Kingdom member limitation

  • Noone can't limit kingdoms' member.It is about players' mental.Firstly,players' mentals must change.We can see Meta X kingdoms like :


    X-1 (60 members)

    X-2 (60 members)

    X-3 (60 members)

    X-4 (60 members)

    X-5 (60 members)

    ... (Total +300 members)

  • LVGD I agree mentality must change, but some of us are already supporting the idea.


    Plus, what you said about wing kingdoms is not gonna work for too long, since there is only 1 spot for the winner on the top, and the wing kingdoms cannot keep supporting forever without any prestige or achievement. As I stated before if they do it , they are either super loyalists or super dumb, and hard to find either of those 2 fractions in numbers of 60s.

  • Welcome to the Thread LVGD .


    This part regarding wings have been discussed a lot in this Thread. The reason why a Kingdom Member Limitation would have potential to improve the situation we see today (kingdoms of 5 wings - 300 players) is the following:


    - Only one Kingdom can win the server. So if such kingdom of 5 wings with 60 members in each should be possible, then 4 wings need to act as helper kingdoms to the 5th. And only the 5th will get the win. In the current system the wings can be set up with the promise of all members of the wings later be invited to the winning main kingdom. That promise would no longer be possible with a Kingdom Member Limit. Hence, wings will need play a full server purely as helpers for the 60 members of the main kingdom to win. Sure, this may happen the first few servers while old groups are still intact in the massive states they are now. But over time I certainly believe that some players will not accept just playing as helpers for the core group of the 60 players in the Main Kingdom. As we all know, differences in temperament and opinions are a factor that drives players into wishing there was something that more represented their own ways, and eventually the 4x60 players of the helper kingdoms will find a place where they feel more at home and can approach the server more freely and independently, without being bounded to help the old core of 60 players win server after server.


    ... who knows if this will work or not. But I'm a strong believer in peoples wish to create something in their own image or to find a home of players with similar mindsets. With the right support from the Travian Dev team with more and more features facilitating Kingdoms of limited Size (such as the Between-Server-Kingdoms idea), I see this game coming to a rebirth.

  • Firstly, I don't really see it as radical change as Mehnir or Dry Worlds or others. Secondly, with almost 20 years of experience in game designing I am pretty confident that Travian team are capable of implementing that limit , bug free , if they want to.


    Call me ignorant but I cannot envision any bugs on implementing 60 members limits on kingdoms. They already have cues from Legend too about it.


    Also, test worlds are there and justifiable for more new ideas of such as Mehnir and others in all fairness but I believe this is something it can get away with.

    Bug free is easy for limitation @kingdom members.

    Only few new variables are needed to add for this limit to work without any bugs...

  • In my experience, if you play a small world and you are unlucky to lose some members to inactivity or take a big hit, this will cause a snowball-effect. Causing you to lose more members and end up in these kind of situations.

    These are also the results after ww-calculation, one or two big hammers on these small servers can make a HUGE difference.

  • My info was that the main WW had little over 600k def.
    And "hammers" were the size of regular army.

    That is usually the case on the smaller servers. And this is exactly what would happen to normal com servers if set limits to the player amount. Normal off armies, but fewer def units.

  • That is usually the case on the smaller servers. And this is exactly what would happen to normal com servers if set limits to the player amount. Normal off armies, but fewer def units.

    So the opposite of it with hammers not able to do any damage to millions and millions of defense is any betters ?

    Again , as players mentioned previously, defense strength is directly proportional to members counts and hammer's strength is not.

  • So the opposite of it with hammers not able to do any damage to millions and millions of defense is any betters ?

    Again , as players mentioned previously, defense strength is directly proportional to members counts and hammer's strength is not.

    Have you tried making bigger hammers?