Twilightpeaks.net
RoE Development => Regent Guide => : X-Osoerde (Alan) December 14, 2008, 04:01:55 PM
-
"No Presence" -- effectively this means that when creating a holding in a province (when you have none) -- cannot be affected by any RP or GB, right?
Diplomacy in the Sword & Crown, most regents don't have holdings in the Imperial City, and therefore couldn't spend influence on the actions?
-
Not sure I like this change. It's very inconsistent with actions such as Create Province (and Holding) are noted with Influence being applicable. The old 5RP/1GB seemed to work quite reasonably.
-
"No Presence" -- effectively this means that when creating a holding in a province (when you have none) -- cannot be affected by any RP or GB, right?
Diplomacy in the Sword & Crown, most regents don't have holdings in the Imperial City, and therefore couldn't spend influence on the actions?
Diplomacy is not tied to any holdings - Holdings not relevant; read the diplomacy example on p. 74
-
Not sure I like this change. It's very inconsistent with actions such as Create Province (and Holding) are noted with Influence being applicable. The old 5RP/1GB seemed to work quite reasonably.
No holding applicable for creating province/holding; so you get the 2RP/1GB rate.
-
I'm altering the way Influence is used starting on turn 67.
The main reasons for the change is the new DDC calculations for things like rule holding, the new (yet to be published advantage/hardiness rule), plus a general need to change things from time to time...
Stay tuned...I think you'll find the new system much easier to use.
-
So here is the deal:
RP&GB will count equally for purposes of Influence (yes, that will change several dynamic-balance-thingies; intentionally - for example, guilders are too effective when compared to other regents, now their gold will be worth comparatively less to then, but even more to other regents...as loans and gifts...which I think is a vast improvement).
Positive Influence gives you a bonus to your DAC (either specified Effort or from Offensive Pool/Purse)
Negative Influence increases the DDC of your opponent (from Defensive Pool/Purse)
1 RP&GB buy +1 Influence
BUT (inspired by how I do character skills in BR) there are THRESHOLDS of diminishing returns (which was the real reason behind the 1/2/3/4/5 RP per influence in he first place, only this works MUCH better)
The first 5 Influence costs 1 RP/GB per +1
The next 5 Influence costs 2 RP/GB per +1 (15 total for a +10 bonus)
The next 5 Influence costs 3 RP/GB per +1 (30 total for a +15 bonus)
This will help limit the Always 2+ syndrome and make it more worthwhile to use Realm actions.
I need to carefully check all the action mods so that no action gets to difficult/expensive to use.
More later.
-
Forgive me if I'm being ignorant, but won't this just make it even more expensive to rule up holdings? As a guilder, that does account for quite a lot of my actions, especially since I'm a non-landed guilder. So basically that will limit my actions even more, if I wish to expand my holdings. My first impression of this is that I can either sit with what I have now and have money to do other actions (which will also be more expensive), or decide to play the rule-up game (until the coffers run dry) and do nothing else.
Yes I'm putting it a bit strong, and I do understand some of your arguments for doing this, but it does at least hit (some of) the guilders quite hard.
-
That is incorrect.
Your RP now becomes more suitable for use as Influence. Your Gbs remain just as useful. But the balance of power between the two is altered in favor of the RP - but only when it comes to Influence. Gbs are still the only viable currency to pay for things* (5Rp = 1Gb just isn't worth it). So there may be a slight disadvantage for those who have large incomes, but it is not too big (and besides, Gbs were much to effective when compared to RP so this is a good fix).
The only thing this rule does, is to slightly increase the cost when using a lot of Influence. At +10 Influence you pay 15 RP/GB (as opposed to 20RP or 10G today). It's only at +11 and above it becomes rather more expensive. But you should rarely need more than +10 Influence...as you'll try to harvest various supportive, misc, synergy and other bonuses for those crucial actions (that's how it's supposed to be anyway).
-
Ok, we'll just see how it works out. I am having a hard time seeing how my gold can be worth more to other landed regents though, considering they suddenly got more influential power (since their RP gives more "bang for the bucks"). Wouldn't it cause my gold to be worth less, since they can do more on their own?
Maybe I'm just suffering from the monday morning/afternoon/evening syndrome. Or maybe I'm just stupid in general ::)
-
Ok, we'll just see how it works out. I am having a hard time seeing how my gold can be worth more to other landed regents though, considering they suddenly got more influential power (since their RP gives more "bang for the bucks"). Wouldn't it cause my gold to be worth less, since they can do more on their own?
Maybe I'm just suffering from the monday morning/afternoon/evening syndrome. Or maybe I'm just stupid in general ::)
You would think so, but remember it is a null-sum game; everyone gets more! And the Threshold rule means they will be needing those RP and their own Gb for influence, just as before. And how are they going to finance those wars then? By loans. From you. Who might even have slightly more gold to spare now that your RP is more useful for other tasks.
-
Hehe, ok. I'll leave it for now and see how it goes. No point in whining about something before trying it out, right? 8)
-
Is this effect now or for Turn #67?
-
Is this effect now or for Turn #67?
Definitely NOT now. This is the Development Board. It will appear in The Herald once it's official.
Side note: Congrats on being our first 1000-post Sovereign.
-
:o Gasp, we're going down the route of diminishing return! Soon the circle will be complete and we'll all be playing with the Rollmaster system, or the even mroe complex Bjorn-master.
On a more serious note, how will the previous effect of scaled cost in relation to type of influencing holding work? Different cut off thresholds for different holding types?
-
:o Gasp, we're going down the route of diminishing return! Soon the circle will be complete and we'll all be playing with the Rollmaster system, or the even mroe complex Bjorn-master.
On a more serious note, how will the previous effect of scaled cost in relation to type of influencing holding work? Different cut off thresholds for different holding types?
It won't. As long as you have a holding/province rulership you can use Influence. If you don't, you can't (only exception are actions such as Diplomacy that aren't tied to a province - anyone can use regency on those).
-
So you will no longer be able to spend influence on a create holding action unless you have a holding in the province already or is the province ruler?
-
So you will no longer be able to spend influence on a create holding action unless you have a holding in the province already or is the province ruler?
There are always exceptions...as usual individual action description can override general rules.
In this case both Create Holding and Create province are exempt from the rule.
-
So here is the deal:
RP&GB will count equally for purposes of Influence (yes, that will change several dynamic-balance-thingies; intentionally - for example, guilders are too effective when compared to other regents, now their gold will be worth comparatively less to then, but even more to other regents...as loans and gifts...which I think is a vast improvement).
Positive Influence gives you a bonus to your DAC (either specified Effort or from Offensive Pool/Purse)
Negative Influence increases the DDC of your opponent (from Defensive Pool/Purse)
1 RP&GB buy +1 Influence
BUT (inspired by how I do character skills in BR) there are THRESHOLDS of diminishing returns (which was the real reason behind the 1/2/3/4/5 RP per influence in he first place, only this works MUCH better)
The first 5 Influence costs 1 RP/GB per +1
The next 5 Influence costs 2 RP/GB per +1 (15 total for a +10 bonus)
The next 5 Influence costs 3 RP/GB per +1 (30 total for a +15 bonus)
This will help limit the Always 2+ syndrome and make it more worthwhile to use Realm actions.
I need to carefully check all the action mods so that no action gets to difficult/expensive to use.
More later.
OoC:
If two or more domains should employ influence toward the failure of a given action, what would be the implications, in terms of the cost of negative influence?
-
I have not yet decided; it is on my to do/simulation list.
Two viable alternatives:
A) Each domain applies separately.
B) All positive/negative effort is combined, and then Influence is calculated.
-
Wait, so not only does "scheduled" influence diminishing returns, but if you have to pull more influence from the defensive/offensive pool, that too is subject to diminishing returns?
If that is the case, then you will typically hit the Aggressor hardest, as it is likely they have already spent Some influence to even set up the action, so they are closer to the next "step" in the cost ladder.
The Defender starts at 1:1 always.
Maybe "pool" influence is always 1:1? - I mean it only gets triggered if someone else is using influence in the first place, so scheduling an action with a DDC of 19 and hoping someone influences it, so you can trigger your offensive pool at 1:1 is really dumb.
-
It won't. As long as you have a holding/province rulership you can use Influence. If you don't, you can't (only exception are actions such as Diplomacy that aren't tied to a province - anyone can use regency on those).
Ok, anyone expecting a straight answer out of HA as regards some requested southern intrigue/espionage is out of luck as a) I don't know which action it's supposed to be and b) I can't spend influence as I have no holdings.
Phew, of the hook...
-
How about this...
There are basically three ways to spend influence:
Planned Influence - This is influence used directly on actions in your DO. Multiple regents can spend influence on an action in the DO (supporters put theirs under "free actions") and it is subject to diminishing returns. All the planned influence that is spent is pooled together and then used to increase the DAC.
Defensive Pool - This is used to counteract other's actions. Actions that other initiate within your sphere of influence (ie. where you can spend influence). Each point of influence (GB or RP) used from defensive pool adds 1 to the DDC.
Offensive Pool - Offensive pool is used to counteract defensive pools. If someone spends influence from a defensive pool to hinder an action you initiated, or to hinder an action that you specified in your DO (offensive pool notes) that you want to assist, then you can use you offensive pool. You can only spend as much from your offensive pool as there has been spent from one or more defensive pools to hinder the action.
Examples & Permutations:
Regent A takes an action within Regent B's sphere of influence. In his DO he spends 15 planned influence to give himself +10 to the DAC. His action activates regent B's Defensive Pool, Regent B spends 10 Influence to raise the DDC by 10. In response Regent A spends 10 Influence from his Offensive Pool to aid the action, giving +10 DAC. The final DDC is increased by 10, the DAC is increased by +20 in total from influence.
Regent A undertakes and action in Regent B, C and D's sphere of influence. Regent A and C spends 30 planned influence to aid the action, giving +15 to the DAC. In response Regent B spends 20 influence from his defensive pool to hinder the action. Regent A, C and D then spend 20 influence from their Offensive pool to aid the action. The Final DDC is increased by +20, the final DAC is increased by +35, through influence.
Savvy?
-
What is the latest word on influence rules? It looks to have been altered in the latest DO template, so I assume some change have happened.
E
-
The DO template uses the new ones, but they haven't been announced in the Errata sub-forum. Bjorn? This is pretty relevant to a couple of my actions.
-
What is the latest word on influence rules? It looks to have been altered in the latest DO template, so I assume some change have happened.
E
The DO template uses the new ones, but they haven't been announced in the Errata sub-forum. Bjorn? This is pretty relevant to a couple of my actions.
OoC:
The following quoted content is excerpted from an e-mail from DM Bjørn (from April 2010, if not mistaken): "Influence threshold will not be implemented THIS turn, that is for certain. Perhaps never."
-
The spreadsheets seem to imply a threshhold though.
-
The spreadsheets seem to imply a threshhold though.
I'll take into account ACTUAL RP spent. I'm ignoring the auto-calc made by the sheet.
-
Hello
Sorry, but I'm left confused. :)
Diminishing returns was taken back out, but did we also go back to old RP rates? - 2:1 best influence rate or did it become 1:1?
-
Hello
Sorry, but I'm left confused. :)
Diminishing returns was taken back out, but did we also go back to old RP rates? - 2:1 best influence rate or did it become 1:1?
No changes have been made to the influence system. Same as before. I was working on some rules, but until I have have time to work on the RG again its put on hold.
-
Curiosity: Are we still looking at implementing this somewhere along the line, once you find time to do Guide work again, Bjorn?
-
Maybe?
(I could be a politician!)
-
"Today's News! President Bjorn raises taxes on electronics and manufacturing companies to 65% because 'they were dominating, so I threw them a curve to keep things interesting for everyone.' Coming up next: could your child be a fae changeling??"
-
I have not yet decided; it is on my to do/simulation list.
Two viable alternatives:
A) Each domain applies separately.
B) All positive/negative effort is combined, and then Influence is calculated.
OoC:
Has a decision been made?
-
No.