Strat 4 Announcement

[Gnjus]

Btw are your Paladins cocked & ready for all those shit-storms that will arise in Diplomacy Sub-forum very soon ? 

[Mayzer]

For AI recruitment, I suggest you implement a faction block list. That way warring factions could not have an enemy waste their tickets if they cannot make it to a battle.

[Hansen]

Please make it possible to recruit AI men for your battles. It is hard for the bandits out there to find mercenaries. If they implement this, it will allso create more small bandit groups.

[Snickers]

What is everyones opinion on the NA/EU split this round? Was it enough, was it stupid, what would be a better alternative?

I liked it when it was strat 2.0. The attackers should have the ping disadvantage. The defenders should choose if the server is NA or EU.

[Shadowren]

So in the new strategus what would be the point in city's/villages/castles?

Villages- makes goods and gear to fit army.

Castles- makes troops (really doesn't have any good use besides that)

Citys- Nothing atm

Im i right?

[Tor!]

Just do something that keeps EU and NA separated, dont really care how it is done. Nobody is interested in fighting across the pond, either way.

[a_bear_irl]

I was fine with the split, playing with 150+ ping is horrible

[PhantomZero]

Fief Corruption for empires that grow too large, but done in a way such that faction splitting does not give you an advantage.  Corruption can still be overcome for organised factions that want to expand. Each faction will have to decide how much corruption it can cope with though.  Factions will also have a Vigilance rating that can decrease corruption.  Vigilance will be a war/fighting based score.[/li][/list]

Could you explain this a little more? Will having inactive or casual members penalize you with this "corruption." How will splitting the faction not effect it? Will you guys have to manually keep track of faction relationships to ensure clans do not "split" to avoid corruption penalties?

[okiN]

He's explained it a little badly. It's not a question of faction size, but of how much land a faction holds relative to its number of active members. The idea is to make it harder for a faction with less active members in it to hold large amounts of land.

As for vigilance, it's an anti-hoarding measure. Factions that fight a lot of wars will accrue economic benefits to make up for their losses, while passive factions will weaken with time.

[Knute]

After the voting and someone wins a fief, will it come with a full population that has gear?  Or will it be defenseless until the owner can stock it?

[PhantomZero]

He's explained it a little badly. It's not a question of faction size, but of how much land a faction holds relative to its number of active members. The idea is to make it harder for a faction with less active members in it to hold large amounts of land.

As for vigilance, it's an anti-hoarding measure. Factions that fight a lot of wars will accrue economic benefits to make up for their losses, while passive factions will weaken with time.

Yes but that wasn't my question. He explicitly stated there is something in place that will prevent splitting. Why would I conquer 4 fiefs as LLJK, and suffer from corruption, when I can just as easily conquer 4 fiefs as L, L, J, and K?

All it does it benefit factions organized like city-states rather than a feudal hierarchy. As we all know some clan leaders don't mind playing the game for all 100+ of their members and simply reminding everyone when to sign up for a battle.

[Teeth]

I do get the point of respawn not being the best system but NO I don't want strategus battle to be the same as c-rpg battle.

You can't do epic castle siege with only 60vs60. 

I disagree. I would hardly call the current sieges epic, just a grindfest.

[Thomek]

Everyone has one life. The maximum army size would be 60. Or 80 if the servers are feeling lucky. Make equipping these 60 soldiers cost the same as a 5k army. It's just way more tense and epic than just throwing tickets around like it's nothing. More like a warband vs warband feel than an army vs army. Alternatively, make tickets scale down so that every person is worth a certain amount of tickets while still having one life. So a 2000 vs 1000 battle means that one team gets 80 player slots and the other gets 40.

Strat battles are short, strat battles are exciting, strat battles are awesome. All I want you to ask is to think about this for a moment.

Signed.
The spawning routine takes out a lot of tactics. What it scaled somehow? One could play up to 5 normal battles in a row for huge battles.

[okiN]

Yes but that wasn't my question. He explicitly stated there is something in place that will prevent splitting. Why would I conquer 4 fiefs as LLJK, and suffer from corruption, when I can just as easily conquer 4 fiefs as L, L, J, and K?

All it does it benefit factions organized like city-states rather than a feudal hierarchy. As we all know some clan leaders don't mind playing the game for all 100+ of their members and simply reminding everyone when to sign up for a battle.

I did answer that, you just weren't paying attention. Like I said, it's based on your active member count relative to the amount of land you hold. Splitting your members into smaller groups won't increase that ratio -- in order to decrease corruption, you'd need to get more players or less land.

[PhantomZero]

I did answer that, you just weren't paying attention. Like I said, it's based on your active member count relative to the amount of land you hold. Splitting your members into smaller groups won't increase that ratio -- in order to decrease corruption, you'd need to get more players or less land.

Oh my mistake then, I thought that meant corruption would increase as you gained more members but land stayed the same.