Let's take a moment and LOL together.

[Casimir]

Well now that the remaining clans have a decent amount of land, we can produce large, heavily armed armies.  there are always disagreements and rivalries over things.  I'm sure there will be more wars to come in strat. Unfortunately those who failed to adequately prepare wont be able to partake in them.  I don't see why that's the fault of those who actively went and sought out alliance and agreements with other factions.


@Ramses, i appreciate your input. indeed my memory of strat is well faded now,  still highlight hypocrisies is always a good way of doing a reality check.

@ToD, AFAIK Hosp were really the only active faction within NE, while TKoV, FCC and Fallen were all very active during this period. Numbers in a faction aren't really representative of how productive or how powerful a faction is.  Its not how big it is, its how you use it?

[Garem]

To the general public, I had no intention of hearing your feedback. I wanted to address the leadership and diplomats of the clans I called out by name, and I'm glad that they've taken time to craft reasonable responses. By and large, the rest of our community is a paltry showing of the human race and its ability to publicly discuss important issues on a subject that we all care about (or, just as often, a degradation into an ego argument of who can hang around but still 'care the least'). I'm rather confident the word "troll" has been used a few dozen times already, none of which is actually an accurate use of the term but a revelation that most people here have no idea how to effectively land an insult. The last few pages of this thread, however, have shown some signs of improvement. Keep the positive direction going, don't give in to simple-mindedness.

I don't have time to make full rebuttals to every little claim. I will do my best to address those that I have addressed, however.

---

Casimir - This response is to your comments on page 8. The rest have been fluff; I will ignore them.

In no way, shape, or form do I promote aimless aggression over cautious competence. What I specifically condemn is incompetent cautiousness. By suing the UIF for peace, and gaining it, you've created a system where the two largest powerblocks are working against an at-the-time non-existent alliance. For Strategus to work so that wars never cease, you cannot have two sides as you've created. Had you refrained from such treaties, you would see (1) the core UIF (~475 players), (2) the Crusader bloc (~325), and (3) a myriad of independent eastern factions (HRE+Fallen, FCC, Mercs, etc.) (~325 players). If someone wants to run those numbers and calculate them more precisely, I'd appreciate that.

The Eastern factions did come together, or attempted to at least. Instead of an interesting tug of war between the three de facto power groups, it became a gang-up scenario with one side having over half the potential power as the other half's potential power. West won't attack the South, the South won't attack UIF, and with the way trading works both the West and the South sides became richer at a rate that the Easterners couldn't even dream of.

For all the fits and raging that goes on over game balance in regards to archers, cavalry, shields, polearms, on and on and on, your statement in regards to balance for Strategus is... "All in all, strategus is strategus.  There's probably gunna be a big bad guy, who holds most of the land and other people wont like him."

But that's contrary to your very actions! You LIKE the "big bad guy"! You make the UIF rich! You're aggravating the problem you have (begrudgingly) accepted exists! Hypocrisy, indeed.

My assertions are no weaker than before. You've foolishly made imbalanced diplomatic choices in order to "win" (at least in the short term) as easily as possible. Instead of challenges and fun (call me crazy, but if it's not challenging, what's the fun in it?), you want to do it the easiest way possible for the quick victory.

Until the Crusader bloc stands up on its own goddamn legs, they're not worthy of respect. Same damn thing goes to the UIF. If you're not interested in fun, not interested in a fight worth fighting or a victory worth keeping, good riddance. I've no use for that foolishness. This is a game. Play it for fun or stop pissing away the opportunity for the rest of us. The independent Easterners are the only ones fighting the real fights, the only ones with a real challenge.

---

Fluffy_Muffin - Going against my own rule, I'll answer you even though you're not a part of this issue in the slightest, just another angry voice tossing about half-truths (or less).

You are either ignorant of the facts or a downright liar. Take your pick. The truth is not hard to see, the history of the Fallen Brigade is clear. The only "small clans" we ever pick fights with are in the securing of our steppes. Who is the offensive party in such situations? It's our land, and we take it. Any small clans that attempted to lay claim to them may have been attacked. I don't recall any, but I won't deny it as a possibility. We have never, ever, under any circumstances made aggression on notably smaller clans, however. The Northern Empire was as big or bigger. We've never initiated such a meaningless conflict, and we never will. We have style and we enjoy fun challenges. 'Winning' isn't everything. The UIF and Templa-- Crusaders' actions speak a different perspective, my opinion on which has been well recorded.

---

Sharky -

Il mio nuovo amico italiono, parlo un po d'italiano. Una bella lingua. Adoro Roma, una bella città che ho visitato quando ero un ragazzo. Pardon, non parlo bene ora. I have to refresh with a translator as often as I know the words, these days.

Your point is not a new one. It's also baseless. We have the hard number of how many players the UIF and her clans have had since the start of Strategus 3.0 several months ago. It's the best indicator we have. I understand that not all the Legio players are as dedicated as some. I understand that some may not play at all anymore, a tragedy despite my contentions with your clan's diplomatic actions and the effects of them.

That aside, Legio, UIF, and the rest of the UIF lackeys are not the only victims of loss of interest. Until some proof that the parties I mentioned have suffered greater losses than others is made apparent, I'm not inclined to listen to this excuse. We have numbers, we know they're not a perfect reflection, but they're a strong indicator and nobody has contrived any argument against this. If the UIF suffers some greater attrition of players that is unknown to me, by all means, let me know and I'll drop the point.

The more I hear the argument pressed by the UIF that "the numbers aren't a true reflection", the greater concern I have of even greater misdeed. If you lack the players but have the numbers, your own words sound hauntingly familiar to the accusations of multi-account cheating than I care to listen to. I don't believe it now, and I don't want to believe it later. I want to trust that this is not the case, that the fault in question is of poor diplomatic judgment in regards to fun and fair play and not literal rulebreaking.

Anyways, you say that the Legio guys aren't having fun? Really, this comes as no surprise at all. So if the UIF isn't enjoying it with every imaginable advantage, consider how your opponents might feel. As much as emotions do (unfortunately) play in this game, it's a game. We should never hate each other over it. You don't hate your friends when you play board games to the point where you don't want to play with them any more, do you? Of course not. And you sure as shit can't play without them- you need opponents. Playing chess, checkers, football, bocce, or any of these things alone isn't much sporting fun. Consider this when hearing the grievances we present.

The more you stack the deck at the card table, the fewer people will fill the seats. We're tired of it. Let's find a solution.

[CrazyCracka420]

You've got the core UIF (Legio, DRZ, Bashi, 22nd, Grey Order, Raven?)  then you've got the UIF sympathizers (wolves, templars, etc)  Anyway, that's how I look at it.  Loosely 85% of the strat factions have non-agression pacts or are directly working together.

I'm pretty close to being done with strategus.  Between the dev team spending their time developing new hats, unplayed game types (rageball, dtv, ctf, stronghold) and new ways to nerf archers AND the massive carebear alliances on the EU side the game is in pretty miserable shape.

In fact I've been playing this last year hoping that things would be improved upon but so far the game is worse now than it was a year ago.

I agree for all the massive bugs in strat 2.0 at least there was fighting.  This strat has been pointless.  Super expensive crafting costs, no penalties for large factions, and for a month or two there was a bug where you lost all equipment you had equipped if you won a battle.  First was fixed for defenders, and then attackers.  Then chadz said a reduction in crafting cost was coming, making a lot of factions wait for this to spend their money, this never came. 

Pretty websites and neat-o in game hats are nice, not to mention constantly nerfing shit with every patch...but fixing lingering issues would be my priority though. 

Not to mention I've seen so many fucking good suggestions to help fix strategus and deter the carebear alliances, but none have been acknowledged, let alone implemented.

I'm sorry. It's just pathetic. Instead of perma-QQ try getting active politically. Try to break this alliance if it exists in the form you think. Personally I'd have nothing against a Grey vs DRZ war, maybe some of the clans involved think the same. Try to making contacts, plan something big. Find secret NA allies to support your cause economically. Do something. Plazek got his shit together in the past and served his revenge cold while providing some of the best Strat battles for the players that I can remember. I hope Mercs are planning something similar tbh.

And I am the last to nerf archery. In fact I'm archer's only hope. At the moment I am working out a system that gets rid of the simple damage reduce on body hits, creating a more sophisticated one that gives full damage for torso hits while letting limb hits give less damage.

Or maybe give people incentive to fight between factions (I've seen at least a dozen suggestions spread across the forums to help you dev's along).  Or maybe make it so that there's penalties to large factions, such as in Single Player if you own too many fiefs (as a person) you have tax inefficiency. 

As it stands right now, strategus is purely a numbers game.  Whoever has the most numbers is in the best shape.  There's no reason for these factions not to ally together and keep wiping out the smaller factions.  But keep making pretty hats for crpg, that will fix the strategus issues.

[Fluffy_Muffin]

(click to show/hide)

To the general public, I had no intention of hearing your feedback. I wanted to address the leadership and diplomats of the clans I called out by name, and I'm glad that they've taken time to craft reasonable responses. By and large, the rest of our community is a paltry showing of the human race and its ability to publicly discuss important issues on a subject that we all care about (or, just as often, a degradation into an ego argument of who can hang around but still 'care the least'). I'm rather confident the word "troll" has been used a few dozen times already, none of which is actually an accurate use of the term but a revelation that most people here have no idea how to effectively land an insult. The last few pages of this thread, however, have shown some signs of improvement. Keep the positive direction going, don't give in to simple-mindedness.

I don't have time to make full rebuttals to every little claim. I will do my best to address those that I have addressed, however.

---

Casimir - This response is to your comments on page 8. The rest have been fluff; I will ignore them.

In no way, shape, or form do I promote aimless aggression over cautious competence. What I specifically condemn is incompetent cautiousness. By suing the UIF for peace, and gaining it, you've created a system where the two largest powerblocks are working against an at-the-time non-existent alliance. For Strategus to work so that wars never cease, you cannot have two sides as you've created. Had you refrained from such treaties, you would see (1) the core UIF (~475 players), (2) the Crusader bloc (~325), and (3) a myriad of independent eastern factions (HRE+Fallen, FCC, Mercs, etc.) (~325 players). If someone wants to run those numbers and calculate them more precisely, I'd appreciate that.

The Eastern factions did come together, or attempted to at least. Instead of an interesting tug of war between the three de facto power groups, it became a gang-up scenario with one side having over half the potential power as the other half's potential power. West won't attack the South, the South won't attack UIF, and with the way trading works both the West and the South sides became richer at a rate that the Easterners couldn't even dream of.

For all the fits and raging that goes on over game balance in regards to archers, cavalry, shields, polearms, on and on and on, your statement in regards to balance for Strategus is... "All in all, strategus is strategus.  There's probably gunna be a big bad guy, who holds most of the land and other people wont like him."

But that's contrary to your very actions! You LIKE the "big bad guy"! You make the UIF rich! You're aggravating the problem you have (begrudgingly) accepted exists! Hypocrisy, indeed.

My assertions are no weaker than before. You've foolishly made imbalanced diplomatic choices in order to "win" (at least in the short term) as easily as possible. Instead of challenges and fun (call me crazy, but if it's not challenging, what's the fun in it?), you want to do it the easiest way possible for the quick victory.

Until the Crusader bloc stands up on its own goddamn legs, they're not worthy of respect. Same damn thing goes to the UIF. If you're not interested in fun, not interested in a fight worth fighting or a victory worth keeping, good riddance. I've no use for that foolishness. This is a game. Play it for fun or stop pissing away the opportunity for the rest of us. The independent Easterners are the only ones fighting the real fights, the only ones with a real challenge.

---

Fluffy_Muffin - Going against my own rule, I'll answer you even though you're not a part of this issue in the slightest, just another angry voice tossing about half-truths (or less).

You are either ignorant of the facts or a downright liar. Take your pick. The truth is not hard to see, the history of the Fallen Brigade is clear. The only "small clans" we ever pick fights with are in the securing of our steppes. Who is the offensive party in such situations? It's our land, and we take it. Any small clans that attempted to lay claim to them may have been attacked. I don't recall any, but I won't deny it as a possibility. We have never, ever, under any circumstances made aggression on notably smaller clans, however. The Northern Empire was as big or bigger. We've never initiated such a meaningless conflict, and we never will. We have style and we enjoy fun challenges. 'Winning' isn't everything. The UIF and Templa-- Crusaders' actions speak a different perspective, my opinion on which has been well recorded.

---

Sharky -

Il mio nuovo amico italiono, parlo un po d'italiano. Una bella lingua. Adoro Roma, una bella città che ho visitato quando ero un ragazzo. Pardon, non parlo bene ora. I have to refresh with a translator as often as I know the words, these days.

Your point is not a new one. It's also baseless. We have the hard number of how many players the UIF and her clans have had since the start of Strategus 3.0 several months ago. It's the best indicator we have. I understand that not all the Legio players are as dedicated as some. I understand that some may not play at all anymore, a tragedy despite my contentions with your clan's diplomatic actions and the effects of them.

That aside, Legio, UIF, and the rest of the UIF lackeys are not the only victims of loss of interest. Until some proof that the parties I mentioned have suffered greater losses than others is made apparent, I'm not inclined to listen to this excuse. We have numbers, we know they're not a perfect reflection, but they're a strong indicator and nobody has contrived any argument against this. If the UIF suffers some greater attrition of players that is unknown to me, by all means, let me know and I'll drop the point.

The more I hear the argument pressed by the UIF that "the numbers aren't a true reflection", the greater concern I have of even greater misdeed. If you lack the players but have the numbers, your own words sound hauntingly familiar to the accusations of multi-account cheating than I care to listen to. I don't believe it now, and I don't want to believe it later. I want to trust that this is not the case, that the fault in question is of poor diplomatic judgment in regards to fun and fair play and not literal rulebreaking.

Anyways, you say that the Legio guys aren't having fun? Really, this comes as no surprise at all. So if the UIF isn't enjoying it with every imaginable advantage, consider how your opponents might feel. As much as emotions do (unfortunately) play in this game, it's a game. We should never hate each other over it. You don't hate your friends when you play board games to the point where you don't want to play with them any more, do you? Of course not. And you sure as shit can't play without them- you need opponents. Playing chess, checkers, football, bocce, or any of these things alone isn't much sporting fun. Consider this when hearing the grievances we present.

The more you stack the deck at the card table, the fewer people will fill the seats. We're tired of it. Let's find a solution.

@ Garem :You answered the 1st part of my post out of context, but i kinda had a feeling you would do that, so ill just copy paste the important part you missed, if you care to reply on this i would apreciate it:

I dont get it, i seriously dont get it. What is this all about. Why do you whine so much? Lets say you won and wiped wolves, hospitaller. More land for you and YOUR allies. Then you, and your allies would expand even more, because as we all agree more battles more fun yes? Then you would wipe some more factions. OFCOURSE you wouldnt attack your fucking friends, so not atacking your allies and expanding you would be the biggas fucking carebears, THE REASON START IS BROKEN. Dont you understand this??? The only reason you arent the ones branded carebear biggass unbeatable alliance is because you got beaten by a bigger one. So stop being a fucking hypocrite already and prepare for the future battles instead of GTXting from strat

[Beauchamp]

(click to show/hide)

@ Garem :You answered the 1st part of my post out of context, but i kinda had a feeling you would do that, so ill just copy paste the important part you missed, if you care to reply on this i would apreciate it:

I dont get it, i seriously dont get it. What is this all about. Why do you whine so much? Lets say you won and wiped wolves, hospitaller. More land for you and YOUR allies. Then you, and your allies would expand even more, because as we all agree more battles more fun yes? Then you would wipe some more factions. OFCOURSE you wouldnt attack your fucking friends, so not atacking your allies and expanding you would be the biggas fucking carebears, THE REASON START IS BROKEN. Dont you understand this??? The only reason you arent the ones branded carebear biggass unbeatable alliance is because you got beaten by a bigger one. So stop being a fucking hypocrite already and prepare for the future battles instead of GTXting from strat

i have nothing against a possibility that some clan kills everyone in the end of strategus, though i'd prefer multipolar world where power is shifting from side to side.

but i guess the biggest part of complaining was against a fact, that strategus was decided since beginning by sheere numbers mustered in uif - aka if you play a board game, everybody starts on more or less similar grounds, resources, chances to win etc... where would be a point in playing any board game, if lets say 7/10 players would agree before the game even started that they will work together until they conquer everything together?

[Casimir]

Casimir - This response is to your comments on page 8. The rest have been fluff; I will ignore them.

In no way, shape, or form do I promote aimless aggression over cautious competence. What I specifically condemn is incompetent cautiousness. By suing the UIF for peace, and gaining it, you've created a system where the two largest powerblocks are working against an at-the-time non-existent alliance. For Strategus to work so that wars never cease, you cannot have two sides as you've created. Had you refrained from such treaties, you would see (1) the core UIF (~475 players), (2) the Crusader bloc (~325), and (3) a myriad of independent eastern factions (HRE+Fallen, FCC, Mercs, etc.) (~325 players). If someone wants to run those numbers and calculate them more precisely, I'd appreciate that.

The Eastern factions did come together, or attempted to at least. Instead of an interesting tug of war between the three de facto power groups, it became a gang-up scenario with one side having over half the potential power as the other half's potential power. West won't attack the South, the South won't attack UIF, and with the way trading works both the West and the South sides became richer at a rate that the Easterners couldn't even dream of.

For all the fits and raging that goes on over game balance in regards to archers, cavalry, shields, polearms, on and on and on, your statement in regards to balance for Strategus is... "All in all, strategus is strategus.  There's probably gunna be a big bad guy, who holds most of the land and other people wont like him."

But that's contrary to your very actions! You LIKE the "big bad guy"! You make the UIF rich! You're aggravating the problem you have (begrudgingly) accepted exists! Hypocrisy, indeed.

My assertions are no weaker than before. You've foolishly made imbalanced diplomatic choices in order to "win" (at least in the short term) as easily as possible. Instead of challenges and fun (call me crazy, but if it's not challenging, what's the fun in it?), you want to do it the easiest way possible for the quick victory.

Until the Crusader bloc stands up on its own goddamn legs, they're not worthy of respect. Same damn thing goes to the UIF. If you're not interested in fun, not interested in a fight worth fighting or a victory worth keeping, good riddance. I've no use for that foolishness. This is a game. Play it for fun or stop pissing away the opportunity for the rest of us. The independent Easterners are the only ones fighting the real fights, the only ones with a real challenge.

you fail to comprehend that either we would destroy you, or be destroyed by you. There was no possibility of us ever working with the Fallen brigade, infact it was the failure of our friends to include us in their plans with you that resulted in their ultimate defeat.  now the fallen territory, and the potential power that comes with it is in our control.

  I also don't remember ever suing for peace with the UIF, probably because it never happened.  All in all for you strategus may be over, for me its just beginning.  Now we have the potential to make large armies, using the actual equipment we want to use, rather than being forced to use peasant gear. Tthe simple fact is there isn't enough space on the map for all factions to play strategus, so some people will have to be wipped out earlier than others, before they really get a chance.

We had a choice, declare war against a UIF faction and attempt to grab their land which would be highly contested and most likely result in our defeat.  or destroy you with little effort and have the potential to defend ourselves and act as we like. Obviously we going to pick the easier option. What's the fucking point in entering a war we're bound to loose when we can reach the same goal with a much higher chance of success.  If the roles had been reversed, and you were the UIF and we'd done this to your closest rival, i'm sure yo wouldn't mind.

Why on earth should we seek to destroy the UIF when clearly their numbers are superior to ours, when we can have a good old fashioned holy war against some steppe dwelling heretics.

You accuse me of being intellectually dishonest, but you are as biased as i am.  You felt the need to create a thread simply to discuss how badly you were crushed. I'm sorry if your factions choices made them unpopular, in the end your not going to do well in strategus unless you've got friends.  Whether the system is fair or not doesn't matter, but if you choose to play the game in a way which isn't as effective as it could be, you have no right to complain when your beaten by those who do.  In future if you don't like strategus, don't play it. No-ones saying you have to.

[Tomas]

Not to mention I've seen so many fucking good suggestions to help fix strategus and deter the carebear alliances, but none have been acknowledged, let alone implemented.

This is something that annoys me too.

I get that there's far too many trolls on these forums to actually have proper discussion though so it would be nice if the Devs would create new section of the forums where only certain people can post.

Every established faction could have a representative that can post and all the devs and admins would be able to post too.  Finally if any of the Devs see an individual they think worthy (and rational), they can invite them in too.  Everybody else in cRPG will be able to read that forum but not post and if any of the people with posting rights are abusive or troll too much or bring strat politics into it, they can be removed.

What this will achieve - a place for open and mature discussion about Strat without the trolls or abuse.  If you want to comment but don't have access then you contact your clan representative who will decide if your comments are worthwhile or not.  For the people that really care about Strat this will allow public interaction with the Devs, that everybody can see and so people can actually see that Strat is moving in one direction or another.

I would also do this with the diplomacy forum - just let clan leaders and diplomats have access and remove all the pointless trolls

[Osiris]

But the Fallen didnt fight the UIF..

and

"? Maybe in the beginning when fiefs are empty but as soon as everything is taken its impossible because everyone skins you with fees in villages/towns/castles and you can't move anywhere without someone's permission or you get ganked. "

well people dont like bandits

maybe you should try to privateer for a large clan? They can let you craft, train etc in a village/castle with a low fee and you go and rape and pillage and plunder and give them a little cut

[Sharky]

(click to show/hide)

@ Garem :You answered the 1st part of my post out of context, but i kinda had a feeling you would do that, so ill just copy paste the important part you missed, if you care to reply on this i would apreciate it:

I dont get it, i seriously dont get it. What is this all about. Why do you whine so much? Lets say you won and wiped wolves, hospitaller. More land for you and YOUR allies. Then you, and your allies would expand even more, because as we all agree more battles more fun yes? Then you would wipe some more factions. OFCOURSE you wouldnt attack your fucking friends, so not atacking your allies and expanding you would be the biggas fucking carebears, THE REASON START IS BROKEN. Dont you understand this??? The only reason you arent the ones branded carebear biggass unbeatable alliance is because you got beaten by a bigger one. So stop being a fucking hypocrite already and prepare for the future battles instead of GTXting from strat

+1. I also remember fallens did try to exploit as mad this strat, were ready to stomp whatever poor little clan tried to take their big OP claims, and tried to form a real big badass alliance byz wolves crusaders pecores fcc mercs fallens hre etc etc much larger then your hipotetical uif that really doesn't exist.
You count us as "uif lackey" for example, but did we send tickets against you, did you see any army or do you really think we would just gift our tickets to greys or drz to make wiping u easier? Why should we want that? 

I say all this not to trow shit on you, you did exatly as most of the clans did in every strat round, you just didn't succeed in your plans this time. So this moralistic rant it's really wierd from you  .

As in every strat clans with a poorer diplomatic position were wiped at start. It's not only because of your diplomatic faults to be fair, ofc being on the losing side in the lasts strategus put you in a more difficult situation. In fact you were wiped not by former UIF members, but by NA clans and crusader alliance guys that considered you weak apparently.
Now it's neutral castle and towns battle time, after that there will definitly will be war if it will be an interesting thing to do (if strat will be fixed)

[kinngrimm]

@OP LOL

even with my second time in strategus i feel often like a noob discussing game balance. But then again in my opinion and in that of a few game developers i know of, game user interfaces should be made for the dumbest possible user.

So my beef is mainly with micro management and also that there is nothing really to do for players without faction implemented, but then again there is not much implemented for players within a faction(come on devs i know you are doing a great job). So i clearly see that players are largly discuraged by
1. long waiting periods till there is half decent equipment available to then make some fine battles
2. factions forming together to actually stand a chance to stay on the map because there were already either other big alliances or single clans with huge numbers and atm numbers do count a lot(seen it in last strat, followed that rule this strat)
3. just being bored out of their minds by having to log into strat for just not being respawned somewhere and moving some trade goods to another player, who then gives the shit to a caravan whos main purpose in strategus life is going between point A and B to swapp goods or sell there and carry gold back. Or waiting to come gold in and then craft stuff...

I have done quite my share of suggestions on these topics but as with so many other suggestions, developers have only so much time and attention span as they do it in their free time, no judgment here   

let me throw some bones

- I like the idear of having max troopsizes on a party, but the micromanagement gets then again bigger, possible solution a limited daily amount of "action points" which can be used daily for some minor things like move/start craft/stop craft/transfer xy maincharacter... by those with rank 8+
- having a faction treasure not a single character gold value, where every amount earend by sells float into, again only be spent by like rank 5+ to buy equipment, but to use for crafting by all but restricted by confirmation(rank7+) for those who want to craft gear so that the efforts of all cant be singlehandly been spent by one morron.
- introducing a diplomatic system that then actually allows scaling/balancing/fine tuning of faction/alliances which are rather carebearstyle. Using insentives like userinterface capabilities to get people to use the system, meaning visual advantages to use it(like i can see also the troop movements of my allies now), but by letting them use it also then being able to calculate the exact numbers who is working with whom to then scale down production effency.(I also like the idear of loyalty points introduced earlier on in this thread)
- missions like infiltration, sabotage, gathering of information of claims/parties, stealing for single players unlike the raid system on a smaller level and many more like that we come to know out of other games. These give always experience to those who do it. And there needs to be stuff which could happen when things don't work out on such a mission, only respawn somewhere else is not good enough. High profit but also High risk if it goes wrong some serroius panalties for a few days perhaps(yeah you goto jail if you mess with the Lord of this fief and got caught).
- crpg needs to make more sense again in terms of strategus support, but also the other way around. The smithing is great i really like it, but for the player who crafts nothing really good comes out for him in terms of his crpg character, there should xp gain be included or a new point system, where when you collect a certain amount of these you can get a loom point for free, by crafting like 5k leather boots or 10k wooden practise swords. You know like feats you reach in steam or some other games, when you accomplished something BIIIG  raided 10/50/100 villages 1/5/10 towns(?), getting laid by a virgin in the local inn, having fought in 25/50/100/250/500/1000 strategus battles.(With those could be included individual titles within crpg showable. Get them their fucking epenins)
- PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE enable lvl 30+ smithing skill increase i beg you
- also nice what was mentioned about choosing a status for the own party bandit/caravan/spy/attack force/..., to be chosen freely once a week, with those could come along as mentioned special abilities other don't have ... love that part Spies sharing their range of view with a contract giver for a period amount of time and xp/gold to be gained/paid; Faster movement speed for raiders, larger view range for attack forces ...
- strat troops/gold/equipment is been bought/sold for crpg gold. If you can't/don't want to stop it then perhaps include it into the market system?
...
more, easier to use and to manage options, make things so dumb users can handle it without a second thought
That doesn't exclude complicated strategies or tactics but the userinterface needs to be at all point waterproof and failsafe, self explanatory so that something like an FAQ or WIKI wouldn't be nesseary in the first place or you directly intigrate it into strat as Enzeklopedia Caladria.

This strategus is not over yet there are still things to test for me , some wars to fight, actions for mućki kinngrimm. I hope it stays online for some more months to come.

See you on the fields of sweat&blood&tears

EDIT:mućki

[RamsesXXIIX]

(click to show/hide)

But the Fallen didnt fight the UIF..

and

"? Maybe in the beginning when fiefs are empty but as soon as everything is taken its impossible because everyone skins you with fees in villages/towns/castles and you can't move anywhere without someone's permission or you get ganked. "

well people dont like bandits

maybe you should try to privateer for a large clan? They can let you craft, train etc in a village/castle with a low fee and you go and rape and pillage and plunder and give them a little cut

Osiris, you should really check up on your strategus history.

+1. I also remember fallens did try to exploit as mad this strat, were ready to stomp whatever poor little clan tried to take their big OP claims, and tried to form a real big badass alliance byz wolves crusaders pecores fcc mercs fallens hre etc etc much larger then your hipotetical uif that really doesn't exist.

The amount of ignorance you show from your posts is hilarious. Start by thinking why the alliance you're referring to was created.

[Gnjus]

This strategus is not over yet there are still things to test for me , some wars to fight, actions for mucik kinngrimm.

It's mućki Kinngrimm. Mućki, like Mućko Đubre. 

[Vibe]

I dont get it, i seriously dont get it. What is this all about. Why do you whine so much? Lets say you won and wiped wolves, hospitaller. More land for you and YOUR allies. Then you, and your allies would expand even more, because as we all agree more battles more fun yes? Then you would wipe some more factions. OFCOURSE you wouldnt attack your fucking friends, so not atacking your allies and expanding you would be the biggas fucking carebears, THE REASON START IS BROKEN. Dont you understand this??? The only reason you arent the ones branded carebear biggass unbeatable alliance is because you got beaten by a bigger one. So stop being a fucking hypocrite already and prepare for the future battles instead of GTXting from strat

And you know that for a fact how?

Stop pulling shit out of your ass.

[Fluffy_Muffin]

Sure,tell me then what scenario do you have in mind?

[Sharky]

(click to show/hide)

The amount of ignorance you show from your posts is hilarious. Start by thinking why the alliance you're referring to was created.

Exploit. Check (autoattack bug followed by the funny devs carpet bombers raids   http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wfLxHJY0lQI)
Stomp little clans that wanted to go in khergit area. Check. I don't have proofs about that but well it just sounds logical every clan would do that 
Try to form big OP alliances. Check.  If you said that you did because another imaginary alliance forced you to, they may easily answer they did their alliance because of your alliance. After we knew you were trying to form an alliance to wipe us ofc we were more syimpatetical to former UIF members (even if we were still not interested in joining the war because we didn't consider you a threat expecially after Byz left and wolves crusaders etc tricked you)
So where's the ignorance in my statements?(besides broken english xD)