More diversity in strategus battles

[Olwen]

make an hybrid and you can play whatever you want in strat battles

just choose melee or ranged

[GRANDMOM]

make an hybrid and you can play whatever you want in strat battles

just choose melee or ranged

Its not what I want to play as in a strat battle - its what I would like to be able to do as a commander when Kalmar chooses who is going to fight for us in battles.

[Ronin]

A very good idea.

[jtobiasm]

Who's got time to level up 2 let alone 3 characters to level 33?

[GRANDMOM]

Would they need to be? Perhaps another thing that might come out of this is a bit lower levels participating in strat - like 28 level and up.

[Vermilion]

For sieges everybody would be either high power draw archer, high accuracy crossbows or strength crutch ing maulers. In field battles or village attacks it would be all cav, agi polearms and agi shielders.

Exactly my thought.

Sorry Gandmom but I really don't think this is a good idea. I think the week change over between characters we got now is more than enough.

If anything like this was implemented I think it should be limited to 2 characters, 6 is too high.

EDIT - Make it two characters and I agree with your suggestion... More than two I think is too much.

Also - Make it so you can switch 1 character with an alt once every two weeks.

[GRANDMOM]

Exactly my thought.

Sorry Gandmom but I really don't think this is a good idea. I think the week change over between characters we got now is more than enough.

If anything like this was implemented I think it should be limited to 2 characters, 6 is too high.

EDIT - Make it two characters and I agree with your suggestion... More than two I think is too much.

Also - Make it so you can switch 1 character with an alt once every two weeks.

you might be right about two chars only. Hard to know exactly what the result would be woth different number of choices. But sure.

But what you say about the ability to change characters once every week like we have now really has nothing to do with what I am suggesting here. This suggestion is about the ability of making diversity in armybuilds and not for the individual to be able to play several different characters.

For the armies we made during strat 4 we had to go with certain numbers of gears in each vategory based on aproximately how many different classes that usually applies for battles - and not based on what or who we actually was going to attack with the army we were building.

All the major clans, as fas as I know, makes their armies more or less exactly the same - a grey army allways has the same amount of each weapon (give or take) for their open field battles. One battle is the same as the next one - you never get surprised by Hetman suddenly fielding an all cavalry army for instance, if he would see it strategically wise to do so in a certain situation - since he cant because of lacking cavalry applicants.

[Vermilion]

For the armies we made during strat 4 we had to go with certain numbers of gears in each vategory based on aproximately how many different classes that usually applies for battles - and not based on what or who we actually was going to attack with the army we were building.

All the major clans, as fas as I know, makes their armies more or less exactly the same - a grey army allways has the same amount of each weapon (give or take) for their open field battles. One battle is the same as the next one - you never get surprised by Hetman suddenly fielding an all cavalry army for instance, if he would see it strategically wise to do so in a certain situation - since he cant because of lacking cavalry applicants.

Hopefully there will be changes to the economy system which will make this a lot harder to do


I see your point that you want to be able to build an army with a style/theme (which I think would be a really good addition to strat and make it a lot more fun / interesting.)

The problem I see is when it comes to castle/town defending. Being able to fill your roster every time with the perfect ratio of ranged and strength clutch builds will completely ruin the balance of attacking a fief (I know its not prefect now).

Also I like the fact that people have to sacrifice certain things in order to be able to participate in every battle/siege. For example horse archers; they have to use ~ 6 attributes just to use rounceys (including horse archery points). In field battles they are annoying as hell!!! However, I take great pleasure knowing that when it comes to a siege of a castle they are going to be a very restricted archer with a lot worse stats compared to dedicated archers.

If you give everyone 6 alts they can apply with, its very easy to have a dedicated archer and a horse archer among them. If you give everyone 2 alts only a few will want both as their only options.

[GRANDMOM]

All valid points Verm, 2 characters might be the right way to go then.

Also, as you say, hopefully the economy system will change alot, so certain items would be enormously increased in cost making it harder to make every army exactly the same (plates for instance).

What I would like to see is the ability to use perhaps use 20 throwers in my army for some reason, or go half HA, or 80%shielders or whatever. Now its more or less the same % of every class in every battle.

Perhaps some restrictions should be added for every class so you cant go 50 archers for instance - Im not sure how to balance it - I just know I want the oppurtunity to make armies for certain purposes.



I want to be able to do this:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login




So you can do this to counter me:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login




Or be able to charge 30-40 of these guys:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login



When this guy is defending his caravan together with his peasant buddies 

visitors can't see pics , please register or login



To do this if I would find it useful:
visitors can't see pics , please register or login



or have a line of 20 guys using this (add their strange armours while you are at it):

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Well thats pretty much the point

Perhaps the two character choices might be good, perhaps adding some restriction to every class so you cant go 51 HA:s in an open field battle.

[Ronin]

I'd say no restrictions are needed for classes really, just allow the creativity to it's fullest. Don't get me wrong, I agree with vermilion about the 2 class per player thingy. I am referring to the class limit for rosters.

For example, infantry is going to be needed for most of the battles, don't forget there are flags too. I also think that an Archer is going to be more useful than a HA as an offensive force, HA is better at surviving and being mobile but archer can do more serious damage in the same amount of time. Of course HA might be more useful overall, but I think they can be countered better with heavy armored infantry.

If there is going to be class restrictions, it might be a bit disappointing for some players to not to get added to the roster only because they are playing with 1 character and that type of character is already full. Remember the 5v5 tournament of Gnjus, everything was free and most of the people showed up with balanced teams in the end. I'd say it will balance itself out. Even if it doesn't, there will be always some need for infantry force.