Cyvasse Test Run

Non-Dip games (such as "Mafia" and "Create Your Own Country") hosted by Forum members.

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby pjkon » 14 Feb 2013, 04:30

I think blackfish has more or less decided that the game is over now. Good game. Your river and forest stratagy was good, even if your king defence was a little weak.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 376
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby Blackfish » 14 Feb 2013, 09:43

Yeah, I think that the enthusiasm for this test run had died down. It accomplished the original goal of telling me what needed to be changed and what didn't, in any case.

Thanks a lot to both players, you've really helped me out here! :D
*A round of applause, ladies and gentlemen, for Zadaron and pjkon!* ;)

I will now compile a list of improvements that could possibly added to future versions. Version 2 will come out sometime this month or in march, depending on free time available to me. I already struggled to GM this game, near the end. (I'll definitely change the coordinates on that version, pjkon :P) These can include wild ideas too, though not all will make it into the finished version.

Feel free to add any suggestions below.

1. Make the Rabble more useful/powerful
-It can kill both siege units and the Crossbowman, provided it can get close enough to attack first.
2. Make the spearman be able to kill the LIGHT Cavalry.
- Not the Heavy Cavalry, too overpowered
3. Units could have certain special abilities. For example:
- The Crossbowman: "Volley" ability. This means that a Crossbowman can use his attack to be part of a "Flank" manoeuvre (see the discussion topic) a limited amount of times each game.
-The Forests can add an "Ambush" ability to melee units. This means that 1 bonus damage is added if one or both of the melee units is in a Forest, during the flank.
- If a fortress is within range of both enemy siege units, and one of the Siege units attacks, the castle and it's occupant are killed instantly. Ability can be called "Siege" or "Breach". This would be similar to a flanking manoeuvre.
- Trebuchets can choose to forego moving and attacking for a turn and "Unpack" or "Fortify". This would allow the trebuchet to rotate on the spot, instead of needing to bounce off of another friendly or enemy unit to change firing direction. The trebuchet can also "unpack" and forego attacking, but movement will be restored. (This one is a little hazy, though I'll think more on this later)

4. Fortresses grant Offensive and Defensive bonuses to units inside.
- Crossbowmen garrisoned in fortress gain +1 range?
- Any melee unit inside a fortress gains +1 defence? (Elephant and Heavy Horse can be possible exceptions)


Pjkon suggested that I remove the damage/defence stats from the game and make it more like chess, anyone can kill anyone. I might implement that in a separate game called Flash Cyvasse, though not in the immediate future.

These are all the suggestions I could come up with. I'm keen to learn what yours are.
"You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war." - Plutarch

Game History
User avatar
Blackfish
 
Posts: 1592
Joined: 28 Oct 2012, 05:46
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+10

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby pjkon » 15 Feb 2013, 22:19

The fortress upgrade sounds interesting, but is made almost useless if the seige rule is also applied. I like making the rabble able to kill ranged units if it gets there first, but I don't think that it is enough. Say the rabble spends one move getting into attack range of a ranged unit, then the ranged unit spends one turn killing it. It never gets used. I don't think that my idea about making all ranged units killable by all mele units (cavelry beat misiles beat spears beat cavelry) has found any agreement, so I will just mention it here one last time.

A random idea that I just had with respect to forts would be to make them indestructible except by trebuchets, but mele units could not attack from them to prevent them from becoming overpowered. This might make fort placement more strategic.

One last thought. Right now the catupult is the most powerful unit in the game. (It can attack more spaces then the trebuchet, by a lot, and can kill anything that the trebuchet or dragon can. Unlike the dragon it can stand off and attack without moving to its opponent's square. Perhaps the catupult could be made weaker by limmiting it to two spaces in one directon range?

All of these ideas (except the fort one) are directed towards avoiding the sort of seige weapons bloodbath which started out our game and will start out any game in which they are impossibly valuable due to their ability to only be killed by the elephant. What does everyone think?
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 376
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby mat.gopack » 15 Feb 2013, 22:23

pjkon wrote:The fortress upgrade sounds interesting, but is made almost useless if the seige rule is also applied. I like making the rabble able to kill ranged units if it gets there first, but I don't think that it is enough. Say the rabble spends one move getting into attack range of a ranged unit, then the ranged unit spends one turn killing it. It never gets used. I don't think that my idea about making all ranged units killable by all mele units (cavelry beat misiles beat spears beat cavelry) has found any agreement, so I will just mention it here one last time.

A random idea that I just had with respect to forts would be to make them indestructible except by trebuchets, but mele units could not attack from them to prevent them from becoming overpowered. This might make fort placement more strategic.

One last thought. Right now the catupult is the most powerful unit in the game. (It can attack more spaces then the trebuchet, by a lot, and can kill anything that the trebuchet or dragon can. Unlike the dragon it can stand off and attack without moving to its opponent's square. Perhaps the catupult could be made weaker by limmiting it to two spaces in one directon range?

All of these ideas (except the fort one) are directed towards avoiding the sort of seige weapons bloodbath which started out our game and will start out any game in which they are impossibly valuable due to their ability to only be killed by the elephant. What does everyone think?

I like the killing any ranged units by melee units idea- it makes you have to defend your siege units more.

As for the rabble, maybe make moving it free? (Eg, you can move the rabble and another unit during the same turn)...
.·ï¨Ï¨Ï¨ï·.mat.gopack.·ï¨Ï¨Ï¨ï·.
Mattopia of the Mattibean Union in CYOC. You should join ;)

"Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake"

Spreadsheets are fun!
User avatar
mat.gopack
 
Posts: 20736
Joined: 22 Nov 2009, 23:40
Location: The Carolinas
Class: Diplomat
Standard rating: (929)
All-game rating: (929)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby pjkon » 15 Feb 2013, 22:28

That sounds llike a good idea. It adds oppertunities for flanking, and increases the rabble's power. One thing I never understood about the flanking rules though. Does a flanking unit pair have to exceed the attacked units power, eaqual it, or get up to one less than it like normal. If anything but the latter than moving the rabble for free will not help with flanking regaurdless of whatever other power it might bestow.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 376
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby Blackfish » 16 Feb 2013, 00:55

pjkon wrote:That sounds llike a good idea. It adds oppertunities for flanking, and increases the rabble's power. One thing I never understood about the flanking rules though. Does a flanking unit pair have to exceed the attacked units power, eaqual it, or get up to one less than it like normal. If anything but the latter than moving the rabble for free will not help with flanking regaurdless of whatever other power it might bestow.


That's a good question, as I grabbed the flanking idea from a different website and modified it a bit for use here. On that website, the combat rules were rather different. I think I'd prefer it if it was equal or above.
"You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war." - Plutarch

Game History
User avatar
Blackfish
 
Posts: 1592
Joined: 28 Oct 2012, 05:46
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+10

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby pjkon » 16 Feb 2013, 04:50

Blue light cavelry e4 attacks red heavy cavelry d4 while blue rabble occupies c4. Flanking is not said to be optional anywhere, and the single unit wins ties. Heavy cavelry survives and light cavelry dies. The rabble killed its own light cav?
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 376
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby Blackfish » 16 Feb 2013, 05:50

Then we must make flanking optional! :D
"You must not fight too often with one enemy, or you will teach him all your art of war." - Plutarch

Game History
User avatar
Blackfish
 
Posts: 1592
Joined: 28 Oct 2012, 05:46
Class: Ambassador
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT+10

Re: Cyvasse Test Run

Postby pjkon » 16 Feb 2013, 16:51

How about flanking just adds a +1 combat level bous to the attacking unit unless the other unit in the flanking amneuver has a power of 4 or above in which case it adds +3 that way flanking always helps.

Making flanking optional is fine to, I just think that its a good rule that wasn't used in our game that could have its capabilities expanded.
It is better to have scs then allies, assuming something aproaching equal combat power in each

Your credibility with eliminated powers is irrelavant

Keep your allies happy enough that they stay allies

If you are receiving a message from me ignore this signature
pjkon
 
Posts: 376
Joined: 06 Feb 2012, 22:05
Class: Diplomat
All-game rating: (1000)
Timezone: GMT-5

Previous

Return to Other Play-by-Forum Games

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 1 guest