cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: kinngrimm on October 22, 2012, 03:40:05 am
-
Imagine, you are 1-2 weeks into the game after voting. You have established your area, fought over some claims exchanged others maybe.
Now against who to fight. Well on EU we got the Western/Eastern block, but what if at that time the numbers of faction members would be counted and then with a bit randomization, but still with comparable numbers clans would be chosen to fight each other.
They would be actually "only able to attack that particular faction determined by Lottery"
After 2-4 weeks, it would be checked again how many members, dependent on that a new smaller faction may join in on the opposing team.
Effects could be:
- no carebear
- low player count, while being successful active members count, the less you need the better.
- forcing people to work together builds up a special skill for RL. "No i can't stand the dude, but i still need to work with him together"
may edit this later, falling asleep right now ^^
-
So Strategus turns into a tournament ladder, essentially?
This does sound interesting, as it work force people to actually fight new opponents for once.
-
imagine rage posts flying if for example druzhina got to fight empire afte this lottery :D they will be all like "hey what the fuck we love each other."
-
so just ditch strategus and have a clan tournament. lets make strat more boring by limiting it totally!
-
Well I do think small wars should be encouraged. Give bonus ressources for taking designated neighboring fiefs, inflict a malus for not doing so. Add a "war weariness" factor so fighting the same enemy over and over becomes harder. Pillaging fiefs should give a huge amount of instant ressource, although severly reducing the fief's prosperity.
-
The fun part of strategus is in the politics. The lottery would eliminate the best parts of strat. Clan leaders should be able to make their own decisions. Even if their decisions are idiotic, it is still better than some AI telling people what to do.
-
The fun part of strategus is in the politics. The lottery would eliminate the best parts of strat. Clan leaders should be able to make their own decisions. Even if their decisions are idiotic, it is still better than some AI telling people what to do.
This is all well and good, but left with a basic strategy game as we have now, all player-run politics tend to become a big 2-block war for the elimination of the other block, instead of the much nicer and RP friendly "medieval-sized" wars over territorial claims and such between adjacent fiefs.
-
The fun part of strategus is in the politics. The lottery would eliminate the best parts of strat. Clan leaders should be able to make their own decisions. Even if their decisions are idiotic, it is still better than some AI telling people what to do.
The fun part of strategus is in the politics. The lottery would eliminate the best parts of strat. Clan leaders should be able to make their own decisions. Even if their decisions are idiotic, it is still better than some AI telling people what to do.
i totally agree with you there. Still imagine another reset in perhaps 6-12 months. Till then most likely also the NA have their fixed two opposing blocks. So every strategus would start pretty much the same. I for myself, quite like the North where i am settling now and have no intentions to settle anywhere else again. This had only been possible through the new NA/EU map split. Nevertheless every faction tends to be in a place they like and they get used to. So also their surrounding factions will be pretty much the same and therefor enemies and friends will be pretty much the same. Thats the way it seems to work. Where is the challenge if you play the same set over and over again also the same. You fight for the same fiefs with or against the same people. Over time when we would see Strategus as finalized, this would bore the hell out of me. As then there wouldn't be much diplomacy to do anymore. As myself changed since strat 2.0, the areas we settled and therefor also our alliances, there were also different enemies, but when you settle in one area for good. There then is no need to make new things happen, just keep the old system going.
As comfortable that may seem on the first glance, overall i expect that to result in stalements as seen in many other games of a similar type.
EDIT: You may also include another option, that after additional months, the factions playing agaisnt each otehr would also increase. So you start in 1vs 1 or 1 vs 2 depending on faction size. And later after 2/4/6/... months it changes to 2 vs 2 or 2vs 3 and teh n3 vs 3 or 3 vs 4 depending again on faction sizes. So that in the end of a strategus cycle you would have again 2 blocks battling each other, but the factions in each block would be randomized at each iteration.
-
Indeed, the gamemechanic for Strat is still somewhat too primitive for us to pull off anything bigger than carebear 1 vs carebear 2. And we should really have AI controlled Barons/Lords or something, that you have to do stupid shit for to gain their approval so you can rule. Giving players that ability to be the Baron who decides will still throw us back to square one, as barely anything unexpected happens in Strat, when only human players are involved.
Like I dunno, "Right to Rule" over town or village to stop them from rebeling or something. Like for instance I woooooo a AI noblewoman, who I will later bed and when she gives birth to my moonbaby I get "Right to Rule". You know, intriques and stuff like that. Having only players, we would barely get any fun at all. I hardly doubt anybody whould want to be a noblewoman who just picks flowers all day. NO, everybody wants to be king, lord, master merc or master trader in Strat, nobody even bothers to be anything else, so dont leave RP only to players......