Tactics: Genesis Unit Nomination [Archive] - Tactics Arena Community Forums

legacy67

10-23-2005, 12:21 AM

Tactics Genesis Voting Format

Per my discussion with xerent, I have made some amendments to the voting process. These amendments are below in green. I have lowerd the required points for petition to 15, and there has been some change made to the final decision process..

I will start this post with a short introduction to the game Tactics: Genesis.

Tactics: Genesis is a TAO-like game that is being programmed by our very own xerent. It has some very key differences, but works on the same premise as a turn-based strategy game played on a grid. You can find the link HERE (http://www.tacticsgenesis.com/).

Xerent made a post in the CAU forums explaining it in more detail which you can find HERE (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=20100).

This thread is for a voting process that will put a CAU unit into actual gameplay. The winning unit will be programmed into Tactics: Genesis by xerent. There will be some minor changes made to fit the format of the new game as there are some statistical categories that differ from TAO. For more information see xerent’s thread or check the Genesis website. It would not hurt for the people who vote to play Tactics: Genesis to see the differences, but most of your decision making should be based on the merits of the units as they exist in CAU.

I will now outline the format for voting.

As per discussions with Mithrandir and Lonely Tylenol, and I believe xerent’s request, the initial pool will be limited to Platinum Certified units, but there will be a petition process for submitting units that are not Certified Platinum.

As only 5 creators have made Platinum Certified units, only 5 units will be automatically submitted. (Duffman has chosen to opt out of the Genesis process so the initial field will actually be limted to 4 units). Any creator that has more than one Platinum unit must choose his or her favorite unit for submission. If there is any unit that is not submitted that someone believes deserves consideration, then a community petition can be created in the CAU forums for its entry. A unit needs 20 points to be submitted by petition. Judges (current and former) carry 2 points, all other community members (must have at least two full CAU designs posted before the date of this thread, a full post means that it includes the basic statistics and descriptions) count as 1 point. This is to prevent people from recruiting non-CAU people to push though a unit for consideration. No creator may have more than one unit up for consideration, so if a unit receives enough signatures on a petition but the creator already has another unit up for consideration; it is the creator’s prerogative to decide which unit shall be voted on.

Some basic rules for the petition period:

- The petition period will last 10 days.
- A “signature” of a petition reads as follows: “I state your name believe that Insert unit name by insert name of creator should be considered in the Tactics: Genesis voting process.
- A petition thread shall be titled as follows: “Official Petition for Insert unit by Insert creator to the Tactics: Genesis Voting Process”
- At the end of a period of 10 days from the beginning of this post, any unit with 15 points will be entered into the voting process for tactics genesis.
- The number of units able to be submitted by petition will be limited to 5 (first come first served) so as to prevent an excessively long voting process.
- A petition must be submitted to this thread within the 10 days under the same title format as above, and with a link to the petition.

After the petition period is over, the voting process will begin. This voting process is open only to members who have been judges or have a unit that is certified Gold or Platinum. The voting period will be a period of 3 weeks from the end of the Petition Period. Any votes must be submitted during this time, any votes submitted after this time will not be tallied, and the winning unit will be decided by the current number of votes.

The actual scoring process will work as follows:

- All judges will rank every unit in the running from best (1) to worst (X). Each unit will get the inverse number of points corresponding to its rank. So if there are 8 units, the first ranked unit will get 8 points and the last ranked unit will get one point.
- At the end of the 3 week period, all scores will be tallied up and the 2 units with the most points will make it into the next process which will take place in the Tactics: Genesis forums.
- In the event of a tie, there will be a runoff voting period of 1 week.
- Judges may not vote for their own units.
- In order to offset this imbalance, all judges units will automatically receive the average number of points, as they are at a disadvantage by not having one set of scores. So if there are 7 units for consideration, all judges units will receive an automatic 4 points to offset the fact that the judge cannot vote for them.
- Any judge must rank ALL units submitted or none of the votes will count.

The final voting will take place on the Tactics: Genesis CAU forum directly after the voting process ends here. As soon as we decide on the final format I will post the details here. Remember that there are distinctive differences between TG and TAO so we are voting on a unit concept and not the particular statistic of these units. The designed balance is important as it has determined the viability of a concept, but changes will be made for the new fgame format.

The exact scheduale will go as follows.
Monday 10/24/05, 12:00 AM - Petition period starts
Thursday 11/3/05 12:00 AM - Petition period ends, Voting period begins
Thursday 11/24/05 12:00 AM - Voting period ends, runoff begins if nessacary
Sunday 12/4/05 12:00 AM -Runoff ends (if acutally happens)

Here are the platinum units that are in the initial submission.
Grapnel Warrior (Lonely Tylenol) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15822)
Fabricor Substantia (legacy67) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19830)
Gramenger (Mithrandir) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17197)
Golem Stormer (Cross Punisher) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19622&highlight=golem+stormer)

legacy67

10-23-2005, 12:21 AM

This section will be reserved for units in petition.
Sorbgon (22woger22) = 16 points
Imperial Queen Bee and Workers = 10 Points
Mysterious Growth (Deck of Jesters) = 6 points
Nite Wiv Horse (New Paradigm) = 1 Point

Units Qualified for Voting by Petition
Sorbgon (22woger22)

legacy67

10-23-2005, 12:22 AM

Grapnel Warrior (Lonely Tylenol) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=15822)
Fabricor Substantia (legacy67) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19830)
Gramenger (Mithrandir) (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17197)
Golem Stormer (Cross Punisher)
(http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19622&highlight=golem+stormer)Sorbgon (22woger22) (http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?p=419602#post419602)

Points Earned
http://img516.imageshack.us/img516/8/tgvotesasof1120059ej.th.png (http://img516.imageshack.us/my.php?image=tgvotesasof1120059ej.png)

Cross Punisher

10-23-2005, 12:39 AM

:rolleyes: my unit easily fits into a TAO related game the easiest:cool:

Lonely Tylenol

10-23-2005, 12:50 AM

It was a tough choice between GW and Abbot... :(

Cross Punisher

10-23-2005, 01:24 AM

I just let legacy decide.:p

Duffman

10-23-2005, 01:32 AM

Storm Golem link has too many http://'s in it ^_^

Cross Punisher

10-23-2005, 01:59 AM

Storm Golem link has too many http://'s in it ^_^
HereIsTheLinkToTheGolemStormerThen. (http://www.tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=19622)

22woger22

10-23-2005, 02:00 AM

I read the whole post, but I have a headache right now, so I'll just clarify things here.

I make a thread "Petition for Unit", I have to get 20 points (in 10 days) for it to be included in the nominations , than the current judges rank it?

:good:

May the best unit win!

legacy67

10-23-2005, 02:11 PM

You create a thread with the proper title as outlined above. You need to get 20 points by Thursday 11/3/05 at 12:00 AM.

Proper title it: Official Petition for Insert unit by Insert creator to the Tactics: Genesis Voting Process.

Then any past or current judge, or anyone with a Certified unit, ranks the units in consideration.

Edit: Golem Stormer link fixed above

Deck of Jesters

10-23-2005, 02:56 PM

So for those units that are already submitted, how do we add our points to them? I do not see any "proper" forms to do so in, that's why I ask.

legacy67

10-23-2005, 02:59 PM

The units already submited to not need points, they are already throught to the voting phase. Any unit you don't see there needs an Official Petition.

Once the petition period is over, the ranking process will begin of all the units in submission.

Cross Punisher

10-23-2005, 05:00 PM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think anyone could get at least 15 points to say there unit deserves to be made real, let alone 20. There simply aren't that many people who can agree with each other.:)

legacy67

10-23-2005, 05:53 PM

I think that it is not that hard, remember this is merely a petition to get into the process.

If it seems just too strong, I may amend it, but I will give it a few days to se what happens first. Anyone who wants to start petitions may do it now.

There are a few units that I may be happy to sign petitions for so if you like any units, set up petitions.

Walrus

10-23-2005, 06:48 PM

uniquinous

10-23-2005, 06:58 PM

Sorry this is such a noob question, but why can't I play T:G? Is it just not released at all? Their forums make it sound like some can play. I just keep getting "cannot find server" everytime I click on the link to play. erm, help?

xerent

10-23-2005, 07:13 PM

It's because my IP changed for the first time in 6 months. Should be up again in a day or so. (In between updates, working on PHP stuff, have to factor in the new address into actionscript while rolling ahead with the updates, that sort of thing.)

Jeffery

10-23-2005, 07:14 PM

It finally drifted, eh?

legacy67

10-23-2005, 07:38 PM

The game is temporarily down. It will be fully operational in December, but up and down intermittantly until then.
At least that's what I thought. I guess it up now.

xerent

10-23-2005, 07:40 PM

Legacy. AIM. Now.

JesusCraig

10-23-2005, 08:02 PM

Ummm... you need a minimum of 14 posters in order to get 20 points. I don't see that happening.

We don't have 14 posters with enough good sense to really extend it that far, we'd have to depend on those people who make bad units to make our judgement calls.

Jeffery

10-23-2005, 08:06 PM

Legacy. AIM. Now.
Sounds like someone started this thread without talking to Xerent.....

legacy67

10-23-2005, 08:07 PM

You need a minimum of 10 posters actually. 10former judges or gold unit creators. Again, if it seems too stiff after a couple of days I will tone it down, but I want to see how it goes at first.

Edit: I discussed it with xerent, we are currently simply discussing administrative issues, we discussed the thread before, we are just ironing out some details.

Edit 2: per my discussion with xerent, some changes will be made to the process

Cross Punisher

10-23-2005, 09:16 PM

Uh I've never played T:G so I don't know how it works there.

Walrus

10-24-2005, 08:46 AM

personally i dont quite understand why the voting for T:G should be so strongly and directly related to the whole committee thing. for starters its a different game.

JesusCraig

10-24-2005, 10:41 AM

Its common human nature to credit authorities with appeals to knowledge, so even outside their subject area authorities are seen as intelligent. It's likely based on the property that anyone who can show enough intelligence in this given field will be able to show intelligence in a similar given field. Whether it's true or not I'm not sure, the style had merit with kings as well as numerous other authorities on general knowledge, but in present day the very aspect of knowledge is too broad. I'm sure its possible for a person to be a credible "judge" in both games but whether there is a correlation between them has yet to be determined, so I'm inclined to agree with walrus, it doesn't really make sense scientifically for us to be more influential.

Then again I'm inclined to believe that the correlation does exist, I transferred to this game from a similar group of background games and picked it up rather quickly. Thus personally I'm inclined to believe that general knowledge can exist to influence a similar field. So I believe that we should be more influential from a personal opinion.

Hard to say really.

Deck of Jesters

10-24-2005, 10:58 AM

So you're basically saying when someone knows their shit, they know it for all related fields ;) I'm fine with the judges getting 2 point votes, they are typically the better unit creators/reviewers, and know which units will fit into the game better.

Walrus

10-24-2005, 12:28 PM

i feel a rant coming on...

Mithrandir

10-24-2005, 12:31 PM

No Walrus no! Think happy thoughts...drift off to happyland...resist the urge to rant!

Walrus

10-24-2005, 12:33 PM

lucky for you i have a unit i need to post.

JesusCraig

10-24-2005, 02:53 PM

Actually I was saying that its percieved that when people know their shit, we relate it to other fields
I was saying for the most part I disagree with said statement. However I'm inclined to believe it makes logical sense when dealing within specific areas of expertise, a person with a degree in calculus will be able to do math, and to some extent either be able to do physics or learn physics faster, so if I can create units in TAO, likely I'll be able to create units in T:G, to a similar extent. That is all presumption of course, but it seems to follow correct reasoning so I'm inclined to believe it, unless of course evidence is presented to sway me.

legacy67

10-24-2005, 05:49 PM

The first petition has been posted and the unit already has 4 points. Please remember to be clear in your petition signing, I have provided an easy to use, fill in the blank format for signing petitions.

"I state your name believe that Insert unit name by insert name of creator should be considered in the Tactics: Genesis voting process"

In any event, good luck to all petitions!

Walrus

10-24-2005, 06:55 PM

all these petitions are going to create huge spam.

legacy67

10-25-2005, 02:20 AM

Only 2 units have had petitions so far. Both of these units are fairly decent designs and could create some good discussion. They also may be better for the larger board of T:G.

Walrus

10-25-2005, 05:16 AM

instead of creating a new thread to discuss the same unit, why not just use the original thread and post here to say you want to petition it.

Cross Punisher

10-25-2005, 06:16 AM

I still find it hard to believe that any unit no matter how good will get 15 points. I've determined that only about 10 people with gold/platinum units might vote and about 7 without gold/platinum units might vote. Sure thats 27 total points possible but I really don't think it would go over half that

After the petition period is over, the voting process will begin. This voting process is open only to members who have been judges or have a unit that is certified Gold or Platinum. The voting period will be a period of 3 weeks from the end of the Petition Period. Any votes must be submitted during this time, any votes submitted after this time will not be tallied, and the winning unit will be decided by the current number of votes.I thought you judges were going to be doing the... *well* judging.

Walrus

10-25-2005, 11:40 AM

legacy67

10-25-2005, 03:47 PM

instead of any of this, i think the fairest thing would be for people to just submit some ideas to xerent and have him choose....seeings at its his game and all.
unless he doesnt want to/doesnt have time of course.

He suggested this process. He likes the way CAU works here, and he thought that a voting proces would be fun. And yes, he is very busy programing T:G.

It is very obvious that you heavily dislike this thread and this process. I am not sure exactly why you are so completely against this, but that is your perrogative. You do have the right to express yourself, but I would request that you dorect any more commoents or criticism to me directly im PM as opposed to degrading the process publically in the Nomination thread. You of course can ignore this if you like and continue posting multiole negative commments about this thread each day, but I would p[refer that you allow the rest of us to enjoy this unmolested. The "spam" that you talk about hasn't happened, and a couple of extra thread really doesn't effect you at all. I respect your right to disagree with this process, but we understand your opinion and do not require any more reminders. Please allow us to have some fun.

Cheers,

L67

Walrus

10-25-2005, 04:42 PM

fun??? fun??????

are you mad?!

Duffman

10-25-2005, 04:53 PM

Motion to it have all of Walrus' units excluded from T:G competion selection because he is a poopyhead.

All in favour say I.

Jeffery

10-25-2005, 04:56 PM

Eye.

Executioner

10-25-2005, 04:59 PM

Deck of Jesters

10-25-2005, 05:58 PM

Nay. Edit: In favor of Walrus, I believe is how that vote works :x Either way, I'm saying Walrus's units should be included.

Anyway... I never got the opportunity to play T:G while it was running, is it basically a "run-off" of this game, but with different units? I do not yet understand how it works.

Walrus

10-25-2005, 06:16 PM

i havent played it either.

legacy67

10-25-2005, 06:40 PM

NAY. I think we need to create units specifically for T:G, its a different game so why would our units work? Also the style is different than tao. I think each active CAU member or judge should create a unit specifically for the purpose of T:G and then those units get voted on.

Exe

We are voting on concepts, not nessacarily the specific mechanics as those will have to be modified for the new game. There are many reasons why we are doing it this way. There will be similar things within T:G in the future, but not yet as the game is still in the early stages.

Lonely Tylenol

10-26-2005, 12:17 AM

Tactics:Genesis is a tactics game with some similar tactical traits, and some different. It wouldn't be too hard to allow a TAO-based unit in T:G territory, with proper modifications. (I imagine the creator of the winning unit will have a talk with Xerent about that.)

If you want one of Walrus' units in a game, petition, and get as many people interested as you can. Otherwise, stop complaining about it. Bump.

Cross Punisher

10-26-2005, 12:24 AM

Jeffery

10-26-2005, 12:33 AM

No body is going to get 15 points

Exactly.

legacy67

10-26-2005, 12:39 AM

First off, I think 15 points is very doable, look at the Sorbgon with 8 already and it's only the 2nd day.

Second, if it turns out that 15 points is completely unattainable (which i don't believe is true) then I will make some modifications.

Cross Punisher

10-26-2005, 12:57 AM

First off, I think 15 points is very doable, look at the Sorbgon with 8 already and it's only the 2nd day.I only count 6: legacy67(2), Deck of Jesters(2), Lonely Tylenol(2)

legacy67

10-26-2005, 01:33 AM

I counted 22w22 as well.

22woger22

10-26-2005, 02:04 AM

- A petition must be submitted to this thread within the 10 days under the same title format as above, and with a link to the petition.
Well, I must've forgotten that:

Official Petition for Sorbgon by 22woger22 to the T:G Voting Process (http://tacticsarena.com/forum/showthread.php?t=21073)

Walrus

10-26-2005, 05:32 AM

why is everything 'official' now?

Jeffery

10-26-2005, 05:34 AM

Because they stopped listening to whining, and decided to keep going as directed by the T:G designer.

Walrus

10-26-2005, 05:50 AM

talking of whining, shouldnt you be somewhere else?

New Paradigm

10-26-2005, 05:51 AM

If you want one of Walrus' units in a game, petition, and get as many people interested as you can. Otherwise, stop complaining about it.

i did the petion 4 nite wiv horse but ppl didnt like it :(

Cross Punisher

10-26-2005, 06:25 AM

I counted 22w22 as well.
but 22w22 didn't follow the "I state your name believe that Insert unit name by insert name of creator should be considered in the Tactics: Genesis voting process" outline, and I thought someone couldn't vote for their own unit.

xerent

10-26-2005, 08:19 AM

I would also like to point out at this time, I do have a CAU on my forum as well. Currently, the game isn't up. My ip has been changing more times than Donald Rumsfeld's diaper, but I digress. Once it's up, you can see. ^^

legacy67

10-26-2005, 01:40 PM

but 22w22 didn't follow the "I state your name believe that Insert unit name by insert name of creator should be considered in the Tactics: Genesis voting process" outline, and I thought someone couldn't vote for their own unit.

You are right, you cannot "vote" for your own unit, but we are not in the voting period yet. We are currently in the petition period, and you can sign your own petition.

22woger22

10-27-2005, 01:39 AM

legacy67

10-27-2005, 03:15 AM

Sorbgon is now at 10 points with plenty of time to go! Well done sir!

Sodamoeba

10-27-2005, 04:41 PM

I didn't read the whole thread, so maybe this was brought up, but I think this should be more of a community effort. Why don't you let everybody who made a gold-certified unit vote, or something along those lines. I don't think something this big in CAU history should be a decision reserved for a select few. Maybe anybody who could vote in petitions should be able to vote for the final voting.

legacy67

10-27-2005, 05:47 PM

Everyone with gold certified unit (ie people who had the option to judge or were judges) can vote. Read the original post a little more carefully.;)

Sodamoeba

10-27-2005, 06:14 PM

:rolleyes: sorry...I had read it, but sometimes I see a big shiny word and skip straight to it, and over the stuff that actually matters. :)

shiny....

22woger22

10-28-2005, 04:51 PM

Sorbgon is now at 10 points with plenty of time to go! Well done sir!
Yes, 5 days to go.

But the ones that have alreasdy voted are the only ones that are active in the CAU forums.

I might go PMing some more people. . . (If that's allowed?)

legacy67

10-28-2005, 04:58 PM

You can PM people, but they need to meet the mininum requirements to sign a petition. See above.

legacy67

10-29-2005, 01:52 PM

Congrats 22w22 for having the firt unit to qualify for voting by petiton!

legacy67

10-30-2005, 08:22 PM

This is just a reminder that the petition period ends on Thursday.

Thursday 11/3/05 12:00 AM - Petition period ends, Voting period begins

There are many units worth petition out there. Anyone who wants to start a petition needs to do so soon.

Cross Punisher

10-30-2005, 08:29 PM

Congrats 22, I really didn't think any unit could get 15 votes; I wasn't expecting LT, O_S, or xerent to vote. Take that however you want :)

legacy67

11-01-2005, 12:20 PM

Just reminding everyone that there are still a couple more days left in the petition process, so sign and make some petitions. I am making no promises, but some leniency may be applied to units that get very close.

xerent

11-01-2005, 04:26 PM

Just so you guys know, Genesis is up and running, at least for the time being.

(Not complete yet, so don't expect a complete game.)

www.tacticsgenesis.com/game.htm

Walrus

11-01-2005, 05:10 PM

how long does it take to connect to a server usually? mine has said connecting for 2 mins so far...it might just be my university blocking it or something.
TAO works fine though

Cross Punisher

11-01-2005, 05:15 PM

Just so you guys know, Genesis is up and running, at least for the time being.

(Not complete yet, so don't expect a complete game.)

www.tacticsgenesis.com/game
The links dead

Walrus

11-01-2005, 05:26 PM

add a .htm to the end and you're ok

xerent

11-01-2005, 09:46 PM

It is. Port 9875 must be allowed for communications. Universities block such ports. This prot number is subject to change.

Walrus

11-02-2005, 07:05 AM

does TAO run through a port?

and if yes, couldnt that one be used?

legacy67

11-04-2005, 12:32 AM

The petition period has now ended. Sorry for the slow update.

We are now entering into the voting period. Anyone who has created a unit that was Certified Gold, been a judge, or is currently a judge (redundant but just making things clear) can participate.

Rank the units in post #3 from 1-5 in decending order (1 is the best). If one of your units is up for consideration, do ont include it in your vote. As explained earlier, the unit ranked #1 gets 5 points, 2 gets 4 points and so on. When memebers with units in consideration vote, they do not rank their unit but it gets the average score (3) automatically. This process is schedualed to be up for 30 days, but I will close it early if sufficient voting has been done. Enjoy and good luck!

Cross Punisher

11-04-2005, 12:37 AM

Good luck to those lucky 5 people then :)

EDIT: And legacy, stop insulting my unit by spelling the name wrong :)

legacy67

11-04-2005, 03:55 PM

My rankings

1. Grapnel Warrior (Lonely Tylenol)
2. Golem Stormer (Cross Punisher)
3. Gramenger (Mithrandir)
4. Sorbgon (22woger22)

I would have made the Golem Stormer 1st as it is my favorite unit in relationship to TAO, but I believe that the Grapnel Warrior is better suited for Tactics: Genesis.

As I have a unit in the running I cannot vote for my own unit. As per the guidelines, it will automatically take the #3 (middle) spot.

Dynamix

11-04-2005, 04:30 PM

i dont know if sum1 has posted this or not,but can you nominate your own unit?

legacy67

11-04-2005, 04:32 PM

Please read the at least the first post of this thread. The submission is closed and we are now in the voting period on the 5 submitted units.

Sodamoeba

11-04-2005, 04:54 PM

5 points: Gramenger
4 Points: Fabricor Substantia
3 Points: Grapnel Warrior
2 Points: Sorbgon
1 Point: Golem Stormer

Bear in mind, I love ALL of these units, but not all of em could get top honors from me, and I have a special place in my heart for the Gramenger. :)

Mithrandir

11-04-2005, 08:41 PM

1. Fabricor Substantia.
2. Grapnel Warrior.
3. Golem Stormer.
4. Sorbgon.
Gramenger (my own unit, and is thus unranked)

You know, the best part of this vote is that while of course I'd love for my own unit to win, I'd really be thrilled for any of these units to make it. Someday I'll have to play some TG to go beyond the theory that CAU mostly consists of. Thanks again xerent for doing this, this is just too cool for words. And thanks to Legacy for finishing the organization of this. I wish I could have been more of a participant in the process but alas, time forbade that possibility.

And thanks Soda for the Gramenger vote. It holds a special place in my heart too.:)

22woger22

11-05-2005, 02:20 PM

For 5 points: Gramenger
For 4 points: Fabricor Substantia
For 3 points: Grapnel Warrior
For 2 points: Golem Stormer

My Sorbgon is unranked.

It was hard to choose between the FS and the Gramenger. Both are my favourite units. Their tactical potential blew me away.

Deck of Jesters

11-05-2005, 02:48 PM

1. Fabricor Substantia
2. Sorbgon
3. Grapnel Warrior
4. Gramenger
5. Golem Stormer

Edit: Note: my votes were ranked by position, not points. Therefore, the Fabricor gets 5 points and the Golem Stormer gets 1.

Kyir

11-05-2005, 03:36 PM

5 points. Gramenger
4 points. Fabricor Substantia
2 points. Grapnel Warrior
1 point. Sorbgon
3 points. Golem Stormer

xerent

11-05-2005, 03:49 PM

5 Points: Golem Stormer
4 Points: Fabricor Substantia
3 Points: Sorbgon
2 Points: Grapnel Warrior
1 Point: Gramenger

Mithrandir

11-05-2005, 07:29 PM

5 Points: Golem Stormer
4 Points: Fabricor Substantia
3 Points: Sorbgon
2 Points: Grapnel Warrior
1 Point: Gramenger
Well that pretty much kills my unit. I don't suppose you could put your votes on hold until AFTER the current discussion on the Gramenger is over could you?

xerent

11-05-2005, 07:32 PM

If you would like, I can.

However. It's not necessarily that I dislike the Gramenger.

It's that I really think the Storm Golem and Fabricor Substantia would work well in the Genesis world.

Deck of Jesters

11-05-2005, 07:42 PM

Note: my votes were ranked by position, not points. Therefore, the Fabricor gets 5 points and the Golem Stormer gets 1.

Mithrandir

11-05-2005, 07:44 PM

If you would like, I can.
Even if our conversation doesn't change your vote, I would still be happier if you saved judgment until I could make my defense.
However. It's not necessarily that I dislike the Gramenger.
I really don't know how much you like it because in the other thread you called it one of your favorites and then you said it wasn't even gold worthy. I'd like to at least convince you it's gold worthy, and exceptionally so.
It's that I really think the Storm Golem and Fabricor Substantia would work well in the Genesis world.
This is fair, no doubt. This voting system doesn't really allow us to pick the best unit here in regards to TAO, and every unit here is designed FOR TAO, but it's still relevant.

And I don't doubt those other two would be easier to program than mine.
Note: my votes were ranked by position, not points. Therefore, the Fabricor gets 5 points and the Gramenger gets 1.
Wow, two in a row. That is very unexpected and disappointing. Oh well, at least the other units here are good.

Deck of Jesters

11-06-2005, 11:36 AM

Oops, just noticed that I put the wrong unit for the 1 point. Gramenger gets 2 points, Golem Stormer gets 1. Dunno why I said Gramenger only gets 1...

razor2007

11-06-2005, 12:10 PM

Well after reading the units up for consideration rather hastily (just ot refresh my memory) it's looking liek this :

1. Grapnel warrior
2. Gramenger (I dunno why people don't like it MIth. I really like this unit, always have. My furgon has a name....if I had a gramenger, it would have a name too.)
3. Sorbgon
4. Golem Stormer
5. Fabricour...thingy....

These are certianly NOT Final votes, just my initial feelings. I'd like some criticisim if I can get it.

Mithrandir

11-06-2005, 12:16 PM

2. Gramenger (I dunno why people don't like it MIth. I really like this unit, always have. My furgon has a name....if I had a gramenger, it would have a name too.)
Thanks. I don't think it's particularly disliked though. Most people like it.

Deck of Jesters

11-06-2005, 12:21 PM

I like it, but the AoE is too small for any boards larger than TAO's (and might even be a bit small for TAO's as well).

Mithrandir

11-06-2005, 12:24 PM

I like it, but the AoE is too small for any boards larger than TAO's (and might even be a bit small for TAO's as well).
I've always assumed xerent would increase the area of effect for TG so it would fit the game better. I asked him via PM about it, I'll post here when he replies (unless he replies here).

legacy67

11-06-2005, 03:53 PM

Mithrandir

11-06-2005, 04:16 PM

I've always assumed xerent would increase the area of effect for TG so it would fit the game better. I asked him via PM about it, I'll post here when he replies (unless he replies here).
xerent said the changes would be between him and me, if the Gramenger came out in first at the end of this thing. I would certainly support a larger area of effect for a larger board and it would be a pretty significant possibility.

Lonely Tylenol

11-06-2005, 04:26 PM

I like it, but the AoE is too small for any boards larger than TAO's (and might even be a bit small for TAO's as well).

T:G is 121 spaces. TAO is 109 spaces.

The only differences is the 3 spaces at each corner aren't cut off. The board is still 11 x 11 spaces.

Also, I'm not going to rush my votes, and please don't finalize these. Right now my votes are inclined towards:

1) Fabricor Substantia (Legacy67)
2) Gramenger (Mithrandir)
3) Grapnel Warrior (LonelyTylenol); default option as it is my unit
4) Sorbgon (22Woger22)
5) Golem Stormer (Cross Punisher)

Deck of Jesters

11-06-2005, 04:28 PM

xerent said the changes would be between him and me, if the Gramenger came out in first at the end of this thing. I would certainly support a larger area of effect for a larger board and it would be a pretty significant possibility.
I'm going to change my voting order then, as follows:

1. Fabricor Substantia
2. Gramenger
3. Sorbgon
4. Grapnel Warrior
5. Golem Stormer

The Gramenger might have had first place, however, the uncertainty of an extended AoE means I will not give it 5 points, due to the lack of effectiveness on a small field.

Even if the only difference is the 3 corner spaces in each corner are kept, I do not believe the AoE is great enough.

xerent

11-06-2005, 06:05 PM

5 Points: Golem Stormer
4 Points: Fabricor Substantia
3 Points: Gramenger
2 Points: Sorbgon
1 Points: Grapnel Warrior

Forest_Archer

11-06-2005, 06:23 PM

5 Points- Gramenger.

This unit would supply a lot of tactics in the game and because we can't have a Furgon in Tactics Genesis, this would be a great substitute (Although it isn't really a lot like the Furgon).

4 Points- Grapnel Warrior.

Its somewhat simple attack would make a great addition to the game.

3 Points- Fabricor Substantia.

Once again, the attack is pretty easy to understand and it would be a mediocre addition to Tactics Genesis.

2 Points- Sorbgon.

This might be a little too complex for Tactics Genesis because of the special abilities and the attack. Don't get me wrong- I like this unit, but it just wouldn't fit the game.

1 Point- Golem Stormer

Tactics Genesis has a very different armor and stats system than TAO. I'm sorry, but it wouldn't fit in very well.

Mithrandir

11-06-2005, 08:33 PM

I would of course recommend Legacy double check to make sure I didn't miscount, particularly because of all the vote changes and stuff, but the current standings are:

Gramenger - 35 points
Fabricor Substantia - 34 points
Grapnel Warrior - 28 points
Golem Stormer - 20 points
Sorbgon - 18 points

This is of course bearing in mind that LT doesn't want his votes counted yet as he hasn't officially cast them.

legacy67

11-06-2005, 08:37 PM

Please do not post rankings unless you have a deceision, or at least put a request to not be counted. Attaching "Final Rankings" to any decision might be helpful in this regard.

Don't worry Mith, I will be rechecking your addition as my last count had the Fabricor ahead by a decent bit, and it has continued to get 5 /4 points pretty consistantly. :cool:

Kyir

11-07-2005, 08:48 AM

due to "pursuading" from a certian someone I'm switching my votes, tthey now read

5 points. Gramenger
4 points. Fabricor Substantia
2 points. Grapnel Warrior
1 point. Sorbgon
3 points. Golem Stormer

Mithrandir

11-07-2005, 09:02 AM

due to "pursuading" from a certian someone I'm switching my votes, tthey now read
It didn't require much persuasion, just establishing that it could be programmed and if it won and by some surprise it couldn't, the second place unit would surely take its place.

Yeah, like any of you had no idea who the "certain someone" was.

xerent

11-07-2005, 10:40 AM

It's not that difficult to program actually.

The main difficulty I could see is that I would actually have to remove the clip for the illusion to be maintained, but the clip would have to be re-added once the attack or move logic was calculated. That could be difficult.

But otherwise, he's just changing states of tiles.

I still like the FC much better. ^_^

Duffman

11-08-2005, 02:26 AM

Zee points now ja?

5 points : Fab Stab (Fabricor Substantia)
4 points : Golem Stormer
3 points : Gramenger
2 points : Grapnel
1 point : Sorby

I think the Fabricor is more suited to T:G than it is TAO. TAO is such a small board and there are always LOS holes. I think in mid to end game all you'll be worried about is giving an LOS oppertunity to their Fab Stab to move your cleric into the middle of the board. That said i really would love a fabricor/barrior/frosty/furgon combo *drools*. See in TAO there aren't any units that alter gameplay so much as the Fabricor would. I mean one moment you're defenses are solid and you're holding off their three pronged attack or whatever and the next moment one of your unit just realises he's be teleported 300 yards away from the battle field and has to run all the way back.
It's a huge unit that mixes up the game play and makes everything and everyone just a little more mad :). Which i think is bad for TAO but good for T:G.

The Golem Stormer is on a knives edge for me. i would really like to know how it is going to be changed as it takes its trip over to T:G. I want to know a little more about your armour Xe cause at the moment it doens't take away a percentage instead it is just a boost on HP as so when armour is gone then the unit loses it's HP. With a straight take over the Golem Stormer fails as it's completely useless when there is no such thing as 'armour', just the start of the HP bar.
But for the moment i put it at four because of what I personnaly could do with the unit to fit it into T:G. Being a sort of army weakener lowering all their stats. Because in T:G there are a lot of stats. In TAO you have HP, Armour, Power... whatnot. However in T:G the starts are interrelated. You have Armour, Evasion, Spirit (Would like to know how spirit works Xe), Fatigue. I think because of this having a unit that can weaken your opponent units is much more advantagues than having a unit in TAO that weakens your opponents units... I mean what Armour and Power? Bah...

Gramenger loses out a bit with a bigger board. I mean you can increase vision, range, area of effect, give it a mana, make it so walking through grass increases fatigue. All good things. But the Gramenger comes into it's own on a closer board with tighter combat.
But i'm not just baseing this on board size don't get me wrong :). It's also the tactical side of it. T:G is going to be a tactical game, but i don't think the tactics in it will be enough to support a unit like the Gramenger as much as it can the other two. I mean this unit is more tactical then the furgon. The furgon you sommon shrubs such they they block things out. Simple. It's an instanteous change to the battlefield. But Long grass isn't that. It doesn't block. You have to summon your grass into a position that hiding your units advantages you. It requires careful planning and desicion making of what units you want to hide, where to hide them and how to do it over a period of a few turns.
I'm not going to argue with you Mith about whether it would 'work' in T:G or not, cause i do think it would; just not as well as the other two.

Grapnel and Sorby really are similar units. The big difference is one uses the vine for slow damage and must sustain the vine to continue with that damage and the other is a damage unit that can slowly drag the unit in. Both will have a sort of threat aura about them when their rope/vine is out. One because the unit is getting pulled into enemy forces and the other because it's HP is slowly going away
I really don't know how you would pick one over the other. I think in their case would would have to pick the one tha game needed more, damage or drainage.
Nothing to say about mvoing them over to T:G though.

Can i go home now? :(

legacy67

11-18-2005, 12:23 AM

The deadline for voting is coming very soon (1 week from today).

Anyone who still has votes needs to submit them soon. If you have changed or wish to change you votes, please edit the old post with a refrence to the new one to help cut down on confusion.

Cheers,

L67

Lonely Tylenol

11-18-2005, 12:36 AM

1) Fabricor Substantia (Legacy67)
2) Gramenger (Mithrandir)
3) Grapnel Warrior (LonelyTylenol); default option as it is my unit
4) Sorbgon (22Woger22)
5) Golem Stormer (Cross Punisher)

These were my votes. I did not however confirm them; I'd like to do so now, if they haven't been added please do so.

Mithrandir

11-18-2005, 08:43 AM

Points seriously need to be tallied.

legacy67

11-18-2005, 02:43 PM

Since things have been up and down and changing so much I am going to tally the points when the voting is over.

Chaosti

11-18-2005, 04:25 PM

5 points: Fabricor Substantia
4 points: Grapnel Warrior
3 points: Gramenger
2 points: Golem Stormer
1 point: Sorbgon

edit: votes changed

CRX687

11-20-2005, 11:16 PM

as per mith's request...

Gramenger - 5 - great, balanced, strategic, not much abusion...
Sorbgon - 4 - I've seen and talked about already
Grapnel Warrior - 3 - same as above
Golem Stormer - 2 - meh
Fabricor Substantia - 1 (I'd give this a 0 if I could...) - I'm surprised something as overpowered as this even made gold... Completely cancel out speed/recovery advantage, no? In a same side battle, this is basically a "I'll sack this for your ___ <insert ANY unit here>" Also, this thing has NO place in any form except turtles, in which case I see potential, but it's still a waste of a space because of it's lack of offensive potential (it's either a preemptive unit or a cheap 1-time killer).

legacy67

11-20-2005, 11:31 PM

Fabricor Substantia - 1 (I'd give this a 0 if I could...) - I'm surprised something as overpowered as this even made gold... Completely cancel out speed/recovery advantage, no? In a same side battle, this is basically a "I'll sack this for your ___ <insert ANY unit here>" Also, this thing has NO place in any form except turtles, in which case I see potential, but it's still a waste of a space because of it's lack of offensive potential (it's either a preemptive unit or a cheap 1-time killer).

Wow, I have never heard anyone rail so badly on the Fabricor, or any of my units for that matter.

You say it's overpowered but then say it is "a waste of a space because of it's lack of offensive potential". So which is it?

You call it preemptive but give no reasoning behind your claims. Then you call it a "cheap 1-time killer when it is very hard to set up a situation where it could one hit, and then the only unit it can one hit is the cleric.

I am not sure what you mean when you say it cancels out speed/recovery advantage.

And you say that this unit is only useful in turtle games, but I would beg to differ and say that it has value in many freestyle situations.

Basically, you make a bunch of claims without backing any of them up, and many of them contradict one another. Nice.

CRX687

11-20-2005, 11:55 PM

You say it's overpowered but then say it is "a waste of a space because of it's lack of offensive potential". So which is it?

in other words, you didn't read what I said at all. This is like a golem ambusher... if you put it in a turtle, it won't be able to do damage fast enough, and the position switch is 80% of the time put it in a very vulnerable position. On the other hand, if you get lucky and get same side, it'll be the perfect unit to sacrafice to draw one of your opponent's key units in... switch with cleric, witch, muddy, wisp, frosty, or stoney to make them utterly useless, basically an unstoppable one for one trade, except for not just cleric.

You call it preemptive but give no reasoning behind your claims. Then you call it a "cheap 1-time killer when it is very hard to set up a situation where it could one hit, and then the only unit it can one hit is the cleric.

See above post. It gets off one attack, and dies. It's cheap because it's unstopable when you both use a same side form... the same reasoning with busher...

I am not sure what you mean when you say it cancels out speed/recovery advantage.

Movement range is a key concept in the balance of this game... a mud/wisp are weak defensively, so they have massive movement ranges allowing them to retreat behind friendly units... where ONLY the ranged units (each with their own drawbacks) can reach them, and they ALL have limited attack powers so that it's never a guaranteed kill. This thing, on the other hand ignores that and guarantees you a kill basically, because- since it brings the target into your other units - you have effectively negated one of the critical balance factors in the same.

And you say that this unit is only useful in turtle games, but I would beg to differ and say that it has value in many freestyle situations.

situations? I beg to differ that a furgon can be VERY useful in many freestyle situations, so can assassin, beasty, witch, and chanty, but you don't see people using them becuase THERE ARE BETTER ALTERNATIVES FOR EVERY PORPOSE (other than the single unit kill, which makes it just as nub as the busher and overpowered as this unit : Pick one opposing unit and kill it, you skip 2 turns <the turns your knights/dragon/other units would take to kill wahtever you targeted)

Basically, you make a bunch of claims without backing any of them up, and many of them contradict one another. Nice.

I'm deepest apologies for believing your brain had the ability to make inferences.

JesusCraig

11-20-2005, 11:55 PM

CRX, the unit uses LoS, in such a way it is slightly more powerful then a scout however its not nearly as powerful as you proclaim.

I have a question, is it possible for me to vote lower then it allows? Like their are units which I believe are suited to the T:G game and units which are totally unsuited, thus I would like to make my votes based more around that concept and it seems to me unfair to give more points to a unit simply at the toss of a coin, if a unit is unfit for T:G it recieves no further consideration in my opinion since that is what we are basing our opinion on, thus my votes will be weighted unfairly to the middle units which I believe are undeserving of the score I must give them. I know it would likely be unjust to allow such a thing at the end of voting, however I believe it would be equally if not more unjust to allow such a thing as I proclaim come true.

CRX687

11-21-2005, 12:00 AM

CRX, the unit uses LoS, in such a way it is slightly more powerful then a scout however its not nearly as powerful as you proclaim.

not true. A scout only does a limited amount of 18 damage. Meaning a player can calculate where to move the unit they want to protect. Also, the person using the scout would want to keep it safe, so that's also a limited factor.

This thing has no such restrictions. It has to trade spots with something, meaning if you want to use it offensively, it ends up vulnerable and dead, if not, then it's too passive to be a viable replacement for any other unit.

Also, since YOU control where THEIR unit is moved to, there is no longer any limit to the damage the targeted unit takes, no longer ANY way the target can be protected... so it's basically a 1 for 1.

Here how you use the unit... put it front and center... you're guaranteed a frosty/cleric if they're used... basically GA reincarnated.

JesusCraig

11-21-2005, 12:03 AM

And the fabricor can't move positions and then attack, so unless your within 6 spaces on the initial move then the fabricor will be unable to do the first turn swap.

CRX687

11-21-2005, 12:07 AM

And the fabricor can't move positions and then attack, so unless your within 6spaces on the initial move then the fabricor will be unable to do the first turn swap. It is no more powerful then the DSM powered pyro's on offensive.

no, pyromancers have the limit of being able to be 1-hit killed and low blocking/armor. Also, they need to attack repeatedly to do much damage, and is limited by the number of units required to pull it off (dragon + dsm + just one pyro =4, meaning you'll need to build a form around it to work)

Okay, not front and center, put it front and off to the side center... in one of the usual Lwar places. IF I get first turn, you're frosty or cleric will be in my lines... there's no escape. to stop it, you'll have to completely renovate your form so that NO possible LOS from the frontrow will be able to reach any of your key units. and even then, a simple Bward solves the problem.

Anyway, my suggestion to you is make a form, put a scout frontrow 3 spaces or 4 spaces from a side, don't move it, see how many key units it can reach.

But then again, I'm also the one that thinks most of the gold/platinum units are bs... simply check one of the older cau threads to see my arguments against units most of them find perfectly good, unfortunately. Just my 2 cents, take it for what it's worth, I'm out, no use arguing.

JesusCraig

11-21-2005, 12:12 AM

I don't know about you, but I don't put my key units in LoS positions very often. Also, if you have a barrier ward, I could have a barrier ward as well, then all I have to do is barrier ward my unit, since my key units are in LoS for some reason, I'm going to assume my barrier ward is covered by my key units, since your choosing that unlikely scenario. Also, if your on the front line, I can walk any unit back in to my form albeit pyro's and DMW's, and if you pull either of those units into your form your likely to take an immense amount of damage.

The Fabricor is consistently slower at action then the opposition thus giving you time to re-evaluate any LoS attacks, its no different then the scout, and much more tactical then the GA. The scout may not send the cleric into enemy lines, but establishing a hit is much easier.

CRX687

11-21-2005, 12:17 AM

I don't know about you, but I don't put my key units in LoS positions very often. Also, if you have a barrier ward, I could have a barrier ward as well, then all I have to do is barrier ward my unit, since my key units are in LoS for some reason, I'm going to assume my barrier ward is covered by my key units, since your choosing that unlikely scenario. Also, if your on the front line, I can walk any unit back in to my form albeit pyro's and DMW's, and if you pull either of those units into your form your likely to take an immense amount of damage.

oh? you have a competitive freestyle form with the cleric, frosty, stoney, witch, and muddy unreachable from LOS first turn? I'd like to see this.

Keep in mind it takes at least 2 turns to kill this thing, and during those turns, you can't move ANY units that would unveal something to LOS. And if I Bward it, it'll be more than 2 turns.

An the Bward is just theoretical, this is the perfect 1 sided rush unit.

And this is not directed at cleric only. ANY unit that wants to be hidden cannot be... most importantly the frost golem and furgon. It's not that difficult to establish a hit if positioned properly and used with a bward.

legacy67

11-21-2005, 12:22 AM

First off, I answered your questions with the Kenki in mind, I'm not sure why I did that, but most of what I said still made sense. Moving on.

I don't see how you garuntee a kill on a Frosty or Cleric if people defend LOS properly. Any normal setup would block any LOS shot from the front line. If your formaiton leaves your Cleric open to LOS shots that would not require a scout to come into your territory, then you are a bad player and desreve to have your cleric killed. The Fabricor ONLY moves by teleportation. If your cleric is open to frontline LOS in the beggining, then quit TAO now.

And in terms of the Frosty, a unit with 60 hp is not sacraficed because it has been forced to the frontline, and anyone who would waste a Fabricor in that manner would be foolish. An excellent player would see this unit more for it's defensive merit, particularly the ability to keep the more dangeous units out of range of the cleric. You seem to hate the GA so much, would it not be nice be able to pull a GA deep into your territory so that it cannot attack your cleric at all?

Basically, all of oyur examples seem hyperbolic. You take worst case scenarios and blow them out of proportion. The Fabricor has 40hp and so much potential, but you seem to think that most players would waste it on moving a Frosty to the frontline. It seems like you are actively trying to find the bad things about this unit and doing whatever possible to ignore the good things.

Edit: New info from CRX's post.

1st off: I would love it if someone Fabricored my Muddy into his formation. I would get to Mudquake and then teleport out for only 15 damage, instead of the major damage that 2 turns of recovery in enemy territory would usually get me.

Also, I a,m not sure about the Turtle implications as I don't turtle much, but I don't know many people who use a Furgon or Stoney in a non-turtle freestyle.

JesusCraig

11-21-2005, 12:22 AM

CRX-Your assuming basic form imbalances. Can your "competitive freestyle" maintain itself against any form which is purposely used to tear it apart? No. So this unit similarly will work well against some forms and poorly against others, I have an aggressive not-quite turtle which this unit would fail against utterly. I also have an anti-rush this unit would be inconsquential against. Of course it can likely beat spread forms, and perhaps aid in the destruction of regular turtles, however that is the balance maintained by many units.

legacy67

11-21-2005, 12:45 AM

JC, you are correct when saying that I cannot make changes to the ranking and point process this late in the game. If you would like to discuss this further then feel free to send me a PM. For now, just ran the units from best to worst, and all will be fine.

Mithrandir

11-21-2005, 12:58 PM

I'm pretty perplexed. I don't think the Fabricor ought to be placed that low. In fact, not counting my own unit I placed them at:

1. Fabricor.
2. Grapnel.
3. Stormer.
4. Sorbgon.

As I understand it though, CRX is criticizing it on grounds of abuse potential in freestyle games. Unfortunately, I'm rather ignorant on freestyle games so I'm not the best judge of that issue. It still doesn't make sense to me though.

I just had a thought, maybe this is crazy but let me throw it on the table. The Fabricor Substantia is, for the first time, under serious attack. Xerent and I are working on a tournament that would involve using the forum to make moves using CAU units in turtle games only. If Legacy and CRX were both willing, why not set up a few games between the two, with different kinds of setups, sometimes with one having the Fabricor, sometimes without, sometimes fabricor on the same side, sometimes not, sometimes one having the first move, sometimes the other, and see how it does. I have a feeling they can't convince each other of this by theorizing but they might be able to do that by trying it out.

I did this with Kyir a while ago with his king, although fortunately we didn't have to use a forum. I was trying to prove that the King was underpowered because by not being able to use two units for the first part of the game, you'd get wiped out early on and not have enough later. So we played a turt game, me using a pretty traditional set, him using a knight as a king and not moving it (and only using 8 other units). Before long, the point was made. I, a completely inexperienced gold player, was in complete control simply because I had such a huge advantage. After that, Kyir made some changes, one of which that the king can get off his throne after his cleric is dead, to make it more balanced.

The point is that we argued about this unit for months and months and never could convince each other. We played a couple of short, mock games and before long we were on the same page and his unit is better for it. If CRX and Legacy are willing, I'd like to see if the Fabricor can stand up under scrutiny. We could use the same method we're using for that tournament. This would of course mean we'd have to delay the rest of the Genesis vote but I think it'd be worth it.

I want the Fabricor to get fair treatment. If it is abusive and deserves low votes for it, let CRX prove it so it gets what it deserves. If it is not abusive, as I believe, let Legacy prove it so it will get the high votes it deserves. Let there be an opportunity to see so wherever the chips fall, the Fabricor will be recognized realistically for what it is, whatever it is.

Chaosti

11-21-2005, 03:45 PM

I'm going to have to back the FS on this one. First of all, there is really only one spot that the FS could reach the cleric first turn. That is exactly 6 spaces in front, since the FS is limited by the inability to attack after movement. Since almost all competent freestyle forms have a unit four spaces in front of the cleric to prevent witch burn, there is no way for the FS to achieve this abusive cleric switch. as for moving the furgon and frosty, these units have short enough recovery and good enough defenses that they should be able to retreat back to safety with relative ease. i mean, ok if a recovering cleric is moved to the front, then of course it's more or less screwed, especially with the FS's damage. then again, you could likewise say that a cleric is screwed if i have a fresh dragon within four spaces. these are situations of tactics and being outmanuevered, not abuse.

JesusCraig

11-21-2005, 04:14 PM

I'm in agreement with Mith, not only would this give you the ability to test out the unit and how it acts in a free-style game, it wouldn't require much time. Since the main attribute CRX worries about is first turn set-up to kill, you'd only have to play the initial moves of the game, providing that units aren't intentionally put at disadvantageous positions to prevent the Fabricor.

This would allow you both to test who has the "proper" theory on how the fabricor would be used and come to an agreement, thereby making this argument fruitful instead of the waste we are left with currently.

And finally it would give Mith a chance to test out his tournament and how it would work.

Mithrandir

11-24-2005, 07:59 AM

Well, voting is over so I figure this should get bumped. I'm disappointed my suggestion has been ignored completely instead of at least getting the dignity of being rejected.

Please link to the Tactics Genesis forum so we can get to it for the runoff period.

legacy67

11-24-2005, 04:58 PM

/ignore

Once xerent and I have decided on how the next step will be formatted, I will post the link to the thread in the TG forums here.

Lonely Tylenol

11-26-2005, 01:25 AM

CRX687

11-26-2005, 08:42 PM

I can't believe I missed Crx's argument.

Then again, it's plain as day that Crx has never played Tactics:Genesis, and that every last one of his concerns related to this discussion are completely and totally unfounded, as his claims are targetted on non-existant problems with the Fabricor related to TAO, and are irrelevant when taking into account the fact that Tactics:Genesis is completely different.

:) Bump, just as a reminder.

You bring up an excellent point. I haven't played TG at all, and was only thinking about it with regards to the current tao game...

JC, I point of key units like frosty because they'd be the most appealing targets... but I can make a knight wall with the Fab behind it and take ANY non teleportation unit to it's inevitable demise in 1 move. I can trade it to break a knight wall, use it to take in a scout off to the side, a furgon... those units CAN attack, but most likely they'll only get 1 off. Also, your opponent needs 2 turns to kill off the Fab itself. My problem isn't with just first turn... this thing will work first or second turn, so it's not really a risk like DSM, It's overpowered when you get same side and super weak (it's not a better alternative to ANYTHING both offensive and defensively)... All this, is of course, with relation to the current TAO. I'm not going to pretend like I know what seed will make the Wyern Egg do, or how it will affect the game.

Mith, I'd be happy to oblige if you hold the tournament after Feb 1st (my last deadline), and the new unit seed will have added by then is not allowed. Also, legacy cannot know beforehand what units I will or will not use, or which side. (like in a real tao game)