Campaigns

[Cakeman]

Does a processing plant add it's rating of units per strategic round, and if so do they add newly built units directly to the standing army? If resources are focused on repair, are units repaired that many inches or is there some bonus when repairing? (say a lvl 3 processing plant can produce one 3" unit a round, but repair 6" or something?)

[stubby]

Does a processing plant add it's rating of units per strategic round, and if so do they add newly built units directly to the standing army? If resources are focused on repair, are units repaired that many inches or is there some bonus when repairing? (say a lvl 3 processing plant can produce one 3" unit a round, but repair 6" or something?)

Resource harvesting and processing plants determine your immediate unit capacity rather than producing anything that's tracked per round. If your army drops below 3 U" of wood-built units, you can build, recruit, or repair back up to 3 U". If you're at or above that limit, then you can't use wood to recruit or repair anymore until you invest more points into wood production or lose some of those units.

Your wood resource also lets you build Location defenses out of wood. These aren't limited by the amount of output; if you have a level two wood plant then you can build level 2 wood defenses regardless of whether the plant has one Glory or a hundred.

I'm thinking of a scenario where a defender has stone walls for defense but has lost his source of stone. An attacker blasts a bunch of holes in the walls, the defender can't use stone to repair them, so the next time that location is attacked, the holes are filled in with wood palisades instead.

[Cakeman]

Ah thanks, I needed that clarified. Azkamat caught on quicker than I did Like with everything, it'd be best to try out to learn and understand how things work with a system.

[Cakeman]

Alright. So walk with me here.

Player A and B are playing a campaign. Their factions are called A and B. Both factions have a castle as a base location, they have 50Ü in reinforcments, and as standing army they both have 5 regular minifig (5Ü), a rider with a horse (2Ü) and a hero (2Ü). Their glory and sacrifice starts at 0, and their alertness level is 1.

First strategic round
Player A starts. He has no glory or sacrifice, so goes on a "heroic escapade!". As from the text: The maximum unit size in a Hero's raiding party, and the maximum amount of Stockpile or Resources up for stealing, are equal to the amount of Glory spent to make the raid. (If a raiding faction has no Glory to spend, as is normal at the beginning of a campaign, conduct the raid as if they had spent one Glory.)

So one default glory, wich means only infantry can oin the hero on his escapade, to raid assets. A sends his hero and five infantry. He can't send his rider, because of it's 2Ü and the limit of 1 for now.

B defends. The temporary location is decided upon. From the text: The maximum size of the defenders on the scene is determined by their faction's Alert level. The defenders are set up according to their Preparedness, with a Sacrifice level of zero for the temporary Location.
Ok, so Attack Glory (1) + Location Sacrifice (0) + Defender's Alert Level (1) = Preparedness (2!) = Caught by surprise!
The location sacrifice is 0, so no units start at their post. A will enter from one side, and B from the other.

In an escapade, "The defenders are set up according to their Preparedness", and "local guards and garrisons don't draw from the enemy's main Army". But how large forces can B set up? Can he also just send 1Ü units, or can he place his rider and hero as well? How many local guards is he allowed to place?

[stubby]

How many local guards is he allowed to place?

Ideally, zero, although players can fudge as they feel appropriate. Whatever the hero is stealing from the location, it's undefended - a warehouse with no guards, a supply caravan with no guards, etc. Maybe there are random civilians or truck drivers or whatever, but no armed local garrison troops. The defending player's army is racing from one side of the map to get to the undefended resources at the same time the Hero is racing from the other end to steal them.

But how large forces can B set up? Can he also just send 1Ü units, or can he place his rider and hero as well?

Normally, this would depend on how much Glory B wants to spend in the defense. B doesn't have any Glory though, so that's going to make for a pretty dull battle. I might have to add "(If a defending faction has no Glory to spend, as is normal at the beginning of a campaign, conduct the defense as if they had spent one Glory.)"

The total U" of the defenders' forces, army plus garrison (if any), should be equal to the U" of the invading forces.

[Cakeman]

So the escapade continues.

B doesn't have glory for defense, and gets a free 1Ü limit on troops allowing him to bring his five infantry. This would put him at a big disadvantage compared to A, who gets to bring his hero. So B get to bring his hero too, but not the rider because it's 2Ü. The forces are set up on each side of the field, with a truck in the middle.

A loses two infantry and B three, but B defends the truck and the resources. A gets 2 sacrifice and 3 glory, and B gets 3 sacrifice and 2 glory. They refill their army from their stockpiles, so A has 48Ü left and B 47Ü.

Then Bs hero does an escapade with reversed results, leaving both players with 5 sacrifice, 5 glory and 45Ü left in stockpile.

A decides to create a new location, a barrack, a Processing location for turning freely available minifigs and small arms into minifig soldiers. It costs 2 glory to create the location, and, A then attaches 3 glory bricks to it, allowing it to produce 3Ü of spearmen. A also spends 1 sacrifice to raise his alert level to 2, and attaches the remaining 4 sacrifice to the barrakcs. A then adds the three new spearmen to his army, wich now totals 5 generic infantry, 1 hero, 1 horse and rider, and 3 spearmen. He did not save any glory for attacks or defense.

B also creates a new location, the plains, a harvesting location for horses. This costs 2 glory, and he adds 2 glory so that it can supprt 2Ü of horse. This leaves him with just 1 glory left, not enough to also build a processing location for turning the horse into a fearsome horse and rider. B saves 1 glory, raises his alert level to 2 for 1 sacrifice, and attaches 2 sacrifice to the plains. B has 1 glory, 2 sacrifice, and his army is the standard 5 inf, 1 horse and rider, 1 hero.

They go for next round.

[AZKAMAT]

When do you think you could have the first written prototype of these rules ready? I have like a project and a half left to finish before my campaign, so I could be ready any time between 1-4 weeks from now.

[stubby]

B doesn't have glory for defense, and gets a free 1Ü limit on troops allowing him to bring his five infantry. This would put him at a big disadvantage compared to A, who gets to bring his hero.

Ah, but it's not a 1U" limit - it's a Size 1" limit. With Glory, I want to control for unit scale rather than unit value. B gets the same Unit Inch value to defend with as A attacks with, but all his units are 1" or smaller. So a Hero is legal, a crazy 5U" wizard would be legal (but he'd spend the entire defense budget), but a Horse or catapult wouldn't be, even if they'd taken enough size damage to bring them down to 1U".

A loses two infantry and B three, but B defends the truck and the resources. A gets 2 sacrifice and 3 glory, and B gets 3 sacrifice and 2 glory. They refill their army from their stockpiles, so A has 48Ü left and B 47Ü.

Correct so far.

Then Bs hero does an escapade with reversed results, leaving both players with 5 sacrifice, 5 glory and 45Ü left in stockpile.

Except that A and B both now have Glory to make their 1-Glory Escapade and defenses, so they don't get them for free anymore. They both spend a Glory and have 4 remaining.

A decides to create a new location, a barrack, a Processing location for turning freely available minifigs and small arms into minifig soldiers.

I just want to make sure we're on the same page here: minifigs and small arms can be created at the Capital; a "soldier" isn't necessarily an improvement. If your spearmen are just minifigs with spears, then you don't need a separate Location for them. If you're using the Barrack to make Infantry Specialists available, then the spearmen could be full Phalanxes.

It costs 2 glory to create the location

A's only Location is his Capital, so a new Location would cost 1 Glory. The Escapade locations have no lasting existence once the Escapades are over.

A then attaches 3 glory bricks to it, allowing it to produce 3Ü of spearmen. A also spends 1 sacrifice to raise his alert level to 2, and attaches the remaining 4 sacrifice to the barracks.

A can only put as much Glory or Sacrifice into a Location or combat action as his current Alert level. So he'd spend 1 sacrifice to raise his Alert level to 2, raising his limit, and could then attach 2 Glory and 2 Sacrifice to the Barracks.

So what we'll see from A and B here:

• Both players: 4 Glory, 5 Sacrifice, 45 U", Alert 1
  
  Player A's turn:
  A adds a Barrack (1G), increases Alert to 2 (1S), adds 2G and 2S to the Barrack, builds 2 Phalanxes (2U").
  A now has 1 Glory, 2 Sacrifice, 43 U", and his army is now 5 minifigs, 1 hero, 1 horse and rider, and 2 Phalanxes.
  
  Player B's turn:
  B adds a Plains (1G), increases Alert to 2 (1S), adds 2G and 2S to the Plains.
  B has 1 Glory, 2 Sacrifice, 45 U", and his army is 5 minifigs, 1 hero, and 1 horse and rider.

When do you think you could have the first written prototype of these rules ready? I have like a project and a half left to finish before my campaign, so I could be ready any time between 1-4 weeks from now.

I'm trying to plug them into a chapter format as fast as I can, but my freelance schedule has all my hours booked into mid-June, so I'm only able to steal time in fits and scraps. It's hard to predict how the freelance revisions will go. Hopefully I'll have a bare-bones draft up in the next couple of weeks.

[AZKAMAT]

That's fine. I realize now I actually have 2 and a half projects so I'll be awhile myself. If it really comes down to it, I'll just pretend like I'm in university again and pore over the stuff that's right here and Frankenstein it into something usable.

[Cakeman]

Thanks a lot for following me here. I hope you can find out what might need clearer wording along the way

Ah, but it's not a 1U" limit - it's a Size 1" limit.

Ah! I see.

A decides to create a new location, a barrack, a Processing location for turning freely available minifigs and small arms into minifig soldiers.

I just want to make sure we're on the same page here: minifigs and small arms can be created at the Capital; a "soldier" isn't necessarily an improvement. If your spearmen are just minifigs with spears, then you don't need a separate Location for them. If you're using the Barrack to make Infantry Specialists available, then the spearmen could be full Phalanxes.

I was under the impression that I needed to produce the actual minifig soldiers, just that there was an endless abundance of raw materials. I just assumed in the wrong direction here.

A's only Location is his Capital, so a new Location would cost 1 Glory.
A can only put as much Glory or Sacrifice into a Location or combat action as his current Alert level.

Nice catch.

Player A's turn:
A adds a Barrack (1G), increases Alert to 2 (1S), adds 2G and 2S to the Barrack, builds 2 Phalanxes (2U").
A now has 1 Glory, 2 Sacrifice, 43 U", and his army is now 5 minifigs, 1 hero, 1 horse and rider, and 2 Phalanxes.

But why does A's stockpile decrease when he builds new units from his locations? If you had a lot of locations but ran out of stockpile, would the locations be useless for units and only good for buildings and defenses?

[stubby]

But why does A's stockpile decrease when he builds new units from his locations? If you had a lot of locations but ran out of stockpile, would the locations be useless for units and only good for buildings and defenses?

Workers and Locations, by default, don't want to get involved in your campaign. They already had their own stuff to do. That's why you've got to inspire them with the Glory of your exploits.

Even once they agree to be available, on any normal day they're still going to want to take their wood or their horses or their brikguys to the local market, the same as they were doing before they got mixed up in your crusade. If you want them to produce their goods for you instead, you've got to pay them (or you've got to pay the tax collectors who beat it out of them; etc.) Your Locations determine what goods are available, your Stockpile determines how much you can produce from them.

Buildings and defenses, you don't pay Stockpile for, because they don't belong to you - they belong to the Location. If somebody else takes over the Location, they get those buildings and those defenses. You convince the people in a location that they need to build defenses by inspiring fear with Sacrifice propaganda. They'll use whatever resources you've made available, but they build the defenses on their own.

[AZKAMAT]

their wood or their horses or their brikguys

Please not all three at once!

[Omega Prime]

But why does A's stockpile decrease when he builds new units from his locations? If you had a lot of locations but ran out of stockpile, would the locations be useless for units and only good for buildings and defenses?

TL;DR: Workers need pay, while defensive buildings don't. Thus, Workers are loyal while defenses switch sides like the traitors they are.

This makes sense from an IRL standpoint. You don't get more supplies when you enlist more soldiers- they need food as well. However, you don't need to feed/pay a mortar pit, or a bunker. Those can also be taken over, as well- they belong to the location. Your mortar pit doesn't come with you when you retreat...
That's one way to think of it.

[Craigallot]

A system like this can easily end up being Too Much Work, but I think you can keep things simple and have a fun campaign still. The easiest way to do this, I think, is with the following:

- Two opposing sides (more would make it too complicated). The number of players on each side doesn't really matter.
- An agreed on max CP each side can bring to a single battle
- A certain amount of overall 'campaign CP' for both sides. The goal is to get the other side to 0 over the course of a series of battles.

You start on 'neutral ground'. Players should agree on a condition that has to be met before the battle is over so battles don't become 'I killed a couple of your guys. Now I will retreat.' (Of course, you would end up viscerally removing the kneecaps of someone who showed such Anorakish behaviour anyway so that he couldn't retreat, but that's not really the point here).

If a player has lost he gets 'pushed back' and becomes 'the defender', and the next battle is fought on a battlefield made by him. He should have to pay for defensive structures or perhaps even terrain like bridges, rivers, rocks, fortifications so there's at least something to consider when making easy to defend terrain.

The advantage is that you can keep the terrain if you win the defending battle, the disadvantage is that the enemy can capture it and keep it if he has to defend this territory in a later stage (probably best done by seeing how much of the terrain is still 'intact' and simply translating that to a CP pool he can spend on defensive structures and doesn't count towards his overall campaign CP).

Every time a new battle begins units that survived the last battle can be brought in for free, units / creations that need to be resurrected or are entirely new need to be paid for with CP. Players can agree on side objectives in each battle that could yield rewards like some free soldiers, weapons, a hero, supplies (which would translate to CP).

Keep fighting until either side is out of CP. You have a chance to change your tactics and build favourable terrain if you're on the defense, and there's a max amount of CP either player can bring every battle so unless one player already has less than that amount of CP in his overall campaign CP (which would only happen near the end of the campaign) the battles will be even and he has a good chance to win or get the objective even if he's behind overall.

[ninja_bait]

I like this campaign idea. I can imagine it with some alternative end conditions, like a number of wins in a row, or capturing the opponent's third battlefield.