6-Week Game Worlds - New special type of Worlds

Struggling to see how strategies would work on such a short server, as it usually takes that long for players to get the foundation of their villages prepared. Would be like "Bish, Bash, Bosh" done, next server.

Are you going to make it that a player starts with fully developed villages and a certain amount of troops?

If you start out with fully devloped accounts, can choose whether you are def or off, and start with predefined troopcounts, rams, cats, chiefs....i might actually consider playing that even if it is kingdoms.

Quote from Jak

Struggling to see how strategies would work on such a short server, as it usually takes that long for players to get the foundation of their villages prepared. Would be like "Bish, Bash, Bosh" done, next server.

Are you going to make it that a player starts with fully developed villages and a certain amount of troops?

As written, none of the details are set in stone yet, but this would certainly be a possibility. We'll have to speed up early, mid- and end-game alike. Basically shorten a lot of the long-term buildup aspects. I don't think making village development take as long as usual and then "suddenly" ending the world would work.

So since we're still in the really early concept phase for this feature, keep your ideas coming. They'll make difference.

6 weeks games worlds sound really nice and in fact is the ideal time set for my taste. For me you just need a x2 speed, even lower building times and a end goal of capturing the ww. Starting with already made villages and troops changes the game a lot and i dont think its the right direction for the game.

Very interesting idea for sure, here is my thoughts and some quick ideas.

6 weeks is 42 days which is exactly how long com 2 has been going on for now, which means that if nothing was changed except wonder spawn time, big players would be hovering at about 5 to 7 culture points, probably even closer to the low end since people would be stopping simming much earlier thanks to the low server duration. Most like the average strong player would have 4 or 5 villages. That would probably be enough to get some excitement but troop counts might end up really low and perhaps most importantly the gap between the experienced (especially teuton) players and the less experienced players (especially on a slower tribe like Romans) would probably be lot bigger than in normal end game. A good Teuton player might have an army that is lets say 25k in strength by day 40 pretty comfortably so that would be the max size of armies in realistic sense. This could cause a lot of problems since that is both quite a lot and not nearly enough in several layers.

Another few problems I see is metas (namely large swaths of players duke invited into the kingdoms because no way to actually build treasuries in such a short time). The distances on the map would also be quite large, not only because people might not have tournament squares but also because a very long range 48h siege is already 5% of the entire rounds duration. This last point is alleviated a bit by the fact that people will have less villages means that people will be packed slight closer than normal.

Here's a non comprehensive list of changes that could help remedy some of these issues.

- Boost the start by having every player start out with maxed out fields and one or two sets of settlers ready to go as well. This way you can essentially skip the first week of development and get right into the action. This could even include basic lvl 10 infrastructure as well
- Possibly cut the production time of units slightly allowing for bigger armies (personally I quite like the small army combat of the early game)
- Boost the destruction power of a single catapult so the strong pvp phase can start earlier with less catapults
- Start the game out on T3 equipment
- Increase the effectiveness of Tournament Square, if you want to keep the max bonus intact double the per level gain and cap it at lvl 10, allowing people earlier access to the speed boost
- Move the wonders closer together and/or add more wonders - the early phase of the game always has the mos tinteresting kingdom dynamics but if there is only few goals and there is 10 different kingdoms between you and the wonder and only 20 days to make it there, most kingdoms simply give up and merge with others. More goals will preserve the small kingdoms easier as people have local goals to fight over

I feel like VP is a mechanic that doesn't work in this short of a time scale, instead the winners should be based around wonders and teamwork capabilities.
- Treasuries should be made significantly cheaper and less time consuming to build, their main purpose would be to simply allow people to cover areas and to keep the crop balance of the current system
- To replace the VP production some other bonus could be added to active treasures such as wonder construction bonus or something else like that if neccessary
- Currently my 42 day world the top kingdom has 18k active treasures and the 15th kingdom (last one on page 1) has 3.3k , so maybe balance it around 8k or 10k

And the big changes to the end game I have 2 variants.

The Classic:
- Wonders spawn at day 35
- Who ever reaches wonder lvl 20 first wins
- Cost and time balanced to match about 7 days of gameplay
- Natars balanced to match that point of the game

The Race
- Wonders open at day 0
- Highest wonder after 42 days of play wins

There is some quick thoughts hopefully you find solutions that work. In general a quick server like that (without being straight up speed) would definitely be interesting to me.

Maybe 2 6c villages next to each other. A 4446 for one, user choice for the second one. All resources fully upgraded.
Simulate one weeks worth of troop production with level 10 barracks and stable. use a slider to determine the amount of each troop. Might have to have a crop/hour cap or resource cost cap to balance it.

Maybe start with 3 settlers ready to go and the CP for the third village?
Double (or more) cranny protection.
other buildings that should be in villages
level 5 market
level 10 main building
level 10 granary and warehouse
level 1 rally point
level 5-10 wall
level 1-5 of each resource bonus building?
level 10 academy
level 1 town hall
level 10 barracks and stable (level 1 in second village)
level 10 cranny
level 5 smithy
level 1 embassy

All none siege military units should be researched (no rams, catas, chiefs)

Maybe start within a certain range of friends? Or maybe you can join in pairs and you will be next to (5-10 squares apart) each other?

Maybe have a bunch of 50 pop natar villages?

This seems like it would be about 400-500cp/day?
new villages at:
500
3000
7000
15000
25000
40000
would give you fairly reliable 5 villages after a week for a middle player? 4 for slow, and probably 6 if you are high activity?

I'll suggest something, it might sound little weird on 1st step, at least from disscussion on same topic we had years ago on legends forum.

My suggestion and would LOVE to play, OCC game. OCC = One City Challange

So basicly as the name says everyone has ONLY 1(one) village and that's it !

We also had disscussions to change settler/chief to do something else than settle/conquer villages, but none of the idea we had comes to my had now, so maybe little more for you to discuss about ..

I think it would be interesting, the only thing is for those long-time players whom with every building being erected gives some kind of gratification. However, for those who specifically don't have that amount of time, (5+ months is quite a long time indeed.) this would certainly bring its own challenges.
I personally wouldn't play in that world, even with only 1X speed, mostly because I have over the years have build comradery out into the real world thanks to friends on Travian, and 6 weeks is hardly a good amount of time that one can do so. That aside, I would probably imagine the game-play to be fasted paced, most if not all the buildings being up to a certain point and IMO such a missed challenge getting up to that point. In 6 weeks time, as soon as the WW's were conquered would probably be best for World End.

Quote from Curtain

And the big changes to the end game I have 2 variants.

The Classic:
- Wonders spawn at day 35
- Who ever reaches wonder lvl 20 first wins
- Cost and time balanced to match about 7 days of gameplay
- Natars balanced to match that point of the game

The Race
- Wonders open at day 0
- Highest wonder after 42 days of play wins

There is some quick thoughts hopefully you find solutions that work. In general a quick server like that (without being straight up speed) would definitely be interesting to me.

Display More

I think Wonders wont work, i like more the idea of a full war server. This means, steal VP from the other kingdoms and the kingdom with more VP after 42 days wins the server. This way people wont sim a lot in order to lvl up a less expensive version of a WW and make things interesting since losing a Off is a BIG deal now. This will lead to make wiser decisions, implement new strats, and more planning on how and where build new villages, treasuries, etc

@Teljildad That could also work, no wonder only VP, I like that idea as well, perhaps I wasn't thinking enough outside the box.
I still think VP and wonders aren't compatible this server but indeed could be just VP instead

Yes, it could be VP or only treasures or even make war for the control of NPC villages or relics, like a king of the hill mode :). Wonders will only lead to a "save the hammer for the end" type of play again xD

Maybe it's time to test if "battling for VP", that is, bringing population down gives you VP, could work. Make it a battle server without world wonders in which everybody destroys eachother to get population down -> get VP. Then end the world after 6 weeks, whoever was battling best will have the most VP

Hello everybody,

we, your Russian community, like this idea and we would certainly play such a game world. Shorter duration would give you an opportunity to plan your strategy much better and spend resources more effectively. For kingdoms leaders it would mean more efficient team management and better resource planning in the beginning as well.

With shorter duration, the arrangement of WW-villages should be changed by decreasing the distances (for example, -30|0 instead of -50|0 or 12|25 instead of 22|45). This results in shortened settlement of the world. In proportion to the shortened distances, amount of cropper tiles should be increased by the same percentage.

The endgame. WW-villages are already on the maximum 100^th level and they will be unlocked after 5 weeks. After conquering, you just have to activate them. For the 7 remaining days — 72 hours are required for the activation. Every kingdom that has conquered a WW-village will have to gather their defensive troops there, because many rivals would try to deactivate it by a successful attack or reconquering, or some other way that you think is the best. Natars should attack WW-villages as usual and they should be strong.

Another suggestion (that personally I find not suitable to the idea at all, as it is related more to a speed world) is to increase some parameters: resources production x2, construction time x3, CP production x3, and some other faster features. A world should be without WW-villages or only 10^th level of WW is required.

There is also a suggestion about boosted start with all resource fields already on the maximum level in your starting village to start fighting earlier, as it has already been suggested above.

One more idea is to unlock WW-villages in the midgame, on 21th day. WW generates victory points every day but not in the end of a round.

Cheers,
Black Swan

Hello guys,
italian players like very much this idea and they suggest:

• a boosted start with a developed village and some troops
• a start without neighbours within 3x3 and 9 crop or 15 crop fields - and oasis - not far from start village
• shorter building construction time and cheaper levels
• troops more faster
• a faster WW, with shorter time and less expensive or with less levels, for eg. only 30 levels instead only conquer them
• add the feature "build street" between own villages so troops and merchants can go more faster
• add a feature who give to defender the chance to shoot against incoming catapults and weaken their attack power

6 weeks does sound mighty short until you realise that its only 2 week shorted that the 8 week x3 servers we already have. Although 1.5x speed would be a lot less 'hectic'

As for the ideas from the Italian forum:

• a boosted start with a developed village and some troops
• a start without neighbors within 3x3 and 9 crop or 15 crop fields - and oasis - not far from start village

Maybe start with one already developed 4446 village (500 pop + 1000 mixed troops) and a freshly settled 9c. This way you are not set in stone whether you are off or deff but still get a nice head start.

• shorter building construction time and cheaper levels
• troops more faster
• a faster WW, with shorter time and less expensive or with less levels, for eg. only 30 levels instead only conquer them
• add the feature "build street" between own villages so troops and merchants can go more faster

Shorter construction time, faster movement, faster WWs .... meaning that it might be better for this to be a x1.5 or x2 and not x1 (I think that I also voted to x2 on that survey you let us fill in a while back)

• add a feature who give to defender the chance to shoot against incoming catapults and weaken their attack power

How about no -.-

Increasing building speed, troop movements, training times, etc., doesn't seem to be a logical way for such a kind of server. I mean, I think you want to create a new server type and not just a 4x speed variant of the game. Boosting the early game phase by letting accounts start with a certain amount of culture points, maybe 3 or 6 settlers and a starter with fully extended fields (like in TL RoA) and reducing the hero fighting strength amount significantly seem more appropiate ways. What just came in my mind is starting with a 4-4-4-6er with fields on 14/15/16 and taking those levels with you if you swap your capital first (starter remains on 10/12 then).
And yes, obviously reducing the ending WW level significantly shortens the endgame phase aswell.

Quote from galadriel

add a feature who give to defender the chance to shoot against incoming catapults and weaken their attack power

There already is.

Love the idea
Really boring with x1 server

TL had a recent version (Rise of Nations?) where you started with 1 village but could settle 2 more from the off. That was certainly a big speed up, but it also meant that croppers got taken very quickly, so starting even a few hours late was very painful.

@Thorsson Perhaps the cropper issue could be solved by simply making the starting village a 15c and every other tile a 6c or 7c variant.
Some kind of symmetric map with player spawn a + shaped area of 6c variants followed by 4 oasis at the corners and another player spawn areas and so on or something like that

Or perhaps there could be a global lock on settling for the first 24h of the server, but then again that would just mean that who ever is closest to a cropper would get it again just with less frustration