (if I recall correctly), and hold until relief. NATO's objective was not to hold them until 21:00 or retake before Soviet relief. Their objective was to delay us until the evacuation of Bamberg munitions depots, then evacuate as much of their force as they could, then blowing the bridges. You may notice from the final screenshot that basically all the bridges were blown already. By the end of the game, they only needed to hold another 4 hours. I'm okay with asymmetric objectives and incomplete information in principle, but not when the game is already so NATO-brained, and we are denied the use of a Soviet amount of artillery rounds. The bigger problem is that if NATO approached it with a truly analytical mind, and treated it as a game, then the scenario would have been impossible for us to win. They could have deployed a dispersed delaying force in closed terrain, a strong counter-attack force, and then set up all their other defenses around the last bridge. Even without resistance, we would not have made it there in time before the munitions depot had been evacuated. All NATO would need to do then is leave, and blow the last bridge on their way out. That is fundamentally poo poo scenario design. Regardless, I had a lot of fun, despite all the issues. Thanks C-SPAM for helping with the plan, and being along for the ride. Zeppelin Insanity has issued a correction as of 02:30 on May 7, 2024 |
# ? May 7, 2024 02:25 |
|
all glitchy on the western front
|
# ? May 7, 2024 02:34 |
|
I've been informed that this scenario comes like that from the game, and it is not the umpire's fault for making the asymmetrical objectives bullshit. In that case, lmao.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 02:37 |
|
Well I mean it was better than our suspicion of WMDs coming out at some point
|
# ? May 7, 2024 02:41 |
|
It sucks that technical issues (and the recce commander) got in the way, but I think you guys did an excellent job. Well done. The traffic jam and trying to get the air orders going as units arrived was a headache, but where the mechanics of the game cooperated with your intent, "It was also unnecessary, as we were smashing right through their main defenses, and that's before most of our forces had even entered the fray." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lT40nTFax7U https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bo_LCroJ7QA CN CREW-VESSEL has issued a correction as of 02:44 on May 7, 2024 |
# ? May 7, 2024 02:41 |
|
Zeppelin Insanity posted:The NATO plan was as one might expect: obsessed with "individual initiative" and far too many terms to "aid" that decision-making rather than having a coherent plan in the first place. I won't post the whole plan, but here is a tease. gradenko_2000 posted:Lol at the saps on the other side of Zeppelin Insanity having to deal with their opfor getting general staff planning
|
# ? May 7, 2024 02:44 |
|
I see that the NATO side's immediate instinct was to create a
|
# ? May 7, 2024 06:26 |
|
quote:not sure if i'd describe smashing through the only line of resistance and now about to flank the nato formation as a 'wasteful' use of firepower, considering that's exactly what you bring the shells for
|
# ? May 7, 2024 08:07 |
|
BearsBearsBears posted:I see that the NATO side's immediate instinct was to create a most realistic part of the game system imo
|
# ? May 7, 2024 08:51 |
|
atelier morgan posted:not sure if i'd describe smashing through the only line of resistance and now about to flank the nato formation as a 'wasteful' use of firepower, considering that's exactly what you bring the shells for This was specifically in reference to 2 recon vehicles being hit by a recon platoon, 2 companies of T-80s, 40 mortar rounds and 60 122mm cluster munitions. On the other hand, this resulted in NATO having no idea they were about to be overrun so it was certainly worth it. Cerebral Bore posted:most realistic part of the game system imo Both sides played their roles perfectly.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 12:06 |
|
BearsBearsBears posted:I see that the NATO side's immediate instinct was to create a I think they played their role really well. Next scenario play as Cubans and do all your planning with some lines in the sand and complain the Russians use way too many arrows. Also, did y'all court martial that recon command?
|
# ? May 7, 2024 18:39 |
|
Orange Devil posted:I think they played their role really well. Turns out there was a pretty good player, but he ended up way too busy with their life, and the replacement sourced after first contact just got confused, overwhelmed, and threw their hands in the air. This is the downside of a large game with people who aren't experts, I guess.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 19:05 |
|
tbf, the test of wartime is that peacetime militaries produce and promote people, some say 30-50%, that do get confused, throw up their hands, and blunder into disaster when combat begins. It’s covered in The Psychology of Military Incompetence. There was a British staff officer under Sir John French who shot himself after the first two weeks of combat in the summer of 1914.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 19:12 |
|
CN CREW-VESSEL posted:tbf, the test of wartime is that peacetime militaries produce and promote people, some say 30-50%, that do get confused, throw up their hands, and blunder into disaster when combat begins. It’s covered in The Psychology of Military Incompetence. I'd shoot myself too if there was a war on and Sir John French was my commander
|
# ? May 7, 2024 19:13 |
|
was there a French officer named Jean British
|
# ? May 7, 2024 21:29 |
|
I'm suddenly reminder of my father telling me about the gangster kid who somehow managed to get himself into an actual regular military unit (my father's) instead of some of the paramilitaries running around, who kept talking about thug life and how he's seen 'the real poo poo', who proceeded to intentionally shoot himself in the foot after seeing what actual combat is like. (and because he's an idiot, the guy did it with one of those signal bullets, or whatever the gently caress they're called, which proceeded to set his foot and boot on fire around the wound) e: There's also the guy who may or may not have committed suicide via fiddling with an AA gun round while holding it an inch from his own face. Either suicide or suicidal idiocy. my dad has issued a correction as of 21:42 on May 7, 2024 |
# ? May 7, 2024 21:40 |
|
Mister Bates posted:was there a French officer named Jean British Dont't know but I do know that John French didn't speak French. Also apparently hated the French? This wasn't seen as a problem by the British when coordinating with his opposite in France, who did not speak English.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 21:42 |
|
German officer named Wilhelm Russia
|
# ? May 7, 2024 21:57 |
|
American General, Robert China, PhD in Latin American Studies.
|
# ? May 7, 2024 23:13 |
|
to end all wars is on sale for ten bucks on steam how bad is the ui in that one
|
# ? May 7, 2024 23:26 |
|
I’ve been playing a lot of Manor Lords, which I am terrible at, and I’m wondering if they’re going to add any ability to designate common land. Or is my Anglocentrism showing again and that wasn’t really a thing in medieval Germany?
|
# ? May 8, 2024 00:28 |
i thought the anglos were on the relatively higher end of segregated commoner ownership?
|
|
# ? May 8, 2024 00:39 |
|
stumblebum posted:i thought the anglos were on the relatively higher end of segregated commoner ownership? They certainly were after enclosing land accelerated during the Tudor period, but since the game is set roughly around 1400, I would expect that allotments of land for common usage would be fairly (pun not intended) common. I suppose that to some extent, all of the land in Manor Lords is commonly used, and livestock are purchased using a region's common treasury, rather than the Lord's personal wealth. It's also possible I am way overthinking a computer game here.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 02:48 |
|
One thing I found odd in Manor Lords is that there is a dedicated woodcutters building that produces firewood and your peasants can't chop their own. I always feel like games like that force you to specialize your labor real early. As I understand it, peasant families would produce most of the goods they consumed within the household including things like firewood, clothing, and beer. Increasing labor specialization should be something that happens as you go from village to town instead of something that's mandatory from the start of the game.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 13:26 |
|
Endman posted:I’ve been playing a lot of Manor Lords, which I am terrible at, and I’m wondering if they’re going to add any ability to designate common land. I think everywhere there was land that couldn't be easily divided was cultivated by peasants. That's "wasteland." Any non-designated arable land should be available for cultivation on the peasants' own initiative.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 13:39 |
|
BearsBearsBears posted:One thing I found odd in Manor Lords is that there is a dedicated woodcutters building that produces firewood and your peasants can't chop their own. I always feel like games like that force you to specialize your labor real early. As I understand it, peasant families would produce most of the goods they consumed within the household including things like firewood, clothing, and beer. Increasing labor specialization should be something that happens as you go from village to town instead of something that's mandatory from the start of the game. Joe or Jolene Peasant was often not allowed to cut down a tree on their own initiative. Those are the Lord’s trees. Thus your woodsman or charcoal burner who is allowed to cut and sell firewood/make it into coal as their job. It was an effective check on speed of deforestation. This is why the heroic guy in little red riding hood shows up to kill the wolf with an axe! But… peasants were allowed to walk around picking up loose sticks and branches and things to supplement their firewood. Once it hit the ground of its own accord it was fair game. The term “windfall” comes from this! A more isolated tenant farm would cut their own firewood from the land they were on. But a castle town like in manor lords probably had a family whose job was woodcutting. Also these rules varied wildly by place and time! My knowledge here is anglocentric.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 17:39 |
1400 is also pretty solidly in the wake of the consequence of the bubonic plague and subsequent rise of yeoman (re-)settlerism in europe, so indivualized households would be increasingly common during this period compared to the traditional commons vs. estates dynamic right?
|
|
# ? May 8, 2024 18:18 |
|
Keeping deforestation in check through regulation is just communism though.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 18:34 |
|
JonBolds posted:Joe or Jolene Peasant was often not allowed to cut down a tree on their own initiative. Those are the Lord’s trees. Thus your woodsman or charcoal burner who is allowed to cut and sell firewood/make it into coal as their job. It was an effective check on speed of deforestation. This is why the heroic guy in little red riding hood shows up to kill the wolf with an axe! So it would make sense to have anybody allowed to cut firewood until you (the lord) decide that's enough of that nonsense and make a decree that only the foresters can do it. Dwarf Fortress is a game that I think does labor specialization pretty well. You start out with few dwarfs and most of them need to do multiple jobs. As your fortress grows you wind up with labor specialization to such a degree that nobody even does their own hauling anymore. Edit: What I would like to see in a game like Manor Lords is when you start your villagers are largely self-sufficient but also very poor and little time for non-subsistence labor. They cut their own firewood, make their own clothes, and brew their own beer. They supplement farming with foraging and hunting if they don't have enough farmland. Maybe they even grow crops outside of the plots you designate for them if the household is large enough to want to do that (you need to appoint a sheriff to stop this sort of nonsense). They wear roughspun clothing in natural colors. As you advance into the game you make dedicated brewers and clothiers and foresters. This provides with your peasants with better quality goods and more free time (and you can adjust quality vs quantity of goods produced). You can then let the peasants have more feast days with their extra time and food or you can use them for corvee labor on your fancy castle. BearsBearsBears has issued a correction as of 22:19 on May 8, 2024 |
# ? May 8, 2024 21:38 |
|
BearsBearsBears posted:So it would make sense to have anybody allowed to cut firewood until you (the lord) decide that's enough of that nonsense and make a decree that only the foresters can do it. Sure, but given that Manor Lords is fundamentally not a Dwarf Fortress about running individual agent simulation I think that wouldn’t be great use of design and programming time. A wishlist feature for the future, maybe, would be to have peasants who can’t source basics like firewood from a market go collect it themselves, thus cutting into time spent on their properly-assigned job.
|
# ? May 8, 2024 21:58 |
|
The dev was also wise enough to consult with a bunch of historians to get a good sense of the social history he using as the scaffold for the game but recognizes that it isn't "historically accurate" since that's a loaded term, and functionally meaningless in a computer game. I think he did good job capturing some aspects of mid to late medieval living. The game also isn't feature complete so it'll be interesting to see how he fleshes out region specialization.
|
# ? May 9, 2024 01:31 |
|
Stairmaster posted:to end all wars is on sale for ten bucks on steam how bad is the ui in that one As bad as the rest of them, but the game is probably their best, with RUS a close second in my books. I have a huge soft spot for those games though, not much else compares. To End All Wars is the best in my books as I find myself always reproducing the same bad solutions to the war organically. "Maybe if I concentrate on the western front I can achieve a breakthrough if I thrown enough troops at the line? Look at all those dead, wow! Hmmm, maybe if I put more troops in the Sinai I can knock the Ottos out and then focus on Germans? More dead huh? And the Ottos don't really matter??? Wild." Had like 1 million die in an offensive Haig would be proud of - 10/10 You have to play with people though, the AI just isn't up to it. Verse the AI you can wrap things up by 1916 as the Russians. Edit: Anyone else in here a glutton for pain that plays AGEoD games? My regular opponent hasn't had the time lately, I'd be up for a casual slow TEAW or RUS game. I have other titles, but I tend not to enjoy them as much, still could be fun though. Virtual Russian has issued a correction as of 01:55 on May 9, 2024 |
# ? May 9, 2024 01:42 |
|
|
# ? May 28, 2024 10:13 |
|
Dreylad posted:The dev was also wise enough to consult with a bunch of historians to get a good sense of the social history he using as the scaffold for the game but recognizes that it isn't "historically accurate" since that's a loaded term, and functionally meaningless in a computer game. I should add that I'm extremely impressed with the game so far. It gives me big Settlers feelings, which is a win in itself; I adored those games. Really what prevents it from being a good simulation of medieval life is the deep level of control it gives you over your people, even stretching to choosing what they do with their back yards, but you obviously want that level of control in a game so that you can make your idea of a perfect medieval village. The alternative would also require a level of AI programming that is beyond most big studios, let alone a single developer. The lives of real country folk in medieval England at least, was often characterised by a distance from authority that contrasts with a system of law and punishment that often appears draconian to us in the modern age. The King's power may have been almost absolute and he could punish you horrendously if you crossed him, but the King was also very far away if you're some random Yorkshire peasant. Or at least it was very far away until his army rocked up on its way to Scotland and stole all your crops, ate all your preserves, pinched your best oxen and gave you nothing but a promissory note with some vague guarantee of payment at an unspecified date in the future.
|
# ? May 9, 2024 02:02 |