• Hi, Travians! :)


    With the upcoming test server around the corner and thus the merger of kingdoms and alliances in mind, we are looking for further kingdom-focused gameplay improvements.


    In a previous thread we discussed the idea of "troop redeployment", which was primarily supposed to improve upon the utility of troops stationed within the center of a big kingdom, far away from the front.


    However, we'd ideally like to push future gameplay features more towards the core of the game, i.e. the kingdoms (hence also the removal of alliances).


    On top of that, we were playing around with the idea and saw it suggested quite regularly that players could build something on the map together other than just villages.


    As a result, here's our conceptual idea for Outposts:

    • General:

      • Every king and duke has the ability to place one Outpost on the map (on empty tiles on the map within their personal influence area)
      • There are three Outpost tiers (unlocked with higher item tiers after 1, 40, 80 days)
      • Placing an Outpost costs a certain amount of treasures (more for higher tiers)
    • Construction:

      • After giving the order and waiting for a short while, the Outpost is placed "under construction"
      • Troops can now be stationed in the Outpost by every player of the kingdom (every player has a personal stationing limit per Outpost)
      • The more troops that are stationed, the quicker the Outpost will be "finished" (higher tiers allow more troops to be stationed per player)
    • Function:

      • Influence Generator: A completed Outpost genereates influence within a 1-tile radius around it
      • Troop Forwarding: Troops stationed in a completed Outpost can be "forwarded", i.e. sent on new troop movements directly from the Outpost (that includes attacks, raids and sieges)
    • Destruction:

      • Outposts can be destroyed through attacks if all stationed enemy units are defeated (the attacker gets the originally invested treasures)
      • Outposts can be demolished by their owner (this takes a while, e.g. 24 hours; during that time the Outpost can still be attacked but not used for troop forwarding)

    What do you guys think of this idea?

    The post was edited 2 times, last by FabianF ().

  • Interesting idea, I'd like to see how it works in reality, my fear is that with Kingdoms currently being such a weak and ineffective way to organise players it will only serve to make the strong stronger and the weak weaker.

  • I believe that this is a good step forward, also the Outpost should be able to be fortified with special buildings perhaps? Such as a much stronger levelled wall, perhaps access to Great Warehouses/Silo's to make things happen and/or crop reduction buildings etc etc.


    Just throwing a few ideas out since we're here anyway!

  • I'm sorry but in my opinion this is only going to give even more advantage to pre-made alliances over the here-to-have-fun players :/

    Keep in mind that we're trying to combat their dominance anyway by removing alliances from the game (and further steps if necessary).

  • Troop redeployment got rightfully shot down in the previous thread. Now instead of that you get troop deployment in a thing belonging to a king/duke. The same balancing problems are still going to be there. Are the troops grouped together or can each player send only their own troops from that outpost? How many troops would you be able to put there? If it's entire hammers, or troops can be grouped together, that's hugely overpowered and destroys the concept of strategic planning. If it isn't entire hammers, what's the point for offense players? Defenders would be able to use it effectively but again, that destroys strategy. In planning operations I always take into account which areas on the map would be able to get defense in time if I fake a certain way so that defense is originally moved to the wrong spot, then on spotting the real attacks can no longer be moved to the right spot in time. Now with outposts defense could be available in any spot with very low travel time since even far away people, who wouldn't be able to help normally, can now help through the outpost. The fact that their accounts were originally in a completely different strategic location with different tactical problems than in other areas matters less. Also, players have to start attacking this thing for no threat to the enemy accounts except the loss of some treasures and troops? So it's another incentive to have no attacks on regular accounts, huh..


    I'm not sure I like the strategic implications of this at all...

  • From what I understand, I do not agree
    With the outpost there will be a target in more to defend, then less defenses in the realm where I can already defend the treasures ....
    (Sorry for my English)
    Bye :)

  • From what I understand, I do not agree
    With the outpost there will be a target in more to defend, then less defenses in the realm where I can already defend the treasures ....
    (Sorry for my English)
    Bye :)

    It is primarily meant to be an additional offensive tool. However you're right that it needs to be defended as well, so it might be an interesting decision whether to put defensive or offensive troops in there at certain points in time.

  • I have a question:
    if you are directed to remove the Alliance, a second step will be the elimination of Wonder of the World? Because I think it is impossible to defend the Wonder of the World with the troops of only one kingdom
    Unless more King become our allies in secret ...
    Thanks ;)

  • I have a question:
    if you are directed to remove the Alliance, a second step will be the elimination of Wonder of the World? Because I think it is impossible to defend the Wonder of the World with the troops of only one kingdom
    Unless more King become our allies in secret ...
    Thanks ;)

    One kingdom is enough to support a WW already at this point (top-3 kingdom atleast), and kingdoms will probably be much larger after the update.

  • I have a question:
    if you are directed to remove the Alliance, a second step will be the elimination of Wonder of the World? Because I think it is impossible to defend the Wonder of the World with the troops of only one kingdom
    Unless more King become our allies in secret ...
    Thanks ;)

    Well, you also have to attack with the troops of only one kingdom.


    Also, as Jallu mentioned above, kingdoms have the potential to span more territory than before.

  • uhm i wish to understand more:


    more ppl can put soldiers into outpost, is there any kind of defense like walls?
    if someone attack the outpost, notification will be sent to? all players who have soldiers into the outpost?
    Troops feeding remain to the owners cities?


    substantially this outpost function is to move easily hammers around world and crush enemies faster?


    My suggestion is to change totally the attack detections, actually people know they are getting attacks even if soldiers are just went out their castle even if from the other part of the world, it could be nice attacks need to be detected from outposts or friendly cities that are on the enemies route
    For example, if i attack a city in the north but that city lack of the "lookout tower", my attack will be detected when will be really close to it, with this new building a town can cover a bigger land to detect attacks
    an outpost could improve greatly the control of the world detecting attacks far away and generating an influence area bigger (not 1 tile but 3-4 tile or more like a little city

  • I don't like this at all, but not for the obvious reasons. One of my main problems with kingdoms is that it's too heavily stacked towards defence - I've made enough posts by now about how and why this is the case.


    This is yet another case of a change that will disproportionately benefit defence. You say that this is to help attack - but there is a limit to the number of troops that can be sent to the outpost per player. That immediately makes it a defensive tool, not an offensive tool. You can pool defence. You can't pool attack. This will cause a flurry of attacks when first released, then people will discover it's useless, and go back to simming as they do now.


    And I struggle to see how this works. Removing limits on troops - or at least make it all troops from one village - or leaving the limits, but making all troops there pool to be used as one by the duke/king that built it would likely tip the balance way too much the other way.


    I'd prefer for serious consideration to be given to looking at the underlying mechanics that need fixing rather than yet another gimmick that will do very little to address the underlying issues that turn this into a simfest.

  • Yep, I'm unconvinced by this as well. At the very least it's an idea that needs serious work; at worst it will make things worse, as suggested by VVV. The way round VVV's objection is not to allow troops from the outpost to reinforce, but that still doesn't make it a good offensive tool, unless you provide the possibility of giving the outpost serious defence,. That will require some clever balancing though.

  • Hi there. And here is feedback from RU community and some questions that hopefully will be answered so that I could deliver it back to RU forum. The link to the original discussion about outpost (in Russian).


    Here is short summary:


    Qwentin:
    Will all the players see the outpost which is under construction? Or just the alliance/kingdom?
    Will troops in the outpost consume crop? How and whose?
    Will outpost have some defence bonus?
    If outpost is attacked, can it be damaged or it can just be destroyed completely?


    SevenZ:
    Who can operate the troops in the outpost? One player or everyone operates with their army separately?
    For example, is it possible, that 100 players send 1k clubs each and then one player rules this army (100k clubs) and destroys the vicinity?


    Qwentin:
    It looks that there are limits how many troops can be sent there, but there aren't any limits how many times players can attack outpost. The defenders will lose, because they won't be able to send enough defense there, right, and at the same time the attacker has no limitations.


    ZeuS:
    I like the idea. The more interactions ingame, the more interestin it is. You can put outpost on kingdom borders and you can start action straight away, no need to wait 12 hours when your troops reach the target and then come back.


    Победа_Носец_RU:
    I have my doubs. Outpost should be either possible to defend unlimitedly or there should be limitations on attacks.


    Щитовод_RU:
    Outpost should give more influence and have an option to be conquered, not destroyed.

  • Hey @Ameno, thanks a lot for summarizing the feedback. I'll try to answer some of those questions.


    Will all the players see the outpost which is under construction? Or just the alliance/kingdom?
    It would be nice to have all the players seeing it so it doesn't spawn out of nowhere. However that would have implications regarding attacking an Outpost while it's in construction (which we don't really want to have happen, but strictly limiting that will have its own problems). So right now I think it'd only being visible within the kingdom.


    Will troops in the outpost consume crop? How and whose?
    They will normally consume crop from their home village. We thought about giving a crop bonus in some way, such as every troop stationed produces an additional crop for the village, to incentivize Outpost usage some more. What do you think?

    Will outpost have some defence bonus?
    Definitely and due to the limited troop amounts not a small one. We're thinking of 100%.


    If outpost is attacked, can it be damaged or it can just be destroyed completely?
    To not make the feature overly complex, we're thinking of just allowing for complete destruction (if all stationed troops are defeated in an attack movement) right now.


    Who can operate the troops in the outpost? One player or everyone operates with their army separately?
    Each player operates the troops they have personally stationed in the Outpost. You can't control troops of other players. Also with this feature troops would not be merged.

    Regarding "attack limitations": Ideally we don't want to have too many exceptions in an Outpost's combat behaviour. If they're still not defendable with a 100% def bonus though, we could think about blocking attacks for a certain time after one came in.

    Regarding the "too small influence radius": We've received that feedback a lot and we think it would be fine to have the influence also grow with the Outpost tier used. Similarly to how the influence of villages grows from 0 to 500 population (diagram).

  • Hello,


    a summary from Italian community:


    Akkaz:


    My first impression of this feature was an advantage to offender armies. Have enemies armies on kingdom boundaries, who could attack at any time very closely to home, it could annoy. But troops limit for each player could be a good idea, because players can't stationing whole army into the outpost.
    It's interesting know if this troops limit will be a % or a fixed amount.


    In other hand it could be very useful for defence troops that could defend boundaries villages in time.


    I find this feature positive and it could add more strategy in game.
    In addition I'd like to know some details:


    - Is it correct think that an alliance could have 21 Outposts (3 kingdoms * 7 dukes)?


    - Will Scouts work as in a village?


    - How many treasures will cost upgrading Outpost? This is useful for consider it affordable put treasures along our alliance boundaries or in a quite place inside alliance.



    PIRATA



    If alliances will be removed it will be only 1 king and 7 dukes. And an Outpost generates influence within a 1 tile around it.


    Considering that in last game worlds every alliances had about 90 players each. So every kingdoms had an average of 30 players. Adding about 2 other players for outpost, we'll have 32 + 30 = 62 players.



    So I ask:


    - Can 62 players defend a WW to the end?
    I don't think.
    But things could chance if Outposts generate more influence so more players could be added into the kingdom.
    An idea is grow influence depending on how many treasures are kept into Outposts.



    In addition it could be better remove stationed troops limit and have many armies otherwise it will be useful only for defensive troops.

  • Thanks @galadriel as well! :)

    It's interesting know if this troops limit will be a % or a fixed amount.

    We're currently thinking it should be a fixed amount. What would a % be based on that doesn't reduce the impact of smaller players too much?


    Is it correct think that an alliance could have 21 Outposts (3 kingdoms * 7 dukes)?

    This concept assumes that the mentioned merger of alliances and kingdoms already happened. So we'd only have one king. The maximum number of dukes is currently unlimited on our test server (based on the expansion slots used by the king), but we consider re-introducing a limit (maybe even 7 as it was before).


    Will Scouts work as in a village?

    Yes, they probably should. :)


    How many treasures will cost upgrading Outpost? This is useful for consider it affordable put treasures along our alliance boundaries or in a quite place inside alliance.

    As a rough orientation, we currently put the three tiers at 25, 125 and 375 treasures. Depending on where we end up with the troop limit per player that might change though.


    Can 62 players defend a WW to the end?

    On the other hand the attacking kingdoms also consist of fewer players, so there are fewer/smaller coordinated attacks on the WW as well.


    But things could chance if Outposts generate more influence so more players could be added into the kingdom.

    As mentioned above, we will probably make the influence radius bigger the higher your Outpost tier is.