Author Topic: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous  (Read 738 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Schoi

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 578
  • Infamy: 114
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: small weiner
  • Game nicks: Skoi, Schoi, jus_the_tip_bby_feel_rlygud
Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« on: April 20, 2019, 03:46:35 am »
+8
This test strategus has shown me that unless the defending team is half retards with over 140 ping. It will look like this due to ladders being destroyed so people fall to their deaths every time they attack

(click to show/hide)

What started out as 31, became 13 for the attacking side

Siege towers (like the base singleplayer campaign) in my opinion would help greatly, when the current ones break (if you can even use them) it makes the area they covered unstable, and basically unplayable and non normal to play on.

This shit will kill the mod in my opinion if attacking side continues to be not fun and fucking retarded

Let me know what you others think, leave a comment. I think this needs to change, now.

EDIT: Yes, some of the attackers did fine. But if over half your team leaves - what's the fucking point?

« Last Edit: April 20, 2019, 03:50:07 am by Schoi »
Best quote
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Well fact is, NA players are mostly casual normies not knowing mechanics & who would have no chance against competitive EU players on the same ping.

Offline Schoi

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 578
  • Infamy: 114
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: small weiner
  • Game nicks: Skoi, Schoi, jus_the_tip_bby_feel_rlygud
Re: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« Reply #1 on: April 20, 2019, 03:49:06 am »
+1
I believe if a siege tower is present, it should take the normal (singleplayer or native) amount of attackers to move it up, and then triple the amount of defenders to move it backwards.
Best quote
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Well fact is, NA players are mostly casual normies not knowing mechanics & who would have no chance against competitive EU players on the same ping.

Offline Schoi

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 578
  • Infamy: 114
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: small weiner
  • Game nicks: Skoi, Schoi, jus_the_tip_bby_feel_rlygud
Re: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« Reply #2 on: April 20, 2019, 03:54:23 am »
0
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Best quote
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Well fact is, NA players are mostly casual normies not knowing mechanics & who would have no chance against competitive EU players on the same ping.

Offline mcdeath

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 797
  • Infamy: 349
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« Reply #3 on: April 20, 2019, 04:23:08 am »
+4
The sieges take way too long and are literally no fun at all. It starts to feel like a chore after about 10 deaths and people start to slowly leave. It happens in field battles as well and ultimately it just kills off the population for the battle server once the strat battle is over.
Strat was fun when people actually used the forums for diplomacy and shit talking. Now you have all these cancerous idiots using discord that just argue about nothing related to strat in the strat channel. The changes that have been made to strat are neat ideas that have been poorly implemented and just take away from c-rpg itself.

The argument that this is a test round is a moot point. If this is the turnout you get for a test round what makes you think that more people are going to come for the real thing when they aren't enjoying the new mechanics in the test round?
McDeath: This guy doesn't shut his lip, but he's one of the funniest players in-game.

Offline Asheram

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1107
  • Infamy: 124
  • cRPG Player
  • stuck in a never ending time loop
    • View Profile
Re: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« Reply #4 on: April 20, 2019, 04:46:56 am »
0
Yeah it worked well when mod had enough ppl to still populate battle during seiges but I agree they take way too long now.
Mortal Combat!ARYS "@Asheram you arent even what you stole from me bud"
PENDULUM
For everything that could have been At least we took the ride There's no relief in bitterness Might as well let it die

Offline DaveUKR

  • Supreme Overlord
  • *******
  • Renown: 1456
  • Infamy: 242
  • cRPG Player
  • Small rain lays great dust
    • View Profile
Re: Attacking a castle or city is cancerous
« Reply #5 on: April 20, 2019, 09:22:04 am »
+4
Sieges are super easy if organized well compared to old Strategus rounds. We just lack population.

And what can we do if people you accepted are retards who are not loyal? They are not amused so they leave, that's an issue of the players and probably your commandship. Get people organized in voice chat, add people who leave to blacklist etc.

I will work on my side to do something better. But it's even more cancerous for me because i'm the only active developer that works with the code for several months already, all the people that volunteered to do stuff with the code - never helped anyhow, though they had all the accesses and instructions. You guys can also help with wiki at least - https://wiki.c-rpg.net , fill it with Strategus info, mechanics etc.

In old times when sieges were 10 times more cancerous, half of roster didn't leave even when it was horrible. So just don't accept pussies who leave and that's it.