Kingdom Change of size limit

  • The game isnt as big as it used to be. I knwo back in 08-11 when i played we had 10 times the amount of players that we have here. Because of this kingdoms are just folding into two alliances at the end game. I believe the best way to counter this would be a size limit on the kingdoms. Having kingdoms with 150+ players is stupid. the size limit should only be at most 30 people since there are only about 500 people playing at the end game. Also to go with this with a size limit of about 30 i believe you should only be able to have 2 allied kingdoms as well. If this doesnt change it will just be 2 kingdoms fighting in every game for endgame and the game will just straight up die off.

  • Restricting the number of alliances doesn't cut it, nor will really restricting the number of players inside one kingdom. You can simply cooperate without any cooperation established through formal gameplay channels like alliances.

  • Agreed with @Rashidix, artificially limiting kingdom size or number or officially allied kingdoms will just result in unofficial alliances and wing kingdoms.
    This has the added negative consequence where people who actually contribute to the win must be kicked in order to integrate some of the better players in a wing. It would for sure suck a lot if I got kicked from a kingdom just because I played bit more casually and the main kingdom only has room for the 30 highest pop govs.
    Not sure if I would play much longer if at wonder lvl 45 king just tells me to go to the wing and continue playing while someone else takes my slot in the main kingdom.


    Here's a bit of interesting game design for you. In games (well in real life as well) when individuals micro optimize their own choices it often leads to everyone having less fun.
    A good example of this is how a server with 100 people ends up being divided. Most people here would probably agree that a slug fest of 7 teams ranging from 10 to 20 people would be the most fun for everyone, the reality is that a portion of governors in the weakest team don't like their personal chances and choose to improve their own enjoyment by joining a stronger team which results in an unbalanced endgame no one enjoys.


    To counteract this effect, instead of trying to force people to form smaller teams you have to incentivize mechanics that naturally favor small teams over big ones but at the same time don't block cooperation


    A "good" example of this type of mechanic would be if VP was changed to generate instead based on active treasures / member. This way small group would be able to make a lots of VP but might have hard time defending it and adding an above average player would still always be worth it. This of course would have lot of loopholes in itself hence the quotation marks but it's an example of a positive mechanic as opposed to a negative mechanic like a hard kingdom size limit.

  • But if the game prevents you from sending reins or resources to anyone not in your kingdom, including WWs, then a limitation on kingdom size could work. Many of us are just sick of metas. I don't recall anyone in TL with its limited kingdom sizes being kicked to make way for other players. I would also be in favor of no kingdom being able to hold more than one WW. I recall seeing a server recently where one kingdom held all 7 WWs. That must have been such a waste of time and money for many players in that server.

  • My opinion is:


    Any restriction that would restrict anything, would restrict me and everything around me, which would result in fewer options in this time/space.


    Beauty of it all is freedom. You start by yourself. Alone.
    You found yourself in world with creatures same like you (homo sapiens).
    To basicly survive, you have to unite with other homo sapiens against other homo sapiens.


    And you want to restrict me with what homo sapiens I can be ally and with what I can? Hey, who are you? You aint gonna pick friends for me or you gonna tell me will I have 1,2,3 friends of 3000. That choice is only mine. I hope you understand.

  • I get what you're saying, but I can't agree with it. You're treating this as if everyone has the same starting position and the same freedom to pick the amount of friends they want to have. That's hardly true. Only a select few players actually have the freedom you're talking about, the rest is forced to be in a meta and has no freedom of choice. Imposing restrictions on e.g. metas would give far, far more options and freedom for those (that is, most) players.

  • You already have requested freedom:
    With only 1 village inside any other Kingdom beside Kingdom that you are already IN, that Kingdom where you settled can invite you.


    So, pointless topic in the end, as I can understand.


    Travian gave you 2 options:
    1. Freely locate any new village
    2. Relocate via "Relocation scrip" in start game.



    And no one qarantiees you gonna have great team. Hell, no one can garantiee King will play out untill the END.


    So.... just enjoy and enjoy freedom that you DO have.

  • The freedom players currently have with those two options is to pick and choose the meta they want to be in. That's no freedom at all. This "freedom" of yours can only work for those that are already at the top of the game - it sucks for everyone else.


    This is exactly like the healthcare discussion in the US. You, like many rich people in the US, would say that guaranteeing healthcare takes away people's freedom. While in reality, without guaranteed healthcare, most people only have the freedom to choose in what way they DON'T get healthcare at all because they can't afford it. Again, that's no freedom at all. It's self-serving crap that only considers their own position and not other people's positions.

  • The problem is: there doesn't seem to be a good solution (I know none) to limit the amount of people who join one meta or another. People seemingly easily join a big team - because it offers seemingly easy gameplay with good chances to win. If you're in a group of 50, then it doesn't matter too much if you're not online for a couple of days. Or if you're simply a slacker and don't build enough troups. It's way more demanding in terms of time and needed devotion and skill to play with a small group of people.


    Not sure how that would look, if there were 1000 players on a server, or 3000 - I don't play the game long enough to know the difference.

  • I said this many many times and will try to explain one more time. Something MUST be done in way of kingdom size ! Games now are simply too boring, and as @Ammanurt mentioned, only option you have now is to decide which of 2 metas you want to join ! That's no fun for me and most of the people playing the game, i want more kingdoms, more kings, i want to decide who i want to play with, who has same goals as me etc, not just sit in the community of 150 players and grind whole game, and send deff to my king/dukes every now and than, just plain boring !


    Also i think if kingdoms were smaller, more people would get into fights, help each other etc., which is not case now.


    Also 7days (4days on 3x) protection is WAY too much ! Make it 1 day on 3x and 3days on normal servers so we can start fighting asap, afterall this game should be about fighting, not building simcity, also people who are in beginners protection can reinforce other players now ?! Simply stupid !

  • Yes, it is a sad fact that a small group of players will work together, but the majority will sit back and expect others to do the work in a meta. The same thing happens IRL. We need smaller Kingdoms.

  • I said this many many times and will try to explain one more time. Something MUST be done in way of kingdom size ! Games now are simply too boring, and as @Ammanurt mentioned, only option you have now is to decide which of 2 metas you want to join ! That's no fun for me and most of the people playing the game, i want more kingdoms, more kings, i want to decide who i want to play with, who has same goals as me etc, not just sit in the community of 150 players and grind whole game, and send deff to my king/dukes every now and than, just plain boring !


    Also i think if kingdoms were smaller, more people would get into fights, help each other etc., which is not case now.

    Oh, I totally agree. The game would be way more fun, if there were not one or two big Metas on any given server who dominate the game. I've seen the very same thing happen on the last four DE servers I played - and it's a big pity: you only have the choice of two sides, one meta or the other, if you want to play for a win. Often even one meta is there right from the start, setting out to dominate the server. So the fate is sealed basically even before the start - a fact which makes matters terrible.


    On the other hand, I totally see why it's big fun to start with a well-organized group of aquaintences whom you know more or less. And 50 is not a terribly big numer. It's more that this number alone is already huge compared to the overall player base of a single server. And a big number of players starting jointly will easily gather the same amount of additional players who start without any intentions of joining this side or that one, who just come and see what is offered.


    Yet, I find it difficult to imagine a solution which would prevent that amount of players to cooperate. They will probably cooperate whether it is feasible via ingame channels or not - you simply establish an outside communication channel and the problem is solved. The only way to avoid this, which I see, is to allow only support of people from the very same kingdom you are part of. But that would turn many parts of the game bottom up.

  • Who are the people who will happily support the winning Kingdom, while not being part of that Kingdom and therefore not getting any recognition for their part in its victory?


    No-one I have spoken to falls into that category, so I've always wondered who they were and, in particular, if they were actually independent players or accounts effectively controlled by those running the meta.

  • Who are the people who will happily support the winning Kingdom, while not being part of that Kingdom and therefore not getting any recognition for their part in its victory?


    No-one I have spoken to falls into that category, so I've always wondered who they were and, in particular, if they were actually independent players or accounts effectively controlled by those running the meta.

    I know many such players. And - depending on the circumstance - I would be one of such as well.


    There's no point to join that one kingdom which is likely to win at all costs. There's much joy in fighting with your own group of people. And when that means that you're "only" a support kingdom for a larger one, so be it.
    Similarily, often I have seen a huge meta form on servers. Then others join into an anti-meta meta. And I wouldn't attack and betray those then long-term allies at the last instance, but grant them the win.

  • @Thorsson Both my current round (which is in wonder lvl 90's) and the previous round before that had entire kingdoms who were mostly interested in making sure someone else loses rather than aiming to win themselves. Well at least past say half way point of the servers.
    Additionally there are many individual players as well who play the game out with their small group and then don't join anyone in the end preferring to stick with the people they have played so far.


    I think it's not even an argument that these people exist.


    I think what you might be touching is the supporting another kingdom part which I also have to disagree on.
    Supporting a foreign kingdom is in my opinion a core strategy that shouldn't be taken out of the game with a hard limiter like being unable to reinforce other kingdoms.


    In this and the previous server (both of which I have played as king of my team) my group has used reinforcements on other kingdoms heavily as a means of proxy fighting and I feel this is a very legitimate strategy.
    For example some where in the early phase of current com2 Bandits (then the strongest kingdom) committed into a huge offense against OSEF/FESO team. I believe they sent 10 or 11 sieges against a single village of OSEF in an attempt to break them once and for all. Osef being sly though realized they had no chance of defending against the much bigger Bandits by themselves asked for assistance and we saw the opportunity to weaken our rival (we were second strongest at that point) and sent our defense in. Without our defense osefs defense would have been broken and who knows how it would have went from there. With our troops we managed to barely hold and only got cleared out on the last attack.


    Reports of the attacks found in this post
    embassy com2 2017


    The aftermath of that fight was that Bandits lost a lot of troops (allowing us to pass them in offense power) and the damage to their morale can't be understated either.


    You might say we were allied or something like that but the reality was that OSEF team came form the earlier round having just beaten us and I considered them top threat to the server until Bandits grew in power and started beating them back.


    There is no way to limit premade metas from helping each other without preventing this sort of teaming up as two against stronger enemy and at least I believe this sort of thing should be possible in the game.




    The real solution isn't hard limits, it's mechanics that encourage teams to intentionally limit their size and to take biggest risks fighting more and bigger enemies instead of simply joining up.
    Hard limits almost always hurt the legitimate people first and the most while allowing the abusers to continue unabated.
    Soft limits are much more fair in their impact.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Curtain ().

  • That's not the same thing at all. That's tactical support of another Kingdom to help your own. The earlier post was about 'spite assistance', preventing someone else winning. I understand those. I'm talking about the situation where a (de facto possibly) 'wing' supports the core without ever any hope of joining that core.

  • Who are the people who will happily support the winning Kingdom, while not being part of that Kingdom and therefore not getting any recognition for their part in its victory?


    No-one I have spoken to falls into that category, so I've always wondered who they were and, in particular, if they were actually independent players or accounts effectively controlled by those running the meta.

    Com4
    Avatar Faust
    Kingdom LS Pirates


    Me and all my team goes in your category. No, we dont need big numbers. No, we do not need simcity win.
    Check our population att and deff. And please do not talk anymore like this!


    You owe apologie to me and my team.



    And who forbides any of you to make small kingdoms? WHat? You got no pplz to play with? Oh bummer. Want me to find you duals or sitters? What?


    Just lock the topic, if you dont like big KIngdoms you are not forced into any.
    And what 7 day no-attack? You can attack when you hit 200 pop. What? YOu dont know to hit 200 pop in 24h? Heh bummer again.


    Dont blame other players for your lack of everything or me or my team or TravTeam.
    Change this change that change this change that.
    WTF

  • What are you talking about Faust? What category is that? When did I ever mention 7 day attack? You seem confused.


    I think you owe me an apology as you know nothing about my play. Look at my prestige compared to yours; one of us has done a lot more than the other - and it isn't you.