Talk:War inside and out

Much of the information at Unit Settings appears to be duplicated here. Was that intentional or should some of this info be merged with Unit Settings? --Calvin November 20:14, 29 July 2006 (CEST)

No it was not intentional,I didn't even know that page had existed.I will instead of cleaning up what is on the other one that is on here I will leave this stuff up here and make a link to that page.There is no problem with that is there? - Corpse Grinder

More people know about and are linked to Unit Settings than War inside and out. Actually, 8 other wiki pages link to Unit Settings compared to only 1 link to War inside and out (apparently a link which you created). The information you've posted here is excellent and helpful, however, it defiantly should be merged with the information available at Unit Settings, Battle and/or Unit Orders. Once that's done, a Delete Request should probably also be submitted (see Meta:Delete Request). Not to discourage you Corpse grinder, just tryin' to keep the wiki clean. --Calvin November 19:06, 31 July 2006 (CEST)

Or just create a link from Unit Orders to this page. Fredrich 02:56, 3 August 2006 (CEST)

And have essentially the same information in multiple places? Duplication is a bad idea. It is confusing to users, requires duplication of effort to update, leads to conflicting information, and it practically guarantees that one of the pages will be left behind and abandoned. It would be much better to merge the information into a single page. Since more pages link to Unit Settings, that would be a better place. And, let's face it, this information is almost all about unit settings. There is much more to waging war than just what unit settings you should use. Perhaps the Waging War page could be expanded to cover more of the facets of waging war in BattleMaster, such as tactics and other things. It could include discussion about why unit settings are important, and what settings would be appropriate in specific situations. But specific details about the unit settings would refer back to the Unit Settings page. --Indirik 15:29, 3 August 2006 (CEST)

That's not a bad idea. If I had enough knowledge and experience with that would write it. Fredrich 20:05, 3 August 2006 (CEST)

This Will have more then just setting,the settings is just the begining of the pageonce I get through that then it will lead into more things then just settings. - Corpse Grinder

I have cleaned it up some and all I am working on more of it, I will be trying to update it weekly if not every other day. -Corpse Grinder

Personally, I think with a little adjustment, Tactical Maneuvers and General Traits may fit better in the On War article. They seem less tactical and more analytical. Fredrich 02:26, 3 September 2006 (CEST)

CS/man

I think the section on CS/man values is a little misleading. You are right in that probably only the developers know exactly how the various stats translate into CS, but I have figured this much out: The values for CS/man is logarithmic. The more men you have, the less CS/men you will get. For example, if one TL has 10 men with stats that somehow equate to 250 CS, and another TL has 100 men with the same stats, the 100 man unit will not have 2500 CS. It will probably be more like 1000 CS. I can only speculate as to the logic behind this phenomenon, perhaps something along the lines of overkill, but in any case, preferential values for CS/man depend not only on the unit type (which you covered), but also on the number of men in the unit. The way the article currently reads, a 50 man infantry unit with 500 CS should be dismissed as average because it's not 1000 CS, but I have never seen a 50 man infantry unit with 1000 CS. It would probably be much easier to just estimate preferential values for the various unit stats (e.g. "Training should be at least 50%" or whatever), but even if we were able to accurately calculate CS, which values are good or average (or bad) are all subjective anyway. I suggest that we start the lesson with the maxim "more CS is better", than define the various unit stats that factor into CS (including why and to some degree how), and finally illustrate how to raise (or lower) these stats. But if you really want to supply preferential values for CS/man, I could probably devise a table of values based on both unit type and unit size, which would give a more complete picture. Aeryn Arete 00:59, 31 August 2006 (GMT-5)

The CS part is just to get a base on it I have seen great units around 40 man 800cs and other things like that it all matters. - Corpse Grinder

I *believe* that the mechanics that cause large units to not have the "full" CS that would be produced if CS was a linear function has to do with bias against larger units. It's easy to see, actually. Before you go into a battle, just record your number of men and CS. After the battle, if you have lost a significant number of your men, calculate it again. Your CS/man will probably go up significantly, and not in a way that could be explained by the small training and cohesion you get from the battle. It's not uncommon to see units of 4 or so infantry have ~120CS.

The idea is that 10 nobles leading 20 men each should be able to beat 5 nobles with 40 men each. This is a sort of compensation to help realms with large numbers of nobles. Otherwise, they would be greatly penalized by the dilution of their forces being spread out over a very large number of nobles.

In any case, it's nice to see someone put together a page like this. It's always good to have more opinions on the way things work.

--Indirik 21:37, 31 August 2006 (CEST)

I think this is a bit of inner-unit overkill factor. Adding a fifth or sixth row of men to your line formation won't help much since they can't fight until others in front of them die. Fredrich 02:26, 3 September 2006 (CEST)

Infiltration

I do not know much of what infiltrators can do some can someone tell me what all they can do so I can make that part better - Corpse Grinder

I believe they can assassinate nobles, kill militia, damage fortifications, burn wherehouses, and count/steal gold in tax coffers. And if you want to sign your name, put three "~", or four to add the date, at the end of your thought. Fredrich 23:21, 1 September 2006 (CEST)

• Infiltrator Stats --Indirik 04:21, 2 September 2006 (CEST)

Taking a look at Infiltrator Stats should give you a good idea of some of the options availble to Infiltrators.

Also, the code Fredrich is suggesting would look like this: --~~~~ and render something like this: --Calvin November 04:36, 2 September 2006 (CEST)

I usually just use the http://wiki.battlemaster.org/skins/common/images/button_sig.png button in the wiki editor to sign a post.

By the way, the Search function (usually over there to the left) is a great way to find if the information you're seeking exists on the wiki. I suggest changing your Preferences (usually up there at the top right) to automatically search all namespaces by default. --Calvin November 04:36, 2 September 2006 (CEST)

Done.

I am not longer going to work on this I just am tired of trying to make it, it was fun at first but I have lost instrest in it, not to mention I have enough problems with the cancer and so forth. You all may do what ever you want with the page. --Corpse Grinder

Reopening

Here soon I will be continue this page from where my cousin left off. If you are wondering he does not play the game anymore in fact he don't really do anything anymore if you catch my drift. Ronnie E.N. 23:25, 3 October 2006 (CEST)