cRPG

Strategus => Strategus General Discussion => Topic started by: Teeth on September 24, 2012, 08:36:30 pm

Title: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 24, 2012, 08:36:30 pm
So if I understand correctly:

Western carebear bloc:
Grey Order
Druzhina
The Union
The Empire
Kingdom of the Nord

Eastern carebear bloc:
The Coalition
Mercs
SoA
Kapikulu
Wolves
Les Troys Lys
Crusader Alliance
CotgS

I counted 22 fiefs that are not under control of one of these carebear blocs and I give those 22 fiefs a week. You guys sure now how to make Strat boring as fuck. Same mega alliance as last time, same claims, but now we have a mega alliance on the other side.

gg
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 24, 2012, 08:49:59 pm
So, how do you imagine big battles will be organized without these "carebears"? Do you have a better idea?

I'm genuinely interested to hear it. It's interesting because a lot of people started complaining that everyone is "2 srs", and that everything should be casual and relaxed. You seem to want a mod where everybody fools around like children, a mod where everything is a joke.

If I wanted a joke I would go and play fucking Battlefield: Heroes.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Miwiw on September 24, 2012, 08:51:15 pm
I'm wondering why small clans should even survive or have fiefs if they only have a couple of semi-active members or if they don't even really care about strat....
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 24, 2012, 09:12:47 pm
So, how do you imagine big battles will be organized without these "carebears"? Do you have a better idea?

I'm genuinely interested to hear it. It's interesting because a lot of people started complaining that everyone is "2 srs", and that everything should be casual and relaxed. You seem to want a mod where everybody fools around like children, a mod where everything is a joke.

If I wanted a joke I would go and play fucking Battlefield: Heroes.

get a life
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 24, 2012, 09:27:58 pm
Well, the big clans could for once stop being fucking pussies and not claim the same old thing with the same old diplomatic relations, screwing over any new clans from the get go. Also, they could not ally with half the playerbase for once, so everyone else can either die or ally with the other half. Would make it a lot more interesting, now wouldn't it? All those clans claiming that they start the new Strat with a clean slate. Turned out really great. Well, atleast we have an even good war now, because both carebear blocs are pretty strong.

Just makes me sad now that Strategus is shaping up nicely, the playerbase does not know how to get the full potential out of it.

(click to show/hide)
Not at all my point.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Rikthor on September 24, 2012, 09:35:46 pm
It's not really limited to this community but any game with some type of conquest mechanic leads to big alliances so people can protect their pixels, just kind of a natural thing to protect their in-game effort.. Not that it is a good thing but it's why it happens everywhere. Well that and wanting to win at all costs, even if it means 5 large clans against 1 small independent clan. A lot of people's motivation at the end of the day is just winning.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Elmokki on September 24, 2012, 09:41:19 pm
For troops there are two constraints. Players to make them and gold for upkeep.
For gold fiefs matter less than in last strat, but we'll see how well the current system works, ie how scarce is the S&D statistic.

If S&D is abundant enough all the big battles need is players who grind the gold and create troops. If you can make money you could even own zero fiefs and have a fairly big army for your faction to conquer shit with. That just assumes there's plenty of S&D and factions don't go too mercantilistic with tax policies. Though I bet that even at very high taxation trading may be profitable with long enough routes since the distance bonus scales up really fast for first 50 kilometers or so.

All I see the big alliances doing is make the game more boring, but of course that's just my opinion.

We need more totally retarded drama that makes factions fight each other since war being fun doesn't seem like a good enough casus belli.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 24, 2012, 09:46:00 pm
It's not really limited to this community but any game with some type of conquest mechanic leads to big alliances so people can protect their pixels, just kind of a natural thing to protect their in-game effort.. Not that it is a good thing but it's why it happens everywhere. Well that and wanting to win at all costs, even if it means 5 large clans against 1 small independent clan. A lot of people's motivation at the end of the day is just winning.
Which would be cool, as long as they would see turning on their allies as an option and go for the personal win. Nerf alliances, buff egoism. Sadly, no one wants to turn on their allies cause they would be excluded from the carebear alliance in Strat 5 even though supposedly no one carries grudges.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 24, 2012, 10:11:39 pm
So who is to be blamed here? Russians? Polacks? :lol:
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 24, 2012, 10:23:55 pm
So who is to be blamed here? Russians? Polacks? :lol:
Nope,
Western carebear bloc:
Grey Order
Druzhina
The Union
The Empire
Kingdom of the Nord

Eastern carebear bloc:
The Coalition
Mercs
SoA
Kapikulu
Wolves
Les Troys Lys
Crusader Alliance
CotgS

These guys.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 24, 2012, 10:28:52 pm
Who do you think started UIF?
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 24, 2012, 10:30:41 pm
Greys and DRZ aren't the only guys my old friendging about in big circlejerk alliences, all those people on that list are equally gay, no exceptions.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 24, 2012, 10:41:27 pm
Greys and DRZ aren't the only guys my old friendging about in big circlejerk alliences, all those people on that list are equally gay, no exceptions.

For a while, Strat 2 was dominated by UIF and some smaller factions tried to fight back. Let's just say: Your mother's asshole, I tragedy.

These blocks are the result from DRZ creating UIF to make sure that they will never get more than manageable opposition. I think that's lame, but eh, what do I care when we get huge battles as a result?

You and your loser factions are going to get wiped pretty soon anyway, and then you'll be running to the forums once again, crying about "carebears" and "srs bsns". Strategus is for big boys(sadly?), no room for playful kids.

Look at it on the bright side: There's always fucking Battlefield: Heroes.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 24, 2012, 10:52:31 pm
Here is Thomek's letter from our archives in September 2010 pleading for an alliance to destroy DRZ before they would become too powerful.

(click to show/hide)

Maybe you should've listened and crushed them before they even got started. You reap what you sow, gents.

As a last ditch effort in strat 1 and to raise some awareness against this threat, we sent out the last of our forces, 2000 men against them to show the spirit of the Ninja Clan. That final day for the  Ninjas of old, there were more Druzhina blood running in the gutters than Ninja blood.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Ninja_Khorin, Keeper of Traditions in the Ninja Clan
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: NuberT on September 24, 2012, 10:59:09 pm
well either form up a meta-alliance against uif from the beginning or get raped - pretty simple.

Personally I don't like it that way, but its the only way..
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 24, 2012, 11:20:00 pm
Here is Thomek's letter from our archives in September 2010 pleading for an alliance to destroy DRZ before they would become too powerful.

(click to show/hide)

Maybe you should've listened and crushed them before they even got started. You reap what you sow, gents.

As a last ditch effort in strat 1 and to raise some awareness against this threat, we sent out the last of our forces, 2000 men against them to show the spirit of the Ninja Clan. That final day for the  Ninjas of old, there were more Druzhina blood running in the gutters than Ninja blood.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Ninja_Khorin, Keeper of Traditions in the Ninja Clan

This might be long-time history but Oberyn saved UIF, as Thomek might remember it, back at that time he contacted me for a contract to wipe drz and as i was about to wipe them with my armies moving toward them Oberyn withdrawed my armies to Reyvadin because he thought that we shouldn't get involved and ninjas might not have been able to pay us. Oberyn if you read this, you're a damn carebear :)

anyway it has always been that way ... templars bloc vs fallens bloc then uif bloc vs others bloc

all i can say is that i'm glad to be neutral and fighting those carebears and morons

FREEDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 24, 2012, 11:29:59 pm
all i can say is that i'm glad to be neutral and fighting those carebears and morons

Interesting approach of neutrality, usually that means you don't take any side whatsoever. I guess your small brain found a way, Lolwen. :wink:

By the way, don't count on being able to "resist" everyone much longer. Eventually you'll just be squished between both blocs.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: IR_Kuoin on September 24, 2012, 11:34:14 pm
Some people seem to forget that this is just a game, on the internet, with digital numbers and letters.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 24, 2012, 11:37:02 pm
So who is to be blamed here? Russians? Polacks? :lol:
I would rather call them DRZ, the Union and Grey Order. Apparently winning is valued so highly that they do whatever it takes and don't give a fuck about fun. They do it for the glory of the motherlfaction. Which kinda ruins the game, cause there is nothing stopping them from forming mega alliances.

I put my only hopes for a truly interesting Strategus on the Nordmen and BashiBazouk to just leave the Greys and DRZ on their own, cause they are already fucking huge. They are not too far gone yet and could probably still make a return to a normal approach to winning. Not DRZ, GO and probably the Union probably, it's just what they do.

Alternatively, one could implement actual diplomacy settings and let factions pay fees for every alliance they have, so having a mega alliance has actual drawbacks. The system would have to be Grey Order proof though, if you know what I mean.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 24, 2012, 11:39:12 pm
Alternatively, one could implement actual diplomacy settings and let factions pay fees for every alliance they have, so having a mega alliance has actual drawbacks. The system would have to be Grey Order proof though, if you know what I mean.
This'd lead to one big strat faction called "Grey Order and DRZ and Union and BashiBitchzouks and Nordwomen"...
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Miwiw on September 24, 2012, 11:41:42 pm
This'd lead to one big strat faction called "Grey Order and DRZ and Union and BashiBitchzouks and Nordwomen"...

like the coaloalaoaloaloalooalition right now.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 12:21:01 am
I would rather call them DRZ, the Union and Grey Order.

Apparently winning is valued so highly that they do whatever it takes and don't give a fuck about fun.

The two are mutually inexclusive. What I mean is, the problem is not the factions themselves but rather the gamer culture inhabiting them. The only three factions that care about winning the most just so happens to be largely Russian or Polish speaking, with extremely limited English capabilities. This "isolative" tendency is highly common with cultures where English is considered unimportant (Brazilian gamers, Spanish Gamers, Korean gamers(IMO the worst), Chinese gamers - all good examples).

I'm not being racist, I'm just saying that Russians and Polacks are very good at games (because a game implies you can win, whether that be in abstract way or concrete way), because to them, winning is EVERYTHING. That makes them very unpleasant. Anyway, nothing you can do about it unless blanket ban Poland/Russia was a solution. :lol:

I put my only hopes for a truly interesting Strategus on the Nordmen and BashiBazouk to just leave the Greys and DRZ on their own, cause they are already fucking huge.

I also hope for this. But it's fucking naive to expect it, so I don't. It's just as likely as UIF disbanding and saying: "Hey guys! We're sorry for making Strategus a big fucking blobfest, we just wanted to win so bad! Let's disband and make competition fun once again!"

As long as UIF exists, we will have meta-alliances to counter them. I'm not really complaining because it leads to a lot of BIG battles. If everyone ran loose like your joke faction it would make people lose interest in Strategus.

Alternatively, one could implement actual diplomacy settings and let factions pay fees for every alliance they have, so having a mega alliance has actual drawbacks. The system would have to be Grey Order proof though, if you know what I mean.

Horrible idea. Maybe offers a solution, but it won't change a thing unless you start enforcing to prohibit metagaming, and we all know that won't happen in the future (December 2010). Not now, not ever.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Thovex on September 25, 2012, 12:25:07 am
I see rivers of tears in the eye yet actual strat hasn't even started yet.

Alternatively, one could implement actual diplomacy settings and let factions pay fees for every alliance they have, so having a mega alliance has actual drawbacks. The system would have to be Grey Order proof though, if you know what I mean.

What prevents people from simply not using the features and just play together?

This'd lead to one big strat faction called "Grey Order and DRZ and Union and BashiBitchzouks and Nordwomen"...

See, if you come up with this why on earth do you think the Nords or BashiBazouk will help your side?
Not just you but this kind of child-flaming has happened with several clans that were roflstomped in strat 1, 2, 3.

Yet there is whine on the forums how Nords, Bashis have to turn neutral (We aren't?), help out against UIF, etc?

Use the brains you were given, THEN whine on the forums, PLEASE.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Miwiw on September 25, 2012, 12:37:30 am
Use the brains you were given, THEN whine on the forums, PLEASE.

AIiaiaiia, LINK PLìs!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tomas on September 25, 2012, 12:43:56 am
like the coaloalaoaloaloalooalition right now.

Yes the Coalition has decided to officially carebear up our long term alliances with HRE and GK but even now at our biggest and having managed to get ALL our members active, we are still smaller than the Grey Order alone was last Strat :D

Mechanics that limit the power of mega alliances are still being thought about but finding ones that are not exploitable is difficult, especially if we want to preserve the large set piece battles in Strat.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 12:50:36 am
What prevents people from simply not using the features and just play together?
Might not have formulated it that well, but my approach was just the first thought that popped up in my head and it's not Grey Order proof at all. Main point is, create an ingame system that basically gives mega alliances disadvantages, which is probably possible when given a lot of thought.

Ah well, I'll just stop caring and I'll accept that Strat will never be as awesome as it could be. I'll just leech xp of all the plate vs plate battles in a couple of months and join Corsair as a bandit as soon as my faction gets blocstomped.

Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vovka on September 25, 2012, 12:59:06 am
(click to show/hide)
At any time u can take ur faction and leave strat without a fight  :P
Or try to destroy UIF and create ur own pinky world  without mega alliances and with a bunch of fights 100 vs100 with pitchforks and cudgels
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 01:06:08 am
At any time u can take ur faction and leave strat without a fight  :P
One in a thousand of GO and DRZ posts in these type of threads. Really shows the one thought you have when it comes to strat and also proves my point. Although I appreciate the attempts at comedy you do, instead of the blatant bragging by others.

Another solution just popped up into my mind. A seperate strat for GO, DRZ and whoever shares their mentality. Let them abuse eachother to death for the glory of their motherlands and let the rest of us have a much more interesting experience.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Erasmas on September 25, 2012, 01:15:20 am
Now, this is a big time bullshit. If you were asked to judge Strat by the posts in this thread you would come to equally smart conclusions as the alien asked to say what the airplanes are for by watching TV - carrying celebrities and crashing. Everyone is playing Strat for fun, not to win, obviously except for Druzhina, Union, Grey Order, Bashi and Nords... That's pathetic.

Any game's purpose is to entertain, and any player's purpose is to win, or at least to try to win - otherwise it is not a game at all. I said that before and I am ready to repeat that any time - the beauty of Strategus is based on personal relations. Call it a ... team-play, is that a good word?.  Just try to build something yourself - create the clan, convince people to trust you, follow you as a leader. Try to find a trustworthy ally. It is a difficult, time consuming, yet rewarding task. Entertaining job.  Not for you? Aaaaah, so you prefer crying that the "game is bad"? Because some play to win? Pity. If you spend enough time and effort building an alternative to what you call "carebear alliances", you would find that is is not impossible. But that would mean that you want to win too, right? Oh, sorry, no - you would do it for fun. LOL. 

Strat 4.0 has a great potential to accommodate large number of clans including medium and small ones. The great wars will come in time. And this game is about the wars, isn't it?
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 25, 2012, 01:16:26 am
Interesting approach of neutrality, usually that means you don't take any side whatsoever.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Neutral

a retard trying to teach me something, fun
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 01:22:18 am
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Neutral

a retard trying to teach me something, fun

That's exactly what I said, so who is a retard now? You are not NEUTRAL because you are ACTIVELY ALIGNING yourself AGAINST both UIF AND "Carebear" bloc. Just because you're fighting everyone doesn't mean you're neutral. That just means you want to get roflstomped by everyone.

Don't bother replying, I have you on my ignore list from now on.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 25, 2012, 01:31:21 am
man, forgot retards dunno how to read ...

seriously bjord, i know you're still at school and failing at it, so don't try to teach me

2. Belonging to neither side in a controversy
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Garem on September 25, 2012, 01:32:06 am
This was me when I tried to play EU side against the UIF.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login



This is me now on NA side.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


This in no way furthers the problems highlighted in this thread. I just wanted you to know that we're having a gay old time over on NA. That is all.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 01:36:57 am
If you spend enough time and effort building an alternative to what you call "carebear alliances", you would find that is is not impossible.
There is no alternative to carebear alliances as long as there is one left. We saw that last Strat. The huge carebear alliance won, as a result, the other clans now take an alternative approach to getting their asses UIF'ed and form their own carebear alliance. Where they are all friends with eachother to face the other group of clans that are all friends with eachother. Now there is no one left to form a carebear alliance with, so the only option left, to be able to compete in strat is joining one of the two existing blocs. Yippy-kay-yee aint that fucking interesting.

Strat 4.0 has a great potential to accommodate large number of clans including medium and small ones. The great wars will come in time. And this game is about the wars, isn't it?
That is where you are plainly wrong. How did strat work out for any of the clans outside the UIF or a different big alliance? They got their asses beat by the bigger alliances. The game is all about numbers, small clans can not compete. Case and point, I counted 22 fiefs outside of the two big carebear alliances, want to bet that you can count them on one hand in two weeks?

This in no way furthers the problems highlighted in this thread. I just wanted you to know that we're having a gay old time over on NA. That is all.
I'm so jelly of NA.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: KingBread on September 25, 2012, 02:05:21 am
Quote
This "isolative" tendency is highly common with cultures where English is considered unimportant (Brazilian gamers, Spanish Gamers, Korean gamers(IMO the worst), Chinese gamers - all good examples).

Bjord... Have you ever been to Poland ? Every polish guy and girl who were educated after communism system felt and achieve at least high school degree can speak english on communicative level. Unless they choose to focus on diffrent language, but still you can't avoid english lessons in Poland. There are many polish guys around CRPG in international clans and many non polish guys in Greys. So your argument is invalid. Banning us won't help destroying huge alliances.


I think that only solution to this problem is involving more people in to strategus. We are very small community with even fewer active strategus players. So everybody knows everybody and Teeh can whine all day but people that spend so many hours on the battlefield will not just simply attack each other.  But like 2 thousand players more and UIF vs Coalition could be only a conflict involving 1/3rd part of map/people. But eventually it will end up in 2 alliances blocks as well after some time.

Just look at democracy systems every new democracy starts with gazyllions of parties and finally ends up with 2.

I personally think that making bandids liars will improve gaming experience of small fiefless clans.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Erasmas on September 25, 2012, 02:09:21 am
Teeth, this vision has a name -  Utopia. Or singleplayer mode  :D

As to other points I dare to disagree - to some extent. You miss one important point. Economics. If I predict correctly, Strat 4.0 will not be about the land you own, cause it gives you close to nothing now. Or rather the purpose of that land has changed. The map is a LOT bigger, and even big clans will have a problem to defend extensive number of fiefs. Not that they won't try - sure they will :D. That could be seen in Strat 3.0 already, and now it will become more clear. The ability to stay alive and carve out the piece of land for a medium/small clan increased like hell. Moreover, the ability to raise mayhem for medium/small clans increased. And I think that with little luck - an patience - that is to be seen soon.

Well, we will talk in a few months. Cause this is a marathon, not a sprint.   
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Havoco on September 25, 2012, 03:28:08 am
It'll always be two big alliances until the devs implement something that will promote being smaller. Maybe even a backstabbing feature. I had an idea for it, but I'll have to type it out later.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vovka on September 25, 2012, 04:55:01 am
What the problem to be a small clan in a big alliance? and fight the little clans of the enemy alliance  :|
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Havoco on September 25, 2012, 05:10:25 am
Nothing, but that's not my point. Some ppl just want to see the game run its course with a group of 1-2 allies fighting another group of 1-2 allies with multiple wars. They want to see it more like singleplayer (as far as diplomacy and wars are concerned).
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Smoothrich on September 25, 2012, 05:12:44 am
What the problem to be a small clan in a big alliance? and fight the little clans of the enemy alliance  :|

Haha, I just made an entire thread about that cuz I figured that's the general philosophy behind the UIF, but people don't understand or don't treat alliances the same way.  They instead they make their own alliances, become crippled in anxiety and fear over being wiped out, while simply get more and more clans as "vassals" and proxy war with them in unfair fights or lots of other unfun things that promote bad gameplay.

Clans should feel safe in attacking other clans regardless of big alliances as long as the fights are fair.  Instead people are afraid guys like UIF, or they start to do this themselves, will respond to any threat with combined armies, massive invasions, funneling of resources in proxy, things like that.

No way to enforce this of course but maybe people don't have to be so doom and gloom about clans that trust each other being allies, and those in these alliances should treat them as a security cushion to go and recruit in to rebuild in case they lose, instead of a way to always stack the odds in your favor at points of attack.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vovka on September 25, 2012, 05:48:34 am
Clans should feel safe in attacking other clans regardless of big alliances as long as the fights are fair.  Instead people are afraid guys like UIF, or they start to do this themselves, will respond to any threat with combined armies, massive invasions, funneling of resources in proxy, things like that.

Faction A: To the arms! war!
Faction B: Сhallenge accepted!
Faction A: Cool! This will be a terrific war! But please do not take more than 20 cudgels in the army! Use only light horses! And do not attack our fiefs we  craft goods here!
Faction B: Ok! And u let us time to retreate and regroup in shield wall!

At a time when there was no UIF. 200 + member faction stood at the head of the block consisting of 90% of the total number of factions. And all what they did it a crusade into a fraction of ten with 1 fief. Yeah those were good times  :P
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 25, 2012, 06:49:16 am
I'm so jelly of NA.
Land of the free! Make Byzantium come join the Shogunate on NA with Ninjas!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: chadz on September 25, 2012, 06:50:37 am
Yes, current situation is, once again, shitty as hell. I'm trying very hard to find something to not only crush those big alliances, but nerf big clans into oblivion as hell. Once a 30 guy clan/group/whatever is no longer more dangerous than a 10 guy clan, and clans start splitting up and fight each other, then I'm happy. Before that, I'll swing that feature&nerf hammer so long and hard until I succeed. Strat will have no future until I succeed in that.

I'm not blaming anyone in those factions, although I really don't get why you're playing the way you're playing. My limited experience in previous strat rounds in a carebear faction was like this:
Let's attack!
We can't, they'd crush us!
Then let's attack them!
We can't, they'd have allies that crush us.
So what now?
We find allies ourselves!


Needless to say, the fun was somewhat limited. I can say I never had so much fun as I have in current strat, of course with an expiry date, it's just a matter of time until we get crushed, but, even if it's only for a few days, I prefer having fun in those, than being in a soviet union simulator for half a year.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: HardRice on September 25, 2012, 06:54:54 am
chadz, go personally destroy them with your infinite supply of troops.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: chadz on September 25, 2012, 06:56:44 am
That's one of many options.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Smoothrich on September 25, 2012, 06:58:15 am
chadz, go personally destroy them with your infinite supply of troops.

This is what I suggest to him everytime.  Lie and say its AI generated random events like a Paradox game then spawn lordly heavy armor stacks to grief clans that are turtling/carebearing too much.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Gingerpussy on September 25, 2012, 08:03:38 am
For the first time for a long long time i am going to post a comment on the forums again.

This is important, even more important is the "threat" from chadz to destroy larger clans. I think you all are wrong.
I realy think strat 4 is allready doing it hard for larger alliances to even function. The reason is that in this strat people have to be more active.
They need all people to do spesific things such as a trader and to have there own army at hand. The supply and demand wil be a key to this strategus.

The first thing in this strat is that there is a link from cRPG to Strategus, and this link with ticks in strategus is realy good becouse it prevents alot of cheating. We all know what happend in strat 2 and 3 from certain groups. My suggestion is to have harder rules within that link with ticket system.

I think that if a player have 0 ticks then he should not be able to trade (buy or sell goods), and that 1 transaction takes away a ticket.

So how does this prevent larger alliances ? Wel look at some former 200 men clans they are down to a 100 now. And most likely they are not more then 30 more or less active players. A simple thing like this will fuck up larger clans and alliances and make them more dependent on the single players skills and his tickets.

Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: dodnet on September 25, 2012, 08:09:39 am
(Temporary) solution for Strat5: Create a completely new map, with new town names, new positions. Shuffle the clans around like shit, better put one clan into the same area, so they have to make their base there. Maybe create a simple diplomacy system where you have to declare war and can only have a few allies.

Last but most important:
Disable chat, teamspeak, email, steam and everything, so no one can communicate and make secret alliances  :mrgreen:

But yeah... current strat is heading into the same two-alliances-war then every before. You see it on every single battle roster. Its always the same clans on the same side. As one of the smaller clans I know we are kinda boned if we don't choose either side, which saddens me. You can't attack a small clan without some big fat alliance behind it.  :(
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 08:16:45 am
I'm in one of those carebear alliances now and I agree with Teeth. We're gay. We're massively gay. We're more gay than Bearforce1 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vSUW-Z_Cnc0) and Azis (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4hQ4J4BFOM) combined. I'm dead serious right now.

It's not that I blaim my guys for it, because like NuberT said there (http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/well-that-was-fun/msg613175/#msg613175), it's the only way to play in EU right now. I hate it to be this way, but eh what can I do.

I'm hoping for chadz or someone else to come up with a nice idea to break up the alliances. I doubt this whole business with the gold bank and looms will work. I'll try to think of something myself and suggest it (already have an idea cooking in my brainz). The state of Strategus is pretty sad right now, even though I like the new fief development and trading mechanics. Such a waste that it adopted the gangbang on little ones metagame from other browser strategy games (I played quite a few of those).

Would be nice to fight in a game without massive alliances. Hell, I wouldn't even mind if we had to break the Fallen Brigade into smaller factions just for Strategus and fight each other as well!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 08:55:44 am
So far everyone sort of agrees on a couple of things, mega alliances are gay but sadly it's the only way to play Strategus at the moment.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 09:20:31 am
Bjord... Have you ever been to Poland ? Every polish guy and girl who were educated after communism system felt and achieve at least high school degree can speak english on communicative level. Unless they choose to focus on diffrent language, but still you can't avoid english lessons in Poland.

No, but I'm born in a country with the exact same outlooks. Hungary and Poland have almost the exact same culture. I have even heard several sayings like: "Brothers in wine, brothers in war", referring to the close bond of Hungary and Poland. I like Polish people too, so I'm just like other Hungarians. But in online communities, I believe more in socializing with everyone from other countries than creating a clan with purely Poles etc. If Hungarians were a major population in this community too, we would probably just make another version of Grey army of bots.

Poles in other clans have my respect, because I can imagine how looking at Greys thinking: "I could be with my countrymen and help conquer Strat, they're very powerful and maybe I would get along with them." and still choosing to remain in your clan is sometimes is slightly demoralizing. Or maybe not, what do I know.

Anyway, while you may have no problem with English, I can attest to the many Hungarians in this community that suffer a bit with it and therefore are not very known other than as players. Christo is not one of them, obviously. And I sort of represent two countries so I'm an exception as well. That's the situation with Greys too.

What do you think players with limited English choose? A big clan native to their own language with a reputation of being powerful or a big international clan with reputation of being powerful?
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Thovex on September 25, 2012, 09:40:17 am
There will always be whine from the losing side, even if you "destroy" mega alliances. (Isn't possible since there is something called friends.  :).)
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: peter_afca7 on September 25, 2012, 09:47:03 am
trololol fail post xD
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: IR_Kuoin on September 25, 2012, 09:48:03 am
Om nom nom, they are making alliances in strategus? Oh noes! We free peasants are doomed.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: dodnet on September 25, 2012, 09:51:13 am
The Coalition    members128   fiefs 33???? 22????????????????? QQ

Read your quote again...  :rolleyes:

Quote
I counted 22 fiefs that are not under control of one of these carebear blocs and I give those 22 fiefs a week.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: KingBread on September 25, 2012, 10:05:57 am


Poles in other clans have my respect, because I can imagine how looking at Greys thinking: "I could be with my countrymen and help conquer Strat, they're very powerful and maybe I would get along with them." and still choosing to remain in your clan is sometimes is slightly demoralizing. Or maybe not, what do I know.





This is sometimes a topic i discuss with other polish guys in international clans. Also some i think 15 years old kids from pure polish clans (but not Greys in this case) are happy to insult you as a traitor of Poland. But overall i have enought polish people around me in RL and i personally like international communities very much.

What do you think players with limited English choose? A big clan native to their own language with a reputation of being powerful or a big international clan with reputation of being powerful?

As i said you need to finish high school to have ability to speak at communicative language and many guys playing CRPG didn't yet. So obviously they are joining native speakers. You are right on this. Ofcourse it doens't mean that Greys are pure 15 year old clan. It means that younger polish guys have no choice cos they don't know english enought to join international clan.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 25, 2012, 11:09:31 am
Yes, current situation is, once again, shitty as hell. I'm trying very hard to find something to not only crush those big alliances, but nerf big clans into oblivion as hell. Once a 30 guy clan/group/whatever is no longer more dangerous than a 10 guy clan, and clans start splitting up and fight each other, then I'm happy. Before that, I'll swing that feature&nerf hammer so long and hard until I succeed. Strat will have no future until I succeed in that.

I'm not blaming anyone in those factions, although I really don't get why you're playing the way you're playing. My limited experience in previous strat rounds in a carebear faction was like this:
Let's attack!
We can't, they'd crush us!
Then let's attack them!
We can't, they'd have allies that crush us.
So what now?
We find allies ourselves!


Needless to say, the fun was somewhat limited. I can say I never had so much fun as I have in current strat, of course with an expiry date, it's just a matter of time until we get crushed, but, even if it's only for a few days, I prefer having fun in those, than being in a soviet union simulator for half a year.

This is awesome. So far I've had more fun this strat than I ever had during the entire strat 2(we skipped round 3), when we were vassals to 22nd who were allied to Grey and DRZ. Literally nothing happened. Strat 1 is still the most fun one for me.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Knute on September 25, 2012, 11:42:28 am
Strat 4.0 has a great potential to accommodate large number of clans including medium and small ones. The great wars will come in time. And this game is about the wars, isn't it?

That is where you are plainly wrong. How did strat work out for any of the clans outside the UIF or a different big alliance? They got their asses beat by the bigger alliances. The game is all about numbers, small clans can not compete. Case and point, I counted 22 fiefs outside of the two big carebear alliances, want to bet that you can count them on one hand in two weeks?

I disagree with you about small clans.  The Free Peasants of Fisdnar started out as a one man defense of AI controlled Fisdnar last fall and then from March through now we've only had 6-10 core members and still managed to take two villages, an AI city and place 10th in points for strat 3 ahead of clans with a lot more people (http://forum.meleegaming.com/announcements/strategus-round-4-starting-sunday-1200-cet/msg601270/#msg601270).  It's not even about owning fiefs though (only Fisdnar and Rivacheg were difficult to take), it's the fact that even when things went wrong we had fun and always had a goal to work toward.  We all started out strat v.3 as clanless players who learned how to be self sufficient on our own as traders and bandits before working together, so we might also have a different mindset about the game from people who've only played Strategus in more conventional large clans.

-------

If there were 15k or even just 3k people actively playing strategus there might be potential for more than a two sided large scale conflict.  With our current population and less people signing up for strat battles in prime time, I think the community is just too small for anything like that atm.  Anything is possible though, get enough likeminded people together and it can happen.


Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: The_Bloody_Nine on September 25, 2012, 12:07:53 pm
For the first time for a long long time i am going to post a comment on the forums again.

Buying strategus gold for cRPG Gold.

Pm amount and what you want for it to me and maybe we can agree.
Impressive :D
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 12:09:36 pm
Impressive :D

I think he means politically, but who cares anyway? You're focusing on the wrong part of his post. :wink:
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: The_Bloody_Nine on September 25, 2012, 12:10:36 pm
nothing important, that's for sure.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: NuberT on September 25, 2012, 12:40:16 pm
a little suggestion: A factions capital could get a huge bonus like in roma surrectum, they could for example generate a fixed amount of gold and troops, so basically your faction capital is worth 5 other fiefs and 20 players idk, would be a huge buff to every small faction. Would probably still lead to big metas, but maybe more then 2 and smaller clans might survive on the map.

3 clans with 10 players each could oppose 1 clan with 70 players - at least in economy terms

obviously strat factions must be fixed to crpg factions for that..
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 25, 2012, 12:41:11 pm
If you've got some guts i don't get why you wouldn't be able to stand up and point your middle finger at both of those alliances just as we're doing right now.

The only complicated point so far is that it's hard to fulfil a roster when both alliances choose to fight against you or forbid their members to join us. Which is imo acting as a moron.

If you want to private yourself from making your own decisions, from being able to take part in a battle, from chosing which fief you want to own or to attack and from being able to have fun the way you want to so yes, just join an alliance. Otherwise just grow some balls and fight like a man.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 01:07:06 pm
If you've got some guts i don't get why you wouldn't be able to stand up and point your middle finger at both of those alliances just as we're doing right now.

The only complicated point so far is that it's hard to fulfil a roster when both alliances choose to fight against you or forbid their members to join us. Which is imo acting as a moron.

If you want to private yourself from making your own decisions, from being able to take part in a battle, from chosing which fief you want to own or to attack and from being able to have fun the way you want to so yes, just join an alliance. Otherwise just grow some balls and fight like a man.

As much as I like what you guys are trying to achieve: inb4 you get raped by UIF1 or UIF2
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 25, 2012, 01:15:14 pm
so what ? afraid to lose pixels ? better not to have fun ?
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 01:19:36 pm
so what ? afraid to lose pixels ? better not to have fun ?

I'm afraid that the fun will be more one-sided, unless you really enjoy losing when outnumbered and outgeared.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Harpag on September 25, 2012, 03:19:44 pm
Yes, current situation is, once again, shitty as hell. I'm trying very hard to find something to not only crush those big alliances, but nerf big clans into oblivion as hell. Once a 30 guy clan/group/whatever is no longer more dangerous than a 10 guy clan, and clans start splitting up and fight each other, then I'm happy. Before that, I'll swing that feature&nerf hammer so long and hard until I succeed. Strat will have no future until I succeed in that.

I'm not blaming anyone in those factions, although I really don't get why you're playing the way you're playing. My limited experience in previous strat rounds in a carebear faction was like this:
Let's attack!
We can't, they'd crush us!
Then let's attack them!
We can't, they'd have allies that crush us.
So what now?
We find allies ourselves!


Needless to say, the fun was somewhat limited. I can say I never had so much fun as I have in current strat, of course with an expiry date, it's just a matter of time until we get crushed, but, even if it's only for a few days, I prefer having fun in those, than being in a soviet union simulator for half a year.

In my opinion your assumption is incorrect, and I think it's results of lack of knowledge about activities of players and their motivation to play.

Joining a large clan, who is a member of large alliance is just very comfortable for casual players cos gives possibility to participate in many big battles (big XP), with a minimal own effort on the map.
Most players have very limited free time and don't want to or can't spend a lot of time on this part of game, because then it ceases to be fun for them.

In contrast, a small group of players are mainly interested in gaming on the map, and is ready to spend all free time allowed for game, to plan and organize tasks for other people.
What's more, leaders of various factions also share their duties and exchanging information and experience, which saves time spent on the game.

Something nice for everyone. In this way, two groups of people with different approaches to the game in a natural way to combine preferences. In biology, such relationship is called symbiosis or rather protocooperation.

As you can see, assuming that you want to achieve something in strat and want big fun battles, large factions or alliances is a method to deal with "no life" behavior forced by zystem.
In fact, there even is no clan that is able to fill full roster and everyone sees it perfectly, so I don't understand how you can't see that large clans and alliances is the only way to sustain this game alive with big number of players.

Desire to artificially dividing community into groups about 10-30 ppl, artificial walls and other such ways is pure lack of understanding basic relationships between members of this community. Every battle and every war has only two sides.

Lack of more clans or alliances is result of absence more competent leaders able (skill, time, interpersonal relations etc) to build their own groups based on existing player base.

There is a lot of loud voices, but that doesn't change shape of the Gaussian curve.

We are grateful for awesome game that you've done for us, but remember that we are your beta testers,not bots kurwa mać...

And now feel free to give me over 9000 "-"  :wink:
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Molly on September 25, 2012, 03:52:56 pm
Well, first off: A war can have more sides than just 2... It's not always "Axis" and "Allies"  :wink:

...but I have to agree on the time part and the "casual" strategus players. Like myself.
Only a few are willing and able to invest the amount of time that is obviously needed to grow and become relevant in Strategus.

Dividing the alliances into smaller pieces will and has to lead to smaller battles. Those arent really interesting for a lot of players of this community, solely based on my observations of battle rosters. The highest amount of different players is always reached in the big battles and not just by the tickets-roster relation but because most of the casual players are looking specificly for the big battles. They take the highest amount of time when participating but the reward is the best too.

I don't have any idea on how to fix this but I am kinda afraid that those 2000vs3000 battles are going to disappear along with big alliances. I am having a hard time to convince myself that this can be prevented, for the sake of the game...
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: HarunYahya on September 25, 2012, 04:18:05 pm
Well, first off: A war can have more sides than just 2... It's not always "Axis" and "Allies"  :wink:

...but I have to agree on the time part and the "casual" strategus players. Like myself.
Only a few are willing and able to invest the amount of time that is obviously needed to grow and become relevant in Strategus.

Dividing the alliances into smaller pieces will and has to lead to smaller battles. Those arent really interesting for a lot of players of this community, solely based on my observations of battle rosters. The highest amount of different players is always reached in the big battles and not just by the tickets-roster relation but because most of the casual players are looking specificly for the big battles. They take the highest amount of time when participating but the reward is the best too.

I don't have any idea on how to fix this but I am kinda afraid that those 2000vs3000 battles are going to disappear along with big alliances. I am having a hard time to convince myself that this can be prevented, for the sake of the game...
It is always axis and allies.
Show me a battle with 3 direct enemies fighting each other in battlefield.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on September 25, 2012, 04:26:28 pm
Larger alliances are just a way of life.  The only way to stop it, is for the game to have mechanics in place to encourage people not to do so. 

Think about single player warband, there's 6 factions that control all that land. 
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Molly on September 25, 2012, 04:28:44 pm
It is always axis and allies.
Show me a battle with 3 direct enemies fighting each other in battlefield.
See? You're talking about battle, I am talking about war. Two different things, mate :P
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Cicero on September 25, 2012, 04:31:44 pm
Mod don't have enough players to full rosters at the moment and without alliances its not possible to full those.

The main problem is ; think about all factions are neutral then a A faction wanted to wipe out B faction they meet in open field battle is 1000 vs 1000

A and B factions dont have enough people to full their roster so they will take people out of their factions so A faction gonna take people from C faction.

B faction is so fuckin mature to say "Oh hello C faction its no problem i dont have a clue that you are killing my soldiers its np"
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: NuberT on September 25, 2012, 05:39:54 pm
why not? I would merc (for money) against everyone but my own faction ofc..

EDIT: also increase xp gain/allow alts in strat and see full rosters everywhere..
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 06:43:26 pm
(click to show/hide)
Really glad that you see it this way. The same here, I am having more fun than I've ever had in Strategus. The system is so much better and playing in a loosely organized, aggressive faction is much better than playing in a boring mega alliance, even if it won't last.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: KingBread on September 25, 2012, 07:00:57 pm
I have to agree with Harpag (and not only becouse i'm his alt). Axis vs Allies it would be super hard to create artificial walls between people. This is just how society works. Only realistic way to create more wars is bring more people here. Much more in fact and after few months all will be divided in 2 again.

But yet i would like to underline the fact that alliances are not super stable things we say some backstabbing in strat 3 and i think we will see now.


In strat 1 everybody had their own war at start, people don't know each other or strat and i didn't care about some russian faction DRZ killing Ninjas when we were at war with Templars, but finish was Axis vs Allies.

I think SOLUTION TO THIS PROBLEM IS GIVE MORE PLACE TO LIVE FOR SMALL FACTIONS by giving them BANDIT LIAR or sth like this allready suggested and let them live with no need to talk about diplomatic stuff yet raiding caravans.  Cos there is no way i will attack people from my clan not for gold not for looms not for strat points.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Thovex on September 25, 2012, 07:07:55 pm
Less whining more battling!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Keshian on September 25, 2012, 07:19:50 pm
Yes, current situation is, once again, shitty as hell. I'm trying very hard to find something to not only crush those big alliances, but nerf big clans into oblivion as hell. Once a 30 guy clan/group/whatever is no longer more dangerous than a 10 guy clan, and clans start splitting up and fight each other, then I'm happy. Before that, I'll swing that feature&nerf hammer so long and hard until I succeed. Strat will have no future until I succeed in that.

I'm not blaming anyone in those factions, although I really don't get why you're playing the way you're playing. My limited experience in previous strat rounds in a carebear faction was like this:
Let's attack!
We can't, they'd crush us!
Then let's attack them!
We can't, they'd have allies that crush us.
So what now?
We find allies ourselves!


Needless to say, the fun was somewhat limited. I can say I never had so much fun as I have in current strat, of course with an expiry date, it's just a matter of time until we get crushed, but, even if it's only for a few days, I prefer having fun in those, than being in a soviet union simulator for half a year.

 I agree.
  Strangely Strat 1.0 had the most diverse number of alliances and wars up until all of Eastern Europe united into UIF 1.0 (and even then a lot of battles and wars).  No other strat version had so many fluctuations of fortune and broad sweeping wars.  2.0 was 2nd best for this and 3rd was worst.The pattern seems to be going the wrong way and there is a reason for this:

By making gold and troops far more difficult to make and produce the intention was to favors smaller, more active clans over large multiple cd-key inactive clans.  But like economics, when you reduce the money supply you slow the velocity of money as well.  By making buildup to battles ever more elaborate and requiring more individuals to pull it off, you made large battles less common and more important, which caused the fluctuations of fief ownership to slow down - this is the core of mega alliances as people solidify holdings and become more entrenched in alliances around these holdings and fewer clans taking risks because coming back from losing a war is so much harder now.

The tick system is a good step in the right direction, but the gold (+100/tick) and troop production (+10/tick) should be significantly higher allowing for more diverse battles (most battles right now are fief transferships with no real fight).  (also increase gold buy/sell/profit of trading 5x). To help balance this make ticks even more restrictive so need to play every day or two to get benefit.

People may worry that small factions may be even worse off, but the FCC was only Cavalieres and Bridgeburners, a 6 man faction in Strat 1.0 and we took and lost several fiefs repeatedly including a city and were more active than in Strat 3.0 with 60-70 members.  So many great battles to merc for as well for little guys as people were always looking for mercs as there were so many battles they couldn't always just fill up the roster with clan members like now where battles are a slow buildup.  Also, neutral fiefs, expecially castles and cities are a great thing in the beginnning - just having people merc against you in neutral fiefs creates opportunities for conflict down the road and they provide a lot of early big battles, which strat 4.0 is lacking.

Strat 1.0 and the middle to end of Strat 2.0 were the most fun I've had since starting cRPG 3 years ago.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Casimir on September 25, 2012, 08:20:29 pm
How do you think kingdoms are formed my friend.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 25, 2012, 09:00:40 pm
Really glad that you see it this way. The same here, I am having more fun than I've ever had in Strategus. The system is so much better and playing in a loosely organized, aggressive faction is much better than playing in a boring mega alliance, even if it won't last.
This is why you'll probably fail (+ you're heathens), you're willing to just accept that you're losing the game, Werfrieds Battalion is blessed by the one true goat and therefore us prevailing is the only logical option, but, if we were all expecting to lose and were just gonna GTX at the first sign of bad luck we'd lose Morks favor and he'd let us die out, for the goat and for lord Werfried!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Keshian on September 25, 2012, 10:10:16 pm
I just realized how much fail the voting system was for actually having an interesting strategus round.  So I broach the idea of fucking up some decent sized clan and forcing them out of their fiefs in an equal sided war.  Then someone mentioned - what about their castles/city?  And it hit me - by allowing castles and cities to be voted for instead of hard-won late game through fighting, you gave most clans on the map strongholds that cant be taken for months so any war you initiate doesn't force them out of their territory. 

Instead they just retreat to their castle/city, save up, and attack you back.  Nothing gets accomplished and you dont force them out of territory, just gain a new enemy.  In older strategus version the early game had the most jostling for location and position that created new wars and enemies and you could force a clan to relocate out of your local region.  It wouldn't be the stagnant cold war nightmare its set up to be.  If we had the troop/gold production of strat 1.0 it wouldn't be quite so bad, but since we don't every clan was given impregnable fortresses without a fight.

I could use a really good neutral fief fight right about now, this is getting boring.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: IR_Kuoin on September 26, 2012, 01:15:23 am
Looks like Al_Adin has a job to do
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Casimir on September 26, 2012, 01:39:00 am
i dont understand the new wave of people this strat who have joined, said they intend to play for fun and then got surprised when they were taken out by more serious and focussed factions.  Its exactly the same as a bunch of pubbies on eu1 getting steam rolled by an organized clan, just bigger.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 26, 2012, 01:42:13 am
i dont understand the new wave of people this strat who have joined, said they intend to play for fun and then got surprised when they were taken out by more serious and focussed factions.  Its exactly the same as a bunch of pubbies on eu1 getting steam rolled by an organized clan, just bigger.

Yeah, some people even go as far as making a thread about how far their panties went up their ass and start crying about carebears. Ironic, 'innit.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Jarlek on September 26, 2012, 06:36:18 pm
Yeah, some people even go as far as making a thread about how far their panties went up their ass and start crying about carebears. Ironic, 'innit.
The best part is he got the blocks wrong xD
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Falka on September 27, 2012, 09:44:05 am
I personally think that making bandids liars will improve gaming experience of small fiefless clans.

This. Visible and accessible only for non faction players or members of small clans. Currently big boys caravans are safe even without army because it's almost impossible to attack caravan and then run away on their territory.

I have even heard several sayings like: "Brothers in wine, brothers in war", referring to the close bond of Hungary and Poland.

In Poland we have the same saying: Polak Węgier dwa bratanki, i do szabli, i do szklanki  8-)
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Corsair831 on September 27, 2012, 12:30:12 pm
best way to beat these carebear noobs is to bandit them ;) ... get loads of rounceys and attack their caravans when they're far away from any help, then run away rinse and repeat.

you're never going to be able to hold territory against someone that strong. Best you can manage to do is to harrass them ;)

also, who says your faction won't last teeth ? :) ... they can't kill you, that's the beautiful thing ... even if they beat you down and beat you down to pitchforks and shirts, i know for a fact that 600 troops with pitchforks and troops will beat 200 troops heavily armed (as soon as the first weapon scavenging starts it's good bye advantage) ..

if you get beaten down to a bloody pulp where you've all got 100 gold left, get 6 guys with 100 troops and 100 pitchforks each to attack one of their "heavily armed we think we're indestructible but in fact are insanely easy to beat" caravans  :)
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Vibe on September 27, 2012, 12:33:12 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tibe on September 27, 2012, 01:05:45 pm
Id like to compare this little situation to the "Civilization" game. Sure you can basically murder every other smaller and less developed nation straight at the middle of the game and make alliance with a nation that is equal to yours, but that just leaves you picking your nose and clicking next turn till the end of the game. Sure you can get more resources and shit when you annhiliate everything in your path, but whats the point when you pretty much kicked all who to wave those awesome things at out of the game. Same in strat.

More players = more fun. Start beating people out of the game and you have noone to wave your successes and hard work at( I know some people care about that), exept your clanmates, but even they will be all like "cool story bro".

I think the huge problem here is that there isnt much variety in strat. Nothing exept declare wars and trade. And as I heard trading is kinda ruined factor. Id suggest things like bounties, player bountyhunters, player monks who convert religions, creating civil unrests in tiefs, spies. Strat leveling like for spying, spreading religion, leadership, trade etc etc . Things are just too stable in tiefs and player parties. Get a tief, watch out for large armies....profit till then. Players got nothing to do but just bot in villages or move to conqure. Cant blame them for just fighting all the time.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tomas on September 27, 2012, 02:10:33 pm
The #1 reason why alliances form is to fill rosters with reliable players.  As a rough estimate it takes at least a 200 man alliance to guarantee filling a 50 man roster and since there are only 500ish players on EU in Strat then of course there is only room for 2 alliances.  It is also the #1 reason why small clans struggle and independent players fail in the end

So here's what I propose

1) Slightly reduced roster sizes in general.
mercs = power(smaller_army_size,0.6)
capped at 50 mercs

Results
(click to show/hide)

As you can see a 100 vs 100 battle would get reduced down to just 16 mercs from its current 28, and village battles at 200 defending troops would only have 22 mercs.  The big Castle and Town sieges meanwhile will still have at least 45 (Castle) or 50 (Town) mercs.

This makes raiding much easier and also slightly prolongs the smaller battles so that they feel less like time wasted.

2)  Remove the reduced upkeep of troops in Fiefs.  This just encourages carebearing over attacking.  If troops cost the same everywhere then faction with too many troops would be forced to get rid of them and actually attack someone.

3) Anonymous mercing.  Only the roster manager can see who you really are.




Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: dodnet on September 27, 2012, 02:33:46 pm
Good suggestions. Though I prefer larger battles, its hard to fill a roster as non-member of one of the carebear-alliances. Especially at the non-usual times. Also the roster-size should be reduced even more at those times where hardly anyone is playing (night, morning and during the day).

3) Anonymous mercing.  Only the roster manager can see who you really are.

That would be nice, but at last during battle you would see the names. So still no carebear1 would play against a carebear1-clan.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tomas on September 27, 2012, 03:37:35 pm
Good suggestions. Though I prefer larger battles, its hard to fill a roster as non-member of one of the carebear-alliances. Especially at the non-usual times. Also the roster-size should be reduced even more at those times where hardly anyone is playing (night, morning and during the day).

That would be nice, but at last during battle you would see the names. So still no carebear1 would play against a carebear1-clan.

In the battle you would appear with a random name.  The only thing you would need to be careful of is that the people in the TS you join and the clan leaders of the battle don't give you away.  The first can be done by simply not speaking and using an alias in TS.  The second is a trust issue that probably adds to the game
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Keshian on September 27, 2012, 03:53:01 pm
Make a better strategus:

1) Make troops and gold easier to get from ticks so more aggressive gameplay allows for greater fluctuations in fortune forcing new territory claims and thus new alliances - as alliances fluctuate more they also tend to decrease in size, only stagnant alliances slowly creep up to include 70-100% of playerbase.

2) Completely random assignment of villages to players (cities and castles should be neutral - fun fights, and also creates discord with whoever mercs on neutral side), so no clan will know which fiefs they will get and will be forced to relocate.  Some clan may get lucky, but then other clans will just attack them if they have too many fiefs.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Nessaj on September 27, 2012, 05:01:14 pm
In the battle you would appear with a random name.  The only thing you would need to be careful of is that the people in the TS you join and the clan leaders of the battle don't give you away.  The first can be done by simply not speaking and using an alias in TS.  The second is a trust issue that probably adds to the game

If that would be put into place, the battle commander should be able to Kick people (or even ban them for the duration of the battle from EU/NA3). Otherwise we'll have a huge army of trolls and idiots fooling around due to anonymity. Polls won't be effective enough.

"TROOP 43 GET IN FORMATION!"
"TROOP 43 WHAT ARE YOU DOING!?"
"TROOP 43 DIES"

 :mad:

There's other ramifications as well, suddenly people will stop talking on TS, not relaying vital battle information or otherwise because they won't want to be recognized, given they want to play as many battles as possible. This would encourage sneaking around, lying, and generally bad behaviour. People would start fixing information on other players, for example which country is someone from, so they can easier spot them playing for the enemy (by checking out his TS) - or simply checking out IP(s). It wouldn't work unless there's a better commanding system present, one that would negate having to use Voice programs such as TS etc. Writing doesn't cut it at all in the bigger battles.

My point is, that this change alone would not help solve the actual issues behind, just mask it more.
We'll have players less talking and "socializing" and in general participating less, and other players/clans will fanatically try to make sure they have the best rosters (which would not be too hard).
It wouldn't solve any of the actual issues of allowing people to sign-up freely.

I personally do prefer anonymity in battle, e.g. only the battle commander knows who is who, only the host of the battle (or people with high enough rank) can see who have signed up etc. It would help, but as stated above it isn't a solution, it is simply 'moving the problem' slightly, and it carries a lot of other issues with it.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Cicero on September 27, 2012, 05:14:18 pm

"TROOP 43 GET IN FORMATION!"
"TROOP 43 WHAT ARE YOU DOING!?"
"TROOP 43 DIES"


"TROOP 43 DO YOU COPY ?"
"TROOP 43 "
"TROOP 43 KIA ASAP"
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tomas on September 27, 2012, 05:29:05 pm
(click to show/hide)

The commander hiring you will know who you are.  If you piss about, they will simply not hire you again as it is now.  If they blow your cover then that is the risk you take when applying.

Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on September 27, 2012, 05:32:52 pm
I think you guys are putting too much thought into the anonymous sign-ups.

The only thing that should change (or would need to) is the enemy in game, cannot see the other team's names on the scoreboard.  People in game, on your team would still be able to see the names of their teammates.   Of course someone on your side could tell the enemy who signed up, but that's the problem of your side, not theirs (don't sign up people you don't trust).  And would be no different than it is now anyways if that were to happen. 

Nothing else would need to change.

Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tibe on September 27, 2012, 07:13:10 pm
To be fair, I dont really get why leaders get so pissed when few guys from their alliance join in a roster against them. If its not some players with insane skill and its not about the madder of who has more players showing up, it makes very little difference.

its always like PM:  "WTF? *lots of snorting and nerdtalk* waahwaah you were against my dudes on that roster, you all deserve to be wiped from strat forever!"
Really? Bitch I go were I can cause I want xp! This really annoys the hell out of me, cause I always have to take out a fucking list of who I can sign up for and for who I cant.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Segd on September 27, 2012, 07:24:00 pm
1) Slightly reduced roster sizes in general.
mercs = power(smaller_army_size,0.6)
capped at 50 mercs
Less mercs = longer battles = less XP = less fun.

Anonymous mercing + doubled\tripled xp = full rosters all the time!
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Moncho on September 27, 2012, 07:27:50 pm
Less mercs = longer battles = less XP = less fun.

Anonymous mercing + doubled\tripled xp = full rosters all the time!
how on earth does longer battles = less XP and fun?
Last time I checked, you get xp every tick, and with every tick slightly less if attacking or more if defending, so the longer a battle, the more xp you get... (maybe your average xp is slightly lower but still better than cRPG...)

And what is the point of a 50v50 battle with 100v100 men? Its just one respawn...
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Segd on September 27, 2012, 07:30:16 pm
how on earth does longer battles = less XP and fun?
Last time I checked, you get xp every tick, and with every tick slightly less if attacking or more if defending, so the longer a battle, the more xp you get... (maybe your average xp is slightly lower but still better than cRPG...)

And what is the point of a 50v50 battle with 100v100 men? Its just one respawn...
XP mainly depends on equip of killed enemies +6k every 200sec. So less people you kill = less XP you gain per tick.

& right now there is not a lot of xp you gain from battles. I get just a little less xp on X1(about 1.5k with my generation against 1.8-2k from Strat battle), but I need to be in TS 10-30min before the battle, follow the orders & fight with this shitty gear(as a xbowman I saw cracked arbalest only once :( )
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 27, 2012, 08:32:03 pm
The #1 reason why alliances form is to fill rosters with reliable players.  As a rough estimate it takes at least a 200 man alliance to guarantee filling a 50 man roster and since there are only 500ish players on EU in Strat then of course there is only room for 2 alliances.  It is also the #1 reason why small clans struggle and independent players fail in the end

So here's what I propose

1) Slightly reduced roster sizes in general.
mercs = power(smaller_army_size,0.6)
capped at 50 mercs

Results
(click to show/hide)

As you can see a 100 vs 100 battle would get reduced down to just 16 mercs from its current 28, and village battles at 200 defending troops would only have 22 mercs.  The big Castle and Town sieges meanwhile will still have at least 45 (Castle) or 50 (Town) mercs.

This makes raiding much easier and also slightly prolongs the smaller battles so that they feel less like time wasted.

2)  Remove the reduced upkeep of troops in Fiefs.  This just encourages carebearing over attacking.  If troops cost the same everywhere then faction with too many troops would be forced to get rid of them and actually attack someone.

3) Anonymous mercing.  Only the roster manager can see who you really are.

Please make a suggestion thread so I can +1 you again! :D
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Harafat on September 27, 2012, 09:08:35 pm
Allright, i was gonna stay out of this, but ye....

1.) The only reason the eastern alliance-carbears-cuddlemonkeys is allegedly there (i mean, is it rly there?  :lol: ), is cuz the other block (that has existed for longer then me playing strat) is still there. We hate mega-alliances as much as every1, but you cant expect us to roll over and die again for the sake of sportmanship. This whole shit reminds me of Kant, where the UIF is the these, we're the anti-these and the synthese has to be decided yet as well as the new antithese. Dont bark to us; we tried it semi-independent last time and look how that turned out.

2.) It is funny as hell that you are trying to addapt the game itself because some group of players make it impossible to play the game it was intended to be. You dont need to tackle the game, you need to tackle the players breaking it. Its like when some1 is murdered, you take all kinds of precautions so that no one can be murdered again (this is good), but you leave the murderer unpunished (not so good). All these measures etc to break up UIF, one crazier then the other. You need to decide, or you'll have a game with UIF, or you need to take em out of the game (and thats a LOT of players). I'm sorry but this is the reality. I for one prefer a game with a good enemy, that way you have some1 to fight.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 27, 2012, 09:21:11 pm
So basically, UIF are a bunch of murderers and bad people who need to be severly punished, and the eastern alliance bloc doesn't exist because for some reason it doesn't?

:golfclap:(we need this smiley btw!)

Sir, you win +10 internets.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 27, 2012, 09:27:51 pm
To be fair, I dont really get why leaders get so pissed when few guys from their alliance join in a roster against them. If its not some players with insane skill and its not about the madder of who has more players showing up, it makes very little difference.

its always like PM:  "WTF? *lots of snorting and nerdtalk* waahwaah you were against my dudes on that roster, you all deserve to be wiped from strat forever!"
Really? Bitch I go were I can cause I want xp! This really annoys the hell out of me, cause I always have to take out a fucking list of who I can sign up for and for who I cant.
It used to be acceptable to sign up against anyone even when in a clan that is active on strat, without it immediately being a declaration of war, as long as you did not sign up in groups. Nowadays its a huge deal if there is one player of a faction fighting against a clan they are supposed to be neutral with.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Harafat on September 27, 2012, 09:28:01 pm
Yes, BJORD, you nailed it!

sry for previous non-troll-imune-comment
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 27, 2012, 09:47:30 pm
XP mainly depends on equip of killed enemies +6k every 200sec. So less people you kill = less XP you gain per tick.

& right now there is not a lot of xp you gain from battles. I get just a little less xp on X1(about 1.5k with my generation against 1.8-2k from Strat battle), but I need to be in TS 10-30min before the battle, follow the orders & fight with this shitty gear(as a xbowman I saw cracked arbalest only once :( )

No, not really. If you kill all the enemies(or roughly all of them) by the end of the timer, you gain the MOST xp.Longer battles actually give better xp. That's why the sieges against castles between 2 groups would give the best xp. The timer would oft go almost to the minute.

Most battles end with 10 minutes or more left on the clock which is close to 30k xp that's LOST cause people died so quickly.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 28, 2012, 02:27:22 am
(click to show/hide)

For several strats you have the UIF being an absolute powerhouse, and finally people gather their brains and form a new opposing powerhouse instead of being steamrolled on a whim.

I'm just surprised it took until Strat 4 and not 3 for this to happen. Strategus will always be politics as it involves "territory" and "factions" and if too many people start banding together then you start seeing counter-alliances. We will still see wars and battles though, as both alliances hardly like each other, so I am content. Strat battle page is busy as always and that is all that matters.

EDIT: I really don't see how this could have surprised anyone, as this is human nature being predictable and true. Strategus simulates factions and wars and it does that rather well, which is a far cry from a perpetual-war-torn-fantasy that a lot of "grunts" expect from Strategus who falsely expect wars to be plentiful and without politics (Which defies human nature). Strategus is a kingdoms simulator, nothing more.

 The entire thing needs to be overhauled to make fighting profitable if that is to change, otherwise you will see the realistic slow-build-ups that we have now and then a massive one-sided war, then a long period of small skirmishes then rinse-and-repeat. As of now fighting is 1.) Not profitable 2.) Does not make it easier to initiate new battles and 3.) Demands a disproportional amount of resources which makes constant quality battles unfeasible. Well... Welcome to a political game then.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Bjord on September 28, 2012, 09:40:15 am
Pretty much summarized all my thoughts about Strat into that one post, Tears.

It also nicely contrasts SgtTeeth's baseless whining and hard reality and logic.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 28, 2012, 03:14:16 pm
Of course its completely logical that a second mega alliance formed as a reaction to the UIF. I do not blame the second mega alliance for doing what they did. I blame the first mega alliance for making Strat politically boring for 3 rounds, but that is not going to change. Victory and big chunks of xp take precedence over everything for some people. Secondly I have to blame the game mechanics, because the UIF's style is admittedly the most effective, which for Russians mean you have to use it, even if it isn't fun or interesting.

Luckily chadz seems to hate the current situation as much as I do, so I am reassured that Strat's potential won't forever be squandered by the mega alliances.

Strategus is a kingdoms simulator, nothing more.
Yes, but then without the pride, nationality, ethnic conflicts, fear, hegemonic aspirations, internal and religious turmoil that defined Medieval politics and made sure that alliances were brittle. Alliances are OP in this game, which makes the politics in this game consist of a choice which big alliance to join.

Breaking an alliance is basically a no go, because every clan carries grudges to the next Strat despite claiming not to. Which would basically be fixed if people were able to relax and shake hands after each round. It's just a game, what happens in the game stays in the game I'd say.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Segd on September 28, 2012, 03:21:22 pm
I do not blame the second mega alliance for doing what they did. I blame the first mega alliance for making Strat politically boring for 3 rounds, but that is not going to change.
I don't remember which mega alliance was first: Templar or Fallen block?  :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Teeth on September 28, 2012, 03:28:48 pm
I don't remember which mega alliance was first: Templar or Fallen block?  :rolleyes:
All I know for a fact is that UIF was too strong for anyone in Strategus 3 and did not disband for Strat 4, therefore creating the need for a second mega alliance.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Cicero on September 28, 2012, 03:48:15 pm
oh please fuck off already he is still whining omfg
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 28, 2012, 06:08:56 pm
oh please fuck off already he is still whining omfg

I like that the majority of your posts lately is whining about whiners/QQers/etc. The irony is overwhelming.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: RamsesXXIIX on September 28, 2012, 06:20:02 pm
I don't remember which mega alliance was first: Templar or Fallen block?  :rolleyes:

It goes further back:

The Templars and Mercs were the big blocks in the first strategus, untill you guys appeared. You destroyed the Templars and formed the UIF with 22nd, Union(Was it union back then?), Grey Order, Legio and a few more I don't remember.

Honestly, we were never a mega-block. We were just one big clan who managed to hold our territory for 2 strats, with the help of HRE.

EDIT: Typo, courtesy of Lambhan ;)
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Olwen on September 28, 2012, 06:45:05 pm
It goes further back:

The Templars and Mercs were the big block in the first strategus, untill you guys appeared. You destroyed the Templars and formed the UIF with 22nd, Union(Was it union back then?), Grey Order, Legio and a few more I don't remember.

Honestly, we were never a mega-block. We were just one big clan who managed to hold our territory for 2 strats, with the help of HRE.

Mercs never were allied with templars under my command. In strat 1 we were on our own.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Casimir on September 28, 2012, 06:49:47 pm
We had a contract, not an alliance as such, we paid for your support.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: LordBerenger on September 28, 2012, 07:30:15 pm
We had a contract, not an alliance as such, we paid for your support.

UIF is what it is today because of Growl's quitting!!!!11 Lol
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: RamsesXXIIX on September 28, 2012, 07:31:23 pm
Mercs never were allied with templars under my command. In strat 1 we were on our own.

Typo, I wanted to say blocks

The Templars and Mercs were the big blocks in the first strategus,
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Matey on September 28, 2012, 09:08:14 pm
If that would be put into place, the battle commander should be able to Kick people (or even ban them for the duration of the battle from EU/NA3). Otherwise we'll have a huge army of trolls and idiots fooling around due to anonymity. Polls won't be effective enough.

"TROOP 43 GET IN FORMATION!"
"TROOP 43 WHAT ARE YOU DOING!?"
"TROOP 43 DIES"

 :mad:

There's other ramifications as well, suddenly people will stop talking on TS, not relaying vital battle information or otherwise because they won't want to be recognized, given they want to play as many battles as possible. This would encourage sneaking around, lying, and generally bad behaviour. People would start fixing information on other players, for example which country is someone from, so they can easier spot them playing for the enemy (by checking out his TS) - or simply checking out IP(s). It wouldn't work unless there's a better commanding system present, one that would negate having to use Voice programs such as TS etc. Writing doesn't cut it at all in the bigger battles.

My point is, that this change alone would not help solve the actual issues behind, just mask it more.
We'll have players less talking and "socializing" and in general participating less, and other players/clans will fanatically try to make sure they have the best rosters (which would not be too hard).
It wouldn't solve any of the actual issues of allowing people to sign-up freely.

I personally do prefer anonymity in battle, e.g. only the battle commander knows who is who, only the host of the battle (or people with high enough rank) can see who have signed up etc. It would help, but as stated above it isn't a solution, it is simply 'moving the problem' slightly, and it carries a lot of other issues with it.

I didn't read all the posts after this, so if someone already suggested this, then just consider this a +1 for them... ANYWAYS
A solution to the issues you mentioned would be... rather than EVERYONE signing anonymously, you could just ALLOW people to apply anonymously with the expectation that they would not be on voice chat and would have a generic name and be hard to command. This means that you would have to take a chance on them... they would still have to follow rules and behave properly and not grief.. but you wouldnt have proper coordination with them and wouldnt know what to expect from them. This means that factions that already have no problems filling out rosters would choose not to hire any anonymous applicants, whereas groups that cannot fill rosters would be able to at least get some bodies on the battlefield.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Zaharist on October 05, 2012, 08:55:22 pm
I don't remember which mega alliance was first: Templar or Fallen block?  :rolleyes:

sry for my English

first major alliances who were aggressive towards factions who formed UIF later:
1). ninja+coco+shogunate, supported by mercs a bit (contract)
2). Templar block and irc vs 22nd. not an alliance, but they both wiped 22nd out of desert
afterwards UIF appeared.
3). Templar block dissapeared
4). Pub crawl failed
5). Fallen and vassals couldn't do anything.

uif wasn't first super alliance, it's just the best. and it started with 2 native clans.

blame urself not uif for making this game lame and not as interesting as it could be.

thank u for attention
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Butan on October 05, 2012, 09:01:33 pm
The history of strategus is made by men and men alone; you cant control them all.
Title: Re: Well, that was fun
Post by: Ohayashi on October 05, 2012, 09:20:41 pm
But... Oceania has always been at war with Eurasia.