This sort of thing annoys me. The Berserks attack us and we fight back, and we get crap from the community for attacking 'noobs' such as Lumetta and VonCrow. Then, when a real noob comes, he gets ganked 2 to 1. A fine first battle.
So, help me out here. A new guy comes, seems interested, posts against our Holy chadzian Empire and calls people to arms against us. Then Moonshine offers him a village right on our borders, so he says 'no'. Then Tristan offers him a village far away from us, one that we had no intention of holding, right in the midst of our other enemies and he says 'yes'. Makes sense, yes?
Then an enemy of us attacks this other enemy of ours, and people get up at this shitty time to crush this poor guy. His first battle has only one kill before we are spawn raped and flags capped.
Ganks happen despite what we have tried in the past to make battles fun, but I feel no one on the opposing side wanted a fun battle. Nobody looked at the rosters and said, 'hey, I'll try even this out'. Is it because I said I will try guarantee Pelagor's independence? Were you trying to stop the expansion of the HCE even though I said I did not want Doom Carrot as a vassal? You all say you want more factions, but yet you force people to join one side or the other.
And that makes Strat boring.
The problem with this fight wasn't the rosters. It was the time. There's no back and forth number crunching. It becomes a matter of 'Get the most people signed up, and pray people are awake at the time of the battle.' it's not like a prime time battle where you can look at the Steam list and say, 'Great fight about to happen, want in?'
Now if you want to know the reasoning behind the attack. First off, right now, I'm a one man clan. Second, I offered Tash Kulun to Doom_Carrot. This is a direct quote from his response: "It is not that I am hostile towards any of the other factions on the map, however I am allied with the HCE, and will shortly be recieving a fief transfer. I appreciate your generous offer;(relations with another faction here), I would not like to risk offending the HCE by rejecting an alliance that I have already agreed upon."
At that point I wrote to him, and told him, in strat... the last thing you want to do as a new faction, or as new member, is to ally with a faction that is already at war. The allies of one, are counted as enemies in war. As an enemy of HCE, I gave him a two day respite. I didn't know where he was on the map. I didn't know what fief he was getting. I had my own plans, and my eyes were on Dashbiga. Here's his response: "I wish I could revoke my alliance. However, I need the support of the HCE should stronger factions raid my land as much as the HCE needs people like me to tend their land and create buffers between them and their enemies. I wish you luck, should we ever meet on the field of battle again."
At this point, he knows what he's up against. He's holding to his alliance (like a good clan leader), and by all accounts, he's appearing as a vassal to HCE. So is he REALLY safe in the steppes? No. He even acknowledges that the fief is still an HCE fief (hence the 'tend their land')
If he wants Tash Kulun, it can still be his. As it appears, HCE has rejected his alliance. Even then, that rejection didn't come until AFTER the attack had been scheduled. What should I have done? Walked away from my own army?
This was solely a roleplaying decision to hit his fief. The difference is, I'll give him a clean slate, providing HCE continues to renounce his alliance. HCE never gives such mercy. ;-) I can't speak for others though... only the Bootlegger(s)
Now, one more point... stop it with the roster posture.
The battle for Tash Kulun, as an example. At one point, I had 5 mercs signed. HCE had 19. How was that even? 'Oh, but you might have ninja'd...' I'm sure that's what James would say. I don't know how many battles I've 'commanded' this round, but of them all, only one had been ninja'd. That was an undeclared war with the Starks, when they were on their afk run. We ninja'd, we won. I was trying to make a point about declaring wars and what not. I thought the point was received. ;-)
Anyway, we're in constant talks, you and I. That battle ended up as a 17 vs 21 battle, and went down to the wire. It was a great fight.
But take a look at these:
http://c-rpg.net/?page=strategusbattlesarchive#!?page=strategusinfobattleroster&id=4394 21 HCE vs 11 Zerks
http://c-rpg.net/?page=strategusbattlesarchive#!?page=strategusinfobattleroster&id=4362 32 HCE vs 9 Squids
I could go deeper. 'Oh well, they might ninja...' And you know what, valid point. But at what point do you have to look at your own house? When do you guys stop, and say, 'Wait, we should make these things a little more fair...' Maybe if the rosters weren't lopsided, or the armies, or the advantages... then things may balance out... but in the mean time, your enemies are fighting you the same way you fight them.
