Mini Expansion - Rectification

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Sord » Thu Sep 29, 2011 7:50 pm

From the 1.06a patch notes:

When framing a player for a ritual targeting Pandemonium the framed player now gets his resistance to deceit bonus added to the Pandemonium modifier of +10 (was +8 previously). Additionally if the framed player has Demonic Premonitions active then his Prophecy level is also added to the challenge modifier.

Which makes it sound like the roll is 2d6+deceit vs 2d6+10+resistances(if any)+DP(if active), so for a true turtle against a totally unprepared target, that's 2d6+6 vs 2d6+10 (about a 10% to frame, 90% to fail). If the target has prophecy 4 and runs DP, they'll defend at 2d6+14, which means the turtle has pretty much a 0% chance of succeeding.

Now against someone with Prince of Lies, the odds of success go way up (44% against an unprepared target), but are still less than 50/50. And I don't know that I would count someone picking Prince of Lies as a turtle.
si.battlespot.com - the wiki for Solium Infernum
Sord
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:39 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Sen » Thu Sep 29, 2011 9:13 pm

Marble Mouth wrote:I guess, and I demand and I play the map. It's not reliable. I'm ok with that.


What does demanding achieve? Remember, the turtle cares only about resource cards and defense. He can concede cards with 1 resource on them, or he can make you spend 4+ order slots vs. 0 winning the first vendetta while he plans to win the second. In all the situations where he is not a neighbour you can only score prestige off him with praetor duels or kill his starting legion with spells once. A neighbour to a turtle will immediately get the Demand---> CounterDemand stalling cycle.

The worst thing about all these is that they overlap with actions taken by prestige players making it difficult to know if you're even banging on the right door.

If all the prestige players ignore the turtle(s), then they'll probably all lose. Maybe it's up to the guy in 1st place to ensure that the game actually ends by prestige victory. Maybe it's up to the guy with the closest stronghold to the turtle, since he's in the most immediate danger. Maybe nobody takes responsibility for it, and the turtle eventually runs wild. It's up to the prestige players in each game to work that out for themselves, and I love it.


What a wonderful little game theory problem, the prestige players all with the decision to cooperate or punish the defecting turtles. Unfortunately, a group can't win in SI, so I find it difficult to imagine any matrix where cooperation succeeds. Unless a meta-game culture develops of stopping a turtle being valued more highly than a win, which is just absurd.

Agreed. In this game, most of your diplomatic decisions are about whether to engage in mutually detrimental fighting, or to leave one another alone. That's why turtling can be so strong. You're leaving everybody else alone, hoping they leave you alone while weakening eachother. That's why the prestige players (loyal to the conclave) must band together against the aloof would-be-traitors before they succeed in usurping the throne.

Are you seriously advocating role playing and fake social contracts as to why a player should act not in their own interest?

You don't have to win every game, a tough fight to be runner up is very respectable, but purposefully losing so that a villainous turtle doesn't win is just daft. Its as muddled as that claim earlier that cooperation is the turtle counter, its an acknowledgement that turtling is overpowered.

This, I believe, is an inescapable fact of more-than-two-player games. If you don't care about the cost to yourself, you can launch an all-out attack on a target of your choice and significantly reduce his chances (and your own) relative to everyone else. I also love this.

All out last gasp suicide attacks are a fact of life in games, let fly the Planet Busters. But at least you can see The Beast coming and prepare a defense against it. You may not even know who to get revenge on when framed.

Sen wrote:
Marble Mouth wrote:I especially disagree with your assertion that the winner can possibly be undeserving. This game's mechanics are often arbitrary and unpredictable. A win is a win.

I don't see how you reconcile the content of those last 3 sentences.

What I meant to say is that the final outcome of the game can be rather arbitrary and that speculating on the deservedness of a win is silly. I enjoy the sharp tactical decisions that I'm forced to make at every turn. It doesn't bother me at all that I can make a series of good moves and still lose, or that someone else could seem to play a weak game and then win.

Disagreeing here. For me, theres always something you could have done to win and which you can learn for next time. Losing is typically more educational than winning and an opponent soundly thrashing you can be a joy to behold when well executed.

Theres nothing to learn from framing in its current form, except that the prestige game is for mugs.

I think it's funny that you bring up chess as an example. There is no luck, no hidden information in chess. It's all there for you to see, if you look far enough into the game, but chess isn't a trivial, boring game. I'm not really going anywhere with that.

I wasn't using chess as an example because chess is a textbook example of a deterministic game that has been solved by spreadsheeting (computational power), I was just using recognisable terms for high value vs. low value units since not everyone knows what a panzergrenadier is etc. Pardon me.

Sord wrote:From the 1.06a patch notes:

When framing a player for a ritual targeting Pandemonium the framed player now gets his resistance to deceit bonus added to the Pandemonium modifier of +10 (was +8 previously). Additionally if the framed player has Demonic Premonitions active then his Prophecy level is also added to the challenge modifier.

Which makes it sound like the roll is 2d6+deceit vs 2d6+10+resistances(if any)+DP(if active), so for a true turtle against a totally unprepared target, that's 2d6+6 vs 2d6+10 (about a 10% to frame, 90% to fail). If the target has prophecy 4 and runs DP, they'll defend at 2d6+14, which means the turtle has pretty much a 0% chance of succeeding.

Now against someone with Prince of Lies, the odds of success go way up (44% against an unprepared target), but are still less than 50/50. And I don't know that I would count someone picking Prince of Lies as a turtle.


Remember theres two rolls going on here, the ritual roll and the identity roll. The +10 (not +12, my mistake) is used vs. the ritual success, which is irrelevent as even a failed ritual causes the excommunication. This special Pandy modifier is certainly applied vs. the ritual roll, but is it applied vs. the identity roll? Anyone know? Still, Deceit resistance (i.e. Amulet of Shadows +3), Paranoia trait and high Prophecy ritual will certainly help you, good to know.
Sen
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Sord » Thu Sep 29, 2011 11:03 pm

Sen wrote:
Sord wrote:From the 1.06a patch notes:

When framing a player for a ritual targeting Pandemonium the framed player now gets his resistance to deceit bonus added to the Pandemonium modifier of +10 (was +8 previously). Additionally if the framed player has Demonic Premonitions active then his Prophecy level is also added to the challenge modifier.

Remember theres two rolls going on here, the ritual roll and the identity roll. The +10 (not +12, my mistake) is used vs. the ritual success, which is irrelevent as even a failed ritual causes the excommunication. This special Pandy modifier is certainly applied vs. the ritual roll, but is it applied vs. the identity roll? Anyone know? Still, Deceit resistance (i.e. Amulet of Shadows +3), Paranoia trait and high Prophecy ritual will certainly help you, good to know.

I pretty sure the patch notes were ONLY discussing the identity roll. I see no reason why the framed player's deceit resistance would reduce the chances of a destruction ritual harming pandemonium. The whole point of the change was to make it harder to excommunicate players by framing, not to protect pandemonium. As far as I know, this is a special identity roll formula that only applies to pandemonium attacks.
si.battlespot.com - the wiki for Solium Infernum
Sord
 
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Feb 26, 2010 11:39 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Marble Mouth » Fri Sep 30, 2011 5:11 pm

I'm currently at work, where I don't have access to SI. I did run some tests this morning. I'd like to have at least ten times this much data, but I believe it's worth posting what I have already.

Methodology:
I started a single player game and got Destruction 1 for IA and Deception 5 for Ritual Masking. I targeted Pandemonium and attempted to frame Azazel. I then saved the game and reprocessed it repeatedly. I suppose I probably should have gone hotseat so that I knew the stats of my dupe, but since I always used the same AI, I believe the results are still meaningful. I had Prince of Lies, so my Deception was at +9, and my Destruction was just +1.

Raw Data:
Frame success/Affliction success: 2
Frame success/Affliction fail: 5
Frame fail/Affliction success: 3
Frame fail/Affliction fail: 9
Total trials: 19

Analysis:
Affliction success: 5/19 ~= 26%
Frame success: 7/19 ~= 37%

Conclusions:
Needs moar data. I am surprised by how often the Affliction succeeded with only a +1. The framing failed with a +9 modifier ~63% in this small sample. These results are strongly suggestive, but inconclusive.
Marble Mouth
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:07 am

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Sen » Fri Sep 30, 2011 6:07 pm

Serves me right for not reading intermediate patch notes. Those numbers are certainly less awful than they used to be.
Sen
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Fuu » Sat Oct 01, 2011 1:46 am

Interesting numbers. I like that Pandemonium has a strong resistance, but it seems pretty arbitrary for it to get +2 to this specific kind of attack without any in-game reasoning (it is explained by its importance of course, but unless you know that this change was implemented there is nothing in the game to make you think that this is the case). Would the same resistance be achievable if the level of Pandemonium was increased by 2? Unless I misunderstand, it seems like it would, and as a small side bonus it would make Pandemonium slightly harder to beat militarily (higher ritual resistance across the board, and higher likelihood of winning the combat challenge roll, with a possibility of +5 instead of +4 to a random stat). This would be a more intuitive way to go than arbitrarily raising the resistance to a specific ritual without any indication of it in-game.
Fuu
 
Posts: 173
Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2010 4:30 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Matchstickman » Sun Oct 02, 2011 6:41 pm

Hey! This thread get's a shout out in Vic's Blog!

Just looking at the two new things on the table I think something is missing/word I can't articulate and may come back and edit in.
The Relic and legions are a Turtle's dream, the Turtle is the one who has all the spare tribute to bid on these things and giving them the chance to buff their own stronghold while they are out conquering Pandemonium is not a good thing.

I'm also not sure about the tribute from excommunication, it sounds like a nice twist until you realise that Turtles will not be asking for tribute at that point, having already buffed themselves enough to go take on the rest of Hell/Pandemonium. It also penalises those people who are pushed out of the Conclave by Ritual Masking... Hmm... is this expansion pushing things towards Deceit builds being the new charisma?

I think I would like to see the relic and new legions only 'released' to the bazaar after someone has been excommunicated, as an emergency measure the Conclave is putting out type thing, though this is just initial gut reaction and no actual thought has gone into it.

Obviously this is all wild speculation before even having seen the expansion and I fully expect to be proven wrong, as in so many other things!
Matchstickman
 
Posts: 335
Joined: Mon Mar 24, 2008 12:48 am
Location: Centre of the Wastes (London)

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Sen » Sun Oct 02, 2011 7:16 pm

All very nice I think. The tribute penalty won't stop Usurper attempts, but will cause them to fail more often. The Guard Legions are a very nice idea.

The paaam-Paaaaam-PAAAAAAH........DUN-DAHHHH! monolith though... Can it be placed in Pandemonium once captured? I'm not sure if its a truly immovable object that will could swing either way with Pandemonium captures or if its just a speedbump that a ritual will take care of.
Sen
 
Posts: 36
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 7:49 pm

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Chaosguy » Sun Oct 02, 2011 11:25 pm

Yeah, wow-- nice stuff & good to know Vic is reading some of this debate and being creative as ever!

The guards idea certainly adds another dimension to play. That said the monolith seems a bit too OP, no? Maybe have it so there is a chance (%) that the stronghold or PoP can't be taken? If it falls into the hands of Gamara as he puts it (and considering the resources your average Gamara stockpiles, its probably not too hard for them to acquire once it shows on the bazaar) it basically ends the game, potentially in a stalemate. If and when they make their move-- they can secure their stronghold-- ignore the conclave then go about destroying their adversaries' strongholds one at a time with only limited fear of reprisal... not sure if this was the intended idea or not from Vic's blog.
Chaosguy
 
Posts: 76
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2011 1:31 am

Re: Mini Expansion - Rectification

Postby Marble Mouth » Mon Oct 03, 2011 5:14 pm

Wow. Had not seen that blog post yet. I love the guard legions. I was hoping specifically for some way for players to improve Pandemonium in the expansion. You could already buff your stronghold with praetors and combat cards, so these are just one more option on top for them. It does little to stop the excomm & kill strategy, but I was always more worried about the take-and-hold for 5 turns strategy. Defending 2 PoP's (1 of them really strong by itself) seems easier than attacking 5 PoP's (each of them with its own player focused on defending it.) The failed tribute roll for excomms will certainly hurt them. Maybe all it does is force them to stockpile more beforehand, but Destruction and Deception both have rituals to punish that. They might not be using the bazaar, but those juicy rituals and combat cards aren't free either. The Black Monolith should certainly be a game changer itself. It's still vulnerable to Deception, or course, and it can be used by turtles as easily as by anyone else. I'm all for it. I favor the "everything is OP" style of game play, where you have to secure some kind of broken advantage for yourself and then try to leverage it into a game state where it is more broken than everyone else's broken advantages. That Cartographer's Table pleases me for similar reasons.
Marble Mouth
 
Posts: 47
Joined: Thu Aug 18, 2011 1:07 am

PreviousNext

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron