Book 3 - Page 170

Jed's head baby, Jed's head

Book 3 - Page 170
Comic - Book 3 - Page 170
Recent posts... (See full thread)
Anomynous 167 wrote:
OneHugeTuck wrote:
Anomynous 167 wrote:

You don't need a Capitol to create a side,


Yes you do.

Please give an example of how a side has been or could be created without a Capital.

I just did give an example: Faq. You sack the Capitol while leaving the Ruler or Heir alive.


That makes no sense. You don't create a side by leaving an ruler/heir alive.

Anomynous 167 wrote:
There are also plenty of sides that lack Capitols, they're called Natural Allies. There are also Barbarians who are each a side unto themselves, otherwise it would be impossible for two warring sides to both hire Barbarian mercenaries in their fued as the Barbarians wouldn't be able to hit each other.


Again, that makes no sense. Why wouldn't barbarians be able to hit each other?? What?

Anomynous 167 wrote:
You don't need a Capitol City to have a Side, but you do need one to have a Capitol Side. That's what makes them Capitol Sides.


Semantics maybe, but no.

Jillian post-faq-fall wasn't a side. She was an heir. So she could start a new side if she claimed a capital site. That makes her an heir with potential, not 'a side'. Just a unit running around with a purse and hopes of survival.

Thus barbarians aren't sides unto themselves. They can presumably start a side if they claim a capital site (is that canon? I know it's in fanfic......can a barbarian claim a capital site and start a side?).

I don't remember if allies are 'sides', so won't argue the point.

Ozamantz said that Faq didn't fall when Stanley sacked it. I say yes, the side did fall. An heir survived that -could- resurrect the side (and call it the same name or a different name).
OneHugeTuck wrote:
Jillian post-faq-fall wasn't a side. She was an heir. So she could start a new side if she claimed a capital site. That makes her an heir with potential, not 'a side'. Just a unit running around with a purse and hopes of survival.

Thus barbarians aren't sides unto themselves. They can presumably start a side if they claim a capital site (is that canon? I know it's in fanfic......can a barbarian claim a capital site and start a side?).

I don't remember if allies are 'sides', so won't argue the point.

Ozamantz said that Faq didn't fall when Stanley sacked it. I say yes, the side did fall. An heir survived that -could- resurrect the side (and call it the same name or a different name).

No, I said that Faq did fall.

I don't think being an heir matters after a side's capitals and ruler both fall; I think being an heir enables the unit to go barbarian in the field instead of disbanding, but after that they're mechanically a regular barbarian warlord or caster.
OneHugeTuck wrote:
Anomynous 167 wrote:
OneHugeTuck wrote:

Yes you do.

Please give an example of how a side has been or could be created without a Capital.

I just did give an example: Faq. You sack the Capitol while leaving the Ruler or Heir alive.


That makes no sense. You don't create a side by leaving an ruler/heir alive.

I admit I only tried to answer that due to Orders, coherent answers are not guaranteed. And for the record, you asked how to create a side without a capitol, but not necessarilly a new one.

You start with a Capitol Side, then you sans the capitol.
OneHugeTruck wrote:
Anomynous 167 wrote:
There are also plenty of sides that lack Capitols, they're called Natural Allies. There are also Barbarians who are each a side unto themselves, otherwise it would be impossible for two warring sides to both hire Barbarian mercenaries in their fued as the Barbarians wouldn't be able to hit each other.


Again, that makes no sense. Why wouldn't barbarians be able to hit each other?? What?

This admittedly, is the easiest of your questions to answer. Units that are either allied or of the same side cannot engage in combat against eachother.
Theoretically if Barbarians are not each a side unto them selves, then Jim[Barbarian] and Bob[Barbarian] would not be able to attack eachother as they are both classed under the side [Barbarian]
However if each Barbarian is a side unto themselves then Jim[Jim] and Bob[Bob] may fight as they can declare war on eachother.

Maybe what makes Barbarians [Barbarians] is that they all take their turns at the same time.

Although then again, we have never seen a Barbarian fight another Barbarian... So my entire point I was making could really be irrelevant.
Then again, it's not technically an engagement if you kill another Barbarian from a distance.
OneHugeTruck wrote:
Anomynous 167 wrote:
You don't need a Capitol City to have a Side, but you do need one to have a Capitol Side. That's what makes them Capitol Sides.


Semantics maybe, but no.

Jillian post-faq-fall wasn't a side. She was an heir. So she could start a new side if she claimed a capital site. That makes her an heir with potential, not 'a side'. Just a unit running around with a purse and hopes of survival.

Thus barbarians aren't sides unto themselves. They can presumably start a side if they claim a capital site (is that canon? I know it's in fanfic......can a barbarian claim a capital site and start a side?).

I don't remember if allies are 'sides', so won't argue the point.

Barbarians can claim Capitol sites, it was brought up during the Great Jenga Fire (Parson would have gone rogue if it wasn't for those meddling rest of Gobwin Knob): and Jillian the Barbarian did start a new side.

Ozamataz Buckshank wrote:
OneHugeTuck wrote:
Jillian post-faq-fall wasn't a side. She was an heir. So she could start a new side if she claimed a capital site. That makes her an heir with potential, not 'a side'. Just a unit running around with a purse and hopes of survival.

Thus barbarians aren't sides unto themselves. They can presumably start a side if they claim a capital site (is that canon? I know it's in fanfic......can a barbarian claim a capital site and start a side?).

I don't remember if allies are 'sides', so won't argue the point.

Ozamantz said that Faq didn't fall when Stanley sacked it. I say yes, the side did fall. An heir survived that -could- resurrect the side (and call it the same name or a different name).

No, I said that Faq did fall.

I don't think being an heir matters after a side's capitals and ruler both fall; I think being an heir enables the unit to go barbarian in the field instead of disbanding, but after that they're mechanically a regular barbarian warlord or caster.

Look, no one is saying that Old-Faq didn't fall (although OneHugeTruck is saying that you said it).

I am just saying that Old-Faq the Side fell not when it lost the Capitol, but shortly after when Stanley sacked Kibo and Otoh.
JadedDragoon wrote:
Count_to_10 wrote:
KKdragonlord wrote:


The fact that there are 2000+ sides now, when there once were only 99, means that either there are more capital sites than sides and when a side falls multiple cities go up for grabs and a single side can become multiple sides after it is conquered... or there is some way to turn a regular city into a capital. I can't think of a different explanation atm.

The other mistery is why there are only about 200 portals in Portal Park, when there are over 2000 sides? Are there a dozen magic kingdoms out there or are there 1800 sides without portals?

The battle for GK was called "The Great Western conflict" by Charlie once. And Jillian has been around a lot. What about the East? The Middle East? The South? The North?

There are only as many sides as there are portals in Portal Park. I'm not sure where you are getting the 2000 number from. Maybe that's the total number of cities in Erfworld.


We know from the Digdoug and Duke Forecastle stories that new sides can be spawned without dissolving the original side. That alone proves sides aren't limited to the original 99. But we also know that sides must have a capitol and capitols must be placed on capitol sites. The easiest explanation for this is that perhaps there are unclaimed capitol sites just laying around?

Also from Digdoug we know that when a side falls it's portal in portal park just vanishes... but obviously that capitol site still exists. Which implies that, should another side claim that site (a likely case given that a side usually only falls to military action inside their capitol) and use it to spawn a new side the portal would reappear in portal park in the same spot.

I concur that I dunno where the 2000+ sides number is coming from.


Yeah, I must admit I don't remember where I saw that figure... perhaps I just added a 0 to the number of portals? Though I swear that I had the distinct impression that there were far fewer portals than there were sides. I tried finding where I got this from, this estimate of how big Erfworld is and how many sides there are in total, but I just couldn't... and if it doesn't exist, then even if read through everything again I wouldn't find it.

I do agree that the explanation of unclaimed capitol sites lying around to be conquered or to rise up spontaneously when taken over by a roving band of barbarians is a good one to consider.

Another idea is that the original 99 sides had whole bunch of capitol sites which became other sides when the originals split off or broke down for various reasons.

We know by Jillian's estimate that strong sides have about 3 capitol sites on average. If half of the 200 sides have 2 capitols and a half of those have 3, while a few deviants have 4 or more capitols then there could be as many as 350+ capitol sites and about 150+ innactive portal pillars.

Possibly the original 99 sides each had 4 capitol sites, maybe one in each corner of their realm. Considering how Haffaton was crumbling under its own weight at about 40 cities, the sweet spot for number of cities should be around 20. That would bring up a projected total of cities to about 2000 (maybe this is the line of thinking where I got to this number).
KKdragonlord wrote:

Possibly the original 99 sides each had 4 capitol sites, maybe one in each corner of their realm.


That's presuming that the 99 covered the totality of the map. With no unexplored territories.
Meaning, the entire map divided completely into 99 territories.
Hazrond wrote:
There aren't units that can't be decrypted, the whole point of Wanda showing off when she first got the pliers was that she could now uncroak ANYTHING, such as the weiner rammer. The idea of attrition is basically something that doesn't work because the thing is, WANDA ISNT THE ONLY UNIT ON THE SIDE, if she isnt there to decrypt the fallen then GK can just move some nearby decrypted over to patch up the hole, it isn't hard just basic troop movements.


I'll probably respond to the rest somewhere else at some point, but I want to hammer this point home. It's never said in the comic that Wanda can decrypt every single unit type.

She says that she can now decrypt many units that before couldn't be uncroaked, like the weiner-rammers.

We haven't seen a single decrypted golem for instance, and we know there were a lot of those not only at the battle for GK (like all the battle bears), but even more were at Spacerock.

This is guesswork, but I'm assuming that only humanoid(sh) units can be uncroaked and any living unit that leaves a body can be decrypted.

I don't know if plant based units can be decrypted or not. They could count as golems, elementals, or living units.
Soval wrote:
Hazrond wrote:
There aren't units that can't be decrypted, the whole point of Wanda showing off when she first got the pliers was that she could now uncroak ANYTHING, such as the weiner rammer. The idea of attrition is basically something that doesn't work because the thing is, WANDA ISNT THE ONLY UNIT ON THE SIDE, if she isnt there to decrypt the fallen then GK can just move some nearby decrypted over to patch up the hole, it isn't hard just basic troop movements.


I'll probably respond to the rest somewhere else at some point, but I want to hammer this point home. It's never said in the comic that Wanda can decrypt every single unit type.

She says that she can now decrypt many units that before couldn't be uncroaked, like the weiner-rammers.

We haven't seen a single decrypted golem for instance, and we know there were a lot of those not only at the battle for GK (like all the battle bears), but even more were at Spacerock.

This is guesswork, but I'm assuming that only humanoid(sh) units can be uncroaked and any living unit that leaves a body can be decrypted.

I don't know if plant based units can be decrypted or not. They could count as golems, elementals, or living units.


I think that she can decrypt every unit that can be popped or tamed but not made by other mancer (which leaves a body of course). So, dwagons, archons, gobwins... all fair game. Crap and other golems, battle bears, tchotckes, dolls, tanenbaums, scarecrows etc are all "NOPE, TYPE MISMATCH ERROR! REDO FROM START!" sort of thing.
Gobwyn Knob had Decrypted Tchotchkes.

http://archives.erfworld.com/Book_2/12

Quote:
"Anything?" she asked him, still staring forward at the Decrypted Tchotchkes in the stack ahead of them.
Disprove me with direct evidence.
Hypothesis: Capital sites are merely easy to reconstruct into another capital. It does not mean that no new capitals are impossible to make without a capital site.
When Jillian was thinking of evacuating FAQ, she was looking for a capital site. If there were other ways of making a capital besides just finding a capital site, she would have been considering those means as well. If there were another way, that's the point at which we would have learned it.