cRPG

Strategus => Strategus General Discussion => Topic started by: Smoothrich on September 25, 2012, 04:26:22 am

Title: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Smoothrich on September 25, 2012, 04:26:22 am
People complain about UIF mega alliances, but funny I remember strat 2.0 began with a mega alliance instantly forming with Shogunate, Searaiders, Pecores, ATS (The Northern Empire), Templars and maybe some others to invade LLJK in the southern desert and wipe us out of the game, because "they aren't like us.. they don't take the game seriously.. they play for FUN!!"  Also fear mongering about our plated chargers blotting out the sun, etc.

Top secret undercover goon espionage teamspeak recording of the conspiracy here:  http://www.mediafire.com/?bbk3h4ungh65hki

After we heroically defended ourselves against an unjust and unfair crusade, we found ourselves surrounded by enemies, with pockets of french resistance by the Pecores inside our borders.  Any time we attempted to make a move, our accounts were hacked, our armies deposited into neutral castles, our rosters deleted seconds before a battle began, endlessly griefed by suspiciously adept hackers that were never brought to justice.

And what did you know, eventually we found some friends out there.  Clans who also had shit experiences dealing with people like Fallen, Templars, Shogunate, The Northern Empire, and many other factions that were all about lying and manipulating players or cheating and exploiting game mechanics to win.  They had common enemies with us, and only together did we come close to having a chance to win a war.

Those guys were Risen, Bashibazouks, Union, and Legione Italica.  Every meeting with them was hilarious, because I felt like I was part of a criminal conspiracy with Turks, Italians, and Russians who often seemed to not trust each other but had to work together to win a war.  We had many, many battles, helping each other out on different ping, sharing troops or gold, and fucking clans up who everyone got sick of.  They were all "UIF" at that point but it was obvious they never received any actual help from DRZ or Grey Order except mercs and a safe border.

The thing is I've dealt with tons of clans in all the versions of Strat as a diplomat, leader, whatever.  And those UIF guys were some of the most reliable, honest, and fun people to play the game with.  Many other major clans had leaders or strategies that were all about lying, backstabbing, scheming, exploiting, shitposting, generally being really awful to play with and very easy to hate.

So to be honest, if you want to have a reason to blame the UIF for ruining strat, you can start with looking at how awful some of the other clans have been and how easy it was to find common ground in wanting to kill them in Internet Swords and Horses.

Most importantly, go ahead and attack one of those clans in the UIF.  I guarantee they will welcome and enjoy the battle, and will fight fair until they win or lose with little to no help from other UIF clans except in mercs unless they need a place to regroup and rebuild, or multiple clans are involved.  That's how its always been before, and how all alliances should be.  No need to be paralysed in fear and inaction, or to only attack smaller clans in 5 to 1 stomps, or to proxy war by funnelling endless supplies to another clan so they faceroll themsleves to a win.  NA or EU, alliance or independent, vassal or master, play the game, fight some battles, and have fun, you pussies.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: PhantomZero on September 25, 2012, 07:17:41 am
I remember those battles well, and they were a lot of fun for all involved. Even the time we retook a village that the Pecores didn't bother defending so it was just a big naked peasant slaughter, and we still somehow managed to have a casualty because some goon dropped his lance.

I honestly couldn't even understand the thick accent of the EU faction leaders helping us half the time, but it sure was fun playing with them in the EU battles.

Strategus is fun because the battles matter, it isn't like a cRPG battle or siege. But if there aren't any battles Strategus isn't very fun. I hope the bank to win heirlooms doesn't cause people to stop having battles.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 08:47:27 am
In before this thread is consumed in flames
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Thovex on September 25, 2012, 09:51:53 am
In before this thread is consumed in flames

Doesn't matter Vibe, good to see there is still people who can think.

I loved the time beating up everyone with LLJK as Risen.  :D

Maybe chadz should give this a read instead of +ing Teeth about his silly whine about how friendships, teamwork, trust and coalitions can win the game.

Combine clans with no real friendship, no real trust, no real teamwork (or skill?  :P) and you get one of these falling-apart in week 1 coalitions.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: KingBread on September 25, 2012, 10:08:44 am
Only reasonable nerf for alliance is to nerf trust and frienship. So i think there should be a team speak virus which will change what you are saying during diplomatic chats
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Bjord on September 25, 2012, 10:50:57 am
What about the other side, Thovex? You can't be friendly with them? "No grudges carried over" etc, that's what okiN said. I think that Strategus can be a friendly thing even with factions that are at war, I don't think this extreme us-against-them mentality is good either.

Yet it's in the human nature, so what can one do?

Everyone has their own perspective about previous rounds, even mine was coloured with some resentment of LLJK in Strat 1 when I was in Shogunate. So what makes every subsequent round any different? It doesn't, I think grudges are carried over forever until someone attemtps to communicate the other party that they're willing to be friendly. And this has not happened ever since The Union joined UIF after almost getting wiped by DRZ, but that was to save their own asses.

As long as we have this distrust contra trust for two large blocs, it will carry on forever.

Maybe it would be better for everyone if they mixed the two blocs with each other just to see what it's like fighting with people you don't "trust". :lol:
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Nessaj on September 25, 2012, 11:02:08 am
I agree, except for the heroic part (nothing heroic about continuously attacking at 4/5/6am :P).



Its an evil circle. There's always been mega-blocs. When one dies another emerges. What we need is gameplay features that discourages huge alliances and more localized wars. Though that is just half of the problem.

The other half is rosters for battles, people don't want good players signing against them etc, so they forge alliances to trade player support.

What could be changed in order to allow for people to more freely sign for battles without "offending" each other?
E.g. why would you help/trade/whatever with a clan where their players fight against you in battles. Especially now that Strategus has more meaning to it than just creating battles for XP, given the introduction of the heirloom bank.
Most clans consider anyone who sign against them in battle to be enemies (or at least hostile).

The easiest solution to it all would be adding more players to the mod, given there'd be more available for sign-ups..

Otherwise, now is the time to come up with some grand ideas that doesn't involve naively trusting in the good of mankind :wink:


Perhaps an idea would be to introduce overall factions clans could sign-up under;
E.g. North/West/South/East & 'Bandit' (could give the factions whatever names, like Single Player).
Introduce XP/gold bonuses for the factions with less players/resources to balance out everything.
You cannot attack anyone who's in your overall faction, and perhaps trading outside ones faction should be disabled too but that'd be up for a discussion, if it is only goods then maybe, but definitely no equipment or troops/gold.

The clan with most fiefs in the North section would automatically become the ruling clan (doesn't give additional gameplay features) of the Norths lands/area -- however those areas would be carved out on the map.
(Introduce additional pink titles, more than simple 'Lords' e.g. Warlord of X Area, or Duke if its "Swadia"-area).
Then at least people would want their clan to either hold specific parts of the lands, or perhaps try and become the ruling factor of the specific faction area, it should keep at least two clans fighting each other in every faction section of the map.

The biggest problem would be figuring out how many factions we need in order to make sure there's plenty of battles with a fair amount of people signed for each side - IMO 3 factions plus bandit faction = 4 total - and then making sure that people divide themselves as fairly as possible into those factions, where-as most probably would chose based on style if the factions are to resemble something specific, e.g. Rhodoks/Swadia and so on.

You cannot leave your faction after having chosen a side, it would completely reset your Strategus character and lock it for a 7 (?) day period.

Include all of the above plus the corruption feature that has been talked about and it'd perfect IMHO.



Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 11:27:03 am
EU strat once a big alliance wins

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Thovex on September 25, 2012, 11:48:21 am
What about the other side, Thovex? You can't be friendly with them? "No grudges carried over" etc, that's what okiN said. I think that Strategus can be a friendly thing even with factions that are at war, I don't think this extreme us-against-them mentality is good either.

Yet it's in the human nature, so what can one do?

Everyone has their own perspective about previous rounds, even mine was coloured with some resentment of LLJK in Strat 1 when I was in Shogunate. So what makes every subsequent round any different? It doesn't, I think grudges are carried over forever until someone attemtps to communicate the other party that they're willing to be friendly. And this has not happened ever since The Union joined UIF after almost getting wiped by DRZ, but that was to save their own asses.

As long as we have this distrust contra trust for two large blocs, it will carry on forever.

Maybe it would be better for everyone if they mixed the two blocs with each other just to see what it's like fighting with people you don't "trust". :lol:

Can be friendly, but the opposite side isn't so why?  :?

I only read the first sentance because I'm too lazy fyi.  :)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 25, 2012, 03:15:41 pm
Inb4 UIF immigrate to NA.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Belatu on September 25, 2012, 03:18:38 pm
Only Godzilla can get rid of this
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Ninja_Khorin on September 25, 2012, 03:31:45 pm
Main problem is that regardless of what people say about not continuing any grudges or alliances to the new round of strat. Essentially DRZ 'n the Gang are once again allied as is the other side.

Would be much more interesting to see atleast the members(as in clans) of the mega alliances switched around a bit. Why not try new allies and areas to settle to spice it up a bit?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: HarunYahya on September 25, 2012, 03:49:00 pm
That was the first and only time i enjoyed cooperating with NA folks.
Those were good days.
Still liking LLJK and putting them outside of my "NA ? meh.." opinion.
That invasion was pretty cool and fun  :twisted:

I felt like I was part of a criminal conspiracy with Turks, Italians, and Russians who often seemed to not trust each other but had to work together to win a war.

LOL
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 25, 2012, 04:03:33 pm
Fallen "-" team is engaging smooth

Its not possible to talk about truth which is two sided as always anyway this thread will be spammed to death ; you know why ?

UIF dont have forum warriors =)

And that shows how we play the game =)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 25, 2012, 04:45:32 pm
Fallen "-" team is engaging smooth

Its not possible to talk about truth which is two sided as always anyway this thread will be spammed to death ; you know why ?

UIF dont have forum warriors =)


Only warriors of Islam.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: RamsesXXIIX on September 25, 2012, 06:01:24 pm
UIF dont have forum warriors =)

Oh you do try Cicero. You're just not very good at it.

I expected to find a solution or similar, since you wrote "What to do?". Meh, didn't find any of that. Any ideas?

btw, the only reason I'm -1ing the op is because:

Clans who also had shit experiences dealing with people like Fallen, Templars, Shogunate, The Northern Empire, and many other factions that were all about lying and manipulating players or cheating and exploiting game mechanics to win.  They had common enemies with us, and only together did we come close to having a chance to win a war.

This is a lie.

(click to show/hide)


Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 25, 2012, 06:07:24 pm
Oh you do try Cicero. You're just not very good at it.

I expected to find a solution or similar, since you wrote "What to do?". Meh, didn't find any of that. Any ideas?

btw, the only reason I'm -1ing the op is because:

This is a lie.

(click to show/hide)


Is that why you got carpet bombed by chadz? Derp
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 06:33:07 pm

Is that why you got carpet bombed by chadz? Derp

Did we get bombed in strat 2.0?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 25, 2012, 06:45:59 pm
Did we get bombed in strat 2.0?
Alaaddin fucked you up =)

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mayzer on September 25, 2012, 06:52:44 pm
The Green Machine.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rikthor on September 25, 2012, 06:52:51 pm
Did we get bombed in strat 2.0?

No you got bombed in 3.0 which has nothing to do with Smoothrich's assertion Fallen has lied and tried manipulating clans. Try again or should we bring up how you Fallen lied about your Northern Empire payoff to not merc for LLJK?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 06:58:53 pm

Is that why you got carpet bombed by chadz? Derp
Ahahaha, carbet bombed, good one!

Now Smooth, what you describe in the OP, sounds like some good Strategus gameplay, except the lying, crying and cheating parts. There was dynamic diplomacy going on. Secret conspiracies, reactions and what not. That is what Strategus should be like. Machiavellian power politics. That is not at all what is going on now. Last Strat was stale as fuck, this Strat is stale as fuck. Cause everyone claims they are going to start with a clean slate, but a week later they are in the same fucking alliance occupying the same fucking territory.

I can already predict the rest of this Strat diplomacy wise. The one alliance is going to fight the other alliance. That is it. Pure staleness. Everybody is such good friends with their alliance bromies and the other side are all cheating bastards. Well I've been in a lot of teamspeaks and everyone is a nice guy in the end, save the one or two actual psycho's. Stop carrying grudges about a game, chill out and ally with someone else for a change.

Or even better. How about you clans man up and fight on your own for a change? I am in a faction with 17 members and we are attacking anyone in our way. We're having a blast and when we lose we will smile and congratulate the opponents. A clan that breaks free from their carebear alliance and then gets beat, deserves a whole load more respect than those pussies holding hands so they can't lose.

One of you clans must have some balls. Do it. You know its possible to backstab eachother in Strategus without being mad at eachother for the next three Strats?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 25, 2012, 07:01:01 pm
No you got bombed in 3.0 which has nothing to do with Smoothrich's assertion Fallen has lied and tried manipulating clans. Try again or should we bring up how you lied about your Northern Empire payoff to not merc for LLJK?

Well it was not me who brought up the bombing, as for the rest I'll  just stay out of this because I'm rather clueless about Strat 2.0 8-)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rikthor on September 25, 2012, 07:08:32 pm
Well it was not me who brought up the bombing, as for the rest I'll  just stay out of this because I'm rather clueless about Strat 2.0 8-)

Fair enough, I should have said Fallen instead of you specifically 8-)

e:
Now Smooth, what you describe in the OP, sounds like some good Strategus gameplay, except the lying, crying and cheating parts. There was dynamic diplomacy going on. Secret conspiracies, reactions and what not. That is what Strategus should be like. Machiavellian power politics. That is not at all what is going on now. Last Strat was stale as fuck, this Strat is stale as fuck. Cause everyone claims they are going to start with a clean slate, but a week later they are in the same fucking alliance occupying the same fucking territory.

SgtTeeth what Smoothrich was describing is pretty much what you are railing against, 9-10 clans or whatever the final tally was joining up to make a mega-alliance to wipe us out. Thanks to game design and Superior Goon Tactics™ we survived, but I would think you agree 10 clans to make an alliance is the exact problem?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: RamsesXXIIX on September 25, 2012, 07:10:04 pm
No you got bombed in 3.0 which has nothing to do with Smoothrich's assertion Fallen has lied and tried manipulating clans. Try again or should we bring up how you Fallen lied about your Northern Empire payoff to not merc for LLJK?

I'm very interested in this particular story, because I think you got it wrong. What is your point of view?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rikthor on September 25, 2012, 07:20:09 pm
I'm very interested in this particular story, because I think you got it wrong. What is your point of view?

So you didn't get paid by Ecko who was the leader of the Northern Empire to stop mercing for us as the Fallen Archer brigade? That's my point of view that was confirmed. I would like to hear your story of how that's not what happened.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Harafat on September 25, 2012, 07:24:46 pm
Fallen "-" team is engaging smooth

Its not possible to talk about truth which is two sided as always anyway this thread will be spammed to death ; you know why ?

UIF dont have forum warriors =)

And that shows how we play the game =)

I suggest we ALL stop playing strat alltogether. In that way THIS guy will actually shut up.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 07:31:13 pm
Fair enough, I should have said Fallen instead of you specifically 8-)

e:
SgtTeeth what Smoothrich was describing is pretty much what you are railing against, 9-10 clans or whatever the final tally was joining up to make a mega-alliance to wipe us out. Thanks to game design and Superior Goon Tactics™ we survived, but I would think you agree 10 clans to make an alliance is the exact problem?
Yes, ofcourse it's on a way too big scale. But atleast these alliances was formed with a clear goal, wiping out LLJK. Then a counter alliance was formed by LLJK, to ensure survival and beat the aggressors. Atleast those were purposeful alliances, instead of the 'let's all hold hands so no one can ever attack us unless they make an enormous alliance themselves' approach. If those alliances would've been disbanded for the next Strat, if everyone would've actually started with a clean slate and if people wouldn't hold grudges over a game, the next round of Strat wouldn't have been doomed.

It is too easy to just join with all the other factions to have an easier time, Smoothrich is right in that the forming of the first enormous alliance is where it started to go wrong. What actually killed Strategus though, is not disbanding the counter alliance for the next Strat.

That's how its always been before, and how all alliances should be.  No need to be paralysed in fear and inaction, or to only attack smaller clans in 5 to 1 stomps, or to proxy war by funnelling endless supplies to another clan so they faceroll themsleves to a win.  NA or EU, alliance or independent, vassal or master, play the game, fight some battles, and have fun, you pussies.
Sadly that is exactly what UIF did in Strat 3 and they would do it again in Strat 4, werent it that all the remaining clans did the sensible, but cowardly thing to make their own mega alliance. UIF are quite the pussies. All the other big clans pussied out of fighting the mega alliance on their own. The only non pussies now are the UDNWSFLC and some other very small groups of players. YEAH!

(which ofcourse will amount to the quick destruction of the UDNWSFLC, but atleast we have our dignity)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on September 25, 2012, 07:40:21 pm
Well in NA there have been a lot of diplomatic talks between a lot of different factions.  As well as lots of different options for new alliances, new friends, new trading partners, new defense pacts, and new enemies.  As well as unfriendly factions working together due to common interests. 

*EDIT* Smaller factions have to weigh the pro's and con's of being independent with no diplomatic agreements with a large faction that is a neighbor. 

Currently there are quite a few factions who control 5 or less fiefs.  NH, Fallen, Remnant, FIDLGB (or w/e they're called this strat), Papal guard, Astralis, and I'm sure others as well.  It just makes sense for these people to make friends (not necessarily allies) with the larger neighbors.  At minimum they should be talking to them.  We can all see the potential risks of not being in diplomatic talks with your neighbors. 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on September 25, 2012, 08:03:53 pm
Being "The Pale Horsemen" now (oooooh 2spooky4u), we've got 2 fief and a castle and are going to be playing bandits this time. Basically, if folks come near us with shit we want, we're probably going to kill them and take their nice things. We're quite small so we run the risk of pissing someone off and inviting death and destruction to our home. But that's just fine, really. I dig being the under-dog and fighting for FREEDOM and whatnot against much larger forces. Being rick-rolled off the map last strategus by hospitaller was a good time for me. Short time, but it was fun.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: IR_Kuoin on September 25, 2012, 08:04:58 pm
Send in the nukes!
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Casimir on September 25, 2012, 08:16:38 pm
Stupid yanks forgetting  that the UIF have been allied since the first strategus and that's where their name comes from.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: BASNAK on September 25, 2012, 08:25:45 pm
I'm a newmy old friend and barely have any idea what you oldmy old friends are talking about.
Everyone's calling eachother for hackers, abusers, glitchers etc. And yet, since I started playing strat I haven't seen anyone hack, glitch etc in strat.

But yeah it's really boring with these "alliances of greaterest justice and no hax". There should be more factions than only two (great alliances) and some bandit scum.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 08:45:36 pm
Stupid yanks forgetting  that the UIF have been allied since the first strategus and that's where their name comes from.
Yeah, listened to that sound file and UIF was already mentioned before this Shogunate, SoA, Templar alliance was formed. It also seems like LLJK was a mega alliance in itself, with them having 150 players, rendering them a superpower that could simply only be countered by allying with others.

They had common enemies with us, and only together did we come close to having a chance to win a war.
150 LLJK, versus Shogunate, SeaRaiders, Templars, VRN, The Northern Empire and SoA as far as this audio track tells me. Shogunate was never a big clan, Templars wasn't back then. The other clans weren't all that big either, no clue about the Northern Empire though. Sounds like 150 LLJK + UIF had a pretty fucking huge chance of winning the war. Ah well, I wasn't there, don't remember exactly how big each faction was. But it's rather clear to me that that alliance that you accuse of spawning the UIF we have now, was rather formed as a reaction to the enormous amount of members that LLJK had. Besides UIF already existed before the anti-LLJK alliance.

So LLJK is to blame?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rikthor on September 25, 2012, 08:52:44 pm
Yeah, listened to that sound file and UIF was already mentioned before this Shogunate, SoA, Templar alliance was formed. It also seems like LLJK was a mega alliance in itself, with them having 150 players, rendering them a superpower that could simply only be countered by allying with others.
150 LLJK, versus Shogunate, SeaRaiders, Templars, VRN, The Northern Empire and SoA as far as this audio track tells me. Shogunate was never a big clan, Templars wasn't back then. The other clans weren't all that big either, no clue about the Northern Empire though. Sounds like 150 LLJK + UIF had a pretty fucking huge chance of winning the war. Ah well, I wasn't there, don't remember exactly how big each faction was. But it's rather clear to me that that alliance that you accuse of spawning the UIF we have now, was rather formed as a reaction to the enormous amount of members that LLJK had. Besides UIF already existed before the anti-LLJK alliance.

So LLJK is to blame?

Pro-tip 1: I was there and we never had 150 members even with inactives, we didn't come close to that number.
Pro-tip 2: Our alliance with Bashis, Risen, Legio didn't come until the halfway point after the Shogunate alliance sent 5 or so 1k armies to try to wipe us out in one glorious doomsday scenario. All three of those decided they couldn't trust Shogunate for various reasons that they would need to expand upon.
Pro-tip 3: As you said you weren't there and probably weren't until Shogunate became Byzantium I would assume so quite a bit history was missed out on your part.
Pro-tip 4: We are always to blame and are always terrible, this has never changed.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 09:33:54 pm
Alright, I get that the information about your player numbers provided by your then enemies might not be entirely correct, seeing as we didn't have a neat player count like we do now. Regardless, it did not seem like the 5 clans that were talked about in the audio file were confident about beating you with anything less than the full support of those 5 clans, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have had the slightest chance on their own. Not sure what made LLJK so fearsome then, it clearly wasn't player skill they were worried about, but an alliance seemed neccesary for survival of any of those clans, simply because LLJK was in a seemingly different league, power-wise.

Not supporting any of the cheating, lying and backstabbing, if that took place. But seems like that first alliance was formed because of a threat as much as the LLJK-UIF alliance. I just don't really see why them forming their alliance was so much worse than you forming yours.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 25, 2012, 09:55:59 pm
Yeah, listened to that sound file and UIF was already mentioned before this Shogunate, SoA, Templar alliance was formed.
for fuck sake who the fuck you are to talk about strategus
simple question who are you ?
How do you know every fuckin thing ?

U dont even know which factions were in shogunate alliance

Kapikulu ( which gave near 5k troops ) at least 40
Pillagers ( which totally did better job than byzantium ) same with byzantium
Seariders at least 30
Den Bitre 20
SoA
Templar 40
Guards  40

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: PhantomZero on September 25, 2012, 10:01:30 pm
Alright, I get that the information about your player numbers provided by your then enemies might not be entirely correct, seeing as we didn't have a neat player count like we do now. Regardless, it did not seem like the 5 clans that were talked about in the audio file were confident about beating you with anything less than the full support of those 5 clans, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have had the slightest chance on their own. Not sure what made LLJK so fearsome then, it clearly wasn't player skill they were worried about, but an alliance seemed neccesary for survival of any of those clans, simply because LLJK was in a seemingly different league, power-wise.

Not supporting any of the cheating, lying and backstabbing, if that took place. But seems like that first alliance was formed because of a threat as much as the LLJK-UIF alliance. I just don't really see why them forming their alliance was so much worse than you forming yours.

Simply put we beat up Acre in a fight and took their fief, and claimed dominion over Shariz and that section of the desert. The shogunate, remembering us from Strategus 1, did not want to have us as neighbors and called in the support of several smaller clans to become puppet states in this area, to squabble amongst themselves after we had been evicted.

It was honestly pretty close, despite 3 of the 5 clans not participating any more than showing up for the fights. With 5 vs 1 it would have been much more difficult. The northern empire didn't do much but that was mainly due to large issues on the homefront.

SoA was our insider, through the leader of the SoA I learned about the plot. They did not help the Shogunate.

The Northern Empire(ATS, Hospitaller, Occitan) brought a 1000 man stack down to fight, I believe they fought at least two battles but they did not send reinforcements and left or were defeated.

The Pecores probably contributed the most, and if they would have waited to start the war with a more solid industrial footing they would have been in a much better position.

The shogunate contributed, but from such a far distance it was slow and they did not invest much in the venture.

The VRN, SeaRaiders, Acre, and other small clans were knocked out as soon as their army even fought a battle as they had no way to replenish their numbers or equipment. The Sea Raiders never even bothered to fight, but constantly had a 1,000 man army ready to attack our southern villages.

LLJK was able to secure victory via many defensive advantages and being able to outlast all other competitors. The villages around Shariz are all very close together, and you could transfer troops/gold/equipment between them without even leaving the fief. Resulting in a daisy chain to put what was needed where it was needed, to more efficiently fight 3 armies at once. Fighting on the home field also gave us a ping advantage, though in those situations the Northern Empire did contribute a lot of mercs.

LLJK also had a large pool of mercs, paying Chaos, FCC, and others to fight for us. In a situation where our battle roster was hacked and we had only LLJK players (and one merc), we lost. Despite having a ticket, advantage and almost the same number of players. With one single goon receiving a score of 0 kills and 50 deaths.

In situations where LLJK was set on the offensive, we mostly lost. It took us months of sieging the Pecores and forcing them to fight at 6am local time 4 nights in a row (the third night was cancelled and delayed a day due to chadz) before we were able to win. And they still managed to cause problems for us after losing their fief, like some terrible french insurgency.

We were also able to snag castles and Shariz in silly fights of 20 men versus 60 due to outright bribery.

We basically won by default since everyone else gave up and Shogunate home territory had been invaded.

Strat 2 was probably the most fun, and I hope Strat 4 has a repeat of those events.

Though the battle i remember most fondly was probably in strat 3, when the HATE clan attacked a 300 strong neutral village with 900 troops and lost.

I can't say much for numbers, but we definitely did not have that many active ones, we had roughly 10 people per fief grinding troops/gold and with 5 fiefs that would put us at around 50. And we had to squeeze those 50 and hound on them daily to turn in their gold and troops to the village so the local lord could transfer them to the three main armies commanded by myself, Gaga, and Smoothrich.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 25, 2012, 10:01:34 pm
for fuck sake who the fuck you are to talk about strategus
simple question who are you ?
How do you know every fuckin thing ?

U dont even know which factions were in shogunate alliance

Kapikulu ( which gave near 5k troops ) at least 40
Pillagers ( which totally did better job than byzantium ) same with byzantium
Seariders at least 30
Den Bitre 20
SoA
Templar 40
Guards  40

Pretty long time ago. Over a year. But weren't Acre in there as well? And Pecores i think. So even more.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Garem on September 25, 2012, 10:03:06 pm
So you didn't get paid by Ecko who was the leader of the Northern Empire to stop mercing for us as the Fallen Archer brigade? That's my point of view that was confirmed. I would like to hear your story of how that's not what happened.

lol, no.

Ecko fucking HATED us. He resisted us with every fiber of his being, which only made our attacks on NE all the sweeter.

If I remember right, we had a merc contract that just expired. I enjoyed the hell out of those battles, and a few of us kept merc'ing for fun. We just didn't have a dog in the fight anymore.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Nessaj on September 25, 2012, 10:06:52 pm
for fuck sake who the fuck you are to talk about strategus
simple question who are you ?
How do you know every fuckin thing ?

U dont even know which factions were in shogunate alliance

Kapikulu ( which gave near 5k troops ) at least 40
Pillagers ( which totally did better job than byzantium ) same with byzantium
Seariders at least 30
Den Bitre 20
SoA
Templar 40
Guards  40

HA HA, Cicero, seriously, you mean PEOPLE? DeBitre 20, SeaRaiders 30, then you're out of your mind! :D

SeaRaiders had about 2 people participating in average in terms of roster sign-ups and no one doing anything in terms of Strategus map activity. Hardly more than a handful in total doing anything in the beginning as well (before the war broke out).

De Bitre had 1 guy active, Ronald Meliossandro, no one else, plus they've never been anywhere near 20 members in their lifetime.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Casimir on September 25, 2012, 10:28:42 pm
Simply put we beat up Acre in a fight and took their fief, and claimed dominion over Shariz and that section of the desert. The shogunate, remembering us from Strategus 1, did not want to have us as neighbors and called in the support of several smaller clans to become puppet states in this area, to squabble amongst themselves after we had been evicted.

It was honestly pretty close, despite 3 of the 5 clans not participating any more than showing up for the fights. With 5 vs 1 it would have been much more difficult. The northern empire didn't do much but that was mainly due to large issues on the homefront.

SoA was our insider, through the leader of the SoA I learned about the plot. They did not help the Shogunate.

The Northern Empire(ATS, Hospitaller, Occitan) brought a 1000 man stack down to fight, I believe they fought at least two battles but they did not send reinforcements and left or were defeated.

The Pecores probably contributed the most, and if they would have waited to start the war with a more solid industrial footing they would have been in a much better position.

The shogunate contributed, but from such a far distance it was slow and they did not invest much in the venture.

The VRN, SeaRaiders, Acre, and other small clans were knocked out as soon as their army even fought a battle as they had no way to replenish their numbers or equipment. The Sea Raiders never even bothered to fight, but constantly had a 1,000 man army ready to attack our southern villages.

LLJK was able to secure victory via many defensive advantages and being able to outlast all other competitors. The villages around Shariz are all very close together, and you could transfer troops/gold/equipment between them without even leaving the fief. Resulting in a daisy chain to put what was needed where it was needed, to more efficiently fight 3 armies at once. Fighting on the home field also gave us a ping advantage, though in those situations the Northern Empire did contribute a lot of mercs.

LLJK also had a large pool of mercs, paying Chaos, FCC, and others to fight for us. In a situation where our battle roster was hacked and we had only LLJK players (and one merc), we lost. Despite having a ticket, advantage and almost the same number of players. With one single goon receiving a score of 0 kills and 50 deaths.

In situations where LLJK was set on the offensive, we mostly lost. It took us months of sieging the Pecores and forcing them to fight at 6am local time 4 nights in a row (the third night was cancelled and delayed a day due to chadz) before we were able to win. And they still managed to cause problems for us after losing their fief, like some terrible french insurgency.

We were also able to snag castles and Shariz in silly fights of 20 men versus 60 due to outright bribery.

We basically won by default since everyone else gave up and Shogunate home territory had been invaded.

Strat 2 was probably the most fun, and I hope Strat 4 has a repeat of those events.

Though the battle i remember most fondly was probably in strat 3, when the HATE clan attacked a 300 strong neutral village with 900 troops and lost.

I can't say much for numbers, but we definitely did not have that many active ones, we had roughly 10 people per fief grinding troops/gold and with 5 fiefs that would put us at around 50. And we had to squeeze those 50 and hound on them daily to turn in their gold and troops to the village so the local lord could transfer them to the three main armies commanded by myself, Gaga, and Smoothrich.

ahh the days where attackers had to play defensively at the start of battles or would be spawn raped :L
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Teeth on September 25, 2012, 10:34:31 pm
(click to show/hide)
What a delightful, honest and objective recollection of events. Although I am not entirely sure what the relevancy is, I thought it was a very good read. So you basically won the defensive war on your own and the alliance with UIF was formed when you went on the offensive, because you and the UIF thought the attacking clans were not to be trusted?

(click to show/hide)
What does that have to do with anything I said? Would you do everyone a favour Cicero and get your ass out of this thread? It seems like everyone has moved on, buried their grudges over something that happened so long ago, in a fucking game, case and point PhantomZero, until you enter one of these strat threads and start spewing your full retard crap.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on September 25, 2012, 10:50:59 pm
For the record, someone suggested last strat that we bring the native factions to strategus...which I don't think is a terrible idea, then there'd only be 6 factions, and people could fight internally over control of the faction.  You'd see more de-centralized power (common to the middle ages) than you do now with massive faction building, which you didn't see til the end of the medieval period.

Also the current smaller factions would then be part of a larger picture (if they wanted to be).

And you'd have to set diplomatic stances towards the other factions, neutral, defense pact, allies, etc.  And only mercs or allies could sign up for you.  There was actually a shit ton of great suggestions for strat about a year ago (starting in the fall of 2011, and going to the end of the year). 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 25, 2012, 11:55:28 pm
HA HA, Cicero, seriously, you mean PEOPLE? DeBitre 20, SeaRaiders 30, then you're out of your mind! :D

SeaRaiders had about 2 people participating in average in terms of roster sign-ups and no one doing anything in terms of Strategus map activity. Hardly more than a handful in total doing anything in the beginning as well (before the war broke out).

De Bitre had 1 guy active, Ronald Meliossandro, no one else, plus they've never been anywhere near 20 members in their lifetime.
i am pretty sure i saw a guy from De Bitre in Ruldi with 1000 troops 1 day later was in Ruldi Garnison =)
We had inactives also i just pointed out the numbers =)

What does that have to do with anything I said? Would you do everyone a favour Cicero and get your ass out of this thread? It seems like everyone has moved on, buried their grudges over something that happened so long ago, in a fucking game, case and point PhantomZero, until you enter one of these strat threads and start spewing your full retard crap.
Well you can do us a favour also get your fuckin ass out of strategus and go find a dark room and cry there ? Why the fuck we need to see your bullshit because you and your clan cant do a fuckin organise on strategus ?
Everyone got a grudge or don't like someone its so fuckin simple we are human. You put some things and i told you that u know nothing about those ofcourse you will go on full retard and tell me gtfo when u don't even have idea what "pillager" faction did.

Poiting out how people is idiotic totally make them mad.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 26, 2012, 12:25:26 am
Why the fuck we need to see your bullshit because you and your clan cant do a fuckin organise on strategus suck grey and drz dick all day ?
Fixed.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 26, 2012, 12:26:53 am
Fixed.
who is this guy ?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Zlisch_The_Butcher on September 26, 2012, 12:43:43 am
Zlisch the GoatsPriest who has yet to try eating drz/grey dick? How does it taste whoever the guy I'm talking to is 'cause I'm gonna be cool and act like I have no idea aswell?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spanish on September 26, 2012, 03:00:56 am
Strat reminds me of monopoly, no ones happy playing it and if you are it's probably because you just lost and are free to leave
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Boss_Awesome on September 26, 2012, 09:43:38 pm
lol, no.

Ecko fucking HATED us. He resisted us with every fiber of his being, which only made our attacks on NE all the sweeter.

If I remember right, we had a merc contract that just expired. I enjoyed the hell out of those battles, and a few of us kept merc'ing for fun. We just didn't have a dog in the fight anymore.

That is my recollection as well.  Back then, North American Fallen members spent most of their c-RPG time being accused of homosexuality by ATS members on ATS administrated servers and we had no love for them.   I merced for LLJK until I went inactive.   I just want to add that Smoothrich is a bit crazy and his theories are wildly inaccurate at times, like one of those conspiriousy theorist types. 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Smoothrich on September 27, 2012, 12:24:17 am
That is my recollection as well.  Back then, North American Fallen members spent most of their c-RPG time being accused of homosexuality by ATS members on ATS administrated servers and we had no love for them.   I merced for LLJK until I went inactive.   I just want to add that Smoothrich is a bit crazy and his theories are wildly inaccurate at times, like one of those conspiriousy theorist types.

I had significant problems with the Fallen organization, mostly due to ineptitude, sleaziness, and general untrustworthiness in all of my dealings with them.  Fallen_Loki was certainly one of the worst leaders in Strategus.  All they did, and often still do, was leak plans told in confidence to instigate proxy wars with vassals, backstab people, never help allies, refuse to merc for supposed "friends" unless directly paid, letting Tears of Destiny be a diplomat who treated everyone with even more arrogance and belligerence, turning more clans into a "Fuck Fallen" attitude.

So instead of addressing any of these problems diplomatically or you know, by not being a dick in general when we talked about it, Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.  Also this was admittedly part of hating ATS servers which everyone could agree were as poorly administered as anything could be.  But stooping so far as to bribe a clan of somethingawful posters with saudi oil money over internet horses political stability is about as hilariously weird and pathetic as you can get.

I've never even posted a single "theory".  I just write things that happened to me and my opinion on those involved.  One opinion is Fallen is one of the most embarrassing gaming organizations I've seen, and are probably the least liked clan in all of cRPG.  Of course there's cool members, but considering things like Loki's former leadership or everything the severely autistic Tears of Destiny has ever said or done, it is pretty much a disgraced clan.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Bjord on September 27, 2012, 07:15:51 am
Cool opinion, bro.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 27, 2012, 10:27:52 am
Lol Saudi Arabian Oil money? Really Fallen? Oh well, i've seen people in EVE and other MMO's buy islands, ships, property and what not for millions of dollars so shouldn't be surprised.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 27, 2012, 10:38:09 am
Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.

Someone call America I'm sure they'll be interested in that oil saving Saudi Arabia
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cepeshi on September 27, 2012, 12:28:29 pm
So many hateful posts, would read again.  8-)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mike_of_Kingswell on September 27, 2012, 02:29:12 pm
Damn it! Pack it up boy! Its over!
Fallen World Domination Inc. got exposed! Thanks to great Detective Smoothrich the world is save another day.
We need to come up with another plan to take crpg over in secret now that our Saudi-Oil-Money buisness went down...

So far the best theorie I have read about the Fallen brigade!

The only thing that freaks me out more is the wierd obsession of yours with Tears of Destiny, Smoothrich...he does make it in every 2. post of yours which is quite disturbing.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Count_Curtis on September 27, 2012, 02:37:05 pm
Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.  Also this was admittedly part of hating ATS servers which everyone could agree were as poorly administered as anything could be.  But stooping so far as to bribe a clan of somethingawful posters with saudi oil money over internet horses political stability is about as hilariously weird and pathetic as you can get.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mike_of_Kingswell on September 27, 2012, 02:43:44 pm
Now that its out in the open I would like to addmit to some stuff to reduce my jail time:

Yes! Its the fallen Brigade's fault that YOUR car is always out of gas! All part of your plan: without your car you cant react fast enough once our wolrd-take-over starts!

Yes! We are responsible for some of the latest 'accidents' on various oil platforms over the last month. Detective Smoothrich was on to us and we had to cover up or operations!

Yes! Tears is the head of our secret organisation since he is the first KING! His right hand is 'Vibe' who he just lately announce to be the second King and legitimate heir to the Fallen World Domination Inc.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rhygar666 on September 27, 2012, 02:45:32 pm
ban he
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Nessaj on September 27, 2012, 02:54:35 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: dodnet on September 27, 2012, 03:02:40 pm
Yes! Its the fallen Brigade's fault that YOUR car is always out of gas! All part of your plan: without your car you cant react fast enough once our wolrd-take-over starts!

Damn... I KNEW IT!  :o
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on September 27, 2012, 03:13:07 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Turboflex on September 27, 2012, 03:41:44 pm
Fallen sponsored 9/11
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tydeus on September 27, 2012, 05:49:15 pm
One opinion is Fallen is one of the most embarrassing gaming organizations I've seen, and are probably the least liked clan in all of cRPG.  Of course there's cool members, but considering things like Loki's former leadership or everything the severely autistic Tears of Destiny has ever said or done, it is pretty much a disgraced clan.
As someone who, in the past, kept several Fallen members from getting unjustly banned from the ATS servers, and possibly having them suffer the same injustice that lljk did with the mass bans, I say, this at least has some merit to it. It may not be the case now, and I find it doubtful that they were more hated than lljk at the time, but Fallen was assuredly not going to win any popularity contests back then. I'm not sure how things are now as you guys seem to stay away from NA for the most part, though I'm wondering why that would be.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on September 27, 2012, 05:56:29 pm
Was Fallen disliked because they had archers?  It always seemed like c-rpg players held the dumbest grudges.  I believe for Hospitallers in strat 2 it was just due to fighting over land claims.  But I thought I got the feeling that a lot of people talked shit (in the pub servers) to Fallen just because they had a lot of archers.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Count_Curtis on September 27, 2012, 06:01:24 pm
To be quite honest, all the unimportant people (cicero, smoothrich, other forum ragers) can shout what they will. when somebody who's words actually mean anything starts hating on us, then maybe we are hated for a reason
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 27, 2012, 06:04:57 pm
Fallen Suck.

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Boss_Awesome on September 27, 2012, 07:31:40 pm
I had significant problems with the Fallen organization, mostly due to ineptitude, sleaziness, and general untrustworthiness in all of my dealings with them.  Fallen_Loki was certainly one of the worst leaders in Strategus.  All they did, and often still do, was leak plans told in confidence to instigate proxy wars with vassals, backstab people, never help allies, refuse to merc for supposed "friends" unless directly paid, letting Tears of Destiny be a diplomat who treated everyone with even more arrogance and belligerence, turning more clans into a "Fuck Fallen" attitude.

So instead of addressing any of these problems diplomatically or you know, by not being a dick in general when we talked about it, Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.  Also this was admittedly part of hating ATS servers which everyone could agree were as poorly administered as anything could be.  But stooping so far as to bribe a clan of somethingawful posters with saudi oil money over internet horses political stability is about as hilariously weird and pathetic as you can get.

I've never even posted a single "theory".  I just write things that happened to me and my opinion on those involved.  One opinion is Fallen is one of the most embarrassing gaming organizations I've seen, and are probably the least liked clan in all of cRPG.  Of course there's cool members, but considering things like Loki's former leadership or everything the severely autistic Tears of Destiny has ever said or done, it is pretty much a disgraced clan.

Smoothrich, you are even more insane than I originally thought.  There will always be intrigue in Strategus, that is what makes it fun.  But some people see things that aren't there, or see everything as a conspiracy.  These people think Bush did 9/11, or that the British bombed Pearl Harbour.  They think Elvis faked his own death, and that aliens are held captive at area 51.    Tears of Destiny is one of the more pleasant people to talk to in the c-RPG community, if you can't get along with him then you can't get along with anyone. 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Braeden on September 27, 2012, 07:40:01 pm
The Fallen Brigade is full of liars, cheaters, backstabbers, murderers and adulterers.  If you deal with them, you must keep your eye on them at every step, lest they turn on you to seize the advantage.  Nothing is sacred in their eyes, no one is safe and attempts to deal with them directly generally end with your receipt of a plethora of puncture wounds from all directions.

Seriously, what's not to like?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Knute on September 27, 2012, 07:41:06 pm
For the record, someone suggested last strat that we bring the native factions to strategus...which I don't think is a terrible idea, then there'd only be 6 factions, and people could fight internally over control of the faction.  You'd see more de-centralized power (common to the middle ages) than you do now with massive faction building, which you didn't see til the end of the medieval period.

Also the current smaller factions would then be part of a larger picture (if they wanted to be).

And you'd have to set diplomatic stances towards the other factions, neutral, defense pact, allies, etc.  And only mercs or allies could sign up for you.  There was actually a shit ton of great suggestions for strat about a year ago (starting in the fall of 2011, and going to the end of the year).

That might have been my 6 faction only suggestion.

http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/another-strategus-suggestion-6-factions-only/msg316452/#msg316452 (http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/another-strategus-suggestion-6-factions-only/msg316452/#msg316452)

Basically everything would be almost exactly the same as it is now, you could create clans and fight anyone you want, but everyone would belong to one of 6 kingdoms or cultures that determined the color of your character on the map and any fiefs you take.  So for example Nords would be blue, Swadians red, etc.  People could change nationalities but there would be a cooldown.

Each color (faction, culture, whatever) would start out with homeland territories that would be AI controlled at first but players could attack AI fiefs in their homeland to have more control over them.  Then the goal would be to expand your faction's color out until it controls the entire map.  These could be the starting territories just based on native singleplayer:

(click to show/hide)
 

----   

The second part of the suggestion was that in each cultural homeland, equipment that represented the culture would be heavily discounted.  So Swadians would have cheap western European style gear, Rhodoks would have cheap crossbows and Italian style gear, etc.  When you take over a territory, the discounts would remain the same so people might want to invade certain areas to get access to the gear.  I thought this might get clans that like certain types of gear to group together so they'd be playing with people they might not normally play with, possibly breaking up some existing alliances and mixing things up a bit.

There would be nothing to stop clans from joining multiple factions (colors), working to advance some and sabotage others.  This system might also get more people signing up for other peoples battle.  If a NA sarranid is attacked in the middle of the night, some EU sarranids might be more likely to sign up for the battle because he's a part of their kingdom.  This suggestion didn't catch on before so I doubt it would now, especially with this whole new version of strategus yet to be fully tried out.  :)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Boss_Awesome on September 27, 2012, 07:46:36 pm
Was Fallen disliked because they had archers?  It always seemed like c-rpg players held the dumbest grudges.  I believe for Hospitallers in strat 2 it was just due to fighting over land claims. But I thought I got the feeling that a lot of people talked shit (in the pub servers) to Fallen just because they had a lot of archers.

100% accurate there.  We don't really talk shit, people just want to be 2hand peasant slaughtering heroes and freak out when they get killed at range.  Often we would run across people with the skill to carry an entire team to victory and just shoot the unholy hell out of them. 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Braeden on September 27, 2012, 07:48:33 pm
They also don't want to dodge.  That's also important.  People get really mad when you tell them to learn to dodge.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Bazinga on September 27, 2012, 09:34:57 pm
I had significant problems with the Fallen organization, mostly due to ineptitude, sleaziness, and general untrustworthiness in all of my dealings with them.  Fallen_Loki was certainly one of the worst leaders in Strategus.  All they did, and often still do, was leak plans told in confidence to instigate proxy wars with vassals, backstab people, never help allies, refuse to merc for supposed "friends" unless directly paid, letting Tears of Destiny be a diplomat who treated everyone with even more arrogance and belligerence, turning more clans into a "Fuck Fallen" attitude.

So instead of addressing any of these problems diplomatically or you know, by not being a dick in general when we talked about it, Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.  Also this was admittedly part of hating ATS servers which everyone could agree were as poorly administered as anything could be.  But stooping so far as to bribe a clan of somethingawful posters with saudi oil money over internet horses political stability is about as hilariously weird and pathetic as you can get.

I've never even posted a single "theory".  I just write things that happened to me and my opinion on those involved.  One opinion is Fallen is one of the most embarrassing gaming organizations I've seen, and are probably the least liked clan in all of cRPG.  Of course there's cool members, but considering things like Loki's former leadership or everything the severely autistic Tears of Destiny has ever said or done, it is pretty much a disgraced clan.

I can second that! Just one more thing, we also have some human trafficking going on in east europe, lead by our glorious polish mafia member mighty Kingbread.
Or how they call him over there "Kurwiszon Kingbread". At least that's what he told us. We don't ask too many questions.

He payed chadz to get Fallen those flying carpet bombers.


True story.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Boss_Awesome on September 28, 2012, 12:30:24 am
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Ever seen Circus Peanuts before?  That weird orange marshmellow peanut shaped candy that they always sell in gas stations yet no one ever buys them?  Do you know who makes those?  The Fallen Brigade, that's who.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Belatu on September 28, 2012, 01:18:37 am
One opinion is Fallen is one of the most embarrassing gaming organizations I've seen, and are probably the least liked clan in all of cRPG.  Of course there's cool members,

I am sure he said that because of me

(click to show/hide)

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: tizzango on September 28, 2012, 01:25:18 am
That Saudi Arabian Oil theory is incredibly funny. Smoothrich, I don't know who you are or what your beef is with the NA Fallen, but I can tell you the EU Fallen play a much more dirty game. Sometimes when we're on EU_1 we throw smoke bombs down and then when people are distracted, we quickly steal their pension fund.

 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 28, 2012, 01:30:42 am
Loki literally began saying a Fallen member has a family involved in middle eastern oil business, some sort of Saudi Arabian bullshit.  He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Harafat on September 28, 2012, 01:40:05 am
He began ordering this guy to pay "donations" to LLJK financed servers upwards of 300 dollars a month. 

Its the upwards word that is key! Smoothrich finally figured it out! WAKE UP Europe, it wasn't the banks, it wasn't the government, it was the fucking fallen brigade giving our moneyz aways to lljk servers!
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mike_of_Kingswell on September 28, 2012, 02:47:12 am
it was the fucking fallen brigade giving our moneyz aways to lljk servers!
Its not your money! Its Saudi-oil money!

I can honestly say something I never thought I would say: Smoothrich you, good sir, made my day!
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Cicero on September 28, 2012, 03:40:34 am
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Count_Curtis on September 28, 2012, 08:44:32 am
Finally! a cicero post that i can +1!
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Dach on September 28, 2012, 09:17:43 am
It's the second one I + today...

The end is nigh!  :lol:
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: BASNAK on September 28, 2012, 11:01:34 am
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spleen on September 28, 2012, 03:47:59 pm
So you're telling me all I ever did to be hated by other players was dwarfed by...saudi oil money?



...I'm so going to watch that damn the innocence of the muslims video now, deal wit it!
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Garem on September 28, 2012, 06:44:49 pm
Fallen "Arab Money" Brigade

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 28, 2012, 06:49:21 pm
Fallen "Arab Money" Brigade

(click to show/hide)
This is remarkably accurate for our get-togethers that we fund every month.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Son Of Odin on September 28, 2012, 08:46:52 pm
"I came to tell you that we successfully expanded our oil empire to Norway."
- Chief executive Son Of Odin

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 28, 2012, 09:21:15 pm
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Son Of Odin on September 28, 2012, 09:27:42 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mike_of_Kingswell on September 29, 2012, 12:36:36 am
Several documentaries will show the truth behind the Fallen Brigade.

Here some official posters:

(click to show/hide)

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Lt_Anders on September 29, 2012, 01:06:18 am
+13 for that post.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 29, 2012, 01:09:03 am
+13 for that post.

Should be higher, comedy gold right there from my number one fan.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Goretooth on September 29, 2012, 01:19:56 am
Was he trolling or is he that much of a nutbar?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 29, 2012, 01:29:36 am
Was he trolling or is he that much of a nutbar?

He is with utmost conviction in that Loki donating money to the servers to keep them floating when Classical made it public he was out of funds and without them they would be shutting down forcing our Saudi Oil Prince to divert funds towards bribing LLJK is true. All things considered this is his best theory personal experience he has ever shared in my opinion.

Join NA Fallen, we are literally rolling in cash... Literally.

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Goretooth on September 29, 2012, 02:21:28 am
He really needs to take a break from this game and the forums for a while.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spleen on September 29, 2012, 03:23:26 am
Yeah, he should probably make a trip to saudi arabia for relaxation.

Just ask Loki, I'm sure he can arrange something...



On a totally unrelated note, please buy our official fallen corporate game: http://oilrush-game.com/

We get major saudi oil royalties from that shit...

Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Casimir on September 29, 2012, 05:02:32 am
oil money.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Son Of Odin on September 29, 2012, 06:14:47 am
oil money.
Want some? Come get some!

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Loki on September 29, 2012, 10:59:19 am
There is a lot of weird stuff being said in this thread, so let me clear some stuff up.

First off, my goal was always to destroy the Northern Empire.  I spent a lot of time working on the project between strat 1 and the start of strat 2.  Figuring out who would be where on the map and who would be interested in such a plan.  When strat 1 ended the Fallen Brigade leadership had a long meeting about what our goals were in strategus, taking over the entire map was impossible due to game mechanics, so we decided that being a source of chaos in the game would be considered winning to us.  The best way to create chaos, we decided, was to attempt to break-up the 2 mega alliances.  The Northern Empire and UIF.  UIF in strat 2 was a little nebulous at the time, they were saying they were disbanding but all the signs pointed to being bigger and stronger than strat 1.  DRZ was claiming that they were working solo again and so I decided to take them at their word and see if they would be interested in a joint strike against the Northern Empire.  Specially because of their place NW on the map and they wouldn't have any space to expand unless it was into NE territory.

LLJK, I could never figure out what their goals were, what their motivation was, or even who was leading them really.  All we knew was that their were a lot of them, they seemed fragmented, but a force to be reconned with.  I worked with LadyGAGA in planning some schemes to take DRZ territory and hand it over directly to LLJK in strat 1, but strat 1 died literally a day before the plan was to be implemented.  In Strat 2 I just didn't know what the fuck they were doing.  They were trying to join UIF then the NE, or at least this is what they were telling me.  So we ended up mercing for them for 50k strat gold a week.  When they couldn't or wouldn't pay up I went to ATS_Ecko and got 150k strat gold for agreeing to not merc for LLJK.  Not really intending to live up to our end of the agreement one way or the other. I could have cared less.  LLJK was doing a hell of a job fending off multiple aggressors at once.  We just laughed and laughed, we couldn't believe that Ecko had given us 150k gold for essentially nothing.

When BRD and the Mercs finally came to a peace settlement, BRD had a fat army but nowhere to take it.  So I just suggested that they attacked ATS and they would have our full support.  That's when the full invasion happened.  We moved a 10k army up into Tsardom territory to prepare for the attack, but I didn't want to blow our cover just yet.  Eastern Tsardom was shitting their pants asking what we were doing with the army.  I told them we were going to take a neutral castle just to the north of our territory.  I'm not sure how much of that they bought.  But Ecko_ATS came to me panic strickened, asking what our intentions were.  I told him that we would send our 10k army to help fight off BRDs brazen attack against the Northern Empire and that Ecko should get Eastern Tsardom to move all of their troops to help against BRD.  Eastern Tsardom leadership was obviously split on what to do.  They moved about half of their armies to the west.  The Fallen Brigade then quickly split our army into 3 smaller armies and took most of the Eastern Tsardom villages without a fight.  I even managed to convince eastern tsardom not to show up for their own battles, so we took the villages without a fight.  I don't even think most Fallen Brigade members knew that part.  We than sat a 10k army on top of Eastern Tsardom's last village, which held their last remaining army.  Basically in seige mode.  We then funneled as many troops and supplies (including ATS's 150k gold) into BRDs armies.  When NE was no more, I just happened to be in a teamspeak with all the leaders of chaos, hospitaller, occitan, ats and goretooth.  They all pleaded that we let them keep  Yruma castle and one other village (I forget the name).  I told them that they would get nothing and that they would be scattered to the four winds.  Goretooth was claiming that he would usurp Ecko and take the remaining loyal hospitaller and ATS members and form a new clan under his leadership.  When I told him no, he went berserk swearing and crying and swearing that he'd fight me to the end of time.  It was the best in life to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of Goretooth.  But in retrospect,  I think it would have been a smarter move on my part to allow these guys to keep the castle and reform; if not to keep them on my side, at least not have them be bitterly hateful enemies.

Strat 2 was a lot of backstabbing, lying, manipulating for sure.  The Fallen Brigade had truly taken it's place as the only evil clan in strategus, and we had become the most hated clan in all of strategus.  That is something I am still very proud of.

As for the middle eastern oil tycoon.  We did actually have an oil baron in the Fallen Brigade, but he wasn't from Saudi Arabia, he was from Qatar.  And we did pay for the LLJK servers for a time, after they were announced to be the official servers and Zealot was saying he couldnt pay for them anymore and that the ATS servers would come back online.

LLJK was always paranoid of me, always thinking I was scheming against them, but I never did.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Goretooth on September 29, 2012, 11:15:39 am
I like how well you did in strat 3  :lol: i got my revenge
Hearing you crying to me in strat 3 was awesome. Looking forward to it again if you come back.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: LordBerenger on September 29, 2012, 12:18:43 pm
So Smooth was right. GGARABFANS
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Tears of Destiny on September 29, 2012, 12:38:08 pm
So Smooth was right. GGARABFANS

No, he is pretty much still batshit crazy about the money used as bribes. Classical made it very public with multiple posts even in the stickied donation thread that he was running out of money, so naturally we wanted to keep them financed as they ran smoothly. Pretty standard troll tactic of using a single shard of truth to create some warped fantasy. Now excuse me while I take a shower in $100 bills.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spleen on September 29, 2012, 01:19:07 pm
So exactly why did I get a diplomacy forum warning for posting in general discussion?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mike_of_Kingswell on September 29, 2012, 01:23:30 pm
So exactly why did I get a diplomacy forum warning for posting in general discussion?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


This is exactly my thought...
I will gladly stop posting in the DIPLOMACY forums on all topics I have been posting offtopic in (which there is: - )
For further information about this i would be thankfull :)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Son Of Odin on September 29, 2012, 01:33:26 pm
This is exactly my thought...
I will gladly stop posting in the DIPLOMACY forums on all topics I have been posting offtopic in (which there is: - )
For further information about this i would be thankfull :)
Read this thread you buggers!: http://forum.meleegaming.com/general-discussion/your-warnings-should-actually-inform-what-exactly-was-violated/

More precisely, my post.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Rikthor on September 29, 2012, 04:56:46 pm
LLJK, I could never figure out what their goals were, what their motivation was, or even who was leading them really.  All we knew was that their were a lot of them, they seemed fragmented, but a force to be reconned with.  I worked with LadyGAGA in planning some schemes to take DRZ territory and hand it over directly to LLJK in strat 1, but strat 1 died literally a day before the plan was to be implemented.  In Strat 2 I just didn't know what the fuck they were doing.  They were trying to join UIF then the NE, or at least this is what they were telling me.  So we ended up mercing for them for 50k strat gold a week.  When they couldn't or wouldn't pay up I went to ATS_Ecko and got 150k strat gold for agreeing to not merc for LLJK.  Not really intending to live up to our end of the agreement one way or the other. I could have cared less.  LLJK was doing a hell of a job fending off multiple aggressors at once.  We just laughed and laughed, we couldn't believe that Ecko had given us 150k gold for essentially nothing.

In other words, I was right. Thanks for admitting it. I will disagree with your post you were the most hated clan at least in the beginning of Strat 2, come on now, you can't say you were more hated than us poor LLJK when we had the super coalition of awful after us :D
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: kinngrimm on September 29, 2012, 05:14:20 pm
OT "What to do"
a while ago i made a suggestion under point 2) (http://forum.meleegaming.com/suggestions-corner/account-sharing-overproduction-players-without-factions/) and still believe that would be a suitable way to go. An inbuilt Diplomatic Relation System which defines basic relations between Factions where the leaders of those factions need to confirm them. By Giving certain insentives like a shared Line of Sight for higher ranking officers you can give a slight advantage to Alliances so they would consider using the system. Then with that you can regulate Production/Trade so that huge alliances or huge single factions would loose some of their potential economy. If stuff would be transfered to other Faction outside the Diplomatic Relation Systems they would loose a lot of what is to be transfered, which is another way to get Factions to use that system so they can be balanced. Also something which is mentioned in other threads is a "unrest" system which but more i believe would go against huge clans with huge inactivity, not bad either.

Also don't get me wrong on the diplomatic system, i love how we do diplomacy atm, meeting on ts, sending pm's etc., i think that would not be obsolete at all or would you just accept an alliance with someone you never spoke to? This system is in my mind majorly a balancing tool, besides making it known who is with whom in bed, something anyone knows who keeps track of forum and battles anyway ... no secrets there ^^
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spanish on September 29, 2012, 08:57:52 pm
In other words, I was right. Thanks for admitting it. I will disagree with your post you were the most hated clan at least in the beginning of Strat 2, come on now, you can't say you were more hated than us poor LLJK when we had the super coalition of awful after us :D

Agreed back then when I saw the goon squad in the servers I went out of my way to try and brutally murder everyone wearing that pig banner. Now I miss the goons because they were so much more fun than fallen :/
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Mannhammer on September 29, 2012, 09:27:49 pm
Now I miss the goons because they were so much more fun than fallen :/

Can't argue with you there. We're the Shit of cRPG. You ignore us, we smell up the room. Get mad and step on us, we get stuck in your shoe.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: KingBread on September 29, 2012, 10:36:38 pm
I cant believe Smooth rich was even 10% right. This is madness i dunno what to do now ? Any help ?

(i need to go and rape some innocent humans i'm transtporting to "western" countries and pay Harpag to create 10 CD-Keys for me)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: HarunYahya on September 29, 2012, 11:54:55 pm
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Thats not how u use history channel guy....
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Son Of Odin on September 30, 2012, 12:50:29 am
(click to show/hide)
Thats not how u use history channel guy....
(click to show/hide)
Oh is that so? Do you remember the part from the show where he says "I'm not saying it was aliens but it was aliens!"

I think that quote is one of the most popular ones when it comes to that meme :D
(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Vibe on October 01, 2012, 07:46:21 am
so when am I getting a piece of that Quatar oil monyz, I've been loyal to the brigade for way too long, I deserve some black liquid love
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Smoothrich on October 01, 2012, 10:10:12 am
real talk

Haha, thanks for posting by the way.  I actually think some of the Fallen made pictures about oil are pretty funny, but your explanation was pro real talk.  Taking out Northern Empire was great Strat drama, the grief you caused Ecko for putting all his eggs in 1 basket and instantly losing to FCC or whoever it was attacking was epic.

Most of the LLJK-Fallen tension came from the flaky merc agreement, because we were constantly besieged by EU clans and had to fight at odd times or counter attack on EU ping.  Fallen actually helped LLJK a great deal in Strat 2.0, after Shogunate wiped us out Fallen gave us shelter to build back up.  So we were pretty mad about having to pay, mercs being unreliable, then being cut off due to Ecko plotting.

Also the Great Khans were your vassal into the desert between us and Camel_Screamers, and we wanted to work with GK to fight Camels, but instead they started sharing fiefs and working together.  Always got shady answers about them from you which made us pissed/paranoid.

To be honest you were very good at playing Strat the way you did, and I probably took some tips out of it in managing my own shady alliances and plotting.  But you reaped what you sowed with the Northern Empire in Strat 3.0 by having Hospitallers, Occitan, and their EU allies teaming up to wipe you guys out right at the start.  And personally people I've made friends with in cRPG always seem to be strong allies regardless of clan or situation, just because we've helped each other before or get along.

Which was pretty much the point of my post.  Some alliances form out of mutual trust, others out of mutual hate.  I don't think you can "fix" alliances with shitty in game mechanics that make everything more difficult to play.  Its up to the players to make the game they want to play.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Casimir on October 01, 2012, 03:21:04 pm
Indeed the respect i hold for some of my enemies, due to past experiences playing cRPG can never be corrupted by what may happen in strategus.

the same is true of vice versa however, if your main contact with someone is through strategus, you will build your opinion of them based on how they act.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: dynamike on October 02, 2012, 11:19:55 pm
It was the best in life to crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of Goretooth.

Can we make posters of this?
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: kinngrimm on October 03, 2012, 11:41:17 am
...instantly losing to FCC or whoever it was attacking was epic. ...
After 3 months constant warfare together with our contract partners The Mercenaries. Fending of 16 different clans and finally would be able to get rid of FCC ^^ Chaos showed up with 7k troops but wouldn't attack. We were curious and when contacted were told, that Chaos wants us to get into Peace Talks with FCC. After a marathon of 3 days with 7-10 hours pure negotiations each day, we came out with Matey rage quitting TS several times ;) a NAP with FCC, the contested claims confirmed and handed over to Mercs which then handed them over as part of our contract to Wolf Pack Mercenaries and Mercs/Wolves on the other hand paying troops & gold to FCC.

Those Troops & Gold then were used to invade NE. Now the funny part is, within those peace talks, FCC tried to strongarm us into joining their cause and attacking the Union. We but disagreed on that part. So while we thought they would take those troops to attack the Union, FCC afterwards choose another target, as history showed the Northern Empire. After FCC surprised NE and we stand in awe for how easy they went through their lines(i watched some battles and only was like OMG) Only one who put up a fight were Hospitallers of the NE. After FCC rushed in there, DRZ and Fallen came too and grab/snacked what they could ^^.

At that time i started planing for strategus 3 talking first time with Hospitallers,Crusaders, CotgS and others about possible alliance and goals. Which resulted in the Desert Alliance and taking on Fallen. I have to admit that the propaganda but also the actions i have seen in strat 2, shaped my view of Fallen and Loki overly negativ. I had at that point close to no relation with UIF, only in strat 3 through close vicinity to DRZ in the desert we came to an understanding to stay out of each others way and had strong Trade with Grey Order going as the far away bonus from one edge from the map to the other were just too juicy :)
Us attacking Fallen and their allies was i guess also seen positivly by UIF, which but i didn't care about as so was my mindset, when Fallen was dealt with there would be a chance to ally with LLJK and Chaos to go against UIF. As but Hospitallers and Chaos(LLJK too?) through some Forum trolling and i was told also trolling on the NA servers came to a bad view of each other and then getting into war with each other while also DRZ pressured north, that then was used by Grey Order/Nords to get us out of the desert and afterwards myself went offline as i was fairly exhausted and crusaders took on the cause against UIF. I can see that DRZ/GO applying for our battles was judged as us being part of the UIF, but we never recieved any resupplies from them and always were worried that the day would come they would attack us, well which as history showed also did.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Canary on October 03, 2012, 01:09:38 pm
After 3 months constant warfare together with our contract partners The Mercenaries. Fending of 16 different clans and finally would be able to get rid of FCC ^^ Chaos showed up with 7k troops but wouldn't attack. We were curious and when contacted were told, that Chaos wants us to get into Peace Talks with FCC. After a marathon of 3 days with 7-10 hours pure negotiations each day, we came out with Matey rage quitting TS several times ;) a NAP with FCC, the contested claims confirmed and handed over to Mercs which then handed them over as part of our contract to Wolf Pack Mercenaries and Mercs/Wolves on the other hand paying troops & gold to FCC.

Those were some crazy talks. Everyone was getting far too stressed out over the whole contest of personalities to behave rationally. Rhaelys had to go without his lunch one day, and that was rather appalling. I think everyone was happy just to have it over with, even if the final situation wasn't ideal for their standards.

Matey was, the whole time, fine with remaining at war. He was reiterating that fact by walking out when he wasn't being brought forth ideas that were of any merit to the FCC. The Mercs in particular were bargaining with some really lackluster ideas at first. It was frankly just as disrespectful how little credence their side gave to the FCC.

Those Troops & Gold then were used to invade NE. Now the funny part is, within those peace talks, FCC tried to strongarm us into joining their cause and attacking the Union. We but disagreed on that part. So while we thought they would take those troops to attack the Union, FCC afterwards choose another target, as history showed the Northern Empire.

I believe it was actually RuConquista that were originally putting the idea forth that we'd all join forces and attack Union, the pretense being to create a mutual enemy to channel the resources against instead of warring each other. Where the FCC was trying to get you on board was because the deal for teaming up and starting a war with someone else was already on the table. Eventually we all realized that it made no sense and it was dropped it as a condition for the peace. All along they wanted those troops and gold so that they could take them to go and fight somebody else, that was always their goal. The target was always, I think, entirely incidental.

Looking back on it, it would've made more sense just to join in and attack instead of initiating the peace talks. But that agreement was rather a novelty, and I doubt we'll see another outcome to a war similar to that one anytime soon. I'm not upset at the way things turned out, though, because it allowed the Northern Empire to crumble, which brought the diplomatic dynamic of strat to a whole different place. It's just a shame that they didn't offer more resistance/fun fights.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: kinngrimm on October 03, 2012, 05:44:04 pm
...
Matey was, the whole time, fine with remaining at war. He was reiterating that fact by walking out when he wasn't being brought forth ideas that were of any merit to the FCC. ...

Looking back on it, it would've made more sense just to join in and attack instead of initiating the peace talks. But that agreement was rather a novelty, and I doubt we'll see another outcome to a war similar to that one anytime soon. I'm not upset at the way things turned out, though, because it allowed the Northern Empire to crumble, which brought the diplomatic dynamic of strat to a whole different place. It's just a shame that they didn't offer more resistance/fun fights.
I admit i was tired after 3 months constant warfare and i pressured mercs to the peace as also they needed to fullfill the contract between us and we both saw a chance to do so by these peace talks. But fighting on would have been ok too and there were voices also on our side which said, fuck it bring it on.
It all makes good for a nice story which i tell from time to time my clan mates  :lol: . ATS i was told has had problems as their main strategus guy was on holiday that time and Eko seemed to be a bit over his head, no offence mate, thats just what i heared. I had before that some nice talks with Eko and we had a NAP. After all of that i visited over several weeks regularly Hospitaller TS and come to know them pretty good Friday pub night  :mrgreen:
And shortly before the next strategus was released i asked them if they wanna team up next strategus so we can fight the EU battles and them the NA battles as we both and surly lots of others were majorly annoyed by the ping and time differential.
Hospitallers didn't quite want to be back in a backseat in an alliance so we spoke about possible enemies and well  :rolleyes: everyone knows what then happened in strat 3.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Matey on October 03, 2012, 09:06:52 pm
After 3 months constant warfare together with our contract partners The Mercenaries. Fending of 16 different clans and finally would be able to get rid of FCC ^^ Chaos showed up with 7k troops but wouldn't attack. We were curious and when contacted were told, that Chaos wants us to get into Peace Talks with FCC. After a marathon of 3 days with 7-10 hours pure negotiations each day, we came out with Matey rage quitting TS several times ;) a NAP with FCC, the contested claims confirmed and handed over to Mercs which then handed them over as part of our contract to Wolf Pack Mercenaries and Mercs/Wolves on the other hand paying troops & gold to FCC.

Those Troops & Gold then were used to invade NE. Now the funny part is, within those peace talks, FCC tried to strongarm us into joining their cause and attacking the Union. We but disagreed on that part. So while we thought they would take those troops to attack the Union, FCC afterwards choose another target, as history showed the Northern Empire. After FCC surprised NE and we stand in awe for how easy they went through their lines(i watched some battles and only was like OMG) Only one who put up a fight were Hospitallers of the NE. After FCC rushed in there, DRZ and Fallen came too and grab/snacked what they could ^^.

At that time i started planing for strategus 3 talking first time with Hospitallers,Crusaders, CotgS and others about possible alliance and goals. Which resulted in the Desert Alliance and taking on Fallen. I have to admit that the propaganda but also the actions i have seen in strat 2, shaped my view of Fallen and Loki overly negativ. I had at that point close to no relation with UIF, only in strat 3 through close vicinity to DRZ in the desert we came to an understanding to stay out of each others way and had strong Trade with Grey Order going as the far away bonus from one edge from the map to the other were just too juicy :)
Us attacking Fallen and their allies was i guess also seen positivly by UIF, which but i didn't care about as so was my mindset, when Fallen was dealt with there would be a chance to ally with LLJK and Chaos to go against UIF. As but Hospitallers and Chaos(LLJK too?) through some Forum trolling and i was told also trolling on the NA servers came to a bad view of each other and then getting into war with each other while also DRZ pressured north, that then was used by Grey Order/Nords to get us out of the desert and afterwards myself went offline as i was fairly exhausted and crusaders took on the cause against UIF. I can see that DRZ/GO applying for our battles was judged as us being part of the UIF, but we never recieved any resupplies from them and always were worried that the day would come they would attack us, well which as history showed also did.

Canary already did an awesome job addressing this, but I do feel like I should also weigh in. I did indeed (fake) rage quit talks a few times just to make sure the other side of talks would understand that they couldn't give us a shitty deal and be done with us. Also, our insistence on Mercs sharing in any war with union was because we had no interest in launching some suicide attack if no one else was confident enough to participate (we had also been told grey order would be either neutral or supporting of such a war, which was probably not true) and yeah I'm pretty sure ruconquista came up with that idea. We eventually got the impression from Rhaelys that we either had to make some deal or have CHAOS turn on us, so we ended up making the deal where we would just take some troops and gold and go elsewhere, thats when Loki suggested that we work with Fallen and DRZ against the NE; it was supposed to be an epic war and in a way it was epic... just not in the way we expected... and of course DRZ was just using us in that effort, but meh we ended up having another real war against them and their vass... allies(:P) afterwards that was pretty fun even if it did really piss me off at first.
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on October 03, 2012, 09:09:53 pm
You're mom's to blame, and she's also what to do. 
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Spanish on October 03, 2012, 09:40:34 pm
That strat was my first and I had complete faith in our allies and then next thing I know I'm stuck in Yruma Castle waiting for the end. Which was good battle but I feel the loss could have been prevented had a few things had gone better and especially for the treacherous blaze knight who single handedly lost over 1000 tickets and had a negative score!

Stupid NE even had a banner we played under and I  never even got along with most of those guys, should of just killed them instead! But no we left all the big playz up to Loki and turtled as successfully as rabbits. Glad that's over..
Title: Re: Mega-Alliances: Who's To Blame, What To Do?
Post by: Lordark on October 04, 2012, 12:06:14 pm
Refreshing thread! Good times! :wink: