99% of All players never experience WW

    Is end game boring for most users? 155

    1. Yes (119) 77%
    2. No (36) 23%

    For the Love of the Game,


    I love the game play until the end... I usually make a hammer, but it seems to be almost totally pointless because of the WW ability to defend with 2-3 support kingdoms. My biggest gripe is once the hammer is used.... it's just logging in and que def troops/send crop to WW. There is literally no other skills needed besides repeated logging in and a few clicks. Def accounts are even more boring because they start to tapper off mid-game. 99% of players basically have a boring end-game. Once WW is about to start.... player vs player attacking essentially stops because there is no point. My hope is that the Travian team can do a test server or something that gets everyone involved in End-game content and boosts player vs player attacks.... an example of this would be using a pure VP method to a certain goal.... in addition, each WW would be worth 50k VP or something like that. It would encourage everyone to still capture a WW, but also not abandon their kingdom to make a WW only kingdom. It would also keep all the other treasuries necessary for victory. I don't have a perfect answer or pretend to have THE fix, but something needs to happen to spice up the end-game for 99% of players. I hope my thoughts cause others to express their thoughts and ideas which will spark a change.


    Thanks,


    Rand

    as in travian there is a "hospital" where you cure the number of dead troop, they are cured, a %, it is nice to have an army, but it is ugly to work for days and that everything dies.

    they have several options, 1. make a new building, a "hospital" like in travian where% of the troops are healed.

    2. put some buff, while the server advances, for example: the wonder comes out + 50% faster troop creation, in the middle of the server 20% troop creation, that way it would be more "addictive".

    are simple opinions.

    Let's be honest, 1 player can win a server quietly, I already gave my opinions many times, put a "stop" of villages, that each player can create a maximum of 5 villages, this way there will be villages with "builds", spies , defenses, producers, etc. in this way the villages would have more value, there would be more wars, and less "together troops 5 months to die in wonder"

    Hospital already exists in the form of bandages. I know they cost silver and this makes them not available for everyone. But making it "free" will be a big game changer and should be done with the utmost care. Maybe make the chances of finding bandages higher in adventures and increase the amount found would be a good middle ground.

    Or a building like the hospital that allows you to produce bandages. You can already get troops from adventures so being able to produce something that you can find wouldn't change much. They are both something "expendable".


    I mean, I really don't want more bandages on my adventures haha

    Hospitals would make mid-game attacks on players more encouraging to make farms, but what is the later game incentive for anyone to attack each other?

    For anyone that is offensive, your troops are usually out raiding.... losing a day of raiding to bring all troops in and then attacking a player for no real gain.... all to often players with hammers in kingdoms will let other players turn into farms or non-hammer/Anvil (Anvils are a dying breed btw due to multi-accounts supplying so much def, but I won't get into that further lol) villages be destroyed because the loss of raiding income would slow down troop que's.... It always seems like you have occasional players that like war, but like my post mentions.... you may have 10-20 real hammers on a good speed server that are used for WW's.... but I (Almost) never see them used on players.... In addition, travel time would take to long to hit most other kingdoms competing for WW's. So once again... after the beginning kingdom establishment.... there is nothing for most players to do.... 1-2 months of excitement establishing kingdoms.... 2 months of raiding/building ques and social drama.... 1-2 months of WW which 99% of players have limited to no interaction with. I love the mechanics of the beginning and a little towards the middle which is why I keep coming back, but the end game is a let down almost every single time. I remember in Travian, artifacts where always exciting mid-game fun. Probably my fondest memory is when our leader/hammer was going to get wiped out by over 300k clubbies and 5/6 senators and I sent 33K pallies from 6 villages all landing same second after capture of leaders hammer and crashed the server lol... I think that was travian 2.5ish over 10 years ago.... So you can tell I keep coming back, but it's for the player vs player interaction and never building a WW which I have been a sitter for once (Way to much time involved for that lol).

    we all like the principle where "you have to survive" but here in kingdoms with the mehir, the survival face is over in 1 week, I understand what you mean, and that's why I suggested these "buffs or events" in the middle of the game or when the wonder comes out.

    It would not be bad either, you have a server of "the last kingdoms wins" where the kingdoms must fight to the death, but to be honest it is something unproblematic and that server could take months and would be endless, there could be conditions like "in 3 months the one remove more villages / kingdoms win etc "

    if they want to win more gold, they would have to add more 15c to the game, that way all the players that put gold would have their 15c and they would not go to another server to found quickly for a good village.

    That said, if they could do anything n.n

    To the poll Is the endgame boring for most users I voted: No.


    To motivate my answer. In my humble opinion the endgame is the most fun of all. All time and efford during the server are leading to this point. The excitement of who is going to finish their wonder first, what kingdom stand in our way of victory and will my hammer/rammer be usefull and be able to pull the victory our way. This is the time where the teamwork of the kingdom needs to be on point to be able to finish first.

    For myself I usually find a dip in action midgame where the army builing will be the main focus. But it really depends on the style you play and how you as a player or your kingdom is involved in politics and wars.


    On what changes will make the endgame more fun I have no decent answer. But if they can impement a new challenging aspect so there will be more fun along side the army buiding and focussing on the WW go for it. (I'd say let it start around day 80 so I get rid of my mid-game dip. :) )

    Hospital idea is garbage but OP is right. end game is boring. Im playing the account on com2 right now that is building the WW and it is zzzzzzz.

    The WW affects who wins the round too much. One of the advertising points for kingdoms was, "you dont need to build the WW to 100 first to win", but a lot of the time you do because the bonus is so high that unless one team absolutely dominated the entire server the WW bonus will determine the winner.

    There was another version of travian legends i played one round of (with egyptians and huns) that was more focused on controlling territories and that was a lot more fun than the WW objective. Im not saying add egypt or the huns to kingdoms (huns were OP) but the VP and win conditions needs to be changed a bit.

    something like zone control or most VP after 100 days, or first kingdom to X VP wins would be better and more involving for more of the server than building the WW. it would encourage more player attacks and a wider array of strategies. Another issue is kingdoms with more players gain treasures faster because of robber camps yet all of the treasures still get concentrated down to a few treasury villages. So doing any one of the 3 new win conditions i mentioned earlier in this paragraph (zone control, most VP after 100 days, first kingdom to X VP) might also require adding a limit to the number of players in a kingdom. running a test server would shed more light on if this is needed. if a limit were to be put in place, 50 players per kingdom (100 with union) would more than likely be sufficient without also being limiting

    I don't think we should change how game works, because end game is most interesting part of the game for those who play seriously.

    However, if we want to make end game more interesting to casual players, It could be possible to add some kind of new round spesific achievements to end game. Like for example "send x amount of crop to ww", "settle village on grey zone", "destroy x level of ww" etc. Making these achievement would generate points which would give a some kind of new colour to "to the edge" badge when you reach a new level to it. (+more prestige points) That would let casual players have something to do and still focus on things are important to kingdom despite not having end game hammers. This would also reward those players who focus on one round instead of farming prestige on multiple game rounds, as these players would have more high level "to the end" badges in their profile.

    Quote from Aqout

    I don't think we should change how game works, because end game is most interesting part of the game for those who play seriously.

    The win condition (team with most VP) would not be changed. Once WW comes out a lot of pvp activity falls off. this decline of pvp activity isnt my opinion, it is measurable statistic in the game. The issue is that there is only 1 way to win (unless the server is completely 1 sided). This limits gameplay creativity and ability to develop new strategies.

    I am playing COM2 here are the kingdom points right now.

    1.GGG 10,425,170
    2. Trinity 10,394,547
    3. GBB 9,052,675
    4.Linden 6,789,011


    I am a duke in GGG. I am building my kingdoms WW. It is about level 40 right now. This was a fun and interesting server. but the winner will be entirely decided by WW ranks on game finish. The team in the top 3 that gets the WW to 100 first will win. 4th could win if they finish first and a lot of damage is done to the other top 3. However, damaging a WW uses a lot of hammers that have a lot of cattas which are built by players who typically did nothing else all server except build them. I have made a WW hammer before, it is very very boring all server. just queue troops and wait. It takes a bit of skill and strategy to know when to use your WW hammers and on who to give your team the best chance of winning but ultimately the strategies are very limited. There are only 2-3 correct ways to build the WW that gives you a strong WW with minimum build time.

    Adding something like a Conquest server that doesnt have the WW but instead has either a set number of days or first team to reach X vp would be a good test. Conquest servers could also possibly bring back artifacts that are in Legends. If a conquest server is implemented i dont think artifacts should be added right from the start (too many changes to evaluate at once). they would have to be considered later.

    I do have a rough outline of what a Travian Kingdoms: Conquest server would look like if enough people are interested in this idea. It wouldnt change anything about the tribes, just changes to a few other aspects to the game. I can write a full post about this if requested. I think this could be implemented in another game mode just like how Night Truce is a Kingdoms game mode.

    I agree with Cerebore (maybe because we're teammates)

    WW slowed everything right up.

    I've seen similar happen in Legends too. In fact a lot of players in Legends play artis then leave lol


    WW is boring. You max mainbuilding and now everything is at minimum build time. Now it all comes down to who captured first by 3minutes and who didn't lose levels to the WW hammer. I know there's a little more than that because you need to defend it. But it's pretty minimal variance.

    If WW was removed and it was purely VP based I think it would improve Kingdoms. Skirmishing against the enemy is fun. And as a defender trying to get troops to critical targets, wave breaking, etc. is good stuff! I have noticed a lot less defender strategies in Kingdoms though because of how close everyone is to each other.


    So what would be the new win/end condition?
    Maybe a VP limit? First to 10/15/20k? Treasuries and capturing is much more important. But then our 3 big treasuries are the new WW. Set treasure limits perhaps. Force spreading, but allow some hoarding still.

    If you are asking about Travian Kingdoms: Conquest, the game should ideally last about as long as a server does now. roughly 130days. it might be possible to shorten this a bit. So you would want a VP limit or day limit in this range. I have played multiple servers of kingdoms. For all of the COM worlds i have played 10 million or something close to this VP is about where kingdoms end when WW finishes. But country servers are smaller than COM servers so you might need to get an average winning score of the last year or two of rounds for that group of servers and then deduct 50% from the winners (WW Bonus), add them together and average it. The problem with this is large teams registering on smaller servers and getting all of the wins easily. This would be boring but some people might do it for the trophy/achievements/prestige.

    So if i were to implement it... It would be first kingdom to 10 million VP or kingdom with most VP at the end of 125 days. would be the winner. Whichever comes first.

    Quote from Cerebore

    If you are asking about Travian Kingdoms: Conquest, the game should ideally last about as long as a server does now. roughly 130days. it might be possible to shorten this a bit. So you would want a VP limit or day limit in this range. I have played multiple servers of kingdoms. For all of the COM worlds i have played 10 million or something close to this VP is about where kingdoms end when WW finishes. But country servers are smaller than COM servers so you might need to get an average winning score of the last year or two of rounds for that group of servers and then deduct 50% from the winners (WW Bonus), add them together and average it. The problem with this is large teams registering on smaller servers and getting all of the wins easily. This would be boring but some people might do it for the trophy/achievements/prestige.

    So if i were to implement it... It would be first kingdom to 10 million VP or kingdom with most VP at the end of 125 days. would be the winner. Whichever comes first.

    I prefer the idea of VP limit as that is easier to track than days passed on the server. Before you know it 125 days have passed.

    Maybe the kingdom needs to hold the lead for a couple days. Gives others that last minute chance to smash some hammers on them haha XD

    I would actually like it if it lasted longer.

    Maybe there should be a limit on number of treasuries you can build. But you can capture as many as you like ;)
    So now it becomes territorial. VP generation is based on how many fields you own too, treasures become a smaller part.