Strategus Reset?

[Butan]

Removing battle time limits would be cool - but only if you could join the battle like any other cRPG public server, and with more commander stuff to easily lead in-game (would be also interesting if Strat Briefing had a direct link to the TS server of each sides).

[Spurdospera]

1) 1/3 rule fix (due next week)
Yes.
2) Change the fief voting system (not sure how but needs to be far easier to manage and with an even more random result to force clans away from the same old claims)
Yes.
3) Allow Fief owners to manage their fiefs from anywhere (frees up more players to actually do stuff)
Yes, but make it so that if fief owner has more than ONE fief, he´d have to be in the fief to control it.
4) Increase the level of the free gear and give it to both attackers and defenders.  No battle should ever be without equipment.
Good call, tho I would give defenders slightly better gear.
5) Allow destroying of equipment (not goods) on the spot for both armies and fiefs and even during reinforcement periods before battles.
Yes.
6) Troop cap based on active faction members.  Each player contributes 10 troops per current strat ticks to their faction up to a max of 1000 troops.  So 10 ticks would add 100 tickets to your faction's cap.  100 ticks would add 1000 tickets and 1000 ticks would also add 1000 tickets.  Free troops will not count towards the faction cap.
I can see your point here, would actually make having vassals useful.
7) Create some kind of score board
Because we all love e-peen

[Bohannon]

I couldn't read the all posts so not sure it's written or not.

When you attack a fief and if you win, you're gaining all armies inside of it. Think yourself as a troop inside the fief. You lost and then you suddenly belong the guy who attacked you. You may dont want to fight with them. Where is the "no surrender" situation?

In my opinion, they need to fix it with a determinated ratio. It could be between 0.2 and 0.5. So when you captured the castle with a 6000 troops, you'll gain 2000-3000 troops.

[Osiris]

6) Troop cap based on active faction members.  Each player contributes 10 troops per current strat ticks to their faction up to a max of 1000 troops.  So 10 ticks would add 100 tickets to your faction's cap.  100 ticks would add 1000 tickets and 1000 ticks would also add 1000 tickets.  Free troops will not count towards the faction cap.
I can see your point here, would actually make having vassals useful.

but that would royally screw over small or solo player factions 

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

but that would royally screw over small or solo player factions 

Seems that way.

[GRANDMOM]

About the faction troops cap:

Wouldnt it be better to involve fiefs in this - I mean:

Faction A owns 3 villages
Faction B owns one village
Faction C owns one village
Faction D owns one village

FActions B,C,D together make a pact to take down faction A - together they have the same faction troop cap as Faction A so the war would be even in numbers.

Every fief - adds to faction troop cap

*Villages adds to faction troops cap
*Castles adds more
*Towns add most

Ofc, every clan should have an initial troop cap even without fiefs

This would add:

1. Possibility to take down larger factions even if they have huge amounts of ticket grinders - take away their fiefs and they cant grind as much
2. Villages - more reason to defend them
3. Makes it profitable to attack fiefs, not just gaining a stronghold and trade, but actually making the clan bigger in number of tickets over time.
4. No more troopstacking since when u reach the limit you need to either expand or sit on your ass while others expand around you and get bigger
5. More counter attacks and a more flexible war situation - if you loose feifs you then need to gain new ones to be able to keep your troops cap

This couldnt ofc set in as soon as you loose a fief, there would need to be a delay of some time, and if you gain another fief or if you got the fief you just lost back there is now worries of loosing troops. If you dont howerer, your troops will "starve" if you have to many.

[Casimir]

Why does everyone seem to think it should be as as easy for small factions as it is for large ones? This will never be the case, and nor should it be. Small factions should have a chance but a small faction shouldn't be able to compete directly with a large faction on their own (unless they are very talented and face others who are utterly incompetent).

[Osiris]

Why does everyone seem to think it should be as as easy for small factions as it is for large ones? This will never be the case, and nor should it be. Small factions should have a chance but a small faction shouldn't be able to compete directly with a large faction on their own (unless they are very talented and face others who are utterly incompetent).

true but we shouldn't give small factions 0 chance just to nerf large ones. troops per players etc just means biggest faction wins however something does need to be done to limit this 30-50k troops in a castle nonsense removing the 1/3 rule should help

[FRANK_THE_TANK]

true but we shouldn't give small factions 0 chance just to nerf large ones. troops per players etc just means biggest faction wins however something does need to be done to limit this 30-50k troops in a castle nonsense removing the 1/3 rule should help

I agree. You can halt the ability of large factions to have ridiculous garrisons holding a fief (Fisdnar had over 8k of troops in it, I think we have 4 at the moment...)stimy

If you make it economically untenable to have 1400+ armies rolling around and say 1.5k plus garrisons in villages 3k for castles and 6k for towns then you force the bigger clans to actually use there players and give them power. Imagine the horrible mayhem of every Merc having 1.4k worth of troops... Someone is bound to do something stupid.

Now what would be interesting is if they could do a Total War style reinforcement thing.

[GRANDMOM]

Why does everyone seem to think it should be as as easy for small factions as it is for large ones? This will never be the case, and nor should it be. Small factions should have a chance but a small faction shouldn't be able to compete directly with a large faction on their own (unless they are very talented and face others who are utterly incompetent).

Everyone doesnt see it that way Cas - this would apply also to the situation you had when GO were down to a couple of fiefs - they grinded a couple of thousands of troops each day and you couldnt take them down (or however it was). Small clans would still be small, but the size would be dependant on fiefs on the map and the actions of the strategus faction and not grinders sitting 24/7 in EU1 or EU2.

[Casimir]

The issue is to do with the overly defensive metagame not the overall balance between large and small. activity should be rewarded more than numbers but it will always be true that the more people you have the stronger you are.

[GRANDMOM]

The issue is to do with the overly defensive metagame not the overall balance between large and small. activity should be rewarded more than numbers but it will always be true that the more people you have the stronger you are.

Yes it will be so, the more members the stronger and it should be that way - but this should also have to do with number of fiefs ofc - you couldnt field troops if you couldnt feed/pay them back in the days.

The defensive strategy would be a waist, if you cant proitect your villages you cant massstack troops in castles - more village fights and more points on the map to fight over - now people only fight for castles and towns

[MURDERTRON]

Even if you forced smaller clans, nothing would stop them from allying or collaborating as one anyway.

[CrazyCracka420]

About the faction troops cap:

Wouldnt it be better to involve fiefs in this - I mean:

Faction A owns 3 villages
Faction B owns one village
Faction C owns one village
Faction D owns one village

FActions B,C,D together make a pact to take down faction A - together they have the same faction troop cap as Faction A so the war would be even in numbers.

Every fief - adds to faction troop cap

*Villages adds to faction troops cap
*Castles adds more
*Towns add most

Ofc, every clan should have an initial troop cap even without fiefs

This would add:

1. Possibility to take down larger factions even if they have huge amounts of ticket grinders - take away their fiefs and they cant grind as much
2. Villages - more reason to defend them
3. Makes it profitable to attack fiefs, not just gaining a stronghold and trade, but actually making the clan bigger in number of tickets over time.
4. No more troopstacking since when u reach the limit you need to either expand or sit on your ass while others expand around you and get bigger
5. More counter attacks and a more flexible war situation - if you loose feifs you then need to gain new ones to be able to keep your troops cap

This couldnt ofc set in as soon as you loose a fief, there would need to be a delay of some time, and if you gain another fief or if you got the fief you just lost back there is now worries of loosing troops. If you dont howerer, your troops will "starve" if you have to many.

See my post about a new item "food" that would control how large of a garrison a fief can have.  You can transfer food from one fief to another (to make a larger garrison at castles/cities).  No reason to have artificial troop caps...have a product (food) control the garrison sizes.  You'd then be able to besiege a castle/city and starve them out.

[GRANDMOM]

Even if you forced smaller clans, nothing would stop them from allying or collaborating as one anyway.

Not even close to the point