no fighting in TK - an addition perspective

  • I fail to see the distinction.

    The distinction is quite clear though. Cheaper offense means cheaper imperians, cheaper swordfighters, cheaper clubmen, cheaper axefighters, etc. Cheaper troops also includes cheaper praetorians, cheaper spearfighters, cheaper paladins, cheaper phalanxes.


    Quote

    And offense is already cheap if you raid -- my hammer pays for itself to keep building, as well as much of it's upkeep.

    Not everyone raids as much as you do and considering the lack of fighting, people like you are too afraid to lose their cheap hammer in an attack.



    Quote

    Assuming they pick the correct village then yes, 2 full anvils can stop 1 full hammer.
    You're very unlikely to every hit 2 full anvils, as very few anvil players will send their entire anvil to someone.

    In kingdoms most players are happy to send their entire anvil to someone else when they see that an attack is coming in in ten hours, especially considering that everyone around them is in the same kingdom/alliance. Even if this is not the case, if a lot of people send a few thousand troops, your hammer does not stand a chance.


    Quote

    It doesn't take that much. But what happens to their DP production when it is spread across 5 targets?

    You simply do not spread your defense across 5 targets, but centre it in the most valuable or the most likely real target.


    Besides, this has nothing to do with the topic. There is a problem of a lack of fighting. The problem is not that people are unable to guard their villages from attacks.

  • Speed,


    server speed.
    the 5x was a different game for many reasons but i found that the server speed encouraged people to attack a lot more knowing that it wouldn't take a week to rebuild if it went splat.


    And this sounds counter intuitive but i also noticed that there were an abundance of resources which also encouraged more attacks knowing that you weren't stuck in the mud waiting on resources to rebuild your troops when you have no troops to gain resources - no catch-22 endless cycle.


    Build-A-Win debate I leave to alb and DH to duke (he he) it out. encourages or discourages battles. discuss :-)


    Less focus on diplomacy during the game. Real world- wonderful! Travian, not so much. It gets boring for a lot, maybe the majority of players, to have to travel so many hours every time they want to farm. Not true of all, of course, but different styles breed different pet peeves.


    COMMUNICATIONS!!! I can't emphasize enough how detrimental the communication interfaces have been. You have to search for every little thing, there are no filters, no way to organize, no way to delete, no way to stress urgency (well, yes you can literally write "Urgent" or Defense" or whatever, but is that the most efficient way to go about it?


    One thing I have noticed is that all the top players are efficient by nature - they love the numbers, they love the timing and the tactics and the team work. without a far better source of communications, all those loves became frustrations. gettertools, ect are great but ingame tools -especially communication tools- should be at the very least sufficient for play. They are not.


    And the most frustrating of all things to me - sight. The position of Gov has got to change, or at least the description so people know what they are getting into. All i saw was red flashing swords on the alliance board which told me virtually nothing. i stopped looking long ago. i don't know any of the goings on in my own alliance (from what i can search out, exclusive to what i am told - like a good little cyborg) never mind any other alliance. it's just pieces of a very scramble picture when you can't see who belongs to who's alliance or anything else about them or the world without searching out every little tedious things page.....by page......by page........(NOT SO SILENT SCREAM)


    A Gov can't even tell who is attacking who from where. There is simply too much dependence on the kings to supply useful information . imagine a newbie stepping into that role. there is NO way they understand what information they need to supply on a regular basis to be competitive.


    the map. unless (again the sight thing) your leaders actually tell you what the colors mean, they are meaningless - and oh don't i love the individuality and flare of each king and alliance. NOT.


    Secret society needs more something. i saw it's use somewhat, but not enough to consider it a useful tool but i will leave that up to those who made full use of it. i would think that if anything would encourage fighting, a group of like minded players would have some fun with it but it didn't seem to make a difference.


    phew, ok, that's it.


    i just want to add my NO to cheaper offensive troops. Balance? Yes. i believe that's what the tribes strive to do and if it's out of whack, hand it over to the many 'number loving' players to crunch out. it would be super accurate and therefore useful. It may be a hindrance to your particular sense of play but is it truly a hindrance to the game? I don't know, but knowing the real numbers would be a place to start.

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

  • I think the only part of pay-to-win I might change would be to restrict insta-build to a few times a day. Maybe 5x in any given town in a day?
    And maybe NPC to maybe 3x per day in any given town.
    (though the NPC restriction would have to go away when the WW are out)
    i think most folks would barely notice ^these -- only the super gold users would.




    Limits like that are not good, like a clear limit on how many governors you can have is not good for the game. Increasing the price per use is much more sensible but nobody wants that because it gives free players chance to keep up with gold players. If you have 10 or 7 gold - whichever developers originally had in mind - per NPC use then even the big whales may stop at some point and rethink whether enormous NPCing makes sense. Gold players will not be driven away because of the price increase - they simply will be doing it less often. This also makes gap between no-gold and gold users smaller.


    Biggest problem with whale/gold/no-gold players in T5k is insta-build and insta-merchant. Insta-merchant makes gold/whale players/kings indestructible. One or the other has to be removed if you want to give regular players any chance. Removing insta-build may even give no-gold king players chance to keep up with others. Right now any whale player can settle a village in your area and it'll reach pop1000 overnight. This of course would require a lot of spending but you don't even need to make it at such a large scale. Ammanurt has a good example of this from his battle with Alb. It was clear example how insta-build + insta-merchant are ruining the game for free players.


    Free players would be much equal with gold users if you remove insta-build feature. There aren't Artifacts anymore and getting your Capital's fields as high as possible is not that necessary anymore. Instant-merhcant is not that big of an advantage without insta-build. You could easily make up this loss with few tweaks to hero's items and implement much wished village buildings reposition. By that I mean for 50 gold you can change the placement of infrastructure buildings inside your village. This would give no advantage to gold users and at the same time was wished by many before T5 Alpha was launched.

  • I don't think "it gives free players a chance to keep up with gold players" is an argument the developers would use, much rather the opposite of it. They're just afraid people will no longer buy gold at those prices, or indeed use less which - in their view - costs them money. Obviously if less pay-to-win leads to more people playing that might not be true at all. Either way, making the gap between no-gold and gold users smaller would be favourable for the game.


    As far as the limits go, it's not exactly a beautiful solution and I would much rather prefer an increase in gold prices, but I do think it would work.

  • If you make it so that you cant insta build, all gold players will leave the game. I certainly will. It will make servers completely unplayable and super long. i am not playing a game to sit and twiddle my thumbs. If you want to do that you can play Farmville or Sim City. This would destroy the game.

  • If you make it so that you cant insta build, all gold players will leave the game. I certainly will. It will make servers completely unplayable and super long. i am not playing a game to sit and twiddle my thumbs. If you want to do that you can play Farmville or Sim City. This would destroy the game.


    You should realize I am a gold player. Although not a whale like you, I still use gold. I guess you have fun playing in servers where there are 1k players or less because your gold has even bigger impact there.


    Reference to Sim City and Farmville will not help you at all. I guess you missed the title in this thread which clearly points that T5k is further step towards Farmville/Sim City due to lack of possible offensive activity.


    But thanks for proving my point that gold players don't want to shorten the gap between free and gold players because you know, without gold a lot of them can't even find the login button.

  • I know of a few games that are community driven and player controlled. They attempted to make some profit all attempts failed but the game has a cult following since 1996. Players make content updates and it's completely volunteer based.. it's also more fair(althought there is some cheating)


    But the cheating is monitored..


    So I would suspect that if this game failed to make a profit and the developers gave up on it one like it would sprout up. Possibly free to play and player controlled...

  • But thanks for proving my point that gold players don't want to shorten the gap between free and gold players because you know, without gold a lot of them can't even find the login button.


    There is absolutely no reason to believe, that gold users, even heavy gold users, are, on average, less experienced and knowledgeable players than non gold users. Slightly opposite actually as it's easier for gold user to find experienced dual and learn (again, on average).

  • There is no fight because there is not enough active players to make a critical mass. I think it's save to say that old school travian in mass rejected kingdoms. Mainly because it's way too heavy, because analytics with one window system is time-consuming beyond reasonable (and how the hell you suppose to plan an operation against an alliance/kingdom if you can't get the list of the players in that alliance?) and communication is broken. After that everyone has a long list of personal dislikes.

  • There is absolutely no reason to believe, that gold users, even heavy gold users, are, on average, less experienced and knowledgeable players than non gold users. Slightly opposite actually as it's easier for gold user to find experienced dual and learn (again, on average).


    Uksik isn't saying gold users are less experienced or knowledgeable.
    He's saying the heavy gold users know they have a huge advantage and want to keep that advantage.

  • It was a little hyperbolic but if you read marius' post and uksik's reaction to it, marius said he doesn't want to play a slow-paced, carefully planned game (and that all gold players don't). Which implies that gold players are too thick to carefully plan their development and just want their game to progress as quickly as possible using as much gold as needed. I don't actually think that's true though.


    Anyway, it would be nice to see from the devs what they intend to do about the lack of fighting :D

  • Uksik isn't saying gold users are less experienced or knowledgeable.
    He's saying the heavy gold users know they have a huge advantage and want to keep that advantage.


    He said that gold users will not be able to find login button, which I read as they don't know how to play at all.

  • Example regarding no insta-build scenario.


    On another (travian) server I had my fields destroyed recently and rebuilding now. Originally, we npced and insta starting level 13, it was early game, so the account was small and we did not have resources to do so more than 2-3 times a day, not too much spending. If insta build did not exist fields would take more time but still will worth it probably. Now however, we have big account and alliance push to rebuild the fields so we have enough resources to build much faster and not much time till the end of server to allow slow build up. If insta build did not exist alliance will not be able to help us rebuild, no way to spend those resources. There is not enough time to bring fields to the original level, leave alone to have them produce enough to pay off and without it we can't support more troops. Constant NPC is more gold than we are spending on insta build. Result - once fields destroyed after mid-game an account would be frozen and frankly, how many will continue in such circumstances?

  • So since someone brought up whether or not we should have insta-build I figured I would throw in my 2 cents. I've been playing Travian for many years. I have been a heavy gold user, I'm no longer a heavy gold user. I didn't use gold to be better than the people who didn't use gold. I used it to make up for the lack of time I had to play the game...also to get an advantage over other committed players who were also using gold.


    There are 2 restrictions in this game: Time and Resources.


    Resources are easy to get, queue troops, kick them out. They come back with resources. If you do this enough, you have unlimited resources 100% of the time. Resource restriction eliminated.


    So getting rid of insta-build makes using gold pointless because it's the best use for it. Even with insta-build. Time is still a factor. Troops queue times and travel times both keep time a factor in the game. Also, all these things you're insta-building with gold don't really give you the edge that people think it's giving you. If you have so many resources that you can insta-build a city from 0 to 1000...odds are that city isn't really adding to your strength very much.


    You can build maces 24-7 (over 800 daily) from the resource production of 2 villages. Which means anybody can get enough raiders to spend 10 gold every week to keep their farm lists available and send out thousands and thousands of maces every hour.


    I'm not saying it's easy, and takes no planning. But it's not impossible for a small or non-gold user to keep up with most gold users. But if the gold users didn't have an edge, I doubt the game would exist. It's really hard to pay people to develop a game with no money.



    With that said, there's no fighting because there typically is no fighting. People who fight within the first month of a server don't have the end of the server in mind. If you're not simming villages and using troops to raid, you're wasting resources and time. If someone attacks you, dodge. If they continue to be a problem, coordinate and deal with it, but limit your costs. The game isn't about killing your neighbor, though it is fun, it's about building a WW, or in this case having the most victory points.


    I'm not advocating peace. I attack people a lot, they have things I want. I am saying war is expensive, and even if you're clearly the winner....you just set yourself back a lot. And depending on how competitive the server is, you might just lose the game because you were looking for a fight.

  • @ÜksikHunt Nothing you said is in any way an argument that is in the least bit convincing. Almost every gold user I know would leave this game immediately if the insta build was in any way compromised. Honestly the fact that you think this feature is in any way unbalancing shows your complete lack of experience in the game. The rate limiting factor on a x1 server is not time to build, as you assert by asking for removing a button that saves nothing but a bit of time. The limiting factor is resources and will always be resources for non-gold users. The mechanic that is most unbalancing in TK is insta delivery.



    Craux While you are correct that resources for a raider are not a huge issue.... that is only true for the town that is raiding.... hence my above point.

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Marius ().

  • I just have to continue along the same lines I have posted many times before. Unless there is some advantage to buying gold, who is going to buy it? And if no one buys gold, where is TG's revenue going to come from? Gold is a fact of life, and gold users having some advantage over non-gold users is another. Without both, there would be no Travian.


    I will not disparage those who choose to play without gold, or those who live in places where gold is not at all affordable, and I applaud them for playing at all. Some non-gold users hang in there and build very effective accounts, and to be honest those who are more likely to be fiercely loyal to a team in today's Travian (T4 and TK) include a good many of those who use little to no gold. Nevertheless, those who complain about the supposed advantages gold use affords (far overblown 99% of the time when mentioned by non-gold users) are simply not seeing the whole picture. TG does not sell advertisements which constantly take up part(s) of the screen and add to the drain on system resources and distract from the game - who among you would rather have 1/4 of your screen filled with advertising?


    In reality, gold users support the free game that non gold users play along with us. Without us, there would be no game to play - TG would not have an online game. I hear so much resentment from non-gold users directed at those of us who essentially pay for the game they play for free - but I am here to tell you that is more unfair than any gold advantage could be. If you went hungry into a restaurant which served meatloaf and potatoes free but charged a premium price for steaks in order to pay for the free food - would you resent those who ate steak for having a better meal?


    @ Marius: The game will always be "unbalanced" when it comes to gold vs no gold, for the reasons I have stated above. However, speaking only for myself as a gold user, using a lot of gold made me somewhat lazy. I know from experience that it is quite possible to play effectively with little to no gold, but it takes a great deal more time, more planning, more skill, more effort and closer teamwork. There are things like NPC and Instabuild, etc. which give gold users a distinct advantage, and all I can say about that has been said above.

  • Excellent idea


    /opens restaurant
    /free meatloaf
    /charge too much for steak



    Crap...people ARE pissed that they get stuck with meatloaf. This is getting out of hand.


  • lol, I like a good meatloaf. I would most likely eat the meatloaf and be thankful there were steak eaters;)


    If I were playing for free or nearly free, I would be thankful there were some buying me a spot to play in and would not resent their "better meal" either.

  • @ Marius: The game will always be "unbalanced" when it comes to gold vs no gold, for the reasons I have stated above. However, speaking only for myself as a gold user, using a lot of gold made me somewhat lazy. I know from experience that it is quite possible to play effectively with little to no gold, but it takes a great deal more time, more planning, more skill, more effort and closer teamwork. There are things like NPC and Instabuild, etc. which give gold users a distinct advantage, and all I can say about that has been said above.


    ^This is why I don't use much gold anymore. I'm not going to wait 10 days for a field to upgrade....but I don't blow hundreds of gold for nothing.


    I also have excel sheets, emphasis on the s, that I use to make my game play much more efficient. these sheets make calculating CP/res costs extremely easy. I got my 2nd village in 5 days (would have been 4 if I didn't assume I got the 500 CP reward for starting the party instead of finishing it) because I used every single resource to work toward that goal. I used a few gold to finish my MB 9 and 10 and Academy 9 and 10...which I got for registering account so everybody gets it.


    Did you know that if you're a Tueton and you have level 6 fields, it's cheaper to make more clubs than it is to upgrade your fields for resources? 180 resources for a club and if you put it in a 25%wood25%wheat it feeds itself to negate the consumption cost, and you gain 1 wood/hr. If you upgrade a lvl 6 woodcutter to lvl 7 it costs you 271 resources per 1 gain. I knew that, after I put all the numbers in a spreadsheet and had it do all the math for me.

  • So maybe getting rid of instabuild completely is impossible. Then put limits on and remove instant merchants since the combination of instant merchants, npc and instabuild is broken beyond belief. What some of you are missing is that most people actually don't want gold to stop existing completely - we want it to become more expensive and/or limited in use per day so that gold whales don't automatically win (and they do right now) and the playing field becomes slightly (but NOT completely) leveled. The difference between gold whales and the rest is huge, even bigger than the difference between normal gold users and free users. Having for example 10x instabuild a day and 10x NPC would easily allow you to rebuild those high level fields more quickly and save time, but it might stop you from doing retarded stuff like putting your 4th village in an enemy stronghold, use instamerchants to constantly, instantly get more resources there and have it become 500 pop (from 0 pop) within a few minutes. People who say that suddeny having another village like that doesn't give much of an advantage have never seen it happen or don't understand that this game is a snowballing game. That kind of stuff is broken and leaves no counterplay (especially with all the restrictions on fighting) unless the other players are gold whales as well and are doing the same thing. Which I, even as a gold user, refuse to do.


    @Marius: I don't buy that most gold people are so weak that they would instantly leave the game if there was a restriction implemented on their ..'abilities'... That would mean that they really don't know how to play, like Üksik said, and just use infinite gold for everything instead of proper planning. I actually think lots of people do know how to play and wouldn't lose much with these limits.


    Ele : I know that weak players tend to leave the game if they have their capital village smashed. But having expensive villages SHOULD be a strategic tradeoff. Losing an important village SHOULD suck. Gold usage has more or less removed that tradeoff...Time to bring it back.


    - - - Updated - - -


    So basically, I want people to have a free meatloaf and potatoes with plastic cutlery and the possibiltiy of buying a steak with a special meatknife, but if there's to be a fight after eating I'd want the steak to be limited to a single knife and not have it include a chainsaw to cut the meat with.


    Or something.