- Location
- Hell
Mah, but what would be worse than being eaten alive slowly? Having all your friends and family disappear with you.There's a difference between drowning and being drowned slowly, like being eaten whole and being eaten alive slowly.
Mah, but what would be worse than being eaten alive slowly? Having all your friends and family disappear with you.There's a difference between drowning and being drowned slowly, like being eaten whole and being eaten alive slowly.
I take it this is coming from a person who has never been eaten alive slowly?Mah, but what would be worse than being eaten alive slowly? Having all your friends and family disappear with you.
It's not really something we can accomplish right now though. Gaerig's methods are not very sophisticated at the moment and her knowledge of humans is...scarce. She'd probably kill them by accident before she tortured them to any degree. Humans are just so fragile~ best wait until she has a better understanding of the world before we go there. Quantity has a quality of its own.I take it this is coming from a person who has never been eaten alive slowly?
More seriously, I think you might be underestimating how bad physical torture is. Emotional trauma like losing people is definitely bad as well, but there is a reason the physical stuff is a level or three lower on Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.
The real danger of over-pushing Vehemence is killing off the population. Go too hard and while they may get used to it, they'll also totally avoid doing the things you can catch them with.owerofmind said that we do in fact have one more year before Fear Vehemence goes down when they grow used to it so I really want to milk it for all it's worth before we quiet down and leave them wondering.
I prefer it the way I've written it since I've written it out that way (stubbornness, thy name is Powerofmind), even if it's a little more complex than necessary, but yours is an accurate simplification.@Powerofmind - reading the math, I had a couple of questions/comments.
First, a general note. Your equations are written out as
0.4*[(10+Fear)+Shrine+Pop]*V and
0.4*[(10+Faith)*1.5+Shrine+Pop], with "mismatched" spirits only getting 2/3 of the DE (naturally calculated with the missing Fear/Faith attribute at 0). Is that a correct summary?
The rate of growth for 'non-specialized' Vehemence (not Fear), and 'non-specialized' Rites (not Faith). It refers to you not having the appropriate attribute.
This is intentional. As attributes rise, DE cap also rises, which allows both focuses to commit more and more to Vehemence actions. Since both focuses can make use of the Vehemence mechanic, and it would be shifted to absolute definition, greatly reducing the effect of attribute increases is the only way to prevent DE growth from becoming a question of 'how much amber did we condense this turn from the overflow?' and keeping it closer to 'will this turn plan leave us under-cap?'Third, I just wanted to confirm: this system HUGELY nerfs both Faith/Fear and SHrine advancement. In AN's original system, the second value of Faith/Fear/Shrine gave you a +100% increase, (x1 -> x2), the next level gave you a 50% increase (x2 -> x3), the next gave you a 33% increase, and so on. Even at high levels the gains were higher than 10%. In your previous system, getting from level 1 to level 10 raises your multiplier from x1 to x4, so if we linearize for convenience, that is about a .33 bonus to multiplier each turn; at the start that is a 33% (1->1.33) bonus and at the end it is just under a 10% bonus (3.66 -> 4).
In the new system, your BEST case scenario is a 10% bonus, and and the end it goes down to something like 3% per point, relatively speaking. To put it another way, a Fear spirit with maxed stats only has 2x the income of a newborn Fear Spirit. Is that intentional?
These were basically the only ways I could ensure attribute-capping didn't turn the game into massive overflow before your first ascension. There is another option, but that's to reduce total Vehemence/turn to around half. Faith and Fear are still critical attributes, but maybe I can shuffle around some values to make them more useful.Now, I'm not saying that this is bad, but was it what you meant to do? You've VASTLY reduced the influence of Shrine/Fear/Faith on DE, to the point where the contribution is almost negligible. Furthermore, this is a huge nerf for these stats. Shrine can probably take it since you've linked it to Trait Cap, but this leaves Fear/Faith without much of a domain.
Yes. The equation I'm going to switch to uses a different Population Modifier scale (down to a value that makes the DE equation equal 0, and up to a soft cap value of 4*era tier, max 20), and Fear spirits will typically eat up 2-3 points at once on a high-value turn. If the number goes too deeply negative, you've basically exhausted the population, either spiritually or literally by killing them all off, and making it progressively more difficult to forcefully push through high value turns without doing major raids or attacks on foreign groups.Fourth. You mentioned that Faith & Fear are roughly balanced with the application of ~1VE. Is that a good point to peg things to? At this rate, our previous turn's 9VE is supposed to be worth about a DECADE of stand income. Just want to make sure things are aligned properly.
Approximately 10% of the 200 DE cap (though there will likely be ways to increase that by the time you get there). This is done to ensure that you have to actually consider economy, rather than maxing the attributes and doing whatever you want whenever you want. It adds an element to consider to turns that was intended for inclusion in AN's quest (or why would he have included DE in the first place?), but fell prey to the escalation AN often seems to suffer from working in.Final question. From what you've said (and just looking at the equations), Faith DE (or Fear DE with 1VE/turn) maxes out around 15DE/turn, give our take. That seems low. Really low. Am I missing something here?
It doesn't take but a moment between a calm and a roil. You don't have to 'prep' a future cast.How hard would it be to keep the surface of the water mirror smooth while roiling up the water milimeters below that layer of smoothness? So that gaerig's attack is stealthy and unexpected I mean
Going to sleep, but Aspect of Human would probably be a good entry to understanding human drives. Spirit of Trade might also help with more sophisticated fears.It's not really something we can accomplish right now though. Gaerig's methods are not very sophisticated at the moment and her knowledge of humans is...scarce. She'd probably kill them by accident before she tortured them to any degree. Humans are just so fragile~ best wait until she has a better understanding of the world before we go there. Quantity has a quality of its own.
Or mix the two a bit? Use aggression to power domestic growth, then between aggressive phases(when enemies are defeated or subsumed, you lightly abuse your home population which had increased in the aggression phase due to the bits of growth you feed them).Vehemence deals with Fear spirits, as in order to get the value high they have to effectively salt the earth and weaken future turn incomes, making their economy rely heavily on aggression (to only hurt Pop mod in enemy territory) or high-low alternations (to let pop mod regrow between major terrorizing).
Will you put the population modifier (and the change during a turn) in its own spoiler like iwth ambrosia/legend/etc, since it seems to be becoming both more important and more changeable?Yes. The equation I'm going to switch to uses a different Population Modifier scale (down to a value that makes the DE equation equal 0, and up to a soft cap value of 4*era tier, max 20), and Fear spirits will typically eat up 2-3 points at once on a high-value turn. If the number goes too deeply negative, you've basically exhausted the population, either spiritually or literally by killing them all off, and making it progressively more difficult to forcefully push through high value turns without doing major raids or attacks on foreign groups.
Blessings return more DE than they cost, and help replenish the population for future fear turns, we should probably always bless instead of save, barring important fear buy turns.64-2X12-8-12-10-5=5 to keep a little fuel in the tank for next round.
I will notate the population modifier's change over time in the DE spoiler. Simply know that the more DE you commit to destructive acts to pick up more Vehemence returns, the more Pop mod you can lose at once. Expect a typical loss of between 1 and 2 points per 3 overtly negative Vehemence, though it can be as high as 1 for 1 if you're doing something really excessive (causing an aurora, or making the sea glow, is not overtly negative or harmful, so you can do things like calming or guiding without damaging growth).Will you put the population modifier (and the change during a turn) in its own spoiler like iwth ambrosia/legend/etc, since it seems to be becoming both more important and more changeable?
I know the game, and totally used elements of it and it's style as references for how I handled Cold Dark, but I had to crack it open and poke around to find that one. Neat little blessing, I'd say. Too bad you don't really have the proper direction to make that happen.I keep thinking to the Earthblood blessing in King of Dragon Pass. Anyone recall that?
Maybe I'm missing something, but the problem I foresee here is that you also emphasized the ambrosia economy. While cutting its basis out at the knees.Since both focuses can make use of the Vehemence mechanic, and it would be shifted to absolute definition, greatly reducing the effect of attribute increases is the only way to prevent DE growth from becoming a question of 'how much amber did we condense this turn from the overflow?' and keeping it closer to 'will this turn plan leave us under-cap?'
Yeah I just remembered because if you had a decent defensive fighting force the Earthblood is crazy fun.I know the game, and totally used elements of it and it's style as references for how I handled Cold Dark, but I had to crack it open and poke around to find that one. Neat little blessing, I'd say. Too bad you don't really have the proper direction to make that happen.
Mismatched spirits get anywhere from 2/3 to 1/2, depending on attribute values.
I'm not seeing where the 1/2 is coming from.The rate of growth for 'non-specialized' Vehemence (not Fear), and 'non-specialized' Rites (not Faith). It refers to you not having the appropriate attribute.
Wait a sec. I thought that you were balancing out so that a spirit would expect to sustain about 1VE without exhausting the population. If that is the case, then I'm confused about how this is supposed to work. Presumably, the amount of absolute vehemence that can be sustained grows with population; at the point where your pop can support 3VE per turn or whatever, does that break the Faith Spirit vs Fear Spirit balance?both focuses can make use of the Vehemence mechanic, and it would be shifted to absolute definition
And again, I am somewhat confused. Is most of the economy supposed to come in from Vehemence? If so, this is going to solidly screw Faith spirits.This is intentional. As attributes rise, DE cap also rises, which allows both focuses to commit more and more to Vehemence actions.
It should be noted that even in AN's original system, passive income only just started being problematic near the cap. The overflow game came out because our DE-producing actions had something like a one-into-three efficiency; even without any passive income, committing a third of our DE to churning let us spend the other two thirds freely. In fact, looking back, the main motivation behind increasing our income wasn't even the income itself, but that each two points of income effectively increased our DE cap by one (since we could spend half of expected income for the coming turn).These were basically the only ways I could ensure attribute-capping didn't turn the game into massive overflow before your first ascension.
I want to make economy turns a trade-off against progress turns. I want to make planners go 'is it worth it to grow DE towards cap this turn, or deal with X issue?'
If it costs more than 50% of your DE to get an appreciable percentage of your cap as DE return, you're less prone to making huge strides every single turn in multiple areas of player focus, because that will break your bank for multiple turns.
Here is the problem with this once you've cut the return-on-investment for DE and passive income - recovering from being under cap is brutal.Approximately 10% of the 200 DE cap (though there will likely be ways to increase that by the time you get there). This is done to ensure that you have to actually consider economy, rather than maxing the attributes and doing whatever you want whenever you want. It adds an element to consider to turns that was intended for inclusion in AN's quest (or why would he have included DE in the first place?), but fell prey to the escalation AN often seems to suffer from working in.
Comparing the DE/ambrosia/amber economy to pennies and singles and big bills is a dreadfully inaccurate metaphor. You run into areas where the metaphor falls apart very quickly, as those pennies are the only way to, as an example in keeping with the metaphor, feed yourself. You've never gone to a supermarket and bought bread with coins, and you don't buy weekly groceries with anything less than a couple twenties. It makes no sense that you can only spend singles for medical treatment or housing rent. Amber to big bills is even more ridiculous, since amber only has an especially high value to people with specific skills and traits. That's like saying only plumbers or electricians are allowed to spend anything bigger than a one dollar bill.Maybe I'm missing something, but the problem I foresee here is that you also emphasized the ambrosia economy. While cutting its basis out at the knees.
Because DE is just the lowest tier of a multi-tier economy. It seems kind of like "pennies (DE) aren't important enough, let's make that central, while increasing the amount of food you need to spend dollars (Ambrosia) on, oh and forget about playing with the fifties(Amber) the entire system was named for"
A faith spirit can get up to about 18-20 DE per turn passively, and get about 6-7 DE per Vehemence with the same attributes. This is about 1/3 at the top end of the spectrum, but starts out higher, at around 2/3.I'm not seeing where the 1/2 is coming from.
Maybe I'm just being blockheaded; could you point out the specifics for me?
*opens mouth*Wait a sec. I thought that you were balancing out so that a spirit would expect to sustain about 1VE without exhausting the population. If that is the case, then I'm confused about how this is supposed to work. Presumably, the amount of absolute vehemence that can be sustained grows with population; at the point where your pop can support 3VE per turn or whatever, does that break the Faith Spirit vs Fear Spirit balance?
And again, I am somewhat confused. Is most of the economy supposed to come in from Vehemence? If so, this is going to solidly screw Faith spirits.
It should be noted that even in AN's original system, passive income only just started being problematic near the cap. The overflow game came out because our DE-producing actions had something like a one-into-three efficiency; even without any passive income, committing a third of our DE to churning let us spend the other two thirds freely. In fact, looking back, the main motivation behind increasing our income wasn't even the income itself, but that each two points of income effectively increased our DE cap by one (since we could spend half of expected income for the coming turn).
In your proposed scheme, the effect of attributes on income just aren't meaningful. As an analogy, give the Omake bonus to DE, our current income with Omakes is higher than what a max-stated spirit would get.
*closes mouth*Here is the problem with this once you've cut the return-on-investment for DE and passive income - recovering from being under cap is brutal.
For argument's sake, lets say that passive income is 10% of max, and investments increase DE by half - i.e. put in 10DE, get 15DE out. Now, lets say that you exhaust all your DE on turn T. How long does it take you to recover, assuming you invest everything into just recovering DE?
On Turn T, you end with have 10% DE from passive income.
On Turn T+1, you end with 25% DE (10%*1.5 from investments + 10% from income)
On Turn T+2, you end with 47.5% DE (25%*1.5 from investments + 10% from income). I'll round up to 50%.
On Turn T+3, you end with 85% DE (50%*1.5 from investments + 10% from income)
On Turn T+4, you end with 137.5% DE (85%*1.5 from investments + 10% from income). Lets round up to 140%, so we've finally restored our DE, and gotten 4 extra Ambrosia ready. Great! Only it took 4 full years.
In comparison, a "stable" regime spending 67% on churn would remain at cap and generate a free ambrosia each turn (67%*1.5 +30% = 110%). Thus, you could say that stable spending is 1/3 of cap. In other words, in the "splurge" option, you spend 3 years worth of stable income simultaneously, basically "borrowing" 2 years of spending - only now you have to spend the next 4 years paying it back.
Actually, that isn't as brutal as I thought it would be - having to repay the cosmic loan double isn't that bad. Though it rapidly gets worse if you need to spend stuff in the years when you should be "paying things off"; kind of the same way that carrying a credit card balance screws you in real life. I dunno - it isn't as bad as I expected, but I feel like you can get stuck in a pretty deep hole this way.
TLDR: I had a question for you at the beginning. In the middle, I felt that passive income as you wrote it doesn't feel meaningful enough, and the influence of attributes on passive income definitely doesn't seem significant enough. Finally, in the end I made an argument that I mostly talked myself out of.
Mostly math. There's also a fairly active argument regarding the merits of pushing for Capricious over solidifying existing traits and skills. Personally I'm just glad that my left brain hasn't shriveled up into a raisin from not having used anything more complex than basic economics for the past four years. I haven't written a real equation since I was 22.
Oh come on ! Why not Penguins ? Only cool Lobster is Zoidberg !
I feel your pain.I really do.Mostly math. There's also a fairly active argument regarding the merits of pushing for Capricious over solidifying existing traits and skills. Personally I'm just glad that my left brain hasn't shriveled up into a raisin from not having used anything more complex than basic economics for the past four years. I haven't written a real equation since I was 22.
Believe it or not I find optimizing systems more engaging than trying to play the game, especially at this point when I'm not that immersed in the game to begin with.I love how @PrimalShadow is so distracted by @Powerofmind's math that it's like he's being actively prevented from participating like before.
Oh. I was talking about just the standard discount ratio - the way you go from /10 for matching stats to /15 for mismatching ones. But what you are saying is true too.A faith spirit can get up to about 18-20 DE per turn passively, and get about 6-7 DE per Vehemence with the same attributes. This is about 1/3 at the top end of the spectrum, but starts out higher, at around 2/3.
A fear spirit can get up to about 6-7 DE per turn passively, and get about 12-13 DE per Vehemence with the same attributes. This is about 1/2 at the top, and starts at nearly 1 to 1.
Yeah, that would help. Fair 'nuff.Each side also has their unique element that lets them cripple their core for a taste of the other side, which actually applies pretty directly to the faith/fear DE repayment rate and balance between them. Faith, who needs to stay, if not near-cap, then at least above 50% much of the time to keep running smoothly, gets their Grand Offering, which punches their pop mod in the gut to very quickly make up the potential repayment turns (seriously, you don't get to see this particular equation, but a decently statted out faith spirit can basically hit their cap from 0 if the conditions are good). Fear, who can get stuck if other spirits are clever enough to deny them access to foreign pops, can trade their more explosive (at cap, a high Vehemence turn can be as good as 6:1 in return on investment, very easy to get out of those repayment turn ruts with) Vehemence gains for a more stable Appeasement decree.