Author Topic: Strategus History  (Read 47242 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Casimir

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1756
  • Infamy: 271
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The Dashing Templar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Templar
  • Game nicks: Templar_Casimir
  • IRC nick: Casimir
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #75 on: May 10, 2011, 09:28:52 am »
0
The fact is Ecko Growl had been talking about leaving before any of this stuff happened.  Hed become far less active after the Crusade as he tried to work on his own game development.

No excuses, although obviously the events in strat acted as a catalyst they were not the cause.
Turtles

Offline ManOfWar

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 243
  • Infamy: 36
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • No crutches at all!
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Remnants
  • Game nicks: Remnant_ManOfWar (Formerly Takeda)
  • IRC nick: ManOfWar
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #76 on: May 10, 2011, 05:25:53 pm »
0
Here is Part 2 of Strategus ATS History:

(click to show/hide)

Bravo Bravo, an excellent recount of the strategus history, Why o why did Destin have to go inactive, Maybe Id still be in Takeda
Just a soldier

Offline Ecko

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 90
  • Infamy: 74
  • cRPG Player
  • Respect is earned.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: NA CRPG Admin
  • Game nicks: Ecko_ATS
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #77 on: May 10, 2011, 06:22:32 pm »
0
I think some people are taking this too seriously. I literally have no problem with the guy. I'm sorry you feel like I'm pouring salt on an old wound or slandering his good name.

He probably was a good guy, but this IS what happened. Don't blame me.


p.s. I clearly stated that it was my belief that he left on those terms, that doesn't mean he did. Cry more ya babies.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Casimir

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1756
  • Infamy: 271
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The Dashing Templar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Templar
  • Game nicks: Templar_Casimir
  • IRC nick: Casimir
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #78 on: May 10, 2011, 07:02:46 pm »
0
I'm not crying, but when you say making up excuses etc. your declaring that as a fact, not an opinion.
Turtles

Offline Ecko

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 90
  • Infamy: 74
  • cRPG Player
  • Respect is earned.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: NA CRPG Admin
  • Game nicks: Ecko_ATS
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #79 on: May 10, 2011, 07:06:01 pm »
0
It was an opinion
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline Beauchamp

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 427
  • Infamy: 79
  • cRPG Player Sir White Pawn
    • View Profile
    • Personal portfolio
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #80 on: May 10, 2011, 08:06:31 pm »
0
Pouring salt on a wound. He is obviously defeated, and you need not slurr his name. I never met Growlz, but from what I hear, he was a good military leader. Honestly he doesn't have to stay and be your play-thing after he (and the templars) have been openly defeated. I'm sure if ATS got ganged, then only bad things would come of it.

PS: I stopped reading your essay at "Goretooth"..

He was a bad military leader (even worse than me). However he was perfect organizer and he was really dedicated to the clan. He also was able to do a lot of other stuff for the clan (graphics, map editing, server management...).
OOODDIIINVALHALLAAAAAAA on the 20th of April 2011: What I know is that... heh, eh ja how can I explain? ...deh feeling to believe in Odin is right, dat is what I say, ja?!

Offline ManOfWar

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 243
  • Infamy: 36
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • No crutches at all!
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Remnants
  • Game nicks: Remnant_ManOfWar (Formerly Takeda)
  • IRC nick: ManOfWar
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #81 on: May 10, 2011, 08:33:48 pm »
0
He was a bad military leader (even worse than me). However he was perfect organizer and he was really dedicated to the clan. He also was able to do a lot of other stuff for the clan (graphics, map editing, server management...).

What did you do that was so bad.


@casimir- What ever happened to the NA wing of Templars "snicker"
Just a soldier

Offline Nebun

  • Duke
  • *******
  • Renown: 532
  • Infamy: 162
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • - BAD BECAUSE RUSSIAN -
    • View Profile
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #82 on: May 10, 2011, 09:45:45 pm »
0
What did you do that was so bad.


@casimir- What ever happened to the NA wing of Templars "snicker"

attacked us assuming we skint
when UIF looks at you
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Offline ManOfWar

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 243
  • Infamy: 36
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • No crutches at all!
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Remnants
  • Game nicks: Remnant_ManOfWar (Formerly Takeda)
  • IRC nick: ManOfWar
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #83 on: May 10, 2011, 10:23:22 pm »
0
attacked us assuming we skint

ah i understand now
Just a soldier

Offline Casimir

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1756
  • Infamy: 271
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The Dashing Templar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Templar
  • Game nicks: Templar_Casimir
  • IRC nick: Casimir
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #84 on: May 10, 2011, 11:34:00 pm »
0
@casimir- What ever happened to the NA wing of Templars "snicker"

Contact seems to have been lost at some point.

Many members went missing after the transfer from GSC to team speak.

Also Alopen went inactive and he really kept up alot of the relay between EU and NA.

We still get the occasional NA recruit but with Hospitalliers on the scene its really an obvious choice for would be NA crusaders.
Turtles

Offline 7000bc

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 57
  • Infamy: 10
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • Vae Victus, motherfucker.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Roma
  • Game nicks: Varros
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #85 on: May 10, 2011, 11:38:18 pm »
0
Pouring salt on a wound. He is obviously defeated, and you need not slurr his name. I never met Growlz, but from what I hear, he was a good military leader. Honestly he doesn't have to stay and be your play-thing after he (and the templars) have been openly defeated. I'm sure if ATS got ganged, then only bad things would come of it.

PS: I stopped reading your essay at "Goretooth"..

As a former templar in days long past, Growl was a good guy, he just had to deal with rl issues. He's gone and cant defend himself, so don't diss him.
For while the fire in the heart of a single Remnant still burns... can Stratia truly have fallen?

Offline Belatu

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 242
  • Infamy: 111
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • what
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Belatucadros
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #86 on: May 11, 2011, 01:52:14 am »
0
Awesome!
My fridge is my shield

Offline 22nd_King_Plazek

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 87
  • Infamy: 57
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #87 on: May 11, 2011, 04:37:08 am »
0
Nice account, interesting to hear how things were in the Americas.

Of course I would dispute as to whether or not we were beaten, we abandoned our few villages with everything we had and took everything up north to meet with the Russians. So we could fight later, on our own terms and gain some retribution. Of course the Templars claimed victory and the end of the first successful crusade upon taking the last of our territories. We had abandoned them with little more than a few peasants and surplus weapons, so in my eyes this was no great accomplishment, hell had we tried to defend it it would not have been that impressive a feat either! They may have declared the wars end but for us, it was far from over  :wink:

It depends how you see it I guess, two seperate wars or just the one, and that depends on your perspective.

---

As to whether Growl was a good leader or not I believe actions speak louder than words. In his favour he had formed a great faction, one of the largest and most powerful (at least that was what people believed, and what people believe matters). However he made some foolish decisions (such as thinking attacking the 22nd was a smart move  :P ), he was already losing the war with the UIF and he ultimately abandoned the Templars at the most important point since their creation.

Of course given that things crumbled so quickly after he left also counts in his favour. He was no doubt essential to the Templars at that point in time, though I believe they have made somewhat of a recovery since, and the loss of a leader at such a point however competent will hit hard.

He was good enough but it is hard to really tell, unless you hold RL reasons for him having to leave against him, which arguably is unfair.

Offline Casimir

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1756
  • Infamy: 271
  • cRPG Player Sir White Bishop A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The Dashing Templar
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Knights Templar
  • Game nicks: Templar_Casimir
  • IRC nick: Casimir
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #88 on: May 11, 2011, 09:40:54 am »
0
Indeed, as bad a decision as it may have been it made strat much more enjoyible for almost everyone involved.  However the latter point of the war did become rather repetative i think the crusade and the great calradian war are some of the most memorable parts of strat.
Turtles

Offline Spawny

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 152
  • Infamy: 27
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Templar_Spawny
Re: Strategus History
« Reply #89 on: May 11, 2011, 01:59:04 pm »
0
Indeed, as bad a decision as it may have been it made strat much more enjoyible for almost everyone involved.  However the latter point of the war did become rather repetative i think the crusade and the great calradian war are some of the most memorable parts of strat.

I agree.

We got our asses handed to us in strat, but I've had loads of fun. Castle defenses and sieges, coordinated open field battles, we've had it all.
Most we lost, but that just made the ones we won more enjoyable.

One thing I don't not like is the general hatred towards eachother over a game (strategus in this case). I personally have no problem with anyone from DRZ and with most from 22nd. If I don't like someone, it's because I don't like that person, not the clan as a whole. What I used to see was hatred because "he's from an enemy clan".
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


The problem is even if you are number 1 in NA you are still only number 467 in EU or the worst in AUS(number 17)