I do not dare to sum things up, but let me express few of my personal thoughts about Strat. These are general as the matter is extensive enough to make Ph.D. on that. Save yourself the TL;DR comments, if you don't want to read it - it is your problem. And I want to stress that it is not addressed AGAINST anyone it is just my
personal view on Strategus as a whole.
I wrote that post more or less at the same as Harry wrote his, so you will see that we have a lot in common. I do not agree with the last part of Harry's post, about the battles - if you managed to move your big and heavy snail army - you did a great job and therefore should be able to use it.
WARNING: Opening all spoilers at once will scare you off.
GENERAL VIEWYou may claim that it is GAME DEVELOPED FOR WARS AND BATTLES - and it is. However, for me at least - and I know few other guys who think similar way - it is not about running mindless skirmishes. It is about building up something, about some progress, making conquests, creating and breaking alliances... running wars, but with something bigger than nearest battle in mind. I mean - one may choose to play the way one wishes, but also one shall take into consideration that others may view this differently. Is this approach boring? Maybe - for some. Is this boring for my clanmates? Well, that is why leading the clan is difficult. Motivating people is difficult. As long as we can deal with it - we will. It is one of the factors complicating the gameplay. Again - relations between people. But if you are able to gather large group of people that will share your vision of how the game should look like, and manage them - good for you, and good for the game. And you should not be punished for that, cause you put time and effort to achieve that. The game mechanics should not be aimed in leveling out the chances despite of personal abilities of the players or their decisions made ingame, but in leveling out the field for various types of players big clans, small clans, and just individuals who want to have some fun or gain out of Strat.
Now, obviously the current round is a move in right direction. Economy, geography, trade systems, marketplaces, restraints in movement and troops upkeep, all that gave Strat depth, and that is a good thing. It made the big clans life more difficult. That is fine. That is even greater test of organizational abilities. It turned out, however, that it did scare off casual players, outside of big clans, or small clans. Why? They do not find it interesting or are unable to play.
The ultimate target should be to draw as many players to Startegus as possible. Basing on what I read on this forum I would dare to divide people outside of clans (medium and big ones at least) in two categories: those who could be interested in Strat due to personal gain (like gold and/or XP in cRPG), and those who could have fun from playing strategic game, but are unwilling to join the large clan for any reason (they either constitute a small clan already or may want create one to get whatever they need).
The first group could be more interested in running small Strategus operation just for cash or XP, the second need to have ability to survive on the map. For the first group we need:
- waaay more XP from Strat battles;
- ability to transfer gold to cRPG at a decent ratio (it is done already)
That may draw them to play Strat for very simple reason they will gain XP and gold for cRPG purposes. If sort of by the way they make something on Strat map, thats even better.
The second group (and the first one as well, in fact) needs ability to stay, survive and have fun in Strategus. I believe that enlarging the map is a good idea to achieve that, even the largest factions cannot defend very large area, and moreover do not need that area. The factions needs are based (atm at least) on the number of their members - you need certain area to make items/goods production efficient. But the bigger map will let even smaller clans hold fiefs and craft items. The bigger map will give the them ability to play fight and run type of game fun, XP and money (ultimately cRPG money). I am talking here about bandits but also about professional traders, about caravan guards maybe. It is happening now even one big clan is playing bandits now.
But that is not enough. The large factions should find it difficult to eat smaller one up. It can be achieved by mobility of small groups of troops and granting them hideouts. Again bigger map and ability to craft good (!!!) items quick enough. I am aware that the production abilities of large clans will always be greater, and this is fine because even now running big army (or big caravan) is (and should be) damn slow and expensive. And that limits the ability to use the full potential of the clan. At the same time caravans can, and should, be followed and attacked. That means that they should be relatively weak.
Due to that, small factions and individuals need a decent gear. That may ultimately require their own place, decent smithing skills, and
money but there is only one way to get it - trade. The only issue is will the attacker be able to run away after taking loot
and where he should run away
Bigger map, teleport and cooldown after attack should do the job. If we have enough small bandits or factions, bigger clans should not be able to retaliate easily. They will have to prioritize the targets, or consider the costs of such retaliation. Will you follow guys who stolen some of your goods to another part of the map? Maybe yes, but if you have difficulties in finding guys out and you have to pay a lot of money to run armored party, you will think about it twice. The decision is based on priority of the target.
All in all it means that for the same of Strat itself big organizations should be weakned. chadzs ideas are good in that matter. He wants to weaken large factions, but not by simple you cant do that built in game mechanics, but by playing with peoples minds. Ability to transfer strat gold to cRPG gold is devastating for big factions where every single player needs to have money, and feels the urge to transfer them to cRPG. Bonus to the fief holders - if they gain more in cRPG than other regular clan members - mean that people will kill each other to become a fief owners; the downside is that it will encourage big clans to take more land just to make people happy. Here the vassal system will disrupt internal organization and will let fief owners rebel against clan. So chadz is playing on ruining discipline, loyalty, clan integrity and organization. Trust me thats a powerful stuff. And mark my words if the vassalage system includes lack of information for the clan leaders, it will completely change the game.
A lot of people says that big alliances ruin the gameplay. I personally do not agree, that is the reality of current, previous and any future Strategus rounds. It is simply unavoidable. If two or more factions decide to play as allies there is no way to stop them, no game mechanics will stop them. This game should be played on many levels big factions will run big armies with great difficulties - against other big factions. At the same time they should face smaller clans that will not be afraid of big ones. And I do think that small factions can make a difference here, disrupting trade routes, raiding fiefs.
I have said that before on several occasions, and I will repeat that again. IMHO the greatest strength of Strat is that it is based on human relations. It mimics the RL in that respect, with all human flaws. Just look at the forums, flame wars. Clans have internal problems too. And that what makes the strategic side of it interesting. And I think that any method of formalizing the relations will fail, people will always use the game features only as a tools to achieve the target. So I am against any formal limits in diplomatic relations it will turn into fiction and will be easily abused.
Again the size of the map will matter. It is very difficult to support the ally that is far away. Trade relations does not have to mean the military alliance, but will always be politically driven.
And with decent XP and gold gain on Strat battles I can guarantee that roster will be full, even if large alliances are created.
Here we come to the raid bonus. You own the fief? Be ready to defend it, put some effort in it, some money, troops and eq, otherwise it can be raided to the great benefit of the attacker - greater than loot in it, that is the bonus (x2? x3? No idea - it is up to chadz & Co). And the defender shall suffer great loss if it fails to defend. The loot has to be taken from anyone in the fief (residents of the fief), not just the fief itself.
Big clans should have difficulties to retaliate attacks, of course until such big faction marks the small one as primary target, but at the high cost of loss of the strategic progress and need for expensive search of the target. For that we need bandits, we need small factions with 1 2 fiefs, we need hideouts for clans or individuals without fiefs. The fiefs that wont be married to the faction, but rather changed with reasonable ease. We need bigger map. Moreover we need the map WITHOUT NA/EU split. That will allow various factions to mix up on the territory. And that adds flavor to the game. That will require, however, decent Night Time mechanics, that cannot be abused, with long cooldown, and long time until change becomes effective. 48h will do, I guess.
You guys may be surprised that I (being member of the large faction) wrote a lot about making big factions weaker. Well, I believe that it will make things more interesting for everyone. I do want to worry about next steps, consider decisions. I do want this game to be difficult.
All in all I think that this Strat round has great potential. Majority of changes (such as increasing XP from Strat battles or tweaking maneuverability), and tests of them may be done without wipe.
Ok, it turned out to be a little chaotic, maybe I will comb that mess later.
