# 502 Choosing Beta 1

[unclemike]

T9 was a city.  They were 3:1. Guess my valor and troop abilities put me over the top but I would guess not being officially bloody enough did it as well.

I guess it is just a game so will live with bogus requirements and incorrect output result.   I will stick to wizard and political kingdoms until enough complaints pile up for things to be offset.

According to my administrative log file, that city battle inflicted:

Percent in Losses (includes withdraw damage):
1SA: 2.2220087%

So your group failed the 5% bloodied requirement so no chance of brigade advancement. As I've said a few times now, your group is too big to qualify for troop advancement. Reduce its size and you'll see your brigades advance in level or don't and continue to complain about it...

But I lost 1 out of my 20 brigades so I really lost 5%.   I got no attrition taken away so that means it really equals 5%.   So yes will continue to complain

That's assuming that you had everything else being equal. Your group had an assortment of troop types, training levels, morale, attrition, and defense. Starting attrition levels are a factor in the complex formula. Your 20 brigades weren't all at 0% attrition when the battle began and you're not considering that in your estimate.

[Ruingurth]

Reviewing the setup again and with this special order : The cost for using them for any "sole" orders for the king is the same as the cost would normally be for a King using that order. In addition, consuls have the following king-like capabilities. They may attempt to enamor any kingdom in the region they are located, at a cost of 8,000 gold and with a 76% chance of success. In the same manner, they may Denigrate a kingdom in their region at a cost of 6,000 gold. To Consul Enamor, use order #465, to Consul Denigrate, use order #478. For either, put the consul abb. in "A", and the effected kingdom in "B". For special order #478, the Ancient Ones chance of success will be the normal chance as per denigration rules, or 35%, whichever is greater.

I guess you can drop : For either, put the consul abb. in "A", and the effected kingdom in "B".

I guess you can drop all the column info on all setups and just advise which tab to look under. IE covert, divine, other.

Matthew

[Jumpingfist]

T9 was a city.  They were 3:1. Guess my valor and troop abilities put me over the top but I would guess not being officially bloody enough did it as well.

I guess it is just a game so will live with bogus requirements and incorrect output result.   I will stick to wizard and political kingdoms until enough complaints pile up for things to be offset.

According to my administrative log file, that city battle inflicted:

Percent in Losses (includes withdraw damage):
1SA: 2.2220087%

So your group failed the 5% bloodied requirement so no chance of brigade advancement. As I've said a few times now, your group is too big to qualify for troop advancement. Reduce its size and you'll see your brigades advance in level or don't and continue to complain about it...

But I lost 1 out of my 20 brigades so I really lost 5%.   I got no attrition taken away so that means it really equals 5%.   So yes will continue to complain

That's assuming that you had everything else being equal. Your group had an assortment of troop types, training levels, morale, attrition, and defense. Starting attrition levels are a factor in the complex formula. Your 20 brigades weren't all at 0% attrition when the battle began and you're not considering that in your estimate.

I went back and actually looked at this it is exactly 5% the only unit to die was the strongest unit I have (highest defensive value) that started with 0% attrition.  the group also has 4 "good" defense with 10% attrition that nothing happened too.  all attrition numbers stayed exactly the same as the turn before the battle Turn 8.   The damage of 2.2% you reported would equal 44% of 1 brigade this should not be enough to kill any brigades within that group unless they already had high attrition which was not the case of most all the brigades in the group especially the one that was actually taken.

Anyway not looking at the bloodied aspect.  in 3rd cycle most every battle I have seen has caused a minimum of double the reported damage.  See my chart (from a day or two ago) it shows this well. 

I went back and looked at some 2nd cycle battles since you keep claiming nothing is different.  If you want to see for yourself check game 192RD turn 10 battles.  4RD was reported 18% damage they started with 2 RD and 6 WY brigades 0 attrition.  after the battle they had 2 RD and 5 WY 7% attrition.  This equals exactly 18% the number reported. 
same turn, 2RD took 16% damage.  started with 1 RD, 6 WY and 0% attrition finished with 1 RD, 5 WY and 2% attrition.  again perfect damage matches output.

I picked those battles because they are similar to what was just reported in game 503 about the BL with 5 BL, 2 WY suffering 26% damage loosing 1 BL, 1 WY and still having 26% attrition which would actually be equal to 2/7 + 26 % or 28% +26% = 54% units lost.   I obviously can not check that these numbers are accurate,  But you can.  if this battle was working correctly I would have expected 2/7 brigades with 0 additional attrition to be near perfect.

[HeadHoncho]

Agree with JF's analysis, which matches my own very strong impressions and back-of-the-envelope calculations, but now with much greater specificity and actual numbers. Great job!

[Ry Vor]

I'm asking that the discussion on battles and military matters such as recruiting Companion brigades in The Choosing be placed in the new thread specifically for that purpose and of that name.

I'd like to see this thread and the similar one in #503 return to a discussion of all aspects of The Choosing: the feel of the kingdoms, the cultural traits, the special abilities, the new spells, the high priestess model, new orders, kingdom interactions, strategy changes, changes in deciding on orders to issue given the other surrounding changes, impressions on the new interface, customization and ESO selections, and any bug reporting.

[Ry Vor]

Would like to inquire, which kingdoms claimed their ESO's successfully, here post-turn 12 or perhaps tomorrow after T13?
Was it minor or major, what did you claim as rewards, was it an obvious choice? 
If you haven't achieved it, some commentary on what led to that.  Hoping for replies from all 12 kingdoms.

[VballMichael]

DE

I opted for the major ESO. In fairness, I don't think I have ever chosen a minor ESO.
As the DE, in a fairly uncontested region, I chose T1 assuming I would be able to own Eastern Steppes. For my other points, I like to choose things in my control. Thus, I took P1 (influence of 17 and 2 princes) as I thought that went nicely with what I needed to accomplish anyway. I also chose D6 (2 level 7 agents). I almost always choose that one because it seems pretty easy to get 2 agents to 7.
I accomplished my ESO by about turn 7 or 8 and just had to make sure not to accidentally kill off my agents before turn 10.

I then submitted my achieved ESO on turn 10 and asked for an extra Demon Prince and a Baron and a point of influence (all to help take a second region which is still not happening yet ).

I find that I keep choosing pretty similar ESOs across the games because they are objectives I can control. Artifacts and leader advancements seem to require hard work AND luck, while the ones I chose just require planning and hoping that nobody comes in to keep me from achieving them.

I do think 3rd cycle is pretty different, but the 991 order seems similar and the DE position is somewhat similar to 2nd cycle. Having said that, and now playing 12 turns, I might choose an artifact objective going forward as I see there are significantly more artifacts in 3rd cycle than there were in 2nd (at least in Eastern Steppes there were) and a calculator to help determine what is needed to succeed at the encounter.

[HeadHoncho]

On ESO, selecting "control a region" is a no brainer for me unless I start contested.

Influence 17 and two Princes is a no brainer in any game where I don't have a natural enemy.

That leaves either a pair of Agent 7's, a pair of P4's, or a pop center with 35K gold or defenses, for my fifth and final ESO point. Or maybe two artifacts if I have foreknowledge of two or more non-gate locations.

[Jumpingfist]

SA
No ESO yet and unsure if I will get it. I went for major like I almost always do. For me it was more a shifting of what I was interested in after selecting the ESO. When I first got the SA I saw the auto promotion for US and all the bonus for promotion for military battles, also the extra leaders. I went for region, 6 generals, and three dukes, 2 artifacts

Then the next turn I decided to let the PI do my artifact hunting and started looking towards military. I could still get my ESO but it would not come until turn 15. Likely if this were a game I was trying to win I would have focused more on it.

I see no issues with the ESO system for 3rd cycle. ESO rewards may need to be looked at a bit. Would seem a duke or baron may be strong buys seeing the lower starting Emmy count. May think about reducing them to count for 2 points and gov for 1 point. I see level 7 agent maybe getting taken now, that is a good thing.
With the increased focus on navies and sea zones, maybe having an option to buy 2 level 16 fleets for a point could be cool. Let them put them in any sea zone no port required.

[HeadHoncho]

Question, I know there's Stir Unrest now, but is status quo also being handled differently in Third Cycle? I ask because my Prince with high influence was unable to prevent a Warlock Duke (also with high influence, I'm sure) from 330'ing a neutral town in a region where he's Friendly. Might have just been the dice, but I thought I would ask, because I vaguely recall a reference to dividing by reaction level, or something like that.