Stategus the trooth!

[Osiris]

Quote from: chadz

"No matter how long you guys cry - I will not give in to dumbing strategus down because some people just want battles. If all you want are battles, then play cRPG, not strat. There are other people who like advanced gameplay."

Stategus is a Grand Stategy game.

This means that to win you need to do multiple things well: 1. Battles 2. Diplomacy 3. Trade 4. Recruit
If you focus on one and neglect others you fail.

Some people seem to be too stupid to grasp the simple fact that Stategus isnt a clan battle torunament with rules to make it fair ^^ You may be the greatest 10 man fighting force in world history but that doesnt mean you will win <3

Size matters deal with it. As in history manpower actually matters and it always will, instead of moaning that your 20 man faction cant take out a 100 man faction 1 on 1 and demanding changes to make it possible i suggest that you PLAY THE GAME.

IE make alliances, seek diplomacy hell maybe in war think about surrendering land to secure peace (shock horror in games like this wars dont have to end in total defeat you can cede lands!)


Basically im just sick of every retard who isnt on top in strat comming here and whining like a total bitch about how strat is unfair It isnt unfair. somewhere you failed. real strat suggestions get ignored because the whole section is filled with QQ from losers. Hell my faction has won lands and is losing lands. Just because our alliance isnt strong enough to beat Greys + Nords doesnt mean that stategus is broken it simply means that they are stronger. They may be stronger in terms of economy/players or skill but they are stronger and are winning and thats how it should be.


That said just remember this you dont have a right to hold lands or even survive strat just because you lose it doesnt mean its unfair <3


*edit*
To generic NA players who blame DRZ. You decided to ignore the obvious fact that they would look to NA lands. stop complaining you should have been more observant
To generic everyone. Ofc the UIF will ally up they keep winning do something about it ^^ maybe search for allies or temporary agreements. In MP eu2 games if someone got too powerfull the others acted. maybe if leaders spoke to each other they would form a temp alliance to stop drz growing.
To harpag. hands off the pope

[Mannhammer]

Good point Strat is perfect in both conception and execution. No changes are needed and anyone who suggests them is just QQ'ing.

[Osiris]

if you read i actually said good strat suggestions are being ignored due to the rediculous amount of suggestions made because someone lost Ie the ones who think strat should be made more fair for little clans etc (basically suggestions that improve strat are good, suggestions that would improve improve strat by making your own faction stronger are bad mkay)

[RibaldRon]

While I understand that strat has played out, basically, exactly how it was intended to play out, you can't say that the NA factions who lost did something wrong.

an NA faction started an NA war, and DRZ moved in.  They won.  That's different than saying "You lost."



Also, you can completely neglect two of those four points, if you only work on Diplomacy, and Trade, while everybody else is working on those four points (battle/recruit) you will inevitably win.  Because there is no incentive to fighting other than the fun/EXP, peaceful trading while slowly building forces over time is the way to win strategus.

Now you will say "well, those factions should have been attacking the peaceful traders!" not as easy as it sounds when they have a lot of support, and another enemy is already at your doorstep. 



Some of the "Winners" agree,  and support some of the suggestions being thrown out there, why does it matter which side of the fence the suggestions come from?  I don't see the mega alliance wanting to change the status quo for what is probably an obvious reason.  For me, I'd like to see the game be more fun for everyone, it will be impossible to set it up in such a way that diplomacy/giant alliances won't HELP you, but changes to make it more enjoyable for everyone would be a plus.

[Osiris]

you can also ask why the two biggest NA factions decided to go to war when a massive EU alliance was sitting there doing nothing for a long time a bit of thinking would show you that to keep some sort of a balance of power then the NA alliances should have gone after the UIF. you dont have to kill them totally ofc just fight for a while and make a treaty

Anyone who looked at the map for the last month could clearly see that if you guys fought each other then it = DRZ win


*edit*
i agree strat needs to be made more fun for the average player i was talking about threads like these

http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,28293.0.html
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,28346.0.html

so many suggestion threads start off with ranting about carebare alliances or QQ about anything other then battle skill making a difference. If we stop these kind of threads and stop the reasons behind strat suggestions being "i lost so it must change" then we can get down to the good stuff and there has been much of it

[LastKaze]

I agree, it's just some clans quit strategus because they believe if they quit, than chadz will wipe it and they get to start again. When I see a thread that says to wipe strat, all i see is a bunch of people QQ because their faction got wiped out, I just think to myself, if there's a wipe than there's a chance they will get wiped out again and then later QQ to wipe the map once more. TBH you don't have to restart strat to make it more fun, all they have to do is just fix the bugs and people will enjoy it more. I also agree that diplomacy is important, without diplomacy your faction will be attacked left to right.

[Osiris]

take a bear in rls suggestions. he has some good points IE minimal player imput. this details the facts that most players dont get a lot to do and that is the main thing i dislike about strat. Then he goes on to QQ about alliances thus making most people ignore his good points. IMO Increasing the fun for individuals = great. QQing because there is an alliance you cant beat and wanting to change the mechanics because someone has more friends than you = bad

[RibaldRon]

you can also ask why the two biggest NA factions decided to go to war when a massive EU alliance was sitting there doing nothing for a long time a bit of thinking would show you that to keep some sort of a balance of power then the NA alliances should have gone after the UIF. you dont have to kill them totally ofc just fight for a while and make a treaty

Anyone who looked at the map for the last month could clearly see that if you guys fought each other then it = DRZ win

To be perfectly fair, the majority of NA did not want to fight amongst ourselves, but even if we had all banded together, we couldn't have made a dent in the UIF's 2/3 of the map, with what would have been 1/4.

When you get an NA army attacking in the EU lands, our ping suffers a lot more than DRZ's does in NA lands.


I've said it before, I'll say it again, I had fun.  We got wiped.  I will continue to make suggestions that I feel will benefit strategus as a whole, not because I lost.



E: It seems you're reading too much into this.  The majority of us are using these situations as an example, it's not QQ because a battle or a war were lost.  We could say Jane went to college for four years, Dave also went to college at the same school, and they both graduated, much the same.  Dave and Jane are both Native American, and were granted land by the government.  Jane received 2/3 of said land, while Dave got 1/3.  They both started restaurants....

Or we could just talk about Strategus.

[Kafein]

Good point Strat is perfect in both conception and execution. No changes are needed and anyone who suggests them is just QQ'ing.

This. Obviously everyone wants Strat to be about everyone being allied and all the enemies quitting the game. Like, you know, realistic feudal diplomacy.


In a grand strategy game, is it commonly admitted that the more competing factions there are, the more interesting it is. Where's the diplomacy when you end up with two powerblocks after a few months ?


I'd like to point out a few things that are terribly wrong with that post, Osiris.

Quote from: chadz

"No matter how long you guys cry - I will not give in to dumbing strategus down because some people just want battles. If all you want are battles, then play cRPG, not strat. There are other people who like advanced gameplay."

That one is rather old, and honestly, being ridiculed now.

Stategus is a Grand Stategy game.

This means that to win you need to do multiple things well: 1. Battles 2. Diplomacy 3. Trade 4. Recruit
If you focus on one and neglect others you fail.

Of course. Problem is, diplomacy is locked down, trade is about who controls the longest trade route, and recruiting is about having more farming drones active players.

Some people seem to be too stupid to grasp the simple fact that Stategus isnt a clan battle torunament with rules to make it fair ^^ You may be the greatest 10 man fighting force in world history but that doesnt mean you will win <3

Size matters deal with it. As in history manpower actually matters and it always will, instead of moaning that your 20 man faction cant take out a 100 man faction 1 on 1 and demanding changes to make it possible i suggest that you PLAY THE GAME.

This never worked in this edition of strat and never will in the future either if the rules don't change, because the game works in such a way there are no incentives to secede from the big alliances. You can try to convince a faction of rebelling with you against it's allies, but they got 0 rational reason to do it.

IE make alliances, seek diplomacy hell maybe in war think about surrendering land to secure peace (shock horror in games like this wars dont have to end in total defeat you can cede lands!)

All of the things in your post, this is the worst. Why on earth would a winning faction stop a war and only take a part of your territory ? There is no "core fief" or "stability" or "revolt risk" mechanics in Strat. Expanding at the fastest possible rate is always better.

Basically im just sick of every retard who isnt on top in strat comming here and whining like a total bitch about how strat is unfair It isnt unfair. somewhere you failed. real strat suggestions get ignored because the whole section is filled with QQ from losers. Hell my faction has won lands and is losing lands. Just because our alliance isnt strong enough to beat Greys + Nords doesnt mean that stategus is broken it simply means that they are stronger. They may be stronger in terms of economy/players or skill but they are stronger and are winning and thats how it should be.


That said just remember this you dont have a right to hold lands or even survive strat just because you lose it doesnt mean its unfair <3

The stronger clans should be winning. But winning in a good game doesn't imply wiping others.

*edit*
To generic NA players who blame DRZ. You decided to ignore the obvious fact that they would look to NA lands. stop complaining you should have been more observant
To generic everyone. Ofc the UIF will ally up they keep winning do something about it ^^ maybe search for allies or temporary agreements. In MP eu2 games if someone got too powerfull the others acted. maybe if leaders spoke to each other they would form a temp alliance to stop drz growing.
To harpag. hands off the pope

Especially about the EU multiplayer games... That works because these players have an amount of goodwillingness and roleplaying I would be very surprised to see emerging out of the current factions winning strat. And more importantly, EU games are very well tought in terms of limiting the advantages of people already winning. In Strat when you take a fief, you get the full income immediately. In paradox grand strategy games, you have to deal with tons of maluses when you take regions by force. Lacking legitimate claims over the land, rebels, different cultures, religions...

[Osiris]

you raise good points which is what i want Strat inst perfect and sure Fiefs should take time to secure and turn to core fiefs of your faction

what is pissing me off is that a good 90% of suggestions are not made around what is good for strat but only what is good for the player making the suggestion.


Quote from: Osiris on Today at 21:15:44

IE make alliances, seek diplomacy hell maybe in war think about surrendering land to secure peace (shock horror in games like this wars dont have to end in total defeat you can cede lands!)


All of the things in your post, this is the worst. Why on earth would a winning faction stop a war and only take a part of your territory ? There is no "core fief" or "stability" or "revolt risk" mechanics in Strat. Expanding at the fastest possible rate is always better.


On this point i must disagree. Why on earth would a winning faction stop a war. well that is down to the other factions If one faction is going to destroy another totally and become too powerfull then the others should step in and force a treaty

In my games of eu2 i must say that if one country totally destroyed another then the other countries would step in to ensure that a treaty was made that didnt make one country totally superior. for example (not a realistic one) If Druzinha Chaos Hospi Grey Nord and Templars were the main factions and Druzinha went to war with Chaos and was going to totally win then it is down to the other factions to ensure that such a victory doesnt mean that Druzinha becaome twice as powerfull as anyone else. If one side is winning by far then it is down to others to limit their gains

This doesnt happen in Strat because well we all hate each other ^^ But if for example in NA Reds and Greens looked at the map before really fighting they might have seen that Greys had devoted some resources to fight the Templars and that a combined NA thrust on DRZ might have resulted in a return to the balance of power

Im rambling because well ive been drinking a lil but i hope i sort of make sense

It is down to the players to form a balance of power not the Devs. The Devs should strive to make the game more interactive and fun for the individual player. They should not be distraced/forced into making more limits to factions because the playerbase lacts the ability to do it themselves.

just my opinion ofc if DRZ win repeatedly its because we let them, let the devs focus on making the game more fun for individuals let the faction leaders focus on making it more fair

[Slantedfloors]

If Druzinha Chaos Hospi Grey Nord and Templars were the main factions and Druzinha went to war with Chaos and was going to totally win then it is down to the other factions to ensure that such a victory doesnt mean that Druzinha becaome twice as powerfull as anyone else. If one side is winning by far then it is down to others to limit their gains

So as a question, why does EU never do this to Druzhina or Grey Order?

Because this seems a whole hell of a lot like you're telling NA that we should have all banded together and sacrificed our own enjoyment of the game to ensure that our tiny little ghetto didn't get wiped out by some massive mega-alliance of Europeans that control literally 3/4 of the map at any one time because every other European clan knuckles under and gives them whatever they want.

i.e, Go Fuck Yourself

[Arn De Gothia]

   The EU vs NA conflict doesn't seem tenable. Pings are bad for either side when battles are fought. Split map, and enjoy. If people say that the population is to small for two different zones, I would respond by saying that the conflicts will become more personal and that in itself might cause greater participation.

   If templars/druz/grey/ect. continue alliances or fight, then its up to them. NA can get back to bashing each other. Despite the shit slinging during the red vs green war, I had a good time. But when Druz rolled in, it felt like there was no point. I disagree that the best strategy for NA was to simply wait or attack the EU "peaceful alliance". Finally, there was great deal of subterfuge and intrigue during the NA war before Druz rolled in. Clans plotted, leaders conspired, and soldiers died. Which, in the end, is what strat is all about. I guess I might be on the winning side, since HATE  allied with hospitaller, but the win doesn't feel good. It's weird to me that people on my side get so pumped up about winning and simultaneously accusing Chaos (green people) of being lazy or bad strategists.

   Hopefully this was just an observation rather than heinous insult to anybody. I myself would love to see more features in strat besides recruit/trade/travel repeat.

Be happy.

[22nd_King_Plazek]

So as a question, why does EU never do this to Druzhina or Grey Order?

Because this seems a whole hell of a lot like you're telling NA that we should have all banded together and sacrificed our own enjoyment of the game to ensure that our tiny little ghetto didn't get wiped out by some massive mega-alliance of Europeans that control literally 3/4 of the map at any one time because every other European clan knuckles under and gives them whatever they want.

i.e, Go Fuck Yourself

lol what a dick.

Templars did face up to the Greys you know, one of the most commonly alleged UIF factions. If you think UIF is such a problem maybe you shoulda helped them out huh, instead of doing nothing then crying about the mega alliance that you watched kill off all of its enemies 1 by 1 as people stood on the sidelines.

[Slantedfloors]

Templars did face up to the Greys you know, one of the most commonly alleged UIF factions. If you think UIF is such a problem maybe you shoulda helped them out huh, instead of doing nothing.

Sufferin' Succotash! You mean a small European clan stood up to to the EU Mega-Block?

Surely this will be the point when the other EU clans draw their carefully concealed knives and attack their brobdingnagian neighbours from behind! This will surely be a great war, as faction after faction say "NO MORE" to the UIF's control over...oh wait, no, the rest of EU are doing jack shit to stop them. Except for the guys who are helping them wipe out the underdogs, I guess.

WELPS, I guess it's up to NA to do what literally every other EU clan will not do. With 1/4 of the resources, as mandated by the ping wall. And facing the opposition of damn near every other EU clan trying to prove what stalwart UIF allies they are.

i.e, Go Fuck Yourself

[Arn De Gothia]

While Slantedfloors doesn't convey his message in the nicest way, I have to agree with him. EU should be fighting EU menaces, as NA should be fighting NA menaces.