Strategus & DoubleXP

[Erasmas]

And here you are wrong IMHO. What we promote is a dev's tool available to everyone, that provides sensible, limited, controllable and connected with certain cost ability to access faction's members, if they are afk. So it is not about GO only. It should serve well any faction active in strat, as noone wants to be a nolife and noone likes to suffer from inactivity of its members.

[Fips]

And here you are wrong IMHO. What we promote is a dev's tool available to everyone, that provides sensible, limited, controllable and connected with certain cost ability to access faction's members, if they are afk. So it is not about GO only. It should serve well any faction active in strat, as noone wants to be a nolife and noone likes to suffer from inactivity of its members.

What this tool does is making the job way easier for big clans and big alliances that already have it way too easy due to the sheer power of numbers on their side. If the next strategus round will allow a few people to lead dozens and dozens of other members there is absolutely no place in the map anymore for the person that is for example recruiting troops. This game needs less micromanagement, i agree, but not like that. Recruiting and transferring troops should have the option to be automized for example, or the whole ticket gaining process redone.

[BlindGuy]

I know lots of people have said this already but please change XP system in strat battles.  Right now no one will do fun themed light armor battles because of the XP drop.  Yes, change economy so that not every army can be a tin can army, but also change the XP system that makes everyone want to be a tin can army.

It's double sided sword: Sure the xp is better with tin cans, but also having heavy armor and best weapon does increase your chance of winning the battle: Peasants HAVE held off tincans on a few occasions but a 1armed man can count them on his fingers.

[Harpag]

And here you are wrong IMHO. What we promote is a dev's tool available to everyone, that provides sensible, limited, controllable and connected with certain cost ability to access faction's members, if they are afk. So it is not about GO only. It should serve well any faction active in strat, as noone wants to be a nolife and noone likes to suffer from inactivity of its members.

Guys please listen to him. Think positively and without notice. Worth a try.

(click to show/hide)

OMG. Do not burn a good idea only because it is our idea 

[Erasmas]

What this tool does is making the job way easier for big clans and big alliances that already have it way too easy due to the sheer power of numbers on their side. If the next strategus round will allow a few people to lead dozens and dozens of other members there is absolutely no place in the map anymore for the person that is for example recruiting troops. This game needs less micromanagement, i agree, but not like that. Recruiting and transferring troops should have the option to be automized for example, or the whole ticket gaining process redone.

Fips, automated recruiting/transferring troops may be a good idea from the perspective of a big clan leaders, but it is also contrary to the general idea of keeping people active. I would prefer to leave organisation of troops collection to the leaders. It is not that hard for anyone that plays crpg (and only these guys produce tickets) to log in on strat page and transfer troops.

It looks completely different if the clan is actually preparing the war offensive or another operation that requires regular participation of several guys. In particular, if certain action depends on one person.

Let me give you an example: Absent owner of the fief defending the siege .  After such battle you need to clear the stock from the looted items, and you may not have too much time to do it before next attack. If the owner is at grandmas having family dinner, that can't be done. Is this guy pissed off? No, 55 guys dealing with supermarket on next battle are pissed off. And such thing happens to big clans and small clans alike.

We have learned that in a long run it is much better to give tasks to as many clan members as possible - it keeps them active. It keeps clan alive. That is why such tool should be used in emergency only - it should cost to use it. Simply, sometimes the clan suffers from moronism of one guy. And that is hardly acceptable. For big and small clans alike.

[Artyem]

Change the default level of gear from -2 to 0 again, it'll encourage early themes and help out smaller factions.

[Corsair831]

"Plate issue in strat isn't really an issue."

"I've tested it couple of times, and I see no advantage of plate."

"heavy cav is also almost exclusive to strat. I haven't seen that many heavy cav on battle servers."

"Weapons Racks. Currently no one wants to build those because they are essentially waste of construction sites"

leshma, best lolquotes of 2013

[Teeth]

I know lots of people have said this already but please change XP system in strat battles.  Right now no one will do fun themed light armor battles because of the XP drop.  Yes, change economy so that not every army can be a tin can army, but also change the XP system that makes everyone want to be a tin can army.

This, also incentivizes people to bandwagon with the side that is already winning. On difficult sieges for example, where I'd say the attackers should be rewarded for not castle-camping themselves and for being willing to grind through terrible 1 to 3 k/d battles. Instead they get the shaft and get a third of the xp of the guys who are playing easy mode battles and camping like pussies in Strat.

Same with factions with strong roster support, independent mercs get more xp if they join the already strong side because of more fun battles (stomping is better than getting stomped) and more xp. The xp system should encourage people to sign up for the underdog.

[Jack1]

This, also incentivizes people to bandwagon with the side that is already winning. On difficult sieges for example, where I'd say the attackers should be rewarded for not castle-camping themselves and for being willing to grind through terrible 1 to 3 k/d battles. Instead they get the shaft and get a third of the xp of the guys who are playing easy mode battles and camping like pussies in Strat.

Same with factions with strong roster support, independent mercs get more xp if they join the already strong side because of more fun battles (stomping is better than getting stomped) and more xp. The xp system should encourage people to sign up for the underdog.

Then people will try as little as possible(assuming you mean the team that does worse gets more XP). IMO, make it so that the closer the KDR is to 50/50 the more the XP there is.

Also not sure how it is in EU but in NA people get crazy obsessed with their performance ratings

(click to show/hide)

look at my sig

. Most people believe that performance is based on stats for both teams. Not sure if this is true or not but they should make that independent on the teams insted, that way it's not just quantity but quality on either side.

[Fips]

Fips, automated recruiting/transferring troops may be a good idea from the perspective of a big clan leaders, but it is also contrary to the general idea of keeping people active. I would prefer to leave organisation of troops collection to the leaders. It is not that hard for anyone that plays crpg (and only these guys produce tickets) to log in on strat page and transfer troops.

It looks completely different if the clan is actually preparing the war offensive or another operation that requires regular participation of several guys. In particular, if certain action depends on one person.

Let me give you an example: Absent owner of the fief defending the siege .  After such battle you need to clear the stock from the looted items, and you may not have too much time to do it before next attack. If the owner is at grandmas having family dinner, that can't be done. Is this guy pissed off? No, 55 guys dealing with supermarket on next battle are pissed off. And such thing happens to big clans and small clans alike.

We have learned that in a long run it is much better to give tasks to as many clan members as possible - it keeps them active. It keeps clan alive. That is why such tool should be used in emergency only - it should cost to use it. Simply, sometimes the clan suffers from moronism of one guy. And that is hardly acceptable. For big and small clans alike.

And this also can just be prevented by another way that does not include taking the account infos and using them for yourself, simply by letting people with a very high rank to be able to do last-minute changes to all the castles in the faction, no matter where the player is. Whatever the problem is, sharing accounts cannot be the solution, ever. There are always ways to work around that.

[bilwit]

Then people will try as little as possible(assuming you mean the team that does worse gets more XP). IMO, make it so that the closer the KDR is to 50/50 the more the XP there is.

Also not sure how it is in EU but in NA people get crazy obsessed with their performance ratings

(click to show/hide)

look at my sig

. Most people believe that performance is based on stats for both teams. Not sure if this is true or not but they should make that independent on the teams insted, that way it's not just quantity but quality on either side.

Well the issue they're bringing up doesn't necessarily have anything to do with performance rating or KD, just that it's pretty asinine that better gear (and most likely the winning/stacked side) = more XP which encourages every army to basically wear the same heavy gear every match and for mercs to stack the ez-mode side. IMO strat XP ticks should be completely even across the board and should be based on how many players are in the server. Performance rating is fine as it is -- it's like QBR in American football (probably a bad metaphor to use on these boards), it's essentially useless and doesn't really tell the whole story but it gives you a general gauge on what to expect when hiring people.

[Elindor]

- Attack area used to be in (circle around hero)
- Was good but abused, was too large
- In this strat it is gone, and results in lack of ability to defend/patrol a region
- Possibly reintroduce this attack range area but just smaller than it was previously?

[ArysOakheart]

We need an NA Fisdnar.

[kinngrimm]

We need an NA Fisdnar.

If not you have my support for EU Fisdnar again.

[Erasmas]

And this also can just be prevented by another way that does not include taking the account infos and using them for yourself, simply by letting people with a very high rank to be able to do last-minute changes to all the castles in the faction, no matter where the player is. Whatever the problem is, sharing accounts cannot be the solution, ever. There are always ways to work around that.

This, actually, is a straight way to create "factions" played by one man, with all ticket farmers just playing crpg and sending troops. And if you want to add automated troops collection... well, no. Bad idea. It should be EMERGENCY measure.