[Strategus suggetsion] EU and NA servers

[DaveUKR]

It's simple. Let's imagine that Strat starts again from the very beginning, all fiefs are neutral, so how should be fiefs picked NA or EU? No need to divide the map. Here it is:

- All fiefs start with 50:50 EU:NA chance. So if you attack a fief which is not affected by anyone - you have 50% chance that the battle will be on EU and 50% that it will be on NA.
- You can affect the chance of EU or NA by staying in the fief and doing some stuff as campaigning (agitation) with 5% chance per hour for 1 villager (so to make it maximum you'll have to persuade 500x50%=250 villagers)
- Once village is captured it will start persuading its villagers like if there were 10 players doing the same (50% chance for 1 villager per hour)
- Agitators can't be kicked from the village, they pay only 10% of the fief tax, they can't see what is going on in the fief (so they don't see the list of players), they can't have troops.
- There should also be 1% chance per hour that an agitator of the opposite side gets killed and spawns somewhere on the map.
 

Lets do some maths. We have a village with 500 population and initial 50:50 chance, we have a small clan of 20 player which will try to make this village 100% EU. They come to the village to persuade villagers: 20x0.05=1 villager per hour (24 villagers a day) so in ~10 days they will maximize the chance of a battle to EU.

// Discuss. Please discuss numbers, percentage and others too.

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

What's it for exactly?

Is it solving a problem or is it just a new mechanic idea?

It sounds interesting I just not totally sure what the point is.

[DaveUKR]

What's it for exactly?

Is it solving a problem or is it just a new mechanic idea?

It sounds interesting I just not totally sure what the point is.

The point is not to force NA or EU players to be on territories which are set manually, let players decide how the map looks like. I.e. some EU or NA factions can't roleplay (The Kingdom of Veluca is NA, but Veluca is EU, orphans of Reyvadin are EU, Reyvadin is NA, Nordmen of Fenada were forced to change the name, free peasants of Fisdnar etc etc etc)

[Slamz]

Conceptually I like it.  As an NA clan, we could go anywhere on the map and take a village and battles for that village would always occur on an NA server.

The village would also exert an aura of influence (similar to what's seen in strategy games like Endless Space or similar to city radius in Civilization) where battles would also be NA.  If we own one village and an EU clan owns the next village over then the auras would meet and compete based perhaps on player population within the city (and/or some other factors).

If an EU clan took our village, it would become an EU village and exert an EU area of influence.


It would be a fair amount of work to implement, though, and would require a more sophisticated map.

Still, as a way to keep EU and NA playing together, I like it a lot more than the current solution.

[Latvian]

Conceptually I like it.  As an NA clan, we could go anywhere on the map and take a village and battles for that village would always occur on an NA server.

The village would also exert an aura of influence (similar to what's seen in strategy games like Endless Space or similar to city radius in Civilization) where battles would also be NA.  If we own one village and an EU clan owns the next village over then the auras would meet and compete based perhaps on player population within the city (and/or some other factors).

If an EU clan took our village, it would become an EU village and exert an EU area of influence.


It would be a fair amount of work to implement, though, and would require a more sophisticated map.

Still, as a way to keep EU and NA playing together, I like it a lot more than the current solution.

exactly my idea

[Taser]

Definitely would go for something like this over arbitrarily splitting the map. Would make it more interesting too since NA and EU aren't necessarily restricted to certain parts of the map.

[MarktpLatz]

It would, as good as it sounds, result in an advantage for big factions since they can afford it to send huge "timezone-turner-armies" while keeping up producing gold and troops at the same time.

[DaveUKR]

It would, as good as it sounds, result in an advantage for big factions since they can afford it to send huge "timezone-turner-armies" while keeping up producing gold and troops at the same time.

Impossibru. The village itself gives an advantage in the size of 10 players. So to make any influence they have to send more than 10 players. Show me at least one faction which will be able to send more than 10 players at least in two villages.

[MarktpLatz]

Well, there are several factions with 100+ players. Even though theyre not all active playing, these clans would be able to. Also, don't forget allies

[DaveUKR]

Well, there are several factions with 100+ players. Even though theyre not all active playing, these clans would be able to. Also, don't forget allies

So it will need 30 players to stay in 1 enemy village for 10 days to make it 100% if defenders don't try to make it opposite. 30 players for 10 days.

[Bjord]

I like the fundaments, but it's a whole different Strat and I'm not sure what the devs have in mind. I like the sphere of influence idea, however. Strategus would potentially be a lot more dynamic, fiefs and large areas NA one month and EU the other month, variety is so nice...