Author Topic: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership  (Read 8509 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tomas

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 718
  • Infamy: 217
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
    • Fallen Brigade Website
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
  • Game nicks: Fallen_Tomas
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #90 on: November 27, 2011, 12:01:27 am »
0
I don't think this idea will make much difference however if you really want to be controversial then it could be extended into something that really will change Strat.

Lets see how many people I can provoke with this idea :D

1)  It costs 500000 cRPG experience per day to play Strat.  So 250 minutes of x2 grind.

2)  People can opt out of Strat properly which means they are not on the Strat map, but they can still fight in Strat Battles.  People should be able to opt in again as well, but only after a week has passed.  This can be used to cover holidays etc. 

3)  If a fief owner opts out then everything in the fief gets transferred to that person and the character gets frozen.  Meanwhile the fief reverts to neutral and has its gold/population reset.  Anybody inactive for 7 days should automatically be opted out of Strat

4)  Making money in Strat, makes you XP in cRPG.  I'd say that for every 1 gold you make on Strat you should get 1000 XP.  So sell 10 goods for 50 gold each and you have made back your Strat fee.  This allows traders to make xp playing Strat.  Craft for 4 days and you will have 100 goods, travel for 1 day and you will get 50 gold goods price.   Do this and you will have gained 2500000 XP (5000000 income - 2500000 strat fees) over the 5 days.  Trading therfore pays well :)

5)  Of course raiding can also pay as it only takes 2 days to attack someone, steal their goods and then sell them yourself.  Do that and you have gained 4000000 XP :D

6)  Owning fiefs also pays - 20 XP per 1 population.  So a Village will only generate 100000 XP and mean you still need to trade/raid.  Of course, you will still get XP from making money from visiting fees and trade taxes so you will get a little extra XP.  A Castle generates 500000 XP which pays of your playing fee entirely allowing you to concentrate on the more strategic side of Strat.  Owning a Town nets you 1000000 XP and therefore pays out 500000 XP per day making them highly desirable. 

7)  For every 100 XP you earn in Strat, you also get 1 gold just to sweaten the deal and allow people playing Strat to carry slightly better equipment in cRPG.  Own a Town and you're getting an extra 10000 gold per day towards upkeep :D  Alternatively you can spread it around your clan a bit to keep them applying for your roster

8)  Since this will remove grinding from the game, troop upkeep and equipment costs would need to be reduced.  Troop recruitment would probably also need increasing.

9)  You cannot store troops inside fiefs (the pop includes the garrison.  This is so that owning multiple fiefs yourself makes you weaker as if two are attacked you can only reinforce 1 yourself.

Overall, the above changes would reduce the playing population of the Strat browser massively and would remove the mostly inactive gold/troop grind entirely from the game.  Instead the only people on the Strat map will be those willing to invest a bit of time into it in order to gain the benfits.  Trading, raiding and owning Towns are the big earners as they are what take the most time.   Owning Villages and Castles are a means to allow you to eventually take a town or secure your clans trade routes.   

EDIT: get the equipment prices and equipment crating set up right and people will also be able to make XP doing this if they want to
« Last Edit: November 27, 2011, 12:22:00 am by Tomas »

Offline Voso

  • Earl
  • ******
  • Renown: 330
  • Infamy: 35
  • cRPG Player Sir Black Pawn A Gentleman and a Scholar
  • The So-so.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Huey's Cavalieres
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #91 on: November 27, 2011, 07:32:51 am »
+1
Please don't choose to do it by gold.

If you do, this will cause the prices of heirlooms on the marketplace to go up and cause fief owners to have control of the market due to their increased gold gain.


Experience doesn't seem too great either as it will cause all fief owners to be a higher level, which both aids in them defending their fief in strat and regular playing in cRPG. This will also become a disadvantage for all non-strat players/fief owners.

I suppose experience is the better of the two though, considering how much experience it takes to level up and how it only affects fief owners whereas increased gold gain could also aid in the purchase of strategus troops through the forums/whatever.
visitors can't see pics , please register or login


There are old sellswords and bold sellswords, but there are no old, bold sellswords.

Offline Sphinxer

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 53
  • Infamy: 16
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: _Sphinx_
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #92 on: November 27, 2011, 07:48:13 am »
0
I'm for anything that can improve Strategus toward the end of the 3 biggest clans sticking together... that's just retarded and it's killing Strategus, just like it killed many other mmorpg. It's now a trading game with "some" battles ,instead of a battle game with some trading.

Offline FRANK_THE_TANK

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1312
  • Infamy: 339
  • cRPG Player Sir White Knight
  • FluckCucker
    • View Profile
  • Faction: A Free and proud Peasant of Fisdnar!!!
  • Game nicks: FRANK_THE_TANK
  • IRC nick: Sippy sip
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #93 on: November 27, 2011, 07:50:50 am »
0
n = terrabad idea
Fammi un pompino!

I think I have ball cancer in my right nut :(
Good news everybody! It's not nut cancer :)
Bad news everybody, I got dumped :(

Offline Dehitay

  • Baron
  • ****
  • Renown: 121
  • Infamy: 48
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Fallen Brigade
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #94 on: November 27, 2011, 08:46:01 am »
0
I'm for anything that can improve Strategus toward the end of the 3 biggest clans sticking together... that's just retarded and it's killing Strategus, just like it killed many other mmorpg. It's now a trading game with "some" battles ,instead of a battle game with some trading.
I'm highly skeptical if this will actually encourage clan vs clan fighting as much as it will in-clan fighting over who gets the fiefs a faction owns. I think giving benefits for battles would be more beneficial to keeping Strategus interesting.

But I've already said that and am just using it as an excuse to ask you while still staying on topic. Who are the 3 biggest clans? I know it has to be between Fallen, Grey Order, LLJK, and Druzhina, but I'm not sure which losers have the smallest membership count of those four.

Offline Maximus101

  • Noble
  • **
  • Renown: 16
  • Infamy: 4
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Merciless
  • Game nicks: Merciless_Takeolan
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #95 on: November 27, 2011, 09:43:40 am »
0
I am very sorry but I REALLY don't like this. The fief owners are the richest people in crpg anyways because they have been playing for a lon tine to get there in the clan. I am 2nd gen and only have a tempered 2hander and the clan leaders have almost everything +3. Maybe split it between the whole clan, therefore making fighting for fiefs worthwhile for everyone or maybe, or just for everyone that fought taking it. But the idea of giving the most richest, experienced players more riches and experience...

Offline Zaharist

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 182
  • Infamy: 76
  • cRPG Player
  • Carpe Diem
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Druzhina
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #96 on: November 27, 2011, 09:59:24 am »
0
Maximus,
1) 30k exp and 1,5k gold per day is nothing
2) fief owners are not the richest ppl in crpg that's for sure
Igni et ferro

Offline Lordark

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 155
  • Infamy: 206
  • cRPG Player
  • Please respect all admins and thier decisions.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Solo
  • Game nicks: Lordark
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #97 on: November 27, 2011, 10:07:11 am »
0
Make it penalty from distance of capitol like Fallen dude said so successful clans wont just be able to steam roll the map!
Never forget the day Dragons came to Calradia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfLxHJY0lQI&feature=related
My personal theme song, We will never surrender!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg1xqAjQ5e4

Offline Segd

  • Marshall
  • ********
  • Renown: 845
  • Infamy: 88
  • cRPG Player A Gentleman and a Scholar
    • View Profile
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #98 on: November 27, 2011, 10:38:33 am »
+1
Make it penalty from distance of capitol like Fallen dude said so successful clans wont just be able to steam roll the map!
then were will be an alliance of small Druzhinas clans(Shariz tsardom, Durquba Khalifat etc.)

Offline Matey

  • King
  • **********
  • Renown: 1327
  • Infamy: 372
  • cRPG Player
  • A Pirate
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: Matey_BRD
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #99 on: November 27, 2011, 11:05:58 am »
+1
i say the golds fine, but more xp. its so minor as to be irrelevant otherwise. as for it giving a huge edge to fief owners, not really. 50k xp a day is 50min at 1x, or 10min at 5x (assuming gen 1). thats not a big deal.

also, its not the longest playing members who get fiefs.. at least not in FCC... our fiefs go to active people who are interested in more active role in strat.

Offline Sphinxer

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 53
  • Infamy: 16
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Game nicks: _Sphinx_
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #100 on: November 27, 2011, 07:25:32 pm »
+3
Well Matey, it's not because the good guys *cough* does it the right way that the bad guys will ;)

I doubt it will change anything in EU and I don't expect to see any wars between the carebears for 50k a day (50mins of play at x1 like Matey said) per fief. They probably rather sit back, enjoy doing f*ck all than fighting, farm troops and gold, pick on small clans (not much of a challenge), do all the trades they want without being disturbed by the few clans who could really stop/slow them, and be OP.

I think in this strat, it really sucks to be on the EU side.

Offline Lordark

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 155
  • Infamy: 206
  • cRPG Player
  • Please respect all admins and thier decisions.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Solo
  • Game nicks: Lordark
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #101 on: November 27, 2011, 08:30:05 pm »
0
then were will be an alliance of small Druzhinas clans(Shariz tsardom, Durquba Khalifat etc.)

Yes of course they can do that but it will make it harder still on those clans so that the smaller guys have better chance. 

Its not a final solution but it is a step in the right direction.
Never forget the day Dragons came to Calradia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfLxHJY0lQI&feature=related
My personal theme song, We will never surrender!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg1xqAjQ5e4

Offline mandible/splinteryourjaw

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 50
  • Infamy: 12
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #102 on: November 28, 2011, 03:00:20 am »
-1
Well Matey, it's not because the good guys *cough* does it the right way that the bad guys will ;)

I doubt it will change anything in EU and I don't expect to see any wars between the carebears for 50k a day (50mins of play at x1 like Matey said) per fief. They probably rather sit back, enjoy doing f*ck all than fighting, farm troops and gold, pick on small clans (not much of a challenge), do all the trades they want without being disturbed by the few clans who could really stop/slow them, and be OP.

I think in this strat, it really sucks to be on the EU side.

I still think the only solution to this is to do something similar to what I wrote in my first post.........

AI armies/bandits roaming the countryside and a roll of the dice forcing certain actions.  Trying to micro manage it with small changes, hoping something will happen, seems to time intensive.  Let the computer make things happen!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

A roll of the dice for fiefholders and aggressive, free-roaming AI units!!!!!!!!

Offline Lordark

  • Count
  • *****
  • Renown: 155
  • Infamy: 206
  • cRPG Player
  • Please respect all admins and thier decisions.
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Solo
  • Game nicks: Lordark
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #103 on: November 28, 2011, 07:47:17 am »
0
Plz fox strat owner ships and fix people being ABLE to attack your own faction to avoid people defending thier own villages and delaying strat battle which Is a banable offence.

http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,21308.0/topicseen.html
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 08:06:09 am by Lordark »
Never forget the day Dragons came to Calradia
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfLxHJY0lQI&feature=related
My personal theme song, We will never surrender!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hg1xqAjQ5e4

Offline Graf_Hodenschaf

  • Knight
  • ***
  • Renown: 38
  • Infamy: 27
  • cRPG Player
    • View Profile
  • Faction: Trade Guild
  • Game nicks: Graf_Hodenschaf
  • IRC nick: Graf_Hodenschaf
Re: Controverse suggestion: fief ownership
« Reply #104 on: November 28, 2011, 08:46:09 am »
0
Hmm, i suggest chadz should start a test phase for lets say 2 month? Im sure most of the strategus players will see what happens or we will see how it works. We also can continue writing our suggestions here.

So, the boss of the fief will get gold and xp, if he is at generation xxx, he can retire xx times and heirloom items. Could it be possible that this will flood the market and make a calradian financial crisis??  :wink: ( seriously, this is a important point to think about !! )
I personally doubt that this will change much of the gameplay ( ok, maybe some inclan-revolutions  :twisted: )
Livestreaming crpg:  twitch.tv/beerman_aut