Book 3 - Page 257

Senpai noticed!

Book 3 - Page 257
Comic - Book 3 - Page 257
Recent posts... (See full thread)
Wild and nearly baseless speculation while waiting for next update: Mathemancy is nothing more than millions upon millions of fate ghosts of croaked mathemancers who desperately wanted the stat numbers of units to mean something. They arrange things so the mathemancy predictions of odds match the statistics of combat results.
:P
I had a thought, while waiting for the next page.

If Charlie has his extrauniversal senses back, can he also affect the extra-universe?

If so... it would explain first why we see so little of him, and also why we have, to the best of my knowledge, only seen him when he was doing something that would otherwise prevent him from stopping us from seeing him (IE, he was busy or offdish at the time). Everything else we've seen, again, to my knowledge, was us actually seeing someone else and seeing Charlie through them.

Yes, I'm suggesting that Charlie reads the comic wherein he himself is a character thereof.
It also occurs to me that Stanley might be simply not sensing his freed caster(s) in the MK or elsewhere... because Charlie is blocking his ruler-senses!
WarFAN wrote:
JadedDragoon wrote:

The issues are with how much money a city can produce vs how much money it takes to pay the upkeep of the units needed to protect that city. Even with just one city this can be an issue. The implication is that at each city level the upkeep needed to mount a reasonable defense is more than the city can produce... necessitating conquest to make up the difference.


I disagree with the black (blacked? darkened? whatever you call it) part. There must be a surplus -even a huge one at some stages- to support the big armies needed for conquest.

I will try my best english to explain myself:

- Warlord Whoever finds a nice capital site and becames Overlord Whoever of the Side (and city) of Whatever.

- Whatever is a Level 1 city and maybe it produces 2000 schmuckers per turn. Lord Whoever has an upkeep of 150 schmuckers, so he is saving 1850 during the first turn.

- Second turn, Lord Whoever pops eight pikers (80 schmuckers per turn), so he saves 1770 schmuckers plus the previous 1850= 3620 schmuckers in the treasury.

- Now it is turn 20. Lord Whoever has 80 pikers, and a Warlord, plus four knights and maybe even some mounts. He still saves 50 schmuckers per turn and has around 13000 schmuckers in the treasury. Maybe a bit more if his units have been foraging.

- So, if Lord Whoever pops another stack of pikers, he will be losing 30 schmuckers per turn. He can do that, or he can upgrade the city to a Level 2, getting more schmuckers per turn and popping more units while saving money.

- When the City of Whatever gets its fith (and maximum) Level, Lord Whoever (who has a respectable army and maybe 80.000 schmuckers in the treasury) has a difficult decission: He cant upgrade the city, so either he stop popping units or he expands his army even more living of his savings during a few turns and trying to conquer or raze the neighbor city of Nearaway.

- Of course, if Lord Whoever does not expand his army, any of the following turns he could have Nearaway´s forces knocking his door...

Although it is highly speculative, we have some info about Jetstone which makes me think about King Slately´s motives for going against Gobwin Knob. Of course, the main reason was Slately´s bigotry about non-Royals. But we know Jetstone´s treasury was in a very bad shape even after losing hundreds of units in Book 1, so... maybe Jetstone had been living of their savings for a good amount of time before that and needed a few conquers/razings to balance the books.


Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. After my last post I was so frustrated I felt it best to take some time away.

One of the key conditions I set was "to mount a reasonable defense." So to account for that condition of my claim in the context of your hypothetical we would need to know how many units Nearaway has as Whatever reaches each stage of development.

Within the Royal Crown Coalition (the first one) Jetstone contributed almost 4000 units... the most by double. One can assume it's because they were the largest side but I think most likely the other sides simply didn't care as much. And we know Jetstone had quite a large number at home still. Unaroyal contributed ~1700 units. And we know Unaroyal had more in reserve at home as well. Sofa King? Almost 1000.

The sides that didn't contribute a whole lot were Foxmud, Hobbittm, and Transylvito. We know TV contributed one mid-to-high level warlord and 28 bats. But we also know TV kept almost all of their units back. Hobbittm and Foxmud contributed 141 and 208 units, respectively. Whether this is because they are small, single city sides compared to the large, multi city sides like Jetstone and TV... we can't be sure.

For the sake of a conservative estimate I will assume that's the case. And propose that our hypothetical Nearaway is a single city side itself, but already established. Assuming they are not fighting a separate war when they move to attack Whatever we can assume they would be able to commit a similar size force to the attack that Foxmud and Hobbittm did.

That means Whatever needs to field at least 150 units of it's own to defend itself from the single-city side of Nearaway. And that assumes the units fielded by Nearaway are mostly just pikers, archers, knights, and the occasional heavy w/ siege. No fliers, no special units (other than the knights).

So yes, in your hypothetical, at level 1 Whatever could pay the upkeep of 80 pikers, one Warlord, 4 knights without exceeding the production of it's level 1 city. What it couldn't do is mount a reasonable defense while limiting itself in such a way. Since it can't mount a reasonable defense it fails that condition of my claim.

Why would an established single city side attack a level 1 city? Well its a second capital site for one thing. There are some serious advantages to having a second capital site in your back pocket... as both the Battle of Gobwin Knob and the Battle of Spacerock demonstrate. Also it's still worth some shmuckers to raze a level 1.

I don't know where your numbers come from. Mine come from the erfwiki's numbers on the RCC's makup (Georgia Power was the Hobbittm warlord in the RCC btw... I didn't realize that till just now). It would be helpful for me to know the numbers your working with when expanding on this idea further.

But if we assume Nearaway waits for Whatever to reach level 2 then it's possible Whatever could mount a reasonable defense against Nearaway... assuming Nearaway doesn't pop a bunch more units specifically to send to conquer Whatever... or pop specialized units that it knows a level 2 doesn't have a way to deal with (beyond overwhelming numbers). Lots of assumptions there.

However, If Nearaway has another single-city side as an ally... Oaferthar, for example... we can be sure they could combine their efforts (Each sending ~150 units for a total of ~300 and split the winnings) to conquer Lvl 2 Whatever without much effort... if Whatever limited itself to only the units it could support with it's single level 2 city. Maybe even let one side take the bulk of the winnings and the other gets the capital site.

And none of this considers a third nearby side, Herwe'Arr, which has several cities and is expanding in a build up to deal with a threat of it's own on the other side of it. Herwe'Arr has no problem sending a 1000 unit army (with heavy siege, fliers, knights, scouts, etc) to curb stomp Whataver, Nearaway, and Oaferthar all in one fell swoop and then leaving their capitol sites unclaimed.

So when one considers all this on the context of "mount[ing] a reasonable defense"... well... I stand by my previous assessment.

Morgaln wrote:
JadedDragoon wrote:


When you raze a city all the units in that city are croaked. [snip]


Wait, what? Am I reading you right that when a city is razed, every unit that currently is in that city is automatically croaked? Where was that established? Why aren't rulers using that to wipe out an attacking force when it is clear they'll lose a city? Are you maybe mixing this up with infernos?


It's possible I'm mis-remembering there. I seem to recall that the units belonging to the same side as the city, if still within the city when it's razed, are automatically croaked. This simulates what would happen if a stupid world city were razed. I did not intend that it would also affect attackers though... after all I doubt it would be possible to raze a contested city at all.

Though to be fair, even if I am wrong about that it actually further backs my argument that the number of units in a city when it's razed does not have to affect how much the side that razes it gets from doing so for razing cities to, in turn, be profitable.

I'm plenty willing to admit that I don't know everything... that I can be wrong. And I don't foe people for daring to question things I say. I don't have to have everyone agree with me. But I do expect people to show a little integrity and extend these same courtesies to me as well. So thank you, both of you, for at least being willing to do that much.
Just realized, this is topic # 666. Huh. :evil:

Hope he posts soon; I'm superstitious.
tadthornhill wrote:
Just realized, this is topic # 666. Huh. :evil:

Hope he posts soon; I'm superstitious.



*sings* "It's the end of the world as we know it..." */sings*
Count_to_10 wrote:
Wild and nearly baseless speculation while waiting for next update: Mathemancy is nothing more than millions upon millions of fate ghosts of croaked mathemancers who desperately wanted the stat numbers of units to mean something. They arrange things so the mathemancy predictions of odds match the statistics of combat results.
:P


"I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced."
OverkillEngine wrote:
Infidel wrote:
OverkillEngine wrote:

It's also possible Charlie is trying to edge around the expansion+upkeep issue by staying a one city side long enough to build a treasury/resource reserve large enough that he can perform a one-turn decapitation strike on every other side. Thus it benefits him in multiple ways to keep everyone else too busy fighting each other to catch on.


Yea, but that is the most obvious line-of-thought and I am naturally suspicious of anything that is obvious.


Obvious to us, yes. Given how dogmatic erfworld natives can be, it may not be obvious to them.


Yea, but I'm not too concerned about what is obvious to the natives, unless we are discussing what they apparently know.
Morgaln wrote:
Ozamataz Buckshank wrote:
On the topic of Charlie's money hoarding, I think it's patently obvious why Charlie wants money so bad.

He's eating it.

Image

How do you think he got SO FAAAAT

Are you saying the shmuckers are causing Charlie's inflation?

That rare moment when the response is better than the joke.
Chiu ChunLing wrote:
There are a lot of problems with some of the Erfworld economics speculations. I don't feel like quibbling over the use of the term "stealing" other than to point out that it is a quibble. One side's loss is another side's gain. In Erfworld terms, war is necessary to support the population. It's not purely a matter of inevitable overpopulation or war being the only way to deal with a ruler who poses a threat to the peace and safety of other sides. War is somehow necessary to avoid depopulation. My speculation is that the rules of Erfworld are to reflect only the military economy, moneymancy (natural and caster) is the process by which the governments of Erfworld leverage the (invisible and unknown) civilian economy. War is necessary to support an outsized military, and the rules of Erfworld reflect this. But it may be that at some point in times there were other ways for sides to improve the base output of their civilian economy ("managing" it by use of warlords and courtiers 'inspecting' things they don't understand is a thing that happens in our world, but what that does is increase the share of the civilian economy that goes to the military, it actually hurts the underlying economy overall). Charlie apparently runs a casino, but in real world terms this can generate revenue but doesn't increase base economic productivity. I see Erfworld as having potentially started out at an early feudal level and having evolved through advances of various kinds until it reached the current "technology" level and then became economically dependent on some exploit of the war rules, probably city razing. Parson indicates that it is possible to upgrade a city using a Dirtamancer in ways that make it significantly cheaper to upgrade, Turnamancers can add improvements like mills, Forists can add gardens, etc. This probably means that the total cost to upgrade the city to a given value can actually be reduced below the value to raze the city. But if you are able to hold the city, razing it and losing the turns of increased schmucker output while you re-level it are probably not economically feasible. Charlie seems to believe that razing all the cities in his territory is economically feasible compared to building them, though it might be simply a reluctance to pop anything other than archons. By the way, we have no indications that it costs schmuckers to pop units unless you hire a Turnamancer to accelerate production (and that seems to be the cost of hiring a Turnamancer). Units cost upkeep once popped, they only cost production time to pop. Production time can be thought of as another resource that is difficult to turn directly into schmuckers but which schmuckers can be used to ameliorate. Also, you can pop basic units more quickly and then promote them using schmuckers, though this seems less cost-efficient than just popping them as what they'll be in most cases. Stanley popped as a piker, was promoted until becoming CWL, then designated as heir. This process probably cost more than hiring a Turnamancer to speed up production on a popped heir.

We know that some natural allies mine for upkeep, others seem able to mostly persist by other forms of sustainable harvesting (with destructive harvesting being an option). So it seems that there are significant other sources for schmuckers than cities (or some way of reducing schmucker upkeep to zero by consuming other resources). It may be that a site that has been "mined out" of gems (or destructively harvested) can recover after being left alone for some period of time (otherwise it would be hard to explain why marbits and gobwins still exist). So a high efficiency mining operation could possibly mine out a hex quickly then move on, eventually returning to the starting point (it is possible that Charlie is doing this in his territory, his gem hoard may be too large to have relied on Moneymancers without giving away more about his treasury than would be acceptable to him, it may partly explain why he prefers to avoid having cities other than CC, or at least how this can work without an unacceptable economic penalty).

Maybe the ecological damage from destructive foraging can only be undone by croaked units decaying nearby, regardless of the passage of time. Devastation would appear to recover over time, as ferals fight each other, but Parson's bracer can access the underlying mechanic (same way he knew the exact rate at which dwagons randomly pop in the minty mountains). Armies could then survive for a time on forage in the aftermath of major battles, creating incentive to send them off into new battles when that surplus of forage runs low. Same basic math as harvesting, but also applies to speaking units.