Time to redress the balance between loyalty & treachery

  • At the moment TK rewards the traitor; I hardly think anyone can argue with this. There are many examples where the traitor causes a big shift in power between Kingdoms - much bigger than any one loyal team-worker can make.


    Does Travian really want to encourage this, because it certainly causes lots of people to leave the game in disgust?


    I suggest that it needs to work out ways where treachery is not so effective and instead reward more those who work for the team.


    I imagine it would be very difficult to punish the traitor - the account has already accepted that it probably will be trashed when it enters treachery; in all honesty there's a 100% likelihood that it is "strongly linked" with an account of the enemy. Therefore the efforts should be rather to reward loyalty, both for the individual and the kingdom. This would also maybe help us lose the simmers who join a Kingdom but who do nothing to contribute to its success - there's nothing like self-interest to change people's behaviour.


    Or am I just an old spoilsport? :whistling:

  • I think you guys have played in to many "good" kingdoms :D . Treachery in my opinion is only a bigger problem in the earlier stages of the game. In the current round of COM1 I am playing it was absolutely necessary going forward to betray our king. I already think to much power is with the king already and this will just reinforce the strengths of a poor king. Especially as it is so complicated to change king.


    By the time you reach mid/end game a traitor can be devastating sure but I think that just makes for a better game, I do not want to put restrictions on the game generally as we limit the options and such we limit the fun of the game. However that is just my opinion.

  • Therefore the efforts should be rather to reward loyalty, both for the individual and the kingdom.

    the efforts must be done by the kingdom themselves... this is a problem with the players.. let 'em figure it out :)


    its obviously very important to keep track of your own players and have spies :)

    The Bolton sends his regards :evil:

  • the efforts must be done by the kingdom themselves... this is a problem with the players.. let 'em figure it out :)
    its obviously very important to keep track of your own players and have spies :)

    That begs several questions.


    1. Given the devastation a well-time treachery can cause (and I dispute leax view that it is only a problem earlier in the game - I've seen Kings depart after Union, not to mention "transferring" huge numbers of treasures); it's just too damned effective.
    2. Who are these selfless souls who sell their own chances of winning anything to destroy some other Kingdom? To me this behaviour only makes sense if they aren't actually a person...
    3. Should the game be more about who has the best spies/5th columns or the worst traitors (including out of game activities), rather than who builds the strongest armies?


    This isn't a big issue in TL, ergo the mechanics of TK are encouraging this behaviour. I say that these mechanics need looking at, because it's not supposed to be what the game is about. Show me anywhere in Travian's guff where they say it's a thrilling game of spy and counter-spy!

  • I totally disagree with what your saying, I think it is part of a natural behavior. Take COM1 for instance again, we are fighting a polish kingdom called ILOVEPL who are allied with another kingdom Yamatai. Now Yamatai are in a heated war with another kingdom called Liberty. Liberty have been suffering some losses and the king felt like the treasury could no longer be protected. Now instead of surrendering the treasures to their enemies they decided to give them to us. That is not even treachery, it is strategy in my opinion.


    All it comes down to is that poor leadership will be rewarded with dangers and spies while good leadership and a team you can trust is rewarded in tenfold when lesser kingdoms are crumbling. My recommendation is choose your leadership wisely.


    Selling your own chances as a way to defeat a opposing kingdom is also a great idea. For instance I have heard of kingdom doing exactly that and coming back after they deleted the account as a dual.


    But let me ask you this @Thorsson, for all those people playing under poor leadership and wanting to make a change, do you want to make it even harder to rise up against their king? Cause I think if we start to plot to change this we are walking dangerously close to people if they end up in a poor kingdom without options just deleting. How can we combat that factor with your proposed balance change?

  • I don't know the answer. That's why I pay Travian the big bucks. Well, not so big, but you get my drift. As I have railed against bad Kings before on these boards, I certainly don't want to make it harder to do away with them. Indeed it should be easier.


    As for the King deciding to give away all the Kingdom Treasures; if it's agreed by the Kingdom, fine, but having been in a Kingdom where such a thing happened, the King was the only one who wanted that course of action - the rest of us would rather have fought and lost then never to have fought at all.


    And I really don't agree with you at all; if you're defeated you should man up and accept it gracefully, rather than rob the victor of his spoils by giving them to someone who didn't earn them at all. All these spite strategies do is prevent wars, because why bother if you don't get the rewards? More bad gameplay IMO.

  • if you're defeated you should man up and accept it gracefully, rather than rob the victor of his spoils by giving them to someone who didn't earn them at all. All these spite strategies do is prevent wars, because why bother if you don't get the rewards?

    I think this is where we really disagree, I think that you can do strategies like that adds to the gameplay. Especially it makes the game deeper and more entertaining, even if I am on the receiving end.

  • I think this is where we really disagree, I think that you can do strategies like that adds to the gameplay. Especially it makes the game deeper and more entertaining, even if I am on the receiving end.

    Yes, as I said, we disagree. There's no risk and therefore there should be no reward. You're not a banker are you?

  • I think you should stop arguing. Deceiving is part of the war and we call that strategy.
    Like it or not. The best way to gain advantage is to subdue your enemy without a fight.
    There is a game outside of the game even.
    Loyalty maybe only for the fool, but I am happy to be a fool anyway.