ROCK Question and Answer Thread : Current

[Mad_Dawg]

Stupid question-

Are the battles being fought require all the clans to participate in? Or are the battles fought by whomever the invaders are, and what clan the defenders are?

No stupid questions, this can easily get confusing/misleading.

Engagements will only involve the lordships that have armies on that square.  So only until you engage or defend will you need to schedule and fight a match. 
Of course you could always join an ally in one of their fights, and that was truly an intention since the early development.  Making only two factions and everyone being allied from the start allows for bigger and better battles so "Teamwork" was one of the founding principles.

Keep the questions coming.

 

[Wappaw_Pizza42]

How will casualties be dealt with when one side has more than one lordship?

i.e. Army X has a total of 1500 troops, from 4 lordships (500+500+250+250). It fights an engagement and loses 200 troops.

 

[Mad_Dawg]

How will casualties be dealt with when one side has more than one lordship?

i.e. Army X has a total of 1500 troops, from 4 lordships (500+500+250+250). It fights an engagement and loses 200 troops.

Casuaulties will be distributed evenly and in perspective of percentage of army size brought by a lordship.  So in this instance the percentages are (33 + 33 + 16 + 16) using even numbers so the casulaties will be (67 + 67 + 33 + 33) with the first two rounded up after taking 33 percent from 200.

 

[Catholic]

I take it moving over sea tiles will be impossible?

 

[Mad_Dawg]

I take it moving over sea tiles will be impossible?

It wouldn't be so bad if it wasn't just 5 posts above you.

About Sea movement, I'm totally lost as to how many turns it would take to cross a given number of Sea tiles. If an army wanted to cross 3-4 Sea tiles (consecutively), how many turns would that take?
Also pertaining to Sea tiles, how do we define a Sea tile? Several tiles have some amount of both land and sea in them.

Posting from the ruleset for clarity.
- Sea Movement

• Armies are allowed to move by sea, from any square adjacent to the main body of water to any other square adjacent to the main body of water.
• Moving by sea will cause the armies movement to be delayed 1 turn cycle.
• Inland rivers and tributaries are not concidered as the main body of water, and are therefore not accessable by sea movement.
• An army that has successfully completed a sea movement must wait a period of 2 turn cycles before performing another sea movement.

Simply put you may move from any square that borders the Argud Bay (main body of water) to any other square with the same border.  That movment will take place 1 turn cycle after you announce the movement. 
Example: You could move your army from F-9 to F-16.  You annouce it on Turn 3 and your army will land in F-16 on Turn 5, so 1 Turn was waited while the army traveled.  In this example, you moved 7 grid squares which would take 4 turns to accomplish by land.

http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,187724.msg4899064.html#msg4899064

 

[Catholic]

Oh, reading. *sighs*

 

[Outlawed]

Question about villages:

Which villages are associated with which settlements?
Villages can't be taken right? At least not directly, I would think.
Do we gain villages by taking settlements associated with said villages?

Question about 'water bodies':

How many bodies are there?
Im assuming there are two, with the straight at B1-C2 separating both bodies?
Or is all the water on the map pretty much 1 big body?

 

[MrNomNom]

So, how do raiding parties come into the world map and wreck things?

 

[Wappaw_Pizza42]

Stupid question-

Are the battles being fought require all the clans to participate in? Or are the battles fought by whomever the invaders are, and what clan the defenders are?

No stupid questions, this can easily get confusing/misleading.

Engagements will only involve the lordships that have armies on that square.  So only until you engage or defend will you need to schedule and fight a match. 
Of course you could always join an ally in one of their fights, and that was truly an intention since the early development.  Making only two factions and everyone being allied from the start allows for bigger and better battles so "Teamwork" was one of the founding principles.

Keep the questions coming.

To join an ally in one of their fights, Do you have to have an army on the same tile?

IE TMW's 500 man army engages Balion's. Only TMWs and Balions can fight?

------------

Is there a set date when rules will be finalized?

When will we learn what sort of equipment our forces will have? (From Garrison troops to our Basic Militia troops up through each upgrade tier)

It's great to see the campaign map out, but we can't really start planning until we have all the rules in the open.

 

[Mad_Dawg]

Question about villages:

Which villages are associated with which settlements?
Villages can't be taken right? At least not directly, I would think.
Do we gain villages by taking settlements associated with said villages?

You are correct, the villages are subordinate to a city or castle and control of them is via controlling their parent settlement.  The list is compiled and I had the post half finished yesterday.  It was pull directly from Singleplayer.  Expect the post with the list in the Campaign Map soon.

Question about 'water bodies':

How many bodies are there?
Im assuming there are two, with the straight at B1-C2 separating both bodies?
Or is all the water on the map pretty much 1 big body?

Just one body of water.  Movements from that western coast fall under the same rules as movements from the bay.

So, how do raiding parties come into the world map and wreck things?

Cool, someone finally got here.  Raiding parties are free roaming with no specific location on the map itself.  You may move around the map as you desire with no limitations on number of squares or delays in your movement.  The only stipulation you have placed on you is the 2 turn buffer between raids, that is there so you cannot continuously attack every turn.  Know rules on who you attack so you can raid a Loyalist one turn and a Rebel the next.  Basically you get to do whatever you'd like within the guidelines given.

 

[Mad_Dawg]

Stupid question-

Are the battles being fought require all the clans to participate in? Or are the battles fought by whomever the invaders are, and what clan the defenders are?

No stupid questions, this can easily get confusing/misleading.

Engagements will only involve the lordships that have armies on that square.  So only until you engage or defend will you need to schedule and fight a match. 
Of course you could always join an ally in one of their fights, and that was truly an intention since the early development.  Making only two factions and everyone being allied from the start allows for bigger and better battles so "Teamwork" was one of the founding principles.

Keep the questions coming.

To join an ally in one of their fights, Do you have to have an army on the same tile?

IE TMW's 500 man army engages Balion's. Only TMWs and Balions can fight?

Yes, will have to be on the same tile.  However the turn is in real time, so can see your ally move to the square and make the engagment and then join them.  That is why the turn is a window of time from Tuesday to Thurday.

When will we learn what sort of equipment our forces will have? (From Garrison troops to our Basic Militia troops up through each upgrade tier)

That was updated in the ROCK Update and Progress thread.  http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,209040.0.html

It's great to see the campaign map out, but we can't really start planning until we have all the rules in the open.

Is there a set date when rules will be finalized?

Put these here together purposefully.  The ruleset thread says 90% and that is quite literal.  There are 3 principles that have been implemented in the development of ROCK and the 1st is simplicity.  While all the question here are welcome and a great thing, they have been more scenarios based on what someone has taken from the ruleset.  I haven't had to update anything so far, except add a Scene Guidelines section which was planned.

The best thing is to take the ruleset and read it through...and then probably read it through again.  Then use that to create a logical process from the rules.  Many things are infurred and deduced from just reading through and seeing the flow.  So while I'm very, very glad to explain things I also feel I've given all most all the structured information there is and feel you are very well equipped to start any plans you feel pertinent to your faction.  There is just no way I could write out in detail every possible scenario that could happen, so I created a logical process to follow.

Obviously the upcoming holiday will create a few days lull, but next week I'll post some times where I will be available and anyone can come on Vent or Steam and ask as many questions as they would like to get a full understanding.

 

[Wappaw_Pizza42]

If an ally moves his army onto your castle/city, will he still replace the garrison with said army in the event of an engagement?

For instance, GKR moves it's 150 man army onto Wappaw's city, which has a 300 man garrison. Then a 500 man KoA army engaged the city tile. Would the Rebels army replace the garrison or be added to it? Would Wappaw still be able to fight against an enemy if an engagement took place?

-----------------------------------------------

When submitting troop movements, will a lordship be required to submit all movements at once?

For instance, Wappaw has a 500 man army and decides to split it. Wappaw sends one of the subarmies to the next tile. Would Wappaw also need to submit a "Hold Position" order the the army that hasn't been moved? Or would Wappaw be able to wait until closer to the end of the movement phase for that week to submit said order?

 

[Outlawed]

If an ally moves his army onto your castle/city, will he still replace the garrison with said army in the event of an engagement?

For instance, GKR moves it's 150 man army onto Wappaw's city, which has a 300 man garrison. Then a 500 man KoA army engaged the city tile. Would the Rebels army replace the garrison or be added to it? Would Wappaw still be able to fight against an enemy if an engagement took place?

-----------------------------------------------

When submitting troop movements, will a lordship be required to submit all movements at once?

For instance, Wappaw has a 500 man army and decides to split it. Wappaw sends one of the subarmies to the next tile. Would Wappaw also need to submit a "Hold Position" order the the army that hasn't been moved? Or would Wappaw be able to wait until closer to the end of the movement phase for that week to submit said order?

I'll answer these. First question:
Yes. The garrison is only in place when no army is present at the city. It doesn't matter if its an ally's or your's.
Second question:
As far as I am concerned all declarations need be made in one post so no, is the answer to your second question.

But I think you bring up a good discussion point. Which leads me to suggest that turn declarations need to go in alternating order between the two sides. So blue team declares, then red declares...etc the turn after that red declares first, then blue ...etc

 

[Mad_Dawg]

If an ally moves his army onto your castle/city, will he still replace the garrison with said army in the event of an engagement?

For instance, GKR moves it's 150 man army onto Wappaw's city, which has a 300 man garrison. Then a 500 man KoA army engaged the city tile. Would the Rebels army replace the garrison or be added to it? Would Wappaw still be able to fight against an enemy if an engagement took place?

-----------------------------------------------

When submitting troop movements, will a lordship be required to submit all movements at once?

For instance, Wappaw has a 500 man army and decides to split it. Wappaw sends one of the subarmies to the next tile. Would Wappaw also need to submit a "Hold Position" order the the army that hasn't been moved? Or would Wappaw be able to wait until closer to the end of the movement phase for that week to submit said order?

I'll answer these. First question:
Yes. The garrison is only in place when no army is present at the city. It doesn't matter if its an ally's or your's.
Second question:
As far as I am concerned all declarations need be made in one post so no, is the answer to your second question.

But I think you bring up a good discussion point. Which leads me to suggest that turn declarations need to go in alternating order between the two sides. So blue team declares, then red declares...etc the turn after that red declares first, then blue ...etc

The first part of Sala's answer is correct.  A garrisoned army circumvents a stationed garrison no matter who's it is.

For the second part the turn is in realtime, constant, reactive.  You have a certain amount of things you can do each turn and the amount that you use or leave on the table is not penalized, outside of the minimum requirement.  So you can move one space and wait there, allow moves to happen, and take your second movement if you'd like.

Your idea for alternating is a good one, however I don't want to allow one side to be able to stall the other or visa versa.  If I implemented a system like this it would be very easy for one lordship to stop the whole campaign by simply not posting anything.  That's not something that can be allowed.

I'm super confused.

The actual semantics of raiding aren't posted anywhere..

True...I should fix that.

Can we just declare a raid regardless of our positions...?

No, you must be on the grid square for that village.  An army has a placement on the campaign map, so it cannot just bounce around.  Raiding parties do not have a placement on the campaign map, so basically they lack locality and are everywhere.

Is it the 50 v 50? Or does an army have to be present at the village to raid it..?

Because if an army has to be there, then that's sort of silly. A whole army moving just to raid a village sounds sort of redundant.
At least have raiding cost something.

The whole army and it costs the most valuable asset you have in the campaign...troops.  Because troops are finite any loss of them should be a calculated move.  So when raiding a village if you lose 50 troops that is 10% of your army (assuming the army is at full capacity).  So while the benefit of the income from your enemies village + not allowing them to gain income from that village is a very good thing, you must balance that with the loss of troops in your army.
(The benefits are derived from the Raiding Party explanation of "raiding" which the key points will be outlined in the lordship's raiding ability in the ruleset soon.  Don't get confused with the semantics just yet as I've said that is a section that needs to be added and missed.)

As for point 3. I agree. Teams should work together and they are/will.
But that's not my concern. My concern is that an army is going to have a really hard time defending an enemy push if it has already moved in its turn. Assuming you're trying to hold off a position someone is going to just be able to break through your 'line' of defense and get behind you without even needing to engage.

Not with the 2 grid square movement and not being able to bypass or move through a grid square containing an enemy army.  So if I understand your concern correctly, the main point is that you cannot move past an army through a grid square.  If you move to a grid square containing an enemy army you must issue an engage declaration.
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,187724.msg4899064.html#msg4899066
- Attacking Guidelines

• An army may not move into a square occupied by an enemy army without making an Engage Declaration.

 

[Outlawed]

Thanks for the answers.
As for alternating orders, maybe just do it as a starting point on each turn cycle.
My whole reasoning was based on the single turn declarations =p

I had read somewhere that a turn declaration had to include the movement, upgrades and income calculation.

Minimum Turn Requirements
Lordships must report a minimum for each turn to show their desired movements during that turn.
Minimum Turn Announcements:
I. Economic calcutation w/ turn income and overall total gold.
II. Declaration for each army, meaning if no movements are taken, a declaration of "Hold Position".
Failure to meet the minimum Turn Requirements by a lordship will result in contact being made by the adminstration, with subsequent occurances leading to warnings and/or dissolvement of the lordship.

Caused the confusion for me.
Furthermore, and sorry for all these questions Mad_Dawg :p, once 'hold' is declared, can an army still move during the turn?

 

[Mad_Dawg]

Thanks for the answers.
As for alternating orders, maybe just do it as a starting point on each turn cycle.
My whole reasoning was based on the single turn declarations =p

I had read somewhere that a turn declaration had to include the movement, upgrades and income calculation.

Minimum Turn Requirements
Lordships must report a minimum for each turn to show their desired movements during that turn.
Minimum Turn Announcements:
I. Economic calcutation w/ turn income and overall total gold.
II. Declaration for each army, meaning if no movements are taken, a declaration of "Hold Position".
Failure to meet the minimum Turn Requirements by a lordship will result in contact being made by the adminstration, with subsequent occurances leading to warnings and/or dissolvement of the lordship.

Caused the confusion for me.
Furthermore, and sorry for all these questions Mad_Dawg :p, once 'hold' is declared, can an army still move during the turn?

Nah, man.  All the questions are great.  The suggestions too.  Keeps me reevaluating the processes and justifying them.  I'm not dillusional enough to think I've established the best way of doing things...yet. 

To me the "hold" is the last resort move that is either cast because you're not sure of what you should do or you just want to see things develop.  It's like "checking" in poker.  You aren't raising but you are still in the game. 
Due to lordships making decisions off of one lordships hold position, Holds will be a closer for that lordships turn for that army.  So they can hold one army, but still make moves with the other.



I'm working on the turn posting format and that should help clear things up.  Expecting a number of things updated and released tomorrow night.

Also as promised, I'm available Tuesday and Wednesday night from 9-11pm eastern for anyone that wishes to visit Balion Ventrilo (information is easily obtained) and ask any questions, get clarification on a specific subject, offer suggestions, or just talk in general about ROCK.

 

[Outlawed]

Yep. Thanks for clearing it up.
I'll read the rules over one more time and make sure its all in my head properly.

The last thing we need is people going 'oh snap, I thought I could do this and that'.

 

[Wappaw_Pizza42]

What happens when a lordship loses its holdings? What about when it loses its armies? Are they eliminated?

IE Wercheg falls, is wK eliminated?

 

[Mad_Dawg]

What happens when a lordship loses its holdings? What about when it loses its armies? Are they eliminated?

IE Wercheg falls, is wK eliminated?

I added a guideline to "Lordships" entitled "Dissovlement" to clarify this question. 

- Dissolvement

• A lordship will be considered dissovled upon the defeat of it's last remaining army.

Lordships are only dissolved by eliminating all of their standing armies.
Factions are dissolved by eliminating all of their lordships, or conquering all of their settlements, or the campaign ended due to a stalemate as per the "Victory Conditions". 
http://forums.taleworlds.com/index.php/topic,187724.msg4899041.html#msg4899041

 

[Slytacular]

Stupid question-

Are the battles being fought require all the clans to participate in? Or are the battles fought by whomever the invaders are, and what clan the defenders are?

No stupid questions, this can easily get confusing/misleading.

Engagements will only involve the lordships that have armies on that square.  So only until you engage or defend will you need to schedule and fight a match. 
Of course you could always join an ally in one of their fights, and that was truly an intention since the early development.  Making only two factions and everyone being allied from the start allows for bigger and better battles so "Teamwork" was one of the founding principles.

Keep the questions coming.

So in ROCK, are you hoping that before an invasion force begins, every clan could send out so many troops (like a 150) to a location so that we can all participate in a fight?