Feeling marginally more human now. :)
So just to clarify our action, we're exploring the river hex SE of first then?
Yup - that is correct.
I apologise for my short post in the IC thread. I've had a terrible period this last week, and have been suffering from sleeplessness the last couple of days.
You going to get some time off in the near future? Sounds like its been a rough couple of weeks.
To answer Jarix's question, now that it is explored, you can spend one BP to claim it. Once claimed, you can build on it (or prepare to build on it, if building a new city).
I vote to get lost. But, I think we agreed that this first square is going to be a farm to reduce consumption - and then build an aviary in it to further decrease consumption - or build a second farm.
I've been rethinking some things.
Annexing the hex will raise consumption. So, we can raise our consumption by one (for the cost of 1 BP) so that we can lower it by two (for the cost of 2 BP more) while simultaneously increasing the difficulty of all our checks by one.
Point being that this will raise the difficulties of ALL our rolls by one.
Would it be better to build more bonuses into our rolls (more buildings that give bonuses to economy, loyalty, stability) before we increase the difficulty of our rolls?
Just a thought.
Wouldn't reducing consumption by 1 be like an effective +5 to economy each turn since we would be 'gaining' a BP? Thus, by annexing a plains and building a farm we would essentially be gaining and losing this:
Economy: +4
Loyalty: -1
Stability: -1
Once the Apiary is built the total would look like this:
Economy: +10
Loyalty: 0
Stability: -1
Not to mention we will be gaining a road and a river hex. This will provide us with boosts to the economy later on as well. Overall I think it is a very lucrative endeavor and will fall in line with my character's line of thinking: food is good =)
You have a scout in Irikar, who should prevent us from getting lost unless smething truly off is happening --- I can take 10 on survival and beat the 15 for "staying on track".
I think annexing the road hex, at least, makes sense -- if only for future gains -- at the same time, because of the cost, I do think that we're better not expanding too quickly (though mapping the area out is still quite necessary) -- however, do we need to declare the annexation now? I ask only because if we trip over a hex with a more valuable resource in it, we might be better off with that one.
But that's me.
Irikar, you and I should take point as often as we can. We both have decent perceptions and can sneak up to take a look. We will make a great team. Especially with being able to share a square =)
Wouldn't reducing consumption by 1 be like an effective +5 to economy each turn since we would be 'gaining' a BP? Thus, by annexing a plains and building a farm we would essentially be gaining and losing this:
Economy: +4
Loyalty: -1
Stability: -1Once the Apiary is built the total would look like this:
Economy: +10
Loyalty: 0
Stability: -1Not to mention we will be gaining a road and a river hex. This will provide us with boosts to the economy later on as well. Overall I think it is a very lucrative endeavor and will fall in line with my character's line of thinking: food is good =)
That "effective" plus five to the economy (+1 BP) is one that would be applied if and only if the economy roll (1d20+E) beat the control DC (10+size) of currently 11 but would be 12 with the annexation of another hex. If that roll is not successful, zero BP is gained. Also, a successful stability roll (made each turn, IIRC) gives 1BP (if no unrest) or reduces unrest by one if it exists. There are two chances to fail each and every turn: income (economy roll) and stability check (stability roll). Increasing the control DC increases the difficulty of both those rolls.
Just a thought to keep track of, but perhaps I am overthinking.
The thought is comparing the surety of having one fewer BP of consumption each turn versus the potential each turn that the change of one on the DC for each die roll (stability, economy) would be the difference in losing all BPs for economy and/or not gaining one BP for stability.
Just a thought.
I don't think we need to declare until the end of the month when the we spend BP.
Once we have done a circuit of the hexes surrounding our city, Jarix will defer to Irikar as to which direction to take. Jarix is a leader that knows how to delegate responsibility.
Each month, except month zero, starts with the upkeep phase (stability, pay consumption, magic items-modified, unrest, in that order) unless DM Patcher has decided something different. In the improvement phase, hexes can be claimed.
Per DM Patcher's above post, it appears he is approaching this in a more fluid manner and allowing us to claim hexes now without having completed the upkeep phase. But, we haven't made a stability check to reduce unrest (currently zero) or gain a BP (a successful result with no unrest).
Hmmm... reducing consumption would be even better than an "effective" +5 because no matter if you pass or fail the roll, you will be retaining that BP.
But I see where you are coming from. By adding that hex, you are concerned we will be adding a slight (I think 5%) chance of failure on all of our checks.
I, personally, would rather not have the threat of us bleeding ourselves dry with consumption.
We have to take the risk at some point, it cannot all be pure safety. If we annex one hex and build a farm this turn, we end up +1BP, and essentially -1 to everything else due to the increase in size. This will cost us a total of 3 BP, which we should be able to afford. Next turn, unless we fail our rolls, we spend the 6BP on an Apiary. This will result in +0 Economy, +0 Loyalty, -1 Stability and +2 BP. The Stability can be fixed the next turn by building an Aviary for a +2 Stability bonus at a cost of 6BP.
Now our consumption is down and we should be able to make enough monthly to build a town hall in 3-4 months. The town hall is key as it will allow us to name a Treasurer, Grand Diplomat and Councilor, which essentially will increase each town stat by +3 or +4 depending on the characters stats.
Finally, if there is one thing Stability, Loyalty or Economy, that people are very concerned about failing, the Ruler can change the bonus to this stat for the month.
Hmmm... reducing consumption would be even better than an "effective" +5 because no matter if you pass or fail the roll, you will be retaining that BP.
But I see where you are coming from. By adding that hex, you are concerned we will be adding a slight (I think 5%) chance of failure on all of our checks.
I, personally, would rather not have the threat of us bleeding ourselves dry with consumption.
I'm fine with that and was just throwing out food for thought.
Of course, this will cost 3 BP to get the hex and farm which means we will need to have all of our checks (two per turn) not affected by that 5% for three turns to break even for the BP spent. Any failure on stability (due to that 5%) would push us back a turn in recouping the spent BP. Any failure on economy (due to the 5%) would push us back two turns in recouping our spent BP before we begin to gain from having less consumption. Plus, the BP spent on the hex and farm could possibly be spent to purchase something else and increase our economy (and possibly stability) further. Thus, that 5% difference in economy success may be 10% difference (and possibly the same for stability) not to mention that an extra bonus to economy may be enough to not only pass but push to a higher bracket giving an additional plus one BP.
I'm just pointing out that when calculating totals based upon continued success, the chance of success drops and by dropping the chance each time, the overall chance sinks at an increasing rate.
:D
My apologies, I'm crunching too much math (and thinking "out loud") and just need to step back and have fun. :)
Of course, maths is fun.
Hah, I'm having fun. Just a good discourse between pals. =)
Alrich, you are beginning to sway me. Reducing consumption looks like a trap because in the end, all you are doing is spending more BP. It would take a long time to recuperate the costs and, in that time, we could be more successful in our rolls.
But then again, judging by how much BP we are earning each turn, we will be spending month after month just to build a little. On a maxed out economy roll and a passed stability check we have the potential to make 6BP a turn. Earning 1 BP a turn is 16% of our maximum capacity. Spending 3BP to get that is probably worth it.
Or another argument: to get what 1 farm provides the economy after 3 months, you would need to spend 30BP (6BP buildings that earn +1 economy [+5 economy]). Or, on the cheaper end, a Town Hall at 22BP with proper bonuses.
|
Wow! I'm going to leave the number crunching to the experts. I will need to print out those rules to get a better grasp of them, though.
I'm just not afraid of a little unrest. We'll be able to correct for it if needed. And we're building a new kingdom. Now is not the time to play it safe. A little risk is going to be required. A bad roll or two won't cripple us (I think) while a good roll or two will set us up nicely.
I'm still for the farm and apiary.
Provided I've done it correctly, just working on the city without claiming a hex results in a 1.5BP/rd after consumption with our current stats, and a 20% chance of generating unrest on the stability roll.
Claiming the hex and building a farm and apiary will generate and average of 2.75BP/rd after consumption, though with a start of cost of 9BP, a cost that would be made up over about 7 rounds. There would be a 25% chance of generating unrest on the stability roll.
So if you went straight for the Town Hall it would take the first town 14-15 rounds to get there. It would take the second town 11-12 rounds to get there, including the setup cost.
Further, these numbers don't take into account unrest, if unrest were generated it would affect the first town much worse, because if they fall their economy roll they lose 2BP, each point of unrest is a +5% chance they will a net loss 2BP (they're starting with a 15% chance of that happening anyway). Whereas the second town will neither gain nor lose BP on a failed economy roll.
None of this takes into account addition building/bonuses by either town. Nor does it take into account that for one round the second town would have a consumption cost of 1BP. I'm probably missing some other things too, but I'm pretty convinced the farm/apiary is the way to go. It's less risky and has higher return. Either way though it's going to be a slog at first.
:P
I think it best to put these in spoilers so as not to clutter up the thread too much.
But, to be clear, as a player I am partial to the idea of annexing the land and building a farm.
About this:
"Or another argument: to get what 1 farm provides the economy after 3 months, you would need to spend 30BP (6BP buildings that earn +1 economy [+5 economy]). Or, on the cheaper end, a Town Hall at 22BP with proper bonuses."
The above fails to take into account there is a potential for failure and just works with the straight numbers of one roll (economy roll divided by five) while completely ignoring chance of failing the economy roll possibly failing the stability roll and the fact that many events require for a loyalty roll to avoid dire consequences.
Something else important to take into account is that at some point (based upon our levels) DM Patcher is going to bump up the control dC by 5. We currently have a base 10 with one for size and one for a city added to that giving us a total of 12. Once that is bumped up, that extra +5 to the economy would all be the difference between a successful roll and unsuccessful roll, not to mention that farther on down the line it will be bumped up again to a base of 20. Justy another thought.
But, to be clear, as a player I am partial to the idea of annexing the land and building a farm.
Important note separate from jawing around
But, it does bring up an interesting point regarding the carpenter: reduces the cost of all buildings in same city by 1 BP and gives economy +2. For 12 BP one could add two smiths giving +2 E and +2 S (or, for the little people, one could add two more butchers for +2 E and +2 L) and it would require 18 more buildings to be built in that same city (by my calculations taking a long time) to make up for the spent BP and ending up with fewer bonuses in the long run and having those bonuses that are received come into play later in the timeline. For those other 18 points, one could build three smiths gaining another +3 to economy and stability and both greatly impacting pushing an economy roll into the next bracket (a 20 would become a 23) but also impacting how often the economy roll actually passes.
Is a carpenter a prereq for something important I have missed or does it seem a very bad idea as it only affects the city it is in?
Note that inspection reveals the following for current city/kingdom:
Average Economy BP produced each turn from economy roll is 3.2
Average Stability BP produced from stability roll is o.6 BP
Actual Consumption BP produced each month is 2 BP
Average BP Yield produced each month is 1.8 BP
Let it be noted that I have been playing with the numbers "outloud" but support the annexation, farm, and apiary.
In general, I prefer to use formulas but having cut-off points instead of formulas that approach zero make things more complicated and thus inspection is often easier...
For the economy roll
In this case, our economy roll total is 1d20+7, the BP gained being the roll total divided by five, and the result being zero for a roll total of 10 or less, thus a piecemeal construction.
A die roll of 1,2, or 3 (a 15% chance, or 0.15) results in roll total of <11 and a weighted contribution of zero.
A die roll of 4,5 (a 10% chance or 0.10) results in a roll total of 11 or 12 for 2 BP with a weighted contribution of 0.2
A die roll of 6-10 (25% or 0.25) results in a roll total of 13 to 17 for 3 BP and a weighted contribution of 0.75 BP
A die roll of 11 to 15 (25% or 0.25) results in a roll total of 18 to 22 for 4 BP and a weighted contribution of 1.0 BP
A die roll of 16 to 20 (25% or 0.25) results in a total roll of 23 to 27 for 5 BP and a weighted contribution of 1.25 BP
Combining these weighted possibilities gives an average contribution from the Economy roll of 3.2
For the stability roll
We are +2, and success on a 9 or better (60% or 0.60) gives 1 BP with a weighted contribution of 0.6
Consumption
1 hex, 1 city district yields 2 BP
Average BP Yield for a Month
Economy 3.2 BP + Stability 0.6 BP - Consumption 2 BP yields 1.8 BP
Did I make an error in here that anyone sees?
Note: A formula can be created to give the result in a manner similar to combining piece meal functions.
"Claiming the hex and building a farm and apiary will generate and average of 2.75BP/rd after consumption, though with a start of cost of 9BP, a cost that would be made up over about 7 rounds. There would be a 25% chance of generating unrest on the stability roll."
The above was assuming 1.5 BP per round.
Decreasing consumption by a net 2 without taking into account the change in weighted contributions of the die rolls would make the net result 3.5 BP per round
I think the result of changing the DC by one using your numbers that gave the 3.5 BP, 1.5 after consumption, would leave a lot more than 2.75 BP
Using my numbers above: average 3.2 BP from economy, average 0.6 BP from stability and consumption of 2 BP, changed to 1 BP the round that the hex is annexed and farm is built, and zero after the apiary is built adding one hex will remove the weighted economy contribution for a die roll of 4 (0.1 BP) and the weighted stability contribution for a die roll of 9 (0.05)
Results
Economy 3.2 BP -0.1 BP =3.1 BP
Stability 0.6 BP -0.05 BP =0.55 BP
Consumption 0 BP
Net Average 3.65 BP gained per turn
Of course, there will be a turn or two where that is 2.65 BP before the apiary is built and there is the increased potential for unrest that would reduce the chances of success (thus removing some of the economy contributions and some of the stability contributions), a potential that I have not factored in.
@ Falger
Is that where our differences came from? If so, could you post how that was done in spoilers? It seemed a little complicated and that the chances would not be worth the trouble...
As stated previously numerous times, I support the annexation, farm, and apiary.
So, what we really need is to explore as many hexes as possible and get some loot that we can use to buy BP - if we are able to make 8k per month, that is an extra 2 BP/month. It will weaken us as a party, but will enable us to expand the town fairly quickly. By building an apiary and farm, we essentially reduce our consumption to 0 unless I am mistaken. Thus, we should not have to worry about any unrest from lack of food. Then we can move forward.
You say in the IC thread that you're going clock-wise, so I have to ask: how are you crossing the river?
Also, exploring a hex takes one day, even if you don't find anything.
How big is the river?
(apparent) depth), width, speed
Does it look like something our horses can take?
I don't have a lot of knowledge with rivers. It is a river that floods often, and that's about all I have to go on.
Are we just going to cross using our horses guys?
I assumed we found a negotiable way across the river to effectively map the hex out. Since it has already been posted that we have mapped this hex, then perhaps we found a safe crossing?
Besides that fact, There is no way Korvin is going to cross a day later after it has been raining non-stop. He's no fool.
Perhaps we should return to town and check on its status? We are not that far away, and it has been raining quite a bit. Without proper improvements the city may be facing some flooding issues.
Or, we can go counter-clockwise. I am good with either
Counter clockwise works. Personally I want to map the 4 river/road hexes, but agree that for gameplay reasons, mapping the hexes around the city is good.
Korvin's got the right of it. My bad. You would have had to cross the river to map the tile, and I did say you completely explored it. I already punted you westwards. (technically north-west, but...)
Works for me, thanks
Thanks DM Patcher. I think we lucked out on that oversight ;). I know Korvin's swim is horrible and I'd imagine most of the group is in the same 'boat' (har-har). There are quite a few other rivers to get us in trouble though. Perhaps we will be purchasing canoes soon. Ya'all can call me Luis or Clark, whichever you prefer.
I thought we would call you Bob because of the way your head goes above and below the water when you attempt to swim.
I think you need a carpenter to get a mill, but I could be wrong, I don't have the rules in front of me.
And yes, fording a river that floods after big rain strikes me as "bad", so I'm happy that we crossed earlier -- I guess we found a narrow spot or a sandbank or something.
You know I really wish the window to edit post was longer. I hate noticing a really dumb spelling error/typo and not being able to fix it. It just kills me a little bit on the inside.
use the preview, I almost always do this since the auto-correct screws up things a lot and I have a habit of forgetting to change the alias
DM Patcher, I am going to be visiting family until the second of January, I do not expect to have time to post anything. Please feel free to move Kezzin back to town, or to use him as an NPC for the duration.
I will see you all when I get back.
Happy holidays!
The 24th and the 31st I will be flying and might not be able to post. I hope to post in between the dates, though.
I'll be spotty from 24-27, but that should be it. I think.
Happy holidays.
Apologies for the slowing down, I tend to struggle during this time of year and am recuperating from some ridiculous depression.
Kick the depression and enjoy life, both here in the game and in RL. There are far too many fun things out there to waste energy being depressed.
Happy Christmas all.
No worries Patcher - I'm sure many of us are not so available around now anyway. :)
I am ok with the slowdown 'cause I hate phone posting.
I am ok with the slowdown 'cause I hate phone posting.
Nods in agreement.
I am back and ready to build us a kingdom! Happy New Year!!!!
Me too!
I'm back home and can post from my computer again! WooT!