Strategus - Honor

[RibaldRon]

Many modern Browser-based games have developed a system such as this.

Basically, crushing your opponents through means other than skill will net you Dishonor, and defending underdogs in conflicts will grant you Honor.

This will be determined by the two side's gear and troop situation, and who is attacking who.  There would of course be a threshold, perhaps a % + 50 troops, so that a 49 troop army can still raid unarmed caravans..  Equipment would also be taken into account.


Anyway, to get to the point: You accumulate Honor, and with Honor comes perhaps an increased Strategus production bonus, and extra EXP while fighting in Honorable battles.  In essence, the strat spoils go to the winner - but if it was a fight in which the loser had no chance, they'll see an increased EXP reward.

This will hopefully ENCOURAGE large factions to give their opposition a chance.  They will still have the troops/gear in surplus to use later, of course.  Factions may have to ask themselves: Is assuring myself victory in this battle worth the Dishonor? And when it does, the side that's losing will at least go out in a big bang of EXP and may have a chance yet to produce the goods needed to recover.


As an example: Naked village slaughter with a huge geared army - dishonorable.  This happened a lot in the NA conflicts, and was basically all DRZ did to fiefs.  Most of the NA VS DRZ battles would have been *slightly* Dishonorable, as they had a sizeable ticket and massive gear advantage.  Red VS Green army battles would have been honor-neutral, as they were pretty evenly matched.


Of course, Honor will be displayed on the battles page, and one can not lose honor as a defender, or gain it as an attacker.



As there has been some discussion of more maps, split EU/NA on different servers, etc. this may improve strategus without the need for the extra "continents" so I am curious as to what everyone's thoughts are on this.

[Zaren]

I like the idea but remember some clans such as fallen are based on the idea of outlaws and other things like that. I think that honor and dishonor should each have benefits similar to the mass effect paragon/renegade system. (Mass Effect 3 ending sucks)
maybe like you said, increase production bonus for those with lots of honor, but maybe a longer quick march(lets say a half hour) for the very underhanded who raid when you least expect it and kill the innocent.

also a system similar to the total war system could be implemented so that when factions lose a lot of fiefs(75%+?) they get bonus cash or maybe supplies or troops to fight back with/ help them escape with

also remember that slaughtering naked villagers isnt always dishonorable. It is sometimes a tactical manuevre which weakens the village itself. Damaging a villages population will cripple it making it not worth as much to the enemy in case they reconquer it.

[Tanken]

Not a bad idea...

As long as it reflects your Faction's honor. I like the idea of having Higher honor to increase your side's bonuses. Faster crafting, better % cashout bonuses, additional crafting bonuses on gear your side creates. That's not a bad concept at all--but I don't know how far (and talented) chadz team of Modders goes and how much effort they're going to exert into this system. It's already fairly simple stuff, but I think we're starting to challenge their threshold for stuff to be implemented.

Strategus is one part (since it is Browser based) they have control over, but I don't think from what I've seen they have a huge ability to do such things.


TL;DR : Good idea, but the problem would probably be that you can have Faction A is the "Good Honorable Guys" so Faction A is safehouse for all crafters and army creators, but Factions B C and D are "Dishonorable" so you have those guys do all your peasant killing and raids, just to glorify Faction A. In other words, Hospitaller could sit back and be the Good guys while they send LL, Occitan, and ATS to do all the shit work and then supply their army with stuff from Hospitaller--while still attending the battles just the same and still retaining their crafting bonuses.

[Vovka]

-Greate new faction and transfer 1k shiny armed tickets
-attack this army by urs 5 naked guy in shitty time
-grind "Honor" 

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

Sounds like a massively convoluted system and as we can see, DRZ have already exploited it, how long until the Greys take it to a whole other level.

[RibaldRon]

To clarify: This would also be a player statistic, and would not be detrimental to accumulate.

Rather, fighting in honorable battles would benefit you in ways which battles do not currently.  Fighting in dishonorable battles will not affect you in Strategus whatsoever, but you may see less cRPG experience from that one battle.  Fighting for the side which nets you some honor, additionally, may be worth more cRPG experience, or give you a Strategus production boost for a short while.


So, this may give some mercenaries pause as to which side to sign up for, and through the players, smaller/underdog armies may actually gain some ground to stand on.

This suggestion is not "please kill all huge armies because they want to smash peasants!" but rather something I feel might add a new layer to Strategus, and hopefully lead to more fun battles, even if a side has to purposefully split up their army and attack in waves.


Nor am I crying about my side losing to DRZ, UIF, ETC, ETC.  I just thought of this idea reading a thread, and thought it was a decent suggestion.  Feel free to disagree.

[Jarlek]

To make sure I got it right:

If one side in a battle has worse equipment/less tickets/led by templars or anything else that makes them the "underdogs", you get a bonus % to the xp gained in that fight if you fight for the underdog? I like that.

[RibaldRon]

To make sure I got it right:

If one side in a battle has worse equipment/less tickets/led by templars or anything else that makes them the "underdogs", you get a bonus % to the xp gained in that fight if you fight for the underdog? I like that.

Well, there would be a threshold to make sure that the most common gameplay would be as it is currently.. I.E. bandits attacking anybody would still count as fairly "honorable" battles, but if you don't ever fight, but instead send gigantic forces to crush small factions, those would be dishonorable fights, and yes.

This is NOT just DRZ smashing Chaos, those battles were a lot of fun, I just wish there could have been more of them.  LLJK, my mother faction, has been guilty of this as well.

Generally, what I'd like to see is more fun battles, and not just a bunch of "I WIN" fights.  But, if a faction burns out, it would be nice if they at least get more out of it.