This is signed,
I can only approve of this superb idea of circumventing the 1/3 rule, you really have a brilliant mind!
I will order my faction fief's owner to decrease its army size each time someone wants to besiege it with at least 1500 men;
I pledge the honor of my faction along with this;ButanZlisch,Rice EatersWBPsdictatorregent,
Owner ofVyincourd Castle and Ergellon CastleSerindiar.
I think we made that deal with grey order a few days ago. We have over 10k troops in grunwalder, but we take them out at the evenings so GO can attack with 2k troops. Hetman promised us the same for when we attack their towns ^^
Would be nice if the desert could make a deal like this :P
That is very good, but 2000 is way too high (particularly in castles's siege, even more in maps like grunwalder!)
You and all those behind this deal inspired me to create this, I think the conditions are fair and easily applicable!!!
Haboe, I trust you to convey my idea to Apostates leaders so the next time you post a message in this topic, it will be to officially pledge membership to this newly created Conclave.
Well ... in the first thought i declared that "conclave" for an dump idea, cause ppl have to speak with each other on TeamSpeak, and not in an thread or organisation .....
i think this rule is not to bad, but it should not be active when defenders have more than 6000/6500 troops, Unimportant it is battle or siege
Another idea would be it, when the castle owner got the same amout of upkeep for troops (when he is in his own castle ofc) as the stationed garrison .... but for that we also need the Devs .... but its an better idea than taking the 1/3 rule totally out ... ^^
That is very good, but 2000 is way too high (particularly in castles's siege, even more in maps like grunwalder!)
You and all those behind this deal inspired me to create this, I think the conditions are fair and easily applicable!!!
Haboe, I trust you to convey my idea to Apostates leaders so the next time you post a message in this topic, it will be to officially pledge membership to this newly created Conclave.
I won't, diplomacy like this is generally just agreed on by 2 party's. No need to do anything like this on the forum, cause it will only result in the old "kinngrimm-bitching". The "you signed a contract, now do it immediately or im gonna flame on the forums again. We have this arrangement with greys, its working as planned, no need for a conclave like this by a third party.
Talk to me on steam whenever you want to besiege my fiefs :) (or WPB's !)Disclaimer: Talking to Butan will not lower the troop counts in WPB lands.
Disclaimer: Talking to Butan will not lower the troop counts in WPB lands.
Talk to me on steam whenever you want to besiege my fiefs :) (or Zlisch for WPB's !*)
as long as the attacker has signed the same treaty we will stand by it.
When the day come that Shu Han get attacked, we will of course make a deal with the attackers.
More xp for the people
Well Haboe, whats ur thoughts on this? Or will u wait until everyone else agrees before u decide to or not?
You need some sex Haboe, chill out
I'm not into gilf's, sorry.
Wolves accepts this agreement and are honored to be amongst its members, and as long as the attacker has signed the same treaty we will stand by it.
Doesn't look like bagge agreed to the conclave, he is just saying he will make a deal with the attackers when the time comes. Or am i reading it wrong?
Doesn't look like bagge agreed to the conclave, he is just saying he will make a deal with the attackers when the time comes. Or am i reading it wrong?
I'd like to see where this goes, how many factions get behind it and how likely they are to honour it.
Or instead of complaining of not being able to attack a giant city with a huge garrison, attack where they don't have 83598457732688328 troops.
omg, that devs have to fix that shit like right now for sieges ... its just unfair.
Either implement a optimized 1/3 attack rule or just hit the reset button, most of us are tired anyway, could really use a brake of clean crpg where everyone can concentrate on having events wich are not inhibited by strat :rolleyes:
Then Devs could also spend some time on and off in some time on optimizing some strat mechanics before restarting a clean slate, and those ppl who still actually want in, can jump in.
There is soo much dump stuff going around in strat, Nighttime fails, agreements, backstabbing.
People complaining about the opposite factions but dont do anything to get along and do the same,
The 1/3 rule is fine in the open fields, wouldnt it be retarded when you have like 1200 trading and get attacked by 300 naked?
But on sieges or fief attacking it totally makes NO SENSE, the best idea would be it when they capture the minimal force to attack a fief should be around 500~ anyway, but no 33% rule.
How about that? I know there are some strat players out there which would attack a fief with 100men and lock it down :&
wood walls can be broken now! @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
For real ? :o
Instructions weren't clear enough, i got my dick caught in the ceiling fan
Is it dead now :/?
We're just gonna end up talking about how we did this and that back then :\ what we should be doing is making fun matches now with whats left of the Apostates tickets, theyre gonna be wiped anyways, so might as well go out banging.
they've repeatedly said they don't care about strat all over the place now, so lower em and let us get to the main attraction inside those mountains :)
i got my dick caught in the ceiling fan
Some agreed to planned sieges to not force the others to waste troops but; there also was a lot of pretty audacious attacks, completely ignoring the "wasted" troops over 2k-2k5 waves.
I've never...6k troops!?
http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=strategusbattlesupcoming#!?page=strategusinfobattledetail&id=5277
That's way more than what i'd waste. Shit, I'd just let you stack that much. We could have 3 nice battles with that 6k troops, rather than 1 battle.
I wanted to say GG;
In one month the garrisonning almost stagnated, so numerous were the battles and loss on every side.(click to show/hide)