cRPG

Strategus => Strategus General Discussion => Topic started by: Harpag on July 03, 2013, 05:53:00 pm

Title: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 03, 2013, 05:53:00 pm
Latest patch has brought a fantastic tool. I want to thank for that here and also recommend it to everyone!

Go to: http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=strategusbattlesarchive + Chart viev

A few examples of statistics:

(all filter fields blank + search)

Global lost troops: (from October 2012 to present) - 1 901 637  :shock:  Genocide!

+(select region)
EU 993 459 (No faction 139 587 - 14.1% lol)
NA 908 178 (FCC 156 812 - 17.3%)

or (for Apostates only)

(Involvment - Faction, Region - EU, Faction - Grey Order, rest fields blank)

Our common statistics:
37 battles, Lost 75 208 troops, we attacked 24 times (64.9%), you 13 times (35.1%) You lost 39.891 (53%), we lost 35 317 (47%), last two weeks 34.6 k 56 % to 44% for us.

(Region EU, Fief: Tshibtin, rest fields blank)

Lost troops: 22,370 This village is a living hell  :)

(Fief: Uxkhal, rest fields blank)

Lost troops: 28 241 including 12 121 Greys - it was not a bad attack, it just looked bad  :wink:

(Period 2 weeks, EU, rest blank)

In the past 2 weeks Apostates lost 25 255 tickets

(Region EU, Faction Coalition and search)

They are fighting mainly against No faction  :lol:
They killed 19,879 randoms hehehe

(Region NA Faction: Free Companies of Calradia)


You look at the most active NA clan

etc.

Have fun

Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tomas on July 03, 2013, 08:48:57 pm
(Region EU, Faction Coalition and search)

They are fighting mainly against No faction  :lol:
They killed 19,879 randoms hehehe

19,879 randoms killed but 24,763 Greys :P

I'm surprised we didn't lose more at Uxkhal though.  It certainly felt like a lot more at the time.  Certainly the most brutal series of Fief battles i've seen in Strat :D
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 03, 2013, 10:18:29 pm
19,879 randoms killed but 24,763 Greys :P

24,763 Greys killed but you lost 28,655  :P

I'm surprised we didn't lose more at Uxkhal though.  It certainly felt like a lot more at the time.  Certainly the most brutal series of Fief battles i've seen in Strat :D

Yes, I'm surprised too. During siege of Uxkhal you've lost 15,563 and we 12,121.
From point of view of a single battle, siege is organizational nightmare much more difficult than defense, but statistics show that it is worth the effort and difference is relatively small.

According to statistics, Coalition is very aggressive - 73% of your battles is an attack, (just a pity that against randoms hehe) and you have 42,681 in Narra, so welcome to Praven  :wink:

Really good tool..., but pity that there is no filtering faction by number of players with tics ^^
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: woody on July 04, 2013, 02:33:50 pm
Great tool, used it to look at apostates versus mercs.

Explains why Haboe stopped updating his epeen kill ratio twaddle.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tomas on July 04, 2013, 02:52:08 pm
Really good tool..., but pity that there is no filtering faction by number of players with tics ^^

You can make a reasonable guess at that from current tickets + lost tickets

The Coalition = 196,450 tickets (85,265 lost + 111,185 current)
Grey Order = 193,530 tickets (118,855 lost + 74,675 current)
Apostates = 175,202 tickets (88,017 lost + 87,185 current)
Druzhina = 160,696 tickets (90,223 lost + 70,473 current)
Crusader Alliance = 152,693 tickets (76,344 lost + 76,349 current)
Wolves = 88,933 tickets (40,854 lost + 48,079 current)
Shu Han = 83,619 tickets (34,088 lost + 49,531 current)
Kapikulu = 65,955 tickets (27,414 lost + 38,541 current)
Peacebreakers = 44,348 tickets (14,693 lost + 29,655 current)
Barabe = 41,589 tickets (26,197 lost + 15,392 current)

Can't be bothered doing any more but that's the top 10 from EU.  I know some of the troops will have been given or bought but that doesn't really make much difference imo as they are still useable tickets for whatever faction has them now.

From the above, The Coalition are the biggest but not by much whilst the main jump is between Crusader Alliance and Wolves.





Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 04, 2013, 03:40:04 pm
These numbers are of course correct, but for current troops only inside fiefs. Troops, gold, goods etc deposited on players remain invisible. Look:

http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=strategusfieflist + chart view + EU

Market size: among large EU factions, only Druzhina professionally manages production and sales and you as usual, biggest noobs - 266k unused goods, over 21 milions gold and 111k troops ONLY IN FIEFS + several hundred attacks^^ against 100 white randoms. Wasted potential  :cry:

Statistics show that you are main reason why our stategus is less dynamic than NA.

Moreover only filtering by tics, can give ability to precisely forecasting far future^^ It's great that there is no such option hehe
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tyr_ on July 04, 2013, 03:56:57 pm
If you compare the % of tickets with the % of troops you can see that it is definitly not coalitions fault. Every facton having (Percentage of troops / Percentage of fiefs) > 1 is making this strat static. So it is basicly every major EU faction except templars.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Keshian on July 04, 2013, 04:14:05 pm
You can make a reasonable guess at that from current tickets + lost tickets

The Coalition = 196,450 tickets (85,265 lost + 111,185 current)
Grey Order = 193,530 tickets (118,855 lost + 74,675 current)
Apostates = 175,202 tickets (88,017 lost + 87,185 current)
Druzhina = 160,696 tickets (90,223 lost + 70,473 current)
Crusader Alliance = 152,693 tickets (76,344 lost + 76,349 current)
Wolves = 88,933 tickets (40,854 lost + 48,079 current)
Shu Han = 83,619 tickets (34,088 lost + 49,531 current)
Kapikulu = 65,955 tickets (27,414 lost + 38,541 current)
Peacebreakers = 44,348 tickets (14,693 lost + 29,655 current)
Barabe = 41,589 tickets (26,197 lost + 15,392 current)

Can't be bothered doing any more but that's the top 10 from EU.  I know some of the troops will have been given or bought but that doesn't really make much difference imo as they are still useable tickets for whatever faction has them now.

From the above, The Coalition are the biggest but not by much whilst the main jump is between Crusader Alliance and Wolves.

Free Companies of Calradia = 197,438 (156,984 lost+40,454 current)

Kind of shows how inaccurate this is.  We have thousands more troops than our garrisons say and of those troops we lost I would say we have bought or traded fiefs or just plain capped flags on over-garrisoned fiefs (captured 15,000 troops that way) for about 90,000 of those tickets.  But under your calculation we would have more members with ticks than grey order and coalition, which I can assure you is absolutely not the case - we would be lucky if we have half their number.


These numbers are of course correct, but for current troops only inside fiefs. Troops, gold, goods etc deposited on players remain invisible. Look:

http://c-rpg.net/index.php?page=strategusfieflist + chart view + EU

Market size: among large EU factions, only Druzhina professionally manages production and sales and you as usual, biggest noobs - 266k unused goods, over 21 milions gold and 111k troops ONLY IN FIEFS + several hundred attacks^^ against 100 white randoms. Wasted potential  :cry:

Statistics show that you are main reason why our stategus is less dynamic than NA.

Moreover only filtering by tics, can give ability to precisely forecasting far future^^ It's great that there is no such option hehe

To be fair occitan learned EU turtling from the UIF and have done a total of 45 attacks since the start of strategus - some of those in EU.  They are the biggest faction in NA with most troops, most gold, most players and most fiefs and they are slowly making NA as stagnant as EU thanks to what arrowaine learned from his EU allies - basically all they do is buy fiefs and never attack, change it to trading simulator game with no real battles.

Its like that one economics game theory where whoever wins the most is the guy that turtles while the other guys doesn't turtle, but then everyone chooses to turtle because its in their interest to not be the big loser who doesn't turtle, but then everyone loses when no one attacks.  We gave Occitan an opening by bleeding 50K troops taking all the FIDLGB and most of the Chaos fiefs, while Occitan built up to 120K troops with them and their vassal faction semenstorm by not doing any attacks for months  (basically we would be the big loser in game theory).  But Arrowaine at heart is scared of us and is so worried about Pixel e-peen they went right back to turtling and stopped marching armies towards us before even 1 battle.


Really - EVERYONE needs to get over their addiction to pixel e-peen.  Just risk losing everything and duke it out for all the troops - no one says you have to attack their castles and cities.  Just attack every village and field army you see.  Even if you lose 60K troops you are not going to lose your core cities and castles with those size garrisons - make mad xp for everyone.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: bagge on July 04, 2013, 04:52:52 pm
Really - EVERYONE needs to get over their addiction to pixel e-peen

Quote of the year.

It's kinda ridiculous how people love their color on the fiefs name and wanking eachother off in their castles/towns.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Erasmas on July 04, 2013, 04:54:45 pm
As long as I agree that Start should be less stagnant, I kinda hate the attitude of "drop everything, stop thinking and attack the enemy". Strategus is supposed to be a strategic game.  Strategic!!! It means that players, factions should plan ahead, have long term goals, try to achieve them and fight to GET something (or to DEFEND) something. 

For that reason I do believe that it really is up to devs to tweak the game mechanics in the way that forces players/factions to fight. I agree that this game is all about fighting, but Strategus is about fighting for something. Faction's sense of security is a killer to this game. we are all willing to fight to achieve something, even to risk to achieve something. But once you achieve it, the smartest strategy in current Calradia is to stock up the troops and gold and say "come and get me". And only devs can change that attitude. We - the players - can only decide not to play smart anymore and do something stupid to have fun.

Which is not a bad idea, and that is why we are giving you all a nice strategical aim - we are asking you to join us in war effort in wiping Mercs  :D  It will take some time, and will give us all a chance to enjoy this game during that time, without having the feeling of running around like headless chicken and fighting for the fighting sake (which is how I perceive NA war theatre).
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tomas on July 04, 2013, 05:14:59 pm
@ Harpag

1) DRZ have no S&D because Coalition, Crusader Alliance, Knights who say Ni and Peacebreakers have been routinely stealing it whenever they can :D  I don't think they are any better at managing it than anybody else.

2) If you take away all the No Faction attacks then The Coalition has still made significantly more faction attacks on EU than anybody else so why does it matter if we made 131 No Faction attacks?

@ Kesh

The tickets still have to come from somewhere and it doesn't matter whether they come from loyalty, diplomacy or payment, they are still coming to you.  I admit that the 15k flagged capped tickets do distort things though and i did say it was only a "reasonable guess" at clan power bases.

The real problem with the guess is that can easily be based on out of date info. There's people out there with enough ticks to grind troops for the next 18 months but they could be completely inactive now except for transferring the troops.  I suspect that what the so called inactive/turtle factions really lack atm, is players to actually make attacks and leaders to coordinate them.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Keshian on July 04, 2013, 05:43:13 pm

 without having the feeling of running around like headless chicken and fighting for the fighting sake (which is how I perceive NA war theatre).

Really?  You haven't been tracking our wars.  We take fiefs from enemy factions and sell them and teleport their players to hell EU, which is significantly more organized than anything on EU side other than the coalition, templar push to take the west 6 months ago and the coordinated move that took most of DRZ fiefs in the desert.  i just have to say - I hope you enjoy attacking Dhirim as much as we did  :twisted: :wink: :twisted:

(click to show/hide)
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 04, 2013, 05:55:09 pm
I totally agree with Erasmas, devs please do this:

http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/why-the-current-battle-system-needs-a-fix-%28in-big-battles%29/msg766872/#msg766872

or at least a random earthquake or flood, best in Narra area ^^ On our side of map nobody wants running around like headless chicken  :lol:

@ Tyr, look at numbers again - Templars have 1:1...

@ Tomas, no offense, but why are you afraid of us so much? After all statistics are not everything  :)

Now, seriously, we are doing what we can to bring in more big battles, but when you accumulate such huge stocks, we also can not leave our land without defense. And full circle. If the devs will not help us solve this problem, we will have to do it together, so if you not plan a holiday now, move a bit your lazy ass and make decent campaign. At end of day XP is for everyone.

@Kesh , even if I was a heavy gambler, I would not make a bet on your survival on our side of  map ( aside from problem with ping, of course )  :)
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Torben on July 04, 2013, 05:57:05 pm
is about fighting for something.


just droping this here  :mrgreen:

http://forum.meleegaming.com/suggestions-corner/give-the-strat-map-more-places-of-strategic-interest/
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 04, 2013, 06:03:54 pm
It looks great, but I no longer have faith in miracles, there is not even a large hope for improvement current 1/3 system
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Keshian on July 04, 2013, 06:40:50 pm
@Kesh , even if I was a heavy gambler, I would not make a bet on your survival on our side of  map ( aside from problem with ping, of course )  :)

Actually i seem to recall TKOV and us doing quite well in strat 2 sharing an eu/na map, I think you might do okay on our side of the map too if you tried hard (aside from problem with being banned for multiaccounting again. of course) :)
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tyr_ on July 04, 2013, 06:56:25 pm
removing the 1/3 system would be stupid aswell imo. We need a proper siege system. If there is a fief with a 10k army you set up a siege army which has to be the same size/bigger, and then the city must be unable to receive any reinforcements unless the besieging army gets smaller than the cities garrison (obviously the besieging army can be reinforced all the time). Then you should be able to make 1 attack after the other with a reasonable army size, taken from the besieging army
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Chris_the_Animal on July 04, 2013, 07:05:06 pm
chart feature +1
harpags avatar +1

sadly i cant upvote your post 2 times  :(
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Erasmas on July 04, 2013, 07:16:52 pm
removing the 1/3 system would be stupid aswell imo. We need a proper siege system. If there is a fief with a 10k army you set up a siege army which has to be the same size/bigger, and then the city must be unable to receive any reinforcements unless the besieging army gets smaller than the cities garrison (obviously the besieging army can be reinforced all the time). Then you should be able to make 1 attack after the other with a reasonable army size, taken from the besieging army

That, actually, is a very cool idea.

A lot more difficult to implement than waiving the 1/3 rule. What I would add - no trade (on trade goods) in besieged location...
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Kalp on July 04, 2013, 07:27:17 pm
And what with current troops upkeep ? Maintenance of 10k-15k besieging army in this case probably cost a lot of gold...
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Casimir on July 04, 2013, 07:39:54 pm
No real surprises in the stats tbh.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Torben on July 04, 2013, 07:48:43 pm
removing the 1/3 system would be stupid aswell imo. We need a proper siege system. If there is a fief with a 10k army you set up a siege army which has to be the same size/bigger, and then the city must be unable to receive any reinforcements unless the besieging army gets smaller than the cities garrison (obviously the besieging army can be reinforced all the time). Then you should be able to make 1 attack after the other with a reasonable army size, taken from the besieging army


the besieging army would have to be attackable from outside at any time ofc
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Haramir on July 04, 2013, 08:07:56 pm
Free Companies of Calradia = 197,438 (156,984 lost+40,454 current)

Kind of shows how inaccurate this is.  We have thousands more troops than our garrisons say and of those troops we lost I would say we have bought or traded fiefs or just plain capped flags on over-garrisoned fiefs (captured 15,000 troops that way) for about 90,000 of those tickets.  But under your calculation we would have more members with ticks than grey order and coalition, which I can assure you is absolutely not the case - we would be lucky if we have half their number.


To be fair occitan learned EU turtling from the UIF and have done a total of 45 attacks since the start of strategus - some of those in EU.  They are the biggest faction in NA with most troops, most gold, most players and most fiefs and they are slowly making NA as stagnant as EU thanks to what arrowaine learned from his EU allies - basically all they do is buy fiefs and never attack, change it to trading simulator game with no real battles.

Its like that one economics game theory where whoever wins the most is the guy that turtles while the other guys doesn't turtle, but then everyone chooses to turtle because its in their interest to not be the big loser who doesn't turtle, but then everyone loses when no one attacks.  We gave Occitan an opening by bleeding 50K troops taking all the FIDLGB and most of the Chaos fiefs, while Occitan built up to 120K troops with them and their vassal faction semenstorm by not doing any attacks for months  (basically we would be the big loser in game theory).  But Arrowaine at heart is scared of us and is so worried about Pixel e-peen they went right back to turtling and stopped marching armies towards us before even 1 battle.


Really - EVERYONE needs to get over their addiction to pixel e-peen.  Just risk losing everything and duke it out for all the troops - no one says you have to attack their castles and cities.  Just attack every village and field army you see.  Even if you lose 60K troops you are not going to lose your core cities and castles with those size garrisons - make mad xp for everyone.

We were on the attacker sides almost 40% of the time during our big war with the VE facing infavorables odds during the entire war and made around 120 battles, most of them 1,5K vs 1,5K.  So saying we were turtling is entirely false, i dont consider it to be turtling when we stopped waging wars for a month when we first faced NA faction that build up for months when we just came back from EU unorganized with some troops and golds.

At the moment our clan is not quite active, except managing our strat shit, just like FCC were almost gone for quite a while last year. We are not as active as when we face the VE, these where good times for everyone, but it almost made us putting too much time in this game and we got feed up.  To be honest, at first we only wanted to give a show and survived the first month of the war, but it drags on and on and never ended until recently.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Harpag on July 04, 2013, 08:54:14 pm
Tyr, 1/3 system would be ok, but only with proper timer or/and with scaling. What we have now is just simply misconception. Do you agree with me?
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Vovka on July 04, 2013, 09:00:57 pm
@ Harpag
1) DRZ have no S&D because Coalition, Crusader Alliance, Knights who say Ni and Peacebreakers have been routinely stealing it whenever they can :D  I don't think they are any better at managing it than anybody else.

 :P
the last one who tried steal from as was kingdom of blade so we get 2400 free goods  :o
other is too lazy do to shit like this  :D looking forward to the new shit pulled out of your ass about what's going on in the DRZ and DRZ lands  :twisted:

Templar only achievement is that they respeс our fiefs and now we have the smaller SD increase among the major factions  :P
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Casimir on July 04, 2013, 09:07:19 pm
Our only achievement? What about those castles you lost? ;)
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Vovka on July 04, 2013, 09:39:25 pm
Our only achievement? What about those castles you lost? ;)
lost? hah! we give it to u in rent so u can make some money  :P
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Rebelyell on July 04, 2013, 09:52:47 pm
Cold war on desert :Episode 245
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Casimir on July 04, 2013, 10:04:07 pm
I paid for a skiing holiday in the mountains only to find there's no snow! I DEMAND REFUND!
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tyr_ on July 05, 2013, 10:07:03 am
Tyr, 1/3 system would be ok, but only with proper timer or/and with scaling. What we have now is just simply misconception. Do you agree with me?

On weekends i agree with you, but now during my exam time i barley have time to equip armies^^
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tomas on July 05, 2013, 02:39:48 pm
The 1/3 system on its own will not work because Clans can still have people inside grinding troops to replace any losses.  With enough grinders you can easily make certain fiefs unconquerable.

On the other hand we should not want to end up with a system whereby Towns can be taken in 1 assault easily and regardless of the number of troops inside.  It is already possible with flag capping but it shouldn't be any more probable because then we go back to a strat where whichever big clans happen to be most active will stomp on everything in their path (like Strat 3).

What we need is a way of freezing fief garrisons under certain circumstances so that fiefs can be ground down naturally over time with 1500 man armies.  Then the defender has to either sit back and take the assaults, which will come at the attackers convenience, or they have to sally out and leave their defenses to break the siege.

Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Butan on July 05, 2013, 03:10:19 pm
First statistical check I did:

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Thats an average of 4500 troops per fief, counting villages as fiefs, even though most of them have 0 or very few troops in.



(click to show/hide)


Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tyr_ on July 05, 2013, 04:15:00 pm
The 1/3 system on its own will not work because Clans can still have people inside grinding troops to replace any losses.  With enough grinders you can easily make certain fiefs unconquerable.

On the other hand we should not want to end up with a system whereby Towns can be taken in 1 assault easily and regardless of the number of troops inside.  It is already possible with flag capping but it shouldn't be any more probable because then we go back to a strat where whichever big clans happen to be most active will stomp on everything in their path (like Strat 3).

What we need is a way of freezing fief garrisons under certain circumstances so that fiefs can be ground down naturally over time with 1500 man armies.  Then the defender has to either sit back and take the assaults, which will come at the attackers convenience, or they have to sally out and leave their defenses to break the siege.

I already made a suggestion with a pretty long explanation about a possible solution: Basicly you need to besiege a fief with an army that has at least the size of the fiefs army (yes, besieging will be expensive, nothing comes for free), and this should block all troop&equipment transfers to/from the fiefs (this also includes the equipment bug getting fixed so you can use all your gear all the time), the only thing possible should be selling items so you can get rid of minused stuff. Once the fief is besieged attackers obviously can put in as many/few troops into an assault as they want, though they might want to end it quickly due to the high upkeep.
Ofc the army should be attackable - either by a counterassault from the city or by attacks from the outside.
Attackers from the outside should be able to breach the besieging armies position when they win their battle and reinforce the city with what they have left afterwards - an idea i like for this is that the besieging army is "spread" around the city. So if there is as many besiegers as besieged, the attacking army has to fight the same amount of tickets it has. So if you besiege a fief with 10k that has an 10k army, an attacker with 1.5k has to fight 1.5
But if you besiege it with 20k, an attacker with a 1.5k army needs to fight 3k.
Whatever survives the battle can reinforce the city, sth like this if i remind it all correctly.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tomas on July 05, 2013, 11:25:32 pm
(click to show/hide)

The trouble with that for me is

1) Big armies move extremely slowly and using many small armies to move and then combining would be a nightmare to coordinate
2) The cost really does get silly
3) If counterattacked all you need is a fairly small amount of bad luck with maps and you will get spawn capped losing everything

Basically the cost in time and resources doesn't outweigh the risk in being spawn capped when counterattacked and so i think we would still have the current stalemate.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Tyr_ on July 06, 2013, 10:38:31 am
as i said - winning a battle means that you breach the defense to get some reinforcement, you wont kill off the whole army surrounding the city ;)
but yeah, coordination and money cost will be a pain, however its still better than the current system
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Butan on July 07, 2013, 04:29:32 am
and teleport their players to hell EU


Just wanted to share an information about that.


There is now a "Strategus" option panel in the Settings on the cRPG website : one of the 2 options there is being able to choose whether you want to respawn on the EU side or the NA side when you get teleported.

Not sure if this has been reported yet, but it should tremendously help NA players.
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Turboflex on July 07, 2013, 04:57:59 am
which page is it on? I cant find it
Title: Re: Archived strat battles - chart view
Post by: Lt_Anders on July 07, 2013, 05:04:09 am
http://forum.meleegaming.com/strategus-general-discussion/it-has-arrived-guarnteed-respawns-in-na-and-better-nighttimes!/msg819667/#msg819667