Difference between revisions of "Discussions/MailandSteelFormat"
m (link fix) |
m (link fix) |
||
Line 55: | Line 55: | ||
:It does. -- [[BillGarrett]] | :It does. -- [[BillGarrett]] | ||
− | :Indeed it does. That is not the same as the (HTH <b><i>Attack</b></i> Modifier) above, which also includes the modifier for Magnitude and Might. The only difference between the (HTH Attack Modifier) and (Parry Modifier) above, is Might (which applies to attacks but not parries). See [[ | + | :Indeed it does. That is not the same as the (HTH <b><i>Attack</b></i> Modifier) above, which also includes the modifier for Magnitude and Might. The only difference between the (HTH Attack Modifier) and (Parry Modifier) above, is Might (which applies to attacks but not parries). See [[BrokenShade/MailAndSteel]] for details. -- [[BrokenShade]] |
Revision as of 00:35, 6 April 2010
Recently the new Armies page has shown up for all the mail and steel units that have been showing up. My question to you all is how should we organize it and set the format standard for links and pages? - BogMod
Discusssion
As the original page author, my opinion counts for squat. :-) But the current format I have is 'Army Units by Type' and then 'Wiki Pages by Author'. This seems to serve the interests of those shopping for stats for a sample army, as well as the generally curious. As for the unit stats themselves, I'm personally a big fan of this look:
Magnitude: VALUE (number of men @ health levels apiece
Hand to Hand: Attack/Damage VALUES
Ranged: Attack/Damage VALUES
Armor: VALUE (Fatigue VALUE)
Drill: VALUE
Might: VALUE (explanation)
Valor: VALUE
Order: VALUE
Movement: VALUE yards
Iniative: Charisma + Presence + VALUE
Optional leader stats follow the unit description. -- BillGarrett
- I'm more or less in agreement with the above. I think everyone's been following that standard so far, already. Wouldn't hurt to have an optional "Extra CS", though - if only to make it easier to understand how the author in question derived their unit stats. Personally, I add notes on equipment and/or charm use, because I factor them into the stats where appropriate. - Miedvied
I don't think its a good standard, primarily because I find it confusing and slightly lacking in detail. ^_^ Here is my alternative ...
ATTACK Initiative: Charisma + Presence + VALUE
HTH Attack Modifier: + [mag diff + VALUE] sux
HTH Damage Modifier: + VALUE
Ranged Attack Modifier: + [mag diff + VALUE] sux
Ranged Damage Modifier: + VALUE
Minimum Damage: + VALUE (hth or ranged)
DEFENCE Parry Modifier: + [mag diff + VALUE] sux
Dodge Modifier: + [mag diff + VALUE] sux
Armour Soak Modifier: + VALUE
Defensive Essence Modifier: + VALUE
Health Levels: x VALUE
OTHER Movement: VALUE
Valour: VALUE
Starting Order: Close, Relaxed, Skirmish or Unordered Magnitude: VALUE (VALUE troops @ VALUE HL each)
Drill: VALUE
Might: VALUE (troop type)
-- BrokenShade
This layout seems to assume a unit leader's stats, as well as providing the unit stats themselves, which is not always desirable. I suppose the issue is, "is it more common to have a unit of a known size with a known leader, or is it more common to want a general 'class' of troops, and adjust leadership and Magnitude to taste"? -- BillGarrett
- It wasn't intended to assume any leader stats, though I did incorrectly allow for a dice bonus to Parries. I've removed that now. ^_^ -- BrokenShade
I was under the impression that the HTH modifier affected Attacks and Parries - Malikai
- It does. -- BillGarrett
- Indeed it does. That is not the same as the (HTH Attack</b> Modifier) above, which also includes the modifier for Magnitude and Might. The only difference between the (HTH Attack Modifier) and (Parry Modifier) above, is Might (which applies to attacks but not parries). See BrokenShade/MailAndSteel for details. -- BrokenShade