Changes to VP system, troop reviving and declaring winner

  • It seems that people are way more active around here so i throw these ideas under discussion here. The topic started from discussing 6 week servers under General section in the forums.

    The general idea of having short term servers with lots of action while demanding low dedication sounds great, but is pretty much impossible to achieve. Whenever you cut troop building- or traveltimes it demands more time online to stay safe or to stay on top if you want to win. With all kind of speical servers arising, night truce, dry servers etc etc they seem like attempts to get more players by making the game more casual(easier to manage). Making the game casual is causing the servers to be filled with massive number of players abandoning the server. People abandon the server in various reasons:

    1) joined to try a new strategy, didnt work out - quit
    2) Got rekt by other players and couldnt rebuild to match his expectations.
    3) ended up in very weak kingdom which had no influence in end game fights so the player had no motivation to keep on playing
    4) off player losing his massive hammer knowing he couldnt rebuild nearly as big and lost interest.
    5) etc etc etc

    If anything, the main goal should be to reduce the number of players giving up on servers as currently we have ~6k players creating accounts and 600-1k actually play it till end. Across all posts there have been some really good ideas, but instead of implementing them on another attempt on speical servers they should be reworked to improve the original Kingdoms game which is 1x 5,5 months. I would've quit long ago if i hadn't the community (meta) around me. I actually find it a great example how Jagex made a massive mistake by taking away PK'ing. People didnt leave because of not being able to PK, (which was possible, only differently) but because of Jagex taking away the reason which kept clans (metas) together. My point is, that whenever i sign in i want to have something to do. If it is taken away (lost army, lost village, fell behind due to lack of time) i will lose interest and that will most likely be the case with many players. Every player wants to feel impactful at every state of the server no matter if they are Kings, Dukes or Govs.

    To counter the negative effects i described above i'd like to state the general goal of my suggestions - being able to catch up at any point of the game. What i have in mind is that if i join the server at 4th month in current servers i would be useless governor to pretty much any kingdom. Being able to support ww with few k crop/troops is pretty much irrelevant to the outcome. I wouldnt be able to effectively attack or defend anyone, not even nearly being able to defend myself if i end up far from excisting kingdoms. It is obvious that it shouldnt be possible to reach top players after starting 4 months later, but it should be possible to reach a point where you could actually have some impact on the game. My initial thoughts would be to tie the available cp amount to server average. So when i start playing on 4th month i would already have CP slots available which boosts my developement decently. In addition, it sounds extreme, but whenever you fall below average population on the server you would be able to build 3x faster to gain up. In terms of balance it obviously needs some serious math behind it, but i hope you get the idea. Same idea could possibly be applied to troop numbers after reworking the troop management which is my next suggestion.

    As mentioned above, losing big hammer is one of the key factors which turn people inactive or to just play less actively maybe only producing def troops, but not participating in social or teamwork aspects of the game. To make rebuilding possible i suggest to add a new building. Lets call it "hospital" for now. It would allow players to revive/heal ~75% of army over some time, for example 4x faster than building troops with separate que + reduced cost. In that way people who have put in huge effort to build an army wont have to lose it entirely and then rebuild for a month or more before they can consider being useful. that would keep average army size bigger than in current servers. That would lead us to my next thought where people with smaller army than average would be able to build troops 3x faster to gain up on average. That effect would be separate from reviving so the effects don't overlap. Average army sizes would become bigger, but the resource system, mainly the lack of crop would keep the army sizes reasonable. It would allow superactive players to build several hammers if they want or people playing less casual can just build army in one village and still use it in mid game. I find it rather dull that some people spend 5,5 months just to play idle and build up a 250k WW hammer. Having more people with the issue of feeding hammers more often would lead to way more active attacking, as the consiquences wouldn't be too harsh.

    That leads me to my final thought about declaring a winner. In more depth about how VP's are gained. In addition to gaining VP's daily from active treasuries the idea of gaining VP's by destroying and cataing enemy villages would give a nice reason for attacking gov's more often. Same for conquering villages and killing troops. It obviously needs some balancing but the general idea is to give kingdoms various ways to gain VP's not just gathering treasures by building armies for months.

    All in all everything i described would keep the game on 1x speed and for 5,5 months but with way more action and things to do.

    All the ideas are not only mine, i did read the previous posts and tried to gather the best + develop them further so i don't take credit for everything!

    I am very eager to keep developing the thoughs so i encourage discussion! Travian dev team is giving us, the players, unique opporitunity to speak out about making the game better for us, don't hesitate to bring in any ideas. Even if your idea seems silly, someone else might come up with something brilliant just because you said something silly.

  • Feralix have some good points and ideas.

    I am a player who started a server on day 90 (or so), here are my observations which might go along with his proposals:
    - adventure rewards favored me - good (one don't get 200 troops when he start a server on day 1)
    - culture production (luck with good helmet) is high - good (slows down significantly with level 6) - not doing parties
    - building to catch up - impossible
    - building troops to catch up - impossible
    - production of resources - not too good but treasure collection helps
    - production of crop - great with treasure (but insignificant for helping WW or -30k crop treasury defense)

    As I got out of protection period and was building up everything nicely I was scouted and attacked by much bigger player. There was only one attack and he stopped. I have some experience so he probably decided it is not worth, but if he wanted to level me to the ground he would do it without braking a sweat.
    So I think what Feralix proposes about governors and VP's would end up bad unless some other changes are made. Something that will make people attack other people of their size or suffer horrible penalties attacking smaller players.
    I understand that any rule to protect small players might cut into farming, which makes big players spend money, so it is not likely to be implemented. So I would advise to look some other way to make more VP but not put some big fat target on small players who have a hard time plying anyway. I think it will just make more people quit after they are targeted by bigger people.

    But if this is the way to go at least consider this when there is a xx% difference in size:
    - don't allow catapults and sieges
    - after first attack and VP is taken, protection period kicks in to rebuild wall and troops
    - deserting troops of the attacker, if attacker is xx% bigger, xx% of his troops desert because of this horrible atrocity he is committing

    As I said rules like this will cut into farming so these rules should be some dynamic rules that are checked and changed for every player at the time of attack and based if player is inactive or active.

    Sorry big bad players, I am a champion of small people :)
    Down with the kings, power to the people!

  • These catchup-mechanics would surely make more people play on the server, but there's always flaws and possible exploits within.

    You can make villages faster? Someone will make 20 accounts and raid those to feed his main account.

    You can make troops faster? Someone will make 20 accounts to bully you with.

    I also don't approve with this game made too noob-friendly, i want to be able to completely destroy someone so he has absolutely no chance to rebuild at all. What i love about this game is the fact that you actually have to be around for the full 150 days to have a good account and not hop in at day 80 and still make a hammer.

    About @feRaliX 's hospital system, no. It's hard to make a big hammer and that way it should be. The queue time is always the ultimate limitation and if you could revive 75% of your troops it would be almost meaningless. If you want to fight, make a secondary hammer. I don't think people who kill off their hammer midgame should be able to get a similar sized hammer as someone who saves his troops whole round. If you want to fight, you can already make multiple hammers. If i wanted to fight people daily i would be on a different game :)

  • i think the CP boost for later joining is good.

    The enemie Army re building and re storage of Buildings is BAD BAD BAD

    Travian is the only strategie Browser Game where you can damage an enemie with catapults and bring him to ZERO

    I am T3 Player and knew, the old days, where you needed 1 hour to re build Main Building, Level One and nearly one week to get your destroyed village back to a point where you can go on (with Gold Feature this can go much faster already).

    So for Tactic Playing Kingdom vs Kingdom and in the Endgame Meta vs Meta this is Important to give abilyty to build Catapults.

    We think next Round Players will only build Battering Rams and few Catapults for steeling Treasury and no one will attack WW any longer or go on Catapults to destroy Hostile Croplands and Core Infrastucture making Mid Game and Early End Game very difficult