cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Topic started by: Osakasa on May 06, 2014, 10:24:16 am

Title: Strategus balance suggestions
Post by: Osakasa on May 06, 2014, 10:24:16 am

As we all know, there is no disadvantage to be a big clan. More players -> bigger bannerstack -> more strategus money and tickets -> better gear etc.

1. Make bigger clans' army upkeep cost higher. If there are two clans, clan A has 300 members and clan B has 30, the upkeep cost for 200 tickets army is higher for clan A.
Why: This feature would give a small balance between big ones and small ones in economy. There are tons of silver in strategus and most of them are in the hands of big ones'. When upkeep cost is same for all clans, bigger ones benefit mostly.
Effect: Small clans could compete better in strategus if they are active. Also this would help new (small) clans in strategus when their upkeep cost is lower. This also encourages new clans join in strategus.

2. Make bigger clans' S&D grow slower in fiefs and castles.
Why: Bigger clans have +20 fiefs/castles, this forms so huge area in strategus map that they can trade goods inside their homeborders with good bonuses, without any risk random army will attack.
Effect: Bigger clans would have to look more incomes in order to keep their massive armies equipped. When big clans can't do trading inside their homeborders as efficiently as now, they will expose themselves for possible attacks. When big ones need more money in maintenance, successful robbery would be a huge reward for small clans. This would balance economy too.

3. Not sure if i like this one either but still... No more strategus silver and tickets from siege server
Why: Siege server is pretty arcade. Many players join in there and start to level up character. If you die, you'll wait 5/20 secs and then respawn whereas in battle server respawn time can be +3mins. This makes playing in siege server more casually. However, when UIF members are active strategus players, most of them are +33 lvl and bannerstacked in same side. This form two teams, team 1: high level ones vs team 2: random players plus those who are leveling up characters. No wonder siege server is so unbalanced.
Effect: If UIF members want to grind tickets and silver, they would have to join battle server. Then, i'm sure, number of players will drop in siege server. Probably temporary but siege server gameplay would be more balanced. Also, a bit easier place to play for low levels.

(click to show/hide)

4. Kill the strategus now
Why:

(click to show/hide)

Because we don't give a fuck about it anyway (EU)

Effect:

(click to show/hide)

There will be 15 players in battle server and 6 players in siege during prime time. Strategus was the only one which kept mod alive, and that removed killed the whole mod when players got bored to play without purpose.

(click to show/hide)

I really don't like this one because i enjoy playing the mod and want to keep it alive as long as possible. This is a great game after all!

Spliting up a big clan to clan1, clan2, clan3... of course would make these changes worthless but then in strategus map logistic is hindered a bit. All transfers must be allowed first before if players were in different clans. Clan1 members couldn't see where Clan2 and Clan3 members are in strategus map. Then bannerstack would be smaller in siege and battle servers.

I'm sure i missed some points there and i know with these changes strategus wouldn't be perfect but i believe a bit better. By better i mean balanced. Balanced mod is more enjoyable, more enjoyable makes mod more active one, which gives more lifetime to mod.

Share your opinions and thoughts please.

Osa|Kasa|la

Title: Re: Strategus balance suggestions
Post by: Switchtense on May 06, 2014, 11:56:45 am

As you said, big factions will split into multiple small factions, still coordianted by the same leaders.

All the troop grinders would be in one faction, then the traders in one, problem of high upkeep solved.

To buy goods you don't need to have the fief in your faction, so split the fief owners into 2 different factions, slow s&d rate fixed.

Would not work at all.

Besides, I do not think that UIF cares about upkeep much. They already are rich as fuck anyway.


Also no more tickets from siege server:
That would also harm small clans, since, so I assume, most people play siege.
And having Druzhina and Greys bannerstack on EU1 would be shit as well.
That is Merc's and Byzantium's job.

Title: Re: Strategus balance suggestions
Post by: Mr.K. on May 06, 2014, 02:34:31 pm

Quote from: Switchtense on May 06, 2014, 11:56:45 am

And having Druzhina and Greys bannerstack on EU1 would be shit as well.
That is Merc's and Byzantium's job.

Druzhina and Grey's can't seem to win while banner stacking on EU1, that's why they stay on EU2 most of the time. Mercs and Byz are a bigger problem though :)

To the actual topic. I would rather just see the banner stacking addressed in the auto(un)balancer. Punish big clans by splitting them up anyway when they join with 20 players to steamroll. Allow only 5-10 players on one team from one clan and if there's more, split them evenly on both teams. Also while doing this, try to avoid some good players constantly getting team switched and forced to play against their clan mates.

On (EU) Strategus, I'm not sure what to do exactly. If you don't want to attack the UIF nor like the northern factions, there's nothing in between. Also the rosters are empty nowadays most of the time so that's even more of an incentive to form big alliances. Splitting them up I don't think would work for the reasons mentioned in the two posts above. We need incentives for them to NOT work with each other. Some kind of a main price for the winner, that can't be sold or transferred (so you couldn't have a shared victory). Would Harpag be so willing to work so hard if it meant in the end Vovka would claim the price? Greed should be the driving force behind Strategus, not friendships.

Also unexpected events like a Mongol invasion in the desert :twisted: or a plague breakout in Suno :shock: or earthquake destroying the city of Reyvadin :| would change the game immediately. It should of course be random not to be too unfair. Changing a few mechanics on the map like deserts, mountains, and snow killing off armies as well as slowing them down would bring more realism and make it harder to attack certain parts of the map, as well as trade in those areas. Camels - bonus in the desert, shit stats in the battles, donkeys would be the same in the mountains. Four seasons, don't try to conquer russ.. Bubastan in the winter and try not to move so much in the desert during the summer. Food production. There are plenty of ways to make strat more interesting, but I'm not sure if it's worth it or not as it seems to be more or less dead already.