Chronic Logic

For further clarification, each time a new effect is triggered, it is added to the stack immediately after the trigger resolves, effectively at the level of the trigger.  This may prompt further triggers that would add to that stack.

That's not what I said at all, mongolian.

"Sounds like a good deck, but it seems easily thrwarted.   Shield-bearer+rider to take out early geo."

That pretty much amounts to "It beats paper but rock kills it, so it's fine."  That whole line of argument encourages that style of development.

Quote from: mongolian on May 31, 2009, 08:34:56 PM
Solution:  Monthly cycle which type of units can be used for Constructed armies.  This will limit down the options that are able to be played, keep constructed more balanced, give the game more flavor and ultimately keep constructed fresh and fun to play.

Solution: We keep having these discussions to balance the level of RPS in the game.  Easily thwarted by 2 specific units means rock-paper-scissors, and arguments calling it a very good deck are only supporting the problem you hate so much.

A unit death is a separate trigger.  It starts a new stack.

For an effects stack to work, it'll need to check for unit deaths as each effect resolves, so that effects don't target dead units.

Now the illusionist is a range 7 (8 with serg) stun explosion on the only mage that can move and act in the same turn.  "Vanish" is kinda pointless when you can use them the same turn.  The whole spectre thing is either an overpowered and overranged once a turn attack, or it's an excuse to try to save up mage attacks so you can do more than one a turn.

How about this for the spectre:

Name: Spectre
Actions: 2
Life: 1
Intangible. Cant capture castle.
Inorganic.  Immune to skills and spells.
Move to target location. 1 range. Cost 1 action.
Stuns enemy when attacked, self destructs.
Stuns units within explosion.  0 range.  Cost 1 action, self destructs.

Now it's significantly more able to be dealt with, but it still costs the enemy to do it.  Since this is a more passive ability, maybe make the entertainment ability start automatically at the beginning of the turn.




------------------------------------
Taunter is a solid melee unit with more than 50 points worth of stats and an ability with an unquantifiable range.  I think it needs to be cheaper, more vulnerable, with a shorter range.  It's explicitly designed to let melee range units advance to destroy ranged units, so to be strategically fair it needs to either be a one shot or be supported by protective units to survive.

Stack is a good idea if done properly.  My major concern with it is that you'd need to be very clear with players about triggering order of competing passive effects, such as whether it's attacker's or defender's attacks first, or if there's a spell/skill/non-type priority.

@Kran: Capture would go first on the stack, anything that would then target the unit landing on that space would be resolved before capturing would, and the castle would only be captured if there was a valid alive on the castle after everything resolved.  As zatikon said, it's a long-term project and we'll be involved in finding any problems.

(As an afterthought, if your pikeman/bowman/tower kills a unit landing on the castle and you have a dracolich in play, do you get a non-gate-guard unit on the castle?)

That's not easy, given that the spectre has two range, which allows it to attack from multiple directions.  To protect one unit at range 7 would require three units fanned out behind it.  If it was closer you'd need even more units and most of them would be stunned and pushed back, leaving the protected unit unprotected next turn.

Changing places may avoid repeat stunning, but it leaves a whole bunch of stunned units separated wide open to your advance, particularly if one saves a couple spirits up.

So it hits the target and one other target within three of the target?  That still makes it potentially hit 1 target at range 3 and one target at range 6 in a configuration far more open than the warlock's line, assuming no serg.

The bigger issue is that it combos with itself.
On turn A it makes two pigs.  On turn B it can potentially kill both.

Quote from: Kran on May 29, 2009, 10:58:05 PM

Quote from: Jezebeau on May 29, 2009, 07:33:43 PM
This is a joke, right?  7x7 explosion for 4?  Two multi-turn removals per turn from one unit?

I'm sorry, you mean 7 range explosion. Else its for 3, i'm sorry for not expecificating it. The target do not explode, just explodes if it die. But i will change the range to 5, cuz of riders that could maybe mess things by making acolyes of other weak support units explode. About the pigs, i forgot it have 2 actions. I will make it 4 range, and that will tigger in the beggining of its turn.

"Blue Lightining: Select target enemy anywhere within 3. Target and any unit in 3 range of the target are damaged by power. Cost 2 actions."

Any unit within 3 of the target means everything in the 7x7 block centered on the target will take 4, including the Circe, because you lowered the targeting range.

Now you've got a unit that has 1 action and three of its four abilities (including move) require 2 actions.  The pig curse, however, is still disabling two units for two turns.  Sure, they can act nearly uselessly, but it also makes them one-hittable by almost every unit in the game.

This is a joke, right?  7x7 explosion for 4?  Two multi-turn removals per turn from one unit?

Yeah, randomization != Zatikon.

I will say that it's too vulnerable, though.

Not sure that's enough.  It's still a rock-paper-scissors unit that, by itself, stands a really good chance of shutting down armies based on big horsemen/soldiers/archers.  Assuming you're clever enough to bring a sergeant, have no other defenses, and aren't protecting the crone with clergy, the opponent needs to bring two units that can cover seven range in two turns (three units for three turns), or a strong inorganic force.

The conditions are passive, but they're persistent, which makes them more debilitating than, say, a 1-turn stun or a return-to-castle.  I don't see any reason why these should be over range 5 (+1 for sergeant/+2 for wizard).

I really like that it's such a range game.  Units like mages, mounted archers, and footmen add precision to the game.  You can tell by what's on the board what your opponent can hit next turn and, if you don't have equal range, you can plan out how to get close enough to kill a pivotal unit.  If you think Zatikon's complicated now, it would only get worse if it frequently got tied up in a tangle of attrition.

Does this mean that it can only affect one enemy, or that it can only afflict one condition upon each enemy?

If it's one condition per enemy, any within 6 is way too powerful for most of those abilities.

Stubborn's pretty fair, but useless against the AI.

Craven would easily be able to hit two incoming units by the time they've closed to attack, and disable them completely if you can disable or kill the one or two other units sent in.  Would this prevent spells?  If so, it would beat two-mage armies in two turns.

I'm not sure what to think of trustless.  It's difficult to envision.

My biggest worry with blockish is that it could make golems extremely difficult to kill.  It would probably also combo too well with feathered serpent in 2v2/coop, and it would disable a channeler before it ever became a danger.

*looks at Kran*

*points at date of post previous to Kran's*