5 Ideas we would like to get commented by devs

    Quote from Sylar#EN(11)

    4. Remove the "Nothing valuable found" reward for hero quests.

    I have been advocating this for years.




    In regards to the attacking camps as many state a hero must be used. No hero needed

    This is a simple fix to help keep it simple and has been suggested by many others.

    Have only one(1) option when attacking camps.

    You have to click the ATTACK button.

    We know this can be done because you have sitters set as only being able to raid.

    So camps can be set to only allow the attack function to work and not raid.

    This will stop those who only want to raid the treasures.

    As for hitting multiple camps per player....Leave that up to the players/kingdoms to figure out their own rules ingame

    1º Opt-out Tutorial: I have already memorized the dialogue of set the name in the grave, fresh meat, oh no we are victims, robbers, bandits.... Tutorial is good for people that is their first or second time on game but... is a bit annoying.

    2º Tab message box: Right now you have this:


    What about to change it to this: (Edited with Clip Studio)


    It would keep it tiddy.


    3º A report button in the profile, so you can report the person directly from the game. And also a report button in the public chat, that until now, the dropdown arrow only has "join chat / Abandon chat" option.

    4º Make browser game responsive to every aspect ratio of the screen.


    5º Hyperlinks! (forgot that) Hyperlinks are needed, and more when we share for discord or getter tools link, some people does not use Computer so copy and paste is a pain.


    6º ....

    Right now I have nothing more to be honest. CSR staff in my own perception does the best. And would not be to the Devs, but to the backend tool programing team, just to improve the CSR Tools.

    Your review of the chat seems not bad to me, as I said on another place I would also like to link it to Discord.
    Something that I don't understand is your point 3º, it is possible to report a conversation in a public chat.

    report chat.png

    When you report they ask you the reason, be precise about it and it will be theorically ok.

    The game overall is fine and cheats happen in any game (so obviously some improvements there will be nice )


    Camps are totally fine. Hero condition is not as good as we think especially when Offensive operation in action.


    My only feed back would be a better messaging system (kingdom chat) like reply or quote option or tag option that trigger notifications. I find it hard to keep up with lots of threads and long conversations.


    And lastly, a bit cheaper gold. Lots other games cost less to play.


    Regards

    D1G

    Quote from DrugsInc

    Your review of the chat seems not bad to me, as I said on another place I would also like to link it to Discord.
    Something that I don't understand is your point 3º, it is possible to report a conversation in a public chat.

    report chat.png

    When you report they ask you the reason, be precise about it and it will be theorically ok.

    That is in a private conversation or kingdom conversation even SS conversation what is fine, but global chat happens this:
    pasted-from-clipboard.png

    I mean it is fine if is not fixed, I keep using help center with screenshots, but this would make easier to the CSR to check what happens in the global chat.

    Thank you, now all we will get is some facny pancy chat update and game will continue being the dumpster fire it is.

    "The point of what I'm suggesting is to weaken "easy farming." If a player goes grey, delete the account after 3 days. If they want to come back then they should start on a new world anyways because they're being farmed to death. Other players here have mentioned menhir abuse. Remove that. If a player is still active and being farmed for days with only 1 village under a certain prestige, put up a protection, offer them more quests to guide them out of being a farm, and offer them a nice relocation recommendation into a smaller area. Either they are new, and we should be providing more guidance, or they are a multi and by putting up attack protection we are blocking illegal behavior."


    This sounds really good. The aspect of not being able to attack people who have clearly left the game, for example 2 weeks without log in or so, and maybe deleting the account after one month of idle. Warning about this at start of the game, that if the player does not log in for one full month, the tribe is deleted from the current game world.


    Also auto evade for capital troops in Travian Legends Gold seems good.


    Not very familiar with the game yet, but keep reading stuff about "Fake Attacks". Suppose you can send hundreds of attacks with one unit to confuse your opponent. Maybe give them estimates in the same way as Heroes of Might and Magic series does. Few (1-3), Several (4-10), Pack (11-100), Horde (101-1000), Throng (1000+) - To alert the player about the attack size. This i think is also realistic, especially if players have scouts idle in the city. I suppose they wont just be idle, but make regular scouting runs in the area and maybe use some way to communicate like network of howls, smoke signs, light signs or similar to alert the village.


    Realistic would be, that Few is hard to notice if the player do not want them to be noticed on purpose but a large army is easy to notice. So small fake attacks might not even be worth showing to the player, maybe rising the threshold according to population, like if the attack is lower than 10x the village population, it wont even be shown to the player. Also, maybe smaller armies are only noticed when they are closer to the village, and larger armies are noticed earlier.


    There could also be a Threshold for number of scouts to represent the scouting network they represent in the area. For example, "Few" scouts would notice a "Throng", Several Scouts could notice a "Throng" and "Horde", Pak of Scouts would notice "Throng", "Horde" and "Pack", Horde of Scouts would notice "Throng", "Horde", "Pack" and "Several", Throng of Scouts would notice all attacks (Throng, Horde, Pack, Several and Few). So Scouts that are stationed within a Village or a City would not only counter enemy Scouts, but scout for the village itself.


    Siege Engines woud change this, and always be considered at least a "Pack" and any army with Siege Engines would be concidered as one Size Category larger for detection purposes. Scouts could also change this so, that they are always concidered to be one size category lower than normal troops.


    This way you could sneak in smaller Raiding Parties, similar to what you do in King of the Dragon Pass.


    Speaking of Dragon Pass, There could be some mystic elements on the game, for example mysti shards, you might have ability to choose hero type: Fighter, Thief, Ranger, Mage, Priest with different kind of special abilities or perks chosen after level up. This would add custom feel for the character and might different server playthroughts different and less streamlined. Again, adding more depth to the gameplay.


    This might add depth to strategy. Do not know is the information i reading walid, but being able to fake large attacks with one or several units seem silly.


    By the Way - How do i change my Hero Picture :D



    So my suggestions:


    1. Ability to edit your profile picture afterwards. (In Travian Legends you can do this already, a good feature to have)


    2. Auto Evade for capital in Travian Gold. (Similar than Travian Legends)


    3. Disabling attacking players who have not logged on 2 weeks straight without the Vacation status. Deleting the tribe from the server if the player have not log in for one month. (Disabling silly farms, and encouraging real gameplay)


    4. Using Army Size Categories for noticing approaching troops. (Not sure are something similar on the game already).


    5. End Game possibilities: For example ability to conduct one large army within the Kingdom, where every Governor can give portion of their army to Kings control. For example, certain end game event triggers this, maybe the condition where you "Win the Server" now, it would not end, but trigger a cataclysmic end game battle where the Kings have to command large armies to some end and the Governors could support the army directly from their villages.



    (I also have been thinking an agenda, that some player groups might want to deny ending the server by making others not able to trigger the end of server. The end of server could also be a cataclysmic event where all is destroyed in the end, maybe in a great battle where the Kings unite or make alliances and battle agains a foe that comes from outside the realm - Maybe a supernal one. Of course the Kings could also win, and the server would then continue until second cataclysm, the third being the final that they cannot win and those Kings who acquire most glory on these end game battles would win. The server end state would also show on which cataclysmic event the server ended, as in how many did the kings defeat together. Without cooperation, surely not even one.)


    (The idea about stopping the end of server is a coalition of Alliances in Travian Legends, who agree not to greate the "Wonder" and strike anyone who attempts to do so down with overwhelming force, keeping forced stagnation on the server, having a means to conduct that also and making everyone know the fate of anyone who tries to build a "World Wonder")


    These kind of things i think, would make the game more enjoyable for the players. Governor + King mechanism already adds to this. But there could as well be more interesting or similar things within the game.


    Hope this helps to advance the game further.

    Moderation: Delete ths Forum Account and / or all Content that goes with it

    Edited 9 times, last by Istonius#EN ().

    Sad 1

    No. Just no. Fakes are really freaking important in this game, there is a reason you want to hide the real attack..

    Might i know a reason for this ?


    If i unerstand how that works, you never do defensive armies, and only offensive ones because you cannot intercept attacking armies because of Fake Attacks.


    So basically defensive troops are void, and you only make attacking troops, and if someone attacks you just attack back.


    But like i mentioned, i am not yet aware how it really works in the game. But if its like that, then thats pretty straightforward what you must do. You basically only attack all the time and if someone attacks you just attack back and trade blows.


    I suspect the players who make any defensive strategies cannot compete, and the reason might just be that Fake Attack and of course some players like that.


    In Travian Legends there was a post where something similar had been tried with Watchtowers in Special Servers. Something regarding Troop Size and Alliances and Spies. Not sure if it was related to Fake Attacks but would be nice feature in my opinion to see an approximation of the attacking army size. Not the direct numbers, but estimate is the army large, medium or small.


    I personally also like the thought, that you can sneak attack, as in a smaller army might be noticed later giving less time to react. Maybe to a vulnerable position. Not Fake Attack, but Sneak Attack.



    Maybe these could be things for Travian 2, not Travian. Advancing the concept further to make a different game. Some would like Travian 1 which is more streamlined, some would like Travian 2 which have more features and variety.


    Something like this have already been done with Travian Legends, which seem way more popular and tries different approaches more. I personally like Travian Kingdom for Graphics and the King / Governor mechanism seem good and interesting.

    Moderation: Delete ths Forum Account and / or all Content that goes with it

    Edited 10 times, last by Istonius#EN ().

    Sad 1

    1.
    pasted-from-clipboard.png

    2. We have chicken boots if it is not enough send your troops to empty robber hideout or for a long walk to far away oasis
    3. They do delete inactive accounts within 1 month of inactivity

    4. T3 spyglass and lvl20 rally point can detect 44 unit fakes and all sieges are +1k units
    5. This would just encourage you to cheat with multies

    Quote from Istonius#EN

    Siege Engines woud change this, and always be considered at least a "Pack" and any army with Siege Engines would be concidered as one Size Category larger for detection purposes. Scouts could also change this so, that they are always concidered to be one size category lower than normal troops.

    you can guess the what units are incoming from travel speed

    Yeah, but can you guess how many ?


    Can you guess is there 1 Catapult or 10 000 ?


    If you gain this information, then there is no problem. You can just ignore the small armies and intercept the large one.


    If so, this would not take away the possibility to use a Distraction which is a different thing. It forces the opponent to ponder does the distraction need to be intercepted and with how many troops. For example, a distraction could be a smaller army, but not just one unit or person which poses as a large invasion force.


    Thats what they say in strategy sites, never defend, always attack. The game mechanics make it so.


    If someone can pull a stunt like that, you see 20+ attacks incoming and cannot know which of them is the army, you might as well ignore the whole thing and do the same thing yourself. Im not experienced with the game yet, but this might force every player to use the same approach, so that every player plays the exact same way. That is very stream lined as far as strategy goes.



    Not sure yet, but the strategy site also spoke about getting reinforcements from Alliance. I see this as void as well. The way i imagine if that thing is like i think it is, any Alliance should not make any reinforcement troops, but focus solely on attack armies as a whole, and attack any who attack them with overwhelming force and use that as a deterrance. Maybe even write to the Allaince description that any agression will be answered with such. Just let the city burn, but burn 10 from the attacker as retaliation. Do not send any reinforcements to ally, do not even build troops that are made for it, build only attacking armies in each city that build troops, and when tens of people do not have to make any Fake Attacks, but 40+ attacks at once as a retaliation. So a person who asks for reinforcement troops in their city maybe got the strategy wrong. It was never defend, always attack.


    If some of the alliance attacking troops do not survive the process, it only means that you have more crops free to make more units, so shouldnt matter much either as you are pumping the attack units non stop, and only them.


    I really do not see any point of making or upgrading any defensive forces outside couple standard stationaries against smaller raids. The reason is Fake Attacks (if they are like that). So let the opponent make the Fake Attacks and plan to bait your defensive forces that does not exist, and attack back with superior force = You should always win if your army is larger.


    So would you rather have a defensive army that have to guess 1 / 10 about the location of interception, or an extra attacking army that can always attack 100% of the time and arrive on the destination. Id say dont bother with defensive troops at all. Any alliance who does, makes themselve weaker. So with your main army cities upgrade siege weapons, attack cavalry and attack infantry. On secondary cities (the so called "defensive armies + support cities") just upgrade one attack unit, either infantry or cavalry and continue towards the +0 crop limit in that location. Everyone else in the alliance does the same, no one make any defensive troops. Against a similar alliance where they make 1/3 troops defensive, its clear who should win.


    So, maybe make "Fake Defenses" instead of Fake Attacks and focus on the real attack.


    So can it be that simple, dominating the server ?


    You just acquire more attack units than the others and make everyone know you are ready to use them.



    Also when that farming is a thing, you could also write for alliance description that any farms you use are under your "protection" and write the most profitable names in the description. So anyone attacking them face the full retaliation of the ally force, no exceptions. Around 100 armies at once.


    Also, if the opposing alliance got 1/3 of defensive troops and 2/3 attacking troops. They really would not want to be on the recieving end with 2/3 attacking troops and 1/3 defending ones, if they even happen to guess the targets right.


    Also, if they attack with 2/3 of their troops and you attack with 3/3, its clear who get the better deal in the trade.



    Maybe its just that simple. Just take the defensive aspect away from the game as a whole. You never have to guess any Fake Attacks becuse you just ignore all attacks, retaliate, and make everyone know it you do. Large Alliance who acts this way makes it way stronger than if you do it alone.


    First step, acquire lots of members. Second step, acquire best map positions. Third step, acquire best farms. And make anyone know it any interception will face full retaliation and only focus on production of full attack force.


    You might think that even one player makes defensive units, or even one defensive army. No, none. Any defensive troops are not attacking troops, and thus should not be produced. It will weaken your attack potential.

    Moderation: Delete ths Forum Account and / or all Content that goes with it

    Edited 29 times, last by Istonius#EN ().

    Sad 1

    If it is single target you def it if he fakes a lot you learn his army size and ts lvl then you can either cata that village or time scout his sending times.
    + No one who can make 10k catas will attack with 10k catas anything else than lvl99 ww.

    This is team game first and foremost. There are def players (like myself) and off players. If you take away fakes the opposing team would always know the real target and kill all off everytime since you can pool def from multiple villages etc.

    Since this thread has devolved into clownworld, I have some new suggestions that fit the theme.


    1. Make everyone have the default avatar, no customizations.

    2. Remove chicken boots.

    3. Make inactive players stay on the map longer and remove farm lists from plus so players who use external tools will only be able to do farm lists.

    4. Make spyglasses reveal the full attacking troops from any distance.

    5. Make multis legal so IYI doesn't have to break the rules.

    "Make spyglasses reveal the full attacking troops from any distance."


    Sold with more Silver on Auction than the +100 Culture item at start of game.



    Id say its a team game too, my strategy as alliance is described as above. So no defensive players there, because it makes the alliance doctrine seem weaker.


    The basis is, the moment you notice any approaching armies on any villages, or came in knowledge of any approaching armies on the "protected" players (as in claimed farms of the empire) you immediately call for a blood hunt - Full scale invasion.


    Also, only respect power, so approach and negotiate with other top Alliances. Do they want war, or that either side wont bother eachother - as in non agression pact.


    With like minded Alliances, a hint for a possibility to military alliance, if anyone send troops to either alliance city or farm, either alliance can call a blood hunt.



    Also, if any member of the alliance gets a wind that other member is making a so called "defensive army" or planning to "defend an attack", the council should discuss it very seriously with the player. It cannot be accepted.


    As for "Scout Armies", you wont need that either. You want everyone to know, and when you attack, it really does not matter do they know. What matters is that you pack a punch and have yet made one more attacking army than the opponent. Let them play the Scouting Game, which amounts to nothing, and you play the Attacking game which results as destroyed cities as they cannot defend against an overhelming and concentrated force.


    As in your doctrine, you always respond with full force, so it does not matter what or why. The only thing that matters there is troops approaching your alliance domain and that there will be more troops approaching the sender.


    You of course have an option to Fake too. I dont know if its possible, but an alliance might send 1000 attacks at once, lets say 100 of them real with Catapults. If you use that wave strategy, you can make the opponent guess that the first one is the cleaner which it isnt, the second one hits and there is two or three with only catapults after the cleaner. Make 100 of those lets say, so 400 catapult armies hits at once against opposing force. Does not matter what the opponent do, there will be damage. Of course a similar alliance can only make 300 of these at most, because 100 of their armies are "Defensive" or "Scouts" which amount to nothing as they wont even know what locations to defend with them and their "Scouts" amount to nothing because they would have been supposed to gain that information which they wont. So why bother.


    Make attack patterns against larger enemies beforehand. So when an aggression happens, check the aggressor and conduct a code "alpha" "omega" "bravo" or whatever which have been passed to all players beforehand. Does not even matter if they are leaked to the targets. Its better that they will, because there is nothing they can do about it. Every player have target villages arranged beforehand for their armies and the leader just says a word, and they launch it as discussed before.



    So, there you have just countered the Fake Attack problem. You dont have it, because it does not affect your behavior. You also use your limited recources in most efficient way possible, and maximize on it for full effect.

    Moderation: Delete ths Forum Account and / or all Content that goes with it

    Edited 19 times, last by Istonius#EN ().

    Sad 1 Confused 1

    Good luck with that. Anyway your suggestions make no sense.

    E: Your strategy would result all of your hammers be gone after the first "hunt for blood" if you could see all attacks btw. Well against any remotely decent team atleast.