Strategus Reset?

[Vovka]

ahh made me lol more than it should (member is another word for penis if you didnt know)

now u all know my secret  my pp is short (

[Butan]

[Keshian]

Yeah voting system really curtailed small factions because people voted mass sections for each faction with any isolated fief being quickly taken by force.  At least with neutral fiefs the buildup to troops and gear to attack made it difficult for large factions to establish themselves for a while making small clans more viable.  Especially with a time limit on strat thats a highly effective way to make it more dynamic for small clans.

[CrazyCracka420]

Yeah voting system really curtailed small factions because people voted mass sections for each faction with any isolated fief being quickly taken by force.  At least with neutral fiefs the buildup to troops and gear to attack made it difficult for large factions to establish themselves for a while making small clans more viable.  Especially with a time limit on strat thats a highly effective way to make it more dynamic for small clans.

totally agree, I thought neutral fiefs was a much better way to go.  Would be nice if some high level people (maybe devs or game admins) were able to accept people to rosters of AI and kick people off. 

[GRANDMOM]

Look, crpg community can accumulate 10000000000 troops per day can run 500 caravans and get money, they have atleast 6 hours of prime time  every day for run battles....
but? they dont give a fuck

Agreed

And now u suggest cap all dat players who do the shit, grind tick's on servers, grind troops, run caravans for upkeep
for? cos all others dont give a fuck and don't want do the same.

They do want to do the same, only it matters not since not much can be done about the general situation in strat, since faction strength in the game is mainly dependant on active accounts, not on territory, strategy or number of fiefs owned. If it was dependant on fiefs owned, we would see a fluctuant strategus instead of a stale strategus going around in circles every round.

- delete 1/3 rule
- less managment (as example free transfer strat tick's or selling on market  cuz alot of players have 1000000000 ticks but its to hard for them give a fuck about dat  ))
- night time prime time for whole faction for attack and defend actions
- multiplyer for big battles

Agreed

- forget about "oh it will be so cute for small clans" cuz it wold't never, small faction -  dead faction unless they are not useful for big one.

the basic idea that I'm trying to say: make strat easier for the lazy and stupid plebs, but not harder for hard working and successful factions ))

Successfull because hard working??

[Tomas]

(click to show/hide)

example: (forget about the exact numbers - they could be worked out later its just to show the system)

Faction A
3 villages - adds 2000 per village to faction troop cap
1 Castle - adds 4000 per castle to faction troop cap
Initial troops cap for a fiefless faction - adds 5000 to faction troops cap
Total faction troop cap = 15000 (the maximum amount of troops faction A can grind)

Faction B
5 villages - adds 2000 per village
Initial troops cap for a fiefless faction - adds 5000 to faction troops cap
Total faction troop cap =  15000(the maximum amount of troops faction B can grind)

Result:
Both Factions will farm out all their grinders into separate factions in order to gain the 5000 troop cap multiple times.
Micromanagement will go through the roof with the factions capable of doing this gaining a huge advantage.
Faction C with no fiefs will have less troops than either Faction A or B and so is even further behind

There cannot be any "bonus" system for troop caps based on size or fiefs because all that does is create loop holes for abuse.

Yes this may penalise solo players but i firmly believe that 1100 troops is enough to have fun with on Strat and as Vovka says, stacking troops in fiefs will be very risky once the 1/3 rule has gone.

[Osiris]

it only goes for armies of 1800+ so 1100 still wont be enough to attack anything. let alone the fact that anything but a village requires waves of attacks

[Tomas]

it only goes for armies of 1800+ so 1100 still wont be enough to attack anything. let alone the fact that anything but a village requires waves of attacks

If there's a risk of getting spawn capped by an 1800 man army then 1800ish will be the max people will want to keep in spawn-cap-able fiefs.  1100 is more than 1/3 of 1800.  Therefore 1100 will be more than enough to attack the majority of fiefs on the map. 

Add to this
- the already established trend of bigger clans to not care about any but their core fiefs (Apostates, CA, GO, DRZ and Coalition have all abandoned villages to hold Castles/Towns)
- the reduced number of overall tickets and limit on turtle power due to the cap (At a guess the Coalition would be capped at around 50k which would mean 3k tickets for each of our current fiefs instead of the ~14k per fief we have now)
- the fact that 3k would fall in 2 easy waves, meaning we'd probably consolidate into just 5ish core fiefs which would free up 11 of our Castles/Towns for others to fight over.

[Keshian]

If there's a risk of getting spawn capped by an 1800 man army then 1800ish will be the max people will want to keep in spawn-cap-able fiefs.  1100 is more than 1/3 of 1800.  Therefore 1100 will be more than enough to attack the majority of fiefs on the map. 

Add to this
- the already established trend of bigger clans to not care about any but their core fiefs (Apostates, CA, GO, DRZ and Coalition have all abandoned villages to hold Castles/Towns)
- the reduced number of overall tickets and limit on turtle power due to the cap (At a guess the Coalition would be capped at around 50k which would mean 3k tickets for each of our current fiefs instead of the ~14k per fief we have now)
- the fact that 3k would fall in 2 easy waves, meaning we'd probably consolidate into just 5ish core fiefs which would free up 11 of our Castles/Towns for others to fight over.

Why we should get rid of voting for castles and cities - less stockpiling more fighting over less valuable fiefs for longer.

[Butan]

If there's a risk of getting spawn capped by an 1800 man army then 1800ish will be the max people will want to keep in spawn-cap-able fiefs.  1100 is more than 1/3 of 1800.  Therefore 1100 will be more than enough to attack the majority of fiefs on the map. 

Add to this
- the already established trend of bigger clans to not care about any but their core fiefs (Apostates, CA, GO, DRZ and Coalition have all abandoned villages to hold Castles/Towns)
- the reduced number of overall tickets and limit on turtle power due to the cap (At a guess the Coalition would be capped at around 50k which would mean 3k tickets for each of our current fiefs instead of the ~14k per fief we have now)
- the fact that 3k would fall in 2 easy waves, meaning we'd probably consolidate into just 5ish core fiefs which would free up 11 of our Castles/Towns for others to fight over.

Where will people put the extra troops on ? On themselves with crazy upkeep ? 
It will be just a "urgency" method when besieged but the first waves of attacks will be on fiefs with crazy amounts of troops in 
Not to add that lowering the garrison to avoid the possibility of "flag cap" (which is extremely low in castles/towns) calls for a Lord that is active 24/24 7/7.
Without the 1/3 above 1800+ troops, some sieges may well fall by flag capping if the lords arent there to avoid item bombing, it will call for more reasonable management of the land.


And most factions doesnt "releases" fiefs pre-emptively, for fear of losing them. They all wait for some invaders to take the cautious decision to let small factions take over here and there, where they couldnt manage fiefs efficiently. Then when the big ones falls back, they all get crushed mercilessly (losing villages is as easy as taking them back).
Then, the 1/3 rule shift may give some big greedy factions like GO/DRZ/COA/KAPI/etc... some incentive to release ownership of the least important fiefs to vassals/allies/friends.


Not sure what you meant with decrease of overall tickets, you meant the fact that less people actively play cRPG, so less troops being recruited? That may be true, but still :

Past total garrisoning:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Today:

(click to show/hide)

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

The turtling has pretty much stagnated, even though there was some very costly sieges in the last weeks. So I think that the total troop regeneration is still high enough to balance the losses of war and attrition.

[Butan]

The only advantage is not wasting troops for the attacker in places with stupid garrisons

That, my friend, is largely enough 


Almost every invasion plans for the past 6 months has been stalled for that reason, except when one had a crazier than reality troop advantage, big polish/russian balls, or "artificially lowered garrison" deals.



Strat leader 1 : "hey, where should we attack?"

Strat leader 2 : "hmmm... looks like the enemy has a village with less than 10k garrison, lets send troops there"

2-3 fights later

Strat leader 1 : "village is captured, well done."

Strat leader 2 : "was fun, lets rest for a while. Lets say 3 months."

Strat leader 1 : "OK, cya."

[MURDERTRON]

Some fiefs need to have their maps changed to something a little more fair or just be straight up removed.  All of the "untakeable" castles or cities only help to create gold and stagnation.

[Real_Dece_Guy]

And which village is it where attackers have a forcefield around some of their flags? Or are there more than 1? Cos that kinda takes the piss.

Ayyike.  Don't know if there are others that have the same problem.

[Keshian]

Ayyike.  Don't know if there are others that have the same problem.

Actually those were fixed in the last patch, which we found out when we capped flags on lost legion who were attacking it.  Not sure if Dhirigh Aban, which had the same issue, was fixed in the last patch too.

[Matey]

Best possible way to get people to stop turtling up is a time limit on strat combined with rewards for achieving things. I'd say 5 month round followed by 1 month break. The rewards could be things like 1 loom point for every 10million renown a faction accumulates or 1 loom point for every 1000 troops they kill or 1 loom for every X number of fiefs a faction owns when strat ends... But ultimately there needs to be a time limit so people will know that if they mess up and get wiped out then they will know when it'll reset and they can either come back then or try something different for the remainder of the current round then regroup for the next one. That combined with cRPG related incentives will get people to actually do shit in strat instead of lounging about stockpiling troops. I do think that capping how many troops can be put in a fief isn't a bad idea either or at least allowing 1500+ troops to attack any fief/player regardless of how many troops they have thus negating the advantage of having a horde of troops.