Action Points? Encumbrance? What?

[ano]

Also blindness lowers AP by smth. about 6 in average. And this isn't stated anywhere.

[JimMorrison]

Also, elephants go from 16 > 8 with a Limp.

I understand how spellcasting encumbrance is greater than melee, that much is shown in a presumably accurate fashion.

I'm just saying that while the inconsistencies may be fine in a general sense, since everyone's units are subject to the same penalties, whether they're the ones we see or not - but I am wondering if perhaps the way that AP costs for attacks are calculated, if perhaps Quickness is not providing the benefit that it claims that it should, and possibly more so for W9/10 Quickness bless, than for spell/item Quickness.


Also, I get it, of course, I didn't think it would be the base Enc that is free, that makes total sense. But the rest of the mechanic seems to be misrepresented at best, and possibly broken in ways that hurt some people more than others.

And good catch Ano. I had noticed that a couple of times, but wasn't concerned with the AP of Blinded units, since they're, well, Blind.

I'm trying to think of a way to make this seem like a fun thing to fix. I know W9 would be really awesome if it worked right. I don't have much material here. >.>

[Edi]

Encumbrance from armor reduces AP unless the unit is mounted, in which case it does not. Base encumbrance has no effect on AP. Limp IIRC cuts AP in half. Crippled cuts AP to 2, no matter the base value.

Attacking uses up all remaining AP for that round, but I'm not certain if it cuts into the AP allowance for movement of the next round (e.g. a unit with 12 base AP moves 6, then attacks, does it cost just the 6, or does it cost 12 and leave only 6 points of AP for movement the next round?).

[ano]

Edi, I think that second variant is right. At least that is what I noticed and, probably, read somewhere.
It may be easily noticed that very often units who didn't perform attack in the combat round leave those, who did, behind the next round.

[Edi]

ano said:
Edi, I think that second variant is right. At least that is what I noticed and, probably, read somewhere.
It may be easily noticed that very often units who didn't perform attack in the combat round leave those, who did, behind the next round.

That's my suspicion as well, but I have not paid quite enough attention to make a definitive call on it. It would explain a lot, though.

[tombom]

According to the manual, attacking costs all of your total action points and if you've already used some the debt carries over to next round. Not sure how accurate this is.

[thejeff]

It certainly seems to be true. It's most obvious when you're watching your troops run down fleeing enemies. You'll see someone make a long move and attack then not move at all the next turn.

I'm still not quite sure how those AP numbers with Limp add up. Is it possible that Limp is actually half, but the displayed penalty is wrong?