|
|
|
|
|
September 1st, 2009, 03:03 PM
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,157
Thanks: 69
Thanked 116 Times in 73 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calahan
@ Squirrelloid
My comment on Cloud Trapezing or Teleporting was just a general piece of advice regarding the game itself on how to deal with flying thugs, and had nothing to do with specific nations. Although certain nations are a lot more vunerable to flying thug raiders than others. I'd imagine Shinuyama would struggle more than some due to lack of national Air or Astral.
And I think you are not quite understanding how the movement phase works. Which order a nation moves in during the movement phase is only relavent if there is a 3rd party involved, such as another nation or an Indy province for example. In these situations, the game decides randomly each turn (if I understand correctly) which nation attacks the 3rd party first. With the nation moving second subequently attacking whatever is in the province when they arrive. ie. So the winner between the 3rd party and the nation that the game decided would move first on that particular turn.
But otherwise all non-friendly movements happen at exactly the same time, with whatever battles that result being resolved after movement. So as has already been said, there is no way to catch a flying raider by simply chasing it in the movement phase, as the movement will laways happen at teh same time.
|
Not true actually, i've tested this in SP. If you get attacked before you move your move gets cancelled, and i've had that happen due to normal movement from the AI, moving to my province from a province I was not moving to. (Obviously, the game has to choose a province when two armies moving towards each other meet in combat).
Also, simultaneous movement is likely impossible to implement, and if not then really hard to implement. The game must evaluate moves in some order (nature of computers - there is no 'simultaneous'). Now, you could make it appear simultaneous by waiting to evaluate the effect of a move, but the game does not appear to do so - thus when an army, moving before the other, enters the others territory, the game determines there is combat and cancels the other army's move.
|
September 1st, 2009, 03:13 PM
|
BANNED USER
|
|
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: San Francisco, nr Wales
Posts: 1,539
Thanks: 226
Thanked 296 Times in 136 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
@ Squirrellord
I apologise, but I think I'll leave it to others to explain to you how the movement phase works. Since you are still not getting it because you seem convinced that you already know how it works, and will not listen to any explanations that differ from your mistaken version of it. Maybe others can expalin it in a different way that enables you to undestand.
|
September 1st, 2009, 03:18 PM
|
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,157
Thanks: 69
Thanked 116 Times in 73 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calahan
@ Squirrellord
I apologise, but I think I'll leave it to others to explain to you how the movement phase works. Since you are still not getting it because you seem convinced that you already know how it works, and will not listen to any explanations that differs from your version. Maybe others can expalin it in a different way that enables you to undestand.
|
I'd be happy to discuss it, but I also have plenty of evidence to support my view, and if you want to convince me I'm wrong you'll have to provide evidence to the contrary that disproves my hypothesis and also explain how my evidence fits into your larger picture. All you've done so far is state a belief about how movement works - I have specific evidence that contradicts that belief so your hypothesis is false. (The game could not generate canceled moves i've seen if your hypothesis were true).
Note that the manual also makes the following claims about movement.
1) Moves are resolved in an order (true)
2) That order is determined randomly each turn (false)
(parentheticals are as best as I can determine).
So even the game designer thinks the moves resolve in a particular order - and since my observations agree with that assessment, I see no reason to doubt him there.
His claim about the order being randomly determined can be rejected with p < ~.01, based on the number of events i've witnessed in which the same nation always moved first in a given game (and no events to the contrary).
|
September 1st, 2009, 03:41 PM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 883
Thanks: 14
Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
I don't think the order is in question, just the end result.
First all magic phase movement happens, then contested provinces have their battles.
Then all normal phase movement happens, then any contested provinces resolve battles.
Chasing someone just doesn't work in Dominions. Or if it does they've really messed up movement in some patch.
|
September 1st, 2009, 04:41 PM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 540
Thanks: 10
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
The order of the listing of the nations has nothing at all to do with why you can't catch this particular unit in this particular game.
I'm making unfriendly movement, you are making unfriendly movement...
all unfriendly movements are resolved before ANY combats at all take place...
now if two armies attempt to CROSS eachother by moving into eachothers adjacent provinces then yes movement can be blocked and canceled...
or if something happens during an earlier phase movement can be blocked and canceled..
otherwise? well what is the otherwise? I don't even know what this imagination additional case you are proposing is... feel free to elaborate about it more.
However, I am not incorrect.
You will never manage to catch me by moving in from an adjacent province unless I also choose to move to an adjacent province, since I can fly... I have to be foolish to do this (although i did it last turn because i had no scouting information about the world at all)... this is one of the advantages of flight... additionally another advantage of flight is being able to avoid having a movement CUT in an earlier phase, and additionally you have to patrol/defend all provinces mapmove2 and mapmove3 away from my current location (theres a much higher chance I will move to one of those than I will try to move to a strictly adjacent province... I wouldn't want to have my movement blocked and have that result in you being able to "combine" armies in my province)
I will die a dom death in 1-2turns anyways... additionally our entire team might concede any day now... if you wanna hop on irc sometime and discuss scenarios of movement and movement blocking I'd even be willing to throw together a test game in which I can send you the files to demonstrate any point you remain confused about and then send them to you.
|
September 2nd, 2009, 12:27 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 223
Thanks: 7
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Squirrelloid
Not true actually, i've tested this in SP. If you get attacked before you move your move gets cancelled, and i've had that happen due to normal movement from the AI, moving to my province from a province I was not moving to. (Obviously, the game has to choose a province when two armies moving towards each other meet in combat).
|
Sorry, but you're flat out wrong about this. Try to reproduce it when you're the one giving both orders (play both sides as human). If you manage to, make a thread about it, you'll have discovered something that goes completely contrary to the standard knowledge about movement.
The way it happens is, a) all regular movements happen in whatever order then b) any contested provinces battles are resolved. Even if an army enters the province you're moving from, you still move out. It's even possible, and I've seen it happen several times both in testing and in games, for two armies moving in direct opposition to "pass through" each other. If what you said was true - that movement into the prov blocks movement - then that scenario would never happen.
|
September 2nd, 2009, 01:06 AM
|
Sergeant
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 223
Thanks: 7
Thanked 19 Times in 12 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
accidentally deleted this post the first time because I thought I double-posted. whoops.
We concede the game to the noob team. We've reached a point where no matter if we win all our remaining battles, we won't be able to keep up with your recruitment. Good game.
I think we did a number of little things and you guys did a number of little things right. Firstly, as I mentioned before, the settings weren't really conducive to the gameplay style we chose. Normally, the vets should probably go for using magic early, since you can take on a disproportional number of enemies easilly enough and since we're more familiar with the magic system in theory than the noobs. But with 150% settings, every spell and every thug needs to kill 50% more enemy troops to be as effective. Had we picked nations that relied on troops and suplemented that with buffs and a little magic, we might have done better. Secondly, we didn't support each other very well. The placement was actually pretty bad in allowing vet support, but it was what some of us advocated for, so no one to blame but ourselves. We also tended to segment off into 1v1 or 2v1 battles, for example we had arco on the ropes, but then we decided to leave him for marignon when we should have pushed really hard with all our nations. And we didn't make good use of our raiding nation, which should have supported those of us engaging in the big battles early on. For example, if we had retreat cut shinuyama with eriu raiders the first time he lost to ashdod, we could have pushed on his forts and maybe the north would have lasted longer. And of course we made the placement mistake and the noobs capitalized on it with ermor. Actually, the choice of ermor might not have been a great one either, since reanimation and skellyspam and cap-only sacreds don't scale up with the settings.
And your team did a great job, and were making a lot of veteran plays. Perhaps we should have used our veto for some of you at the start (Namad likes to comment that some of you have been playing for longer than he has). When I saw teleport-mind-duel squads and ice pebble staffs show up I knew we were in big trouble.
Anyway, good game, and I hope you all learned something. I did make a note earlier, before the current discussion broke out, that one thing that some of you hadn't picked up on yet was proper movement order, so interesting that we're having this discussion now.
|
September 2nd, 2009, 01:46 AM
|
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Finland
Posts: 883
Thanks: 14
Thanked 11 Times in 9 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
Yup, thanks for the game.
Agree with most that TheDemon said. I like the concept really, but settings this time was really weird in parts.
|
September 2nd, 2009, 02:01 AM
|
Second Lieutenant
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 540
Thanks: 10
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
btw the correct strategy I referenced earlier that the noobs failed to employ was just simply 'attack my capital with shinyuma'
the evocations and troops of the other nations were something I could deal with, even if not deal with well... I couldn't deal with shinyuma's troops nor their evocations whatsoever.... yet shinyuma sat on the sidelines for a half dozen turns
of course once you realized what this strategy was I immediately folded
|
September 2nd, 2009, 02:11 AM
|
|
General
|
|
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Irving, TX
Posts: 3,207
Thanks: 54
Thanked 60 Times in 35 Posts
|
|
Re: Noobs vs. Vets III: Revolution, MA, CBM. Let's get it on!
I've been a long time gone but good game noobs. We took one out of three, so I guess that means that noobs in numbers win Well, there's a lot more that goes into it than that. Game #2 was my favorite.
__________________
Be forewarned, anything I post is probably either 1) Sophomoric humor, 2) Satire, 3) A gross exaggeration of the power I currently possess, 4) An outright lie, or 5) Drunken ramblings.
I occasionally post something useful.
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|