Alamaze & Fall of Rome Forum

Full Version: agent counter-espionage and guard confusion
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
The descriptions for counter-espionage and guard are not very clear in the rulebook so I hope someone can help me in understanding these particular agent orders.

Is the rulebook correct in that the orders 920 (counter-espionage) & 925 (guard) have different formulas in reducing the success rate of an enemy agent?

Order 920 says the counter-espionage reduction is a percentage ratio of the foreign agent’s success rate while order 925 guard is a direct and linear percentage reduction of the foreign agent’s success. The two operate in a different manner than each other.

For example,
Agent 4 is attempting to steal artifact from an emissary (so either counter-espionage or guard may be used to protect the artifact). Agent 4 in this mission has a 30% success rate with a 15% chance being caught (actually, the description for order 960 steal artifact from another kingdom has an agent 4 only having a 10% chance of success but I’ll use Cipher’s updated chart instead).

Agent 2 is counter-espionage the emissary’s location (no A in column C for order 920) which will provide a reduction of 13% (calculated as 3% + lvl 2 x 5%/lvl = 13%).

If the Agent 2 is instead guarding the emissary (which includes protection of the emissary's artifact) then the reduction will be 20% (calculated as lvl 2 x 10%/lvl = 20%)

So is the Agent 4’s success rate in stealing the artifact:

1) with Agent 2 performing counter-espionage: 26.1% (30% - 3.9%) {calculated as 13% of 30% = 3.9%}
2) with Agent 2 performing guard: 10% (30% - 20%)

To avoid confusion, would it be better if both counter-espionage and guard operate under the same game mechanic? That both behave in the same manner of either directly reducing the enemy agent’s chance proportionally (e.g., 50% - 20% = 30%) or as a ratio percentage (e.g., 50% - {20% of 50%=10%} = 40%).

I briefly viewed Fall of Rome's agent orders and it looks like the newer game always calculates a direct and proportional percentage rather than a ratio factor regarding agents. Is the same true for Alamaze (or Kingdoms of Arcania) and the rulebook's description is in error or do both counter-agent orders above operate by different mechanics?

[*** 2nd part of question ***]
Does counter-espionage and guard both increase the chances of a foreign agent's caught chance by the formulas above or does the game use the same method for both situtations (in that both counter-espionage and guard use a direct and proportional increase of being caught)?

In other words, the above Agent 4’s chance of being caught has a base of 15%:

1) does Agent 2 counter-espionage of 13% equate to just a 3.9% increase (calculated as 13% of 15% = 3.9%) which results in a total 16.9% chance of being caught
2) does Agent 2 guard of 20% increase equate to a direct 20% increase or 35% total chance of being caught
3) do both counter-espionage and guard increase a foreign agent’s caught chance by the same amount (of 20%)

Any help with all of this would be much appreciated.
This has been bothering me for a while too. I ended up not bothering with Counter espionage on the assumption that it wouldn't give me predictable results.

Any clear answer would be appreciated.
(08-03-2013, 09:43 PM)Jumbie Wrote: [ -> ]This has been bothering me for a while too. I ended up not bothering with Counter espionage on the assumption that it wouldn't give me predictable results.

Any clear answer would be appreciated.

Bothering me too. As I have mentioned before, there were some changes made in North Carolina that I don't get, but clarifying Counter Espionage is one I have targeted for action. I have spoken with Cipher about this and I need to write the way it should work and he will verify the code supports it. It should be addition, not multiplication, so if its 3% + 5% per level, an L4 should reduce the chance of success by 23 points, not 23%. So a 50% chance of agent success should be reduced to 27% (50-23), not 50% x (1-23% = 77%) = 38.5%.