[Community discussion] What can be improved on Strategus

[Vovka]

will be nice if before implement it u make a test battle list
EU attack EU 1 per hour
NA attack NA 1 per hour
EU attack NA 1 per hour
Na attack EU 1 per hour
in same time

i bet it will be fucking mess XD

also in such a system would be the case when the same faction will have battle on two different servers at the same time 

[hellou]

Butan, very well thought.  I think it would actually work pretty well.  Nice job.


Haven't heard back though - any chance we can add crpg gold ticks and strat ticks for participation in strat battles?  We really really need something to get people motivated to participate in strategus again.  Reward system would do wonders.


Also, maybe a ranking system, where the more battles you participate in and do well in, the greater your rewards or the more troops you can move around with like a warlord?

Total agree about rewards. Maybe more strat battles more ticks more troops gain rate.

Would be nice to have EU/NA1 as free hunting servers without banner balance and EU/NA3 as clan battle servers.
In past warlord was the guy who was best warrior, so I would like to see that the k/d or damage output influence the rewards.
It would not only be a nice simulation of middle ages but also prevent people from xp battles where they let temselves mass kill for xp, no kill no rewards.
On the other hand the information about performance needs a redone/remove because if you defend neutral fiefs you cant have always good k/d, that information prevent some ego players like habimanqa or varadin from merc for neutrals.

[Jambi]

I would like to see that the k/d or damage output influence the rewards.
It would not only be a nice simulation of middle ages but also prevent people from xp battles where they let temselves mass kill for xp, no kill no rewards.
On the other hand the information about performance needs a redone/remove because if you defend neutral fiefs you cant have always good k/d, that information prevent some ego players like habimanqa or varadin from merc for neutrals.

Wouldnt realy work, if you have played strat battle's you would know. Some people are assigned not to fight at all, but simply to defend, scavenge or build things. Thus getting no , to very few kills... automaticly a bad performance K/D or score wise.
And also with the diversity of builds we got, score or K/D doesnt give a clear picture on how you actually performed.

It would be a choice of the commander realy, as its always been. I have merc'ed myself out in the past, where commanders would dish out rewards to top scores etc or people doing very well in battle, to motivate people and make them sign up for them.
Or - If you want a reward, you check and ask payment when you sign up for a roster.

[hellou]

Jambi, builders will get their regular xp, silver, gold, ticks but no rewards like bonus=more xp, ticks, silver, gold, troops gain rate.
I wrote k/d or damage output.

[Jambi]

Jambi, builders will get their regular xp, silver, gold, ticks but no rewards like bonus=more xp, ticks, silver, gold, troops gain rate.
I wrote k/d or damage output.

Yep i got your point.
But im argueing how that would be fair, with  players that have roles or builds  that dont involve killing or generating alot of score.

Being a builder... or standing at your flag defending it.. picking up weapons and bringing them back for the entire battle, are already very boring tasks. Adding rewards for score or higher K/D's will only demotivate these sort of tasks even more.

Every role in battle is as important as the other, and all are needed. Giving them diffrent gold/xp etc rewards/bonuses, is a silly thing in my opinion.

[Flans]

Yep i got your point.
But I'm arguing how that would be fair, with  players that have roles or builds  that don't involve killing or generating a lot of score.

Being a builder... or standing at your flag defending it.. picking up weapons and bringing them back for the entire battle, are already very boring tasks. Adding rewards for score or higher K/D's will only demotivate these sort of tasks even more.

Every role in battle is as important as the other, and all are needed. Giving them different gold/xp etc rewards/bonuses, is a silly thing in my opinion.

It is almost always the clans own men that do the tasks you are talking about which means they can easily ask they faction leader/clan leader for a reward.

[Jambi]

It is almost always the clans own men that do the tasks you are talking about which means they can easily ask they faction leader/clan leader for a reward.

But so can the players that are tasked with producing good scores and K/D's ?

[Flans]

But so can the players that are tasked with producing good scores and K/D's ?

The system would give the bonuses to all players that are doing well,most clans would not reward 20 players.The faction/clan leaders are limited to rewarding a few players. I know every player is walking in millions but if players want rewards for all battles which the system would provide those millions would go down,

So the reward system should be implemented and clan leaders can just reward the few that although are being helpful are not recognised by the system.

This would bring people to even the small battles as they still get the rewards for them "To an extent"

[Butan]

I made a mistake, misjudged NA and EU point of view, when looking at a someone else nighttime.
Ignore the image I made, it actually managed to confuse myself and make me write a couple errors.

Cant just simply now make some new rules and options... and say:" well too bad for russia.

"Too bad for russia" in which situations though?
Today, when you attack a NA at a good time for Russia, the battle will be at around midday for them. Too bad for NA? 

I gotta polish the system, but in effect it would give good time to defenders, attackers would have 1 or 2 shots for a big battles at the other timezone per day.
Thats how it worked today too, but only via peer pressure and organisation.
Peer pressure and organisation will still be there, via manual override and a couple things that I still work on technical limitations.

[Knute]

This seems like one of the hardest things to tackle right off the bat. It doesn't address the issue of which server an EU vs NA battle would take place on but I had this idea for adjusting battle times a few years ago:

Basic Concept:

Whenever a battle is initiated, both the attacker and defender would have the option to agree on a new time for the battle.  If they don't agree on a new time the battle would just happen the way it would now, 24 hours from the time initiated or later depending on nighttime.

So for example:

The attacker catches up to the defender in middle of the night so the battle is scheduled to take place at 4am.  In the battles tab on the strat interface there would be a "Change Battle Time" button.  When selected it would bring up a list of all the open battle slots within the next 24 hours.  The attacker would then select all the times that would be more convenient for them, so they might choose just one or a range of times like from 5pm-10pm. 

After the attacker saves his selections, the defender would get an automated message notifying them that the other player wants to change the battle time.  In the defenders "Change Battle Time" menu, they would see the attackers choices highlighted and could either select one and confirm the changed battle time or select their own range of convenient times which the attacker would then see highlighted after also getting an automated message informing them that the defender has picked their battle times.

Once both players confirm the new time, it's locked.  Also, the defender would be able to initiate changing the battle time too, I'm just using the attacking side for the example.

Why: 

It seems pretty common for battles to take place at times that neither side wants.  If something like this was possible it would help cut down on that and the rage/accusations/ill feelings toward other players that go along with it.

[Butan]

That + the enforced nighttime would be a good combo too.

I'm trying to find better ways so it helps me to read some ideas.
In the end I want something that is the most convenient for the most people.

[Butan]

General question: how would you feel if more elements from single-player Warband were introduced in strategus?

Like how they handle taxes, garrison, prisoners
I personaly think there is a lot of ideas in the original game that are superior to what we have on strategus right now.

[Keshian]

General question: how would you feel if more elements from single-player Warband were introduced in strategus?

Like how they handle taxes, garrison, prisoners
I personaly think there is a lot of ideas in the original game that are superior to what we have on strategus right now.

1000% support this.  I feel like chadz took the idea from singleplayer simply to make it multiplayer but kind of butchered and killed a lot of the fun of the singleplayer campaign in the process.  I would love to see raiding be more about burning the outlying farms of a city of town lowering its prosperity for extended period of time and increasing the likelihood of rebellion of some of the garrisoned troops - forcing people to leave the city and attack the pillagers to save their revenue and troops.  (instead of current raid being attacking city just like a normal attack just without fighting population).

[Jambi]

The system would give the bonuses to all players that are doing well,most clans would not reward 20 players.The faction/clan leaders are limited to rewarding a few players. I know every player is walking in millions but if players want rewards for all battles which the system would provide those millions would go down,

So the reward system should be implemented and clan leaders can just reward the few that although are being helpful are not recognised by the system.

This would bring people to even the small battles as they still get the rewards for them "To an extent"

...
Tell me, how would millions go down, if people are only rewarding/trading gold with eachother.
This is kindergarden level.
Example:
Polly has 5 dollars and Kevin has 10 dollars. They both have 15 dollars together.
Polly gives head to Kevin and Kevin pays her 5 dollars. Now Polly has 10 dollars and Kevin has 5 dollars. They both have 15 dollars together.

General question: how would you feel if more elements from single-player Warband were introduced in strategus?

Like how they handle taxes, garrison, prisoners
I personaly think there is a lot of ideas in the original game that are superior to what we have on strategus right now.

No.

1# There are already mods out there for making singleplayer a multiplayer.

2# Take a lesson from all those before you, trying to "fix" the balance or strat for the past 5 years by simply adding more broken stuff ontop of it. Try the break the vicious circle, by for once fixing the broken stuff first... instead of adding more stuff to it in hopes your fixing anything.

3# Strat is strat, and many players have invensted in this for years, because they like it already.

4# An overhaul will msot likely mess it up, and bring even more broken stuff and kill the mod all together (As if it isnt dead enough already). I like the gesture of players wanting to add to the game and come up with new ideas. But simply take a look at what mess CRPG is in right now, after the true devs arent here anymore.  With all these new and prolly better games coming out, few people will have the patience to wait for fixes.

5# M:BG already promised us a sort of advanced strategus mode.

Anyways im out. Thanks for trying Butan, i apreciate the gesture and wish you good luck. But in my opinion its simply a waste of time. RIP CRPG/Strat 2016.
Wish i had the motivation to help you out, but i simply dont care. Im glad i can put this behind me now.

[Rhekimos]

General question: how would you feel if more elements from single-player Warband were introduced in strategus?

Like how they handle taxes, garrison, prisoners
I personaly think there is a lot of ideas in the original game that are superior to what we have on strategus right now.

I for one would like more big battles and less watching the Strat map 24/7 so that nobody steals S&D type mechanics.
So;

1) Make the game more abstract. No longer getting fucked on a trade run simply because you had to choose between sleep and watching for raiders. (Think browser games that mostly deal with numbers.)

I think Strat participation would greatly benefit if the gametype required a fraction of the current time investment.

2) Greater Strat rewards for cRPG playing and reduce the requirement of cRPG play in form of ticks. This way upcoming clans have more of a chance against the well established ones.

And if someone hasn't got the time for cRPG, they can still help a bit and maybe catch a few of the Strat battles.

3) Tie the Strat battle XP (or other) rewards to commanders more. Not completely of course, but enough to incentivize coming to TS and playing in a more organized fashion.