Stealing Victory Points

  • Dear players,


    we would like to make the race for victory points more exciting and dynamic. In this context I brought up the idea of allowing alliances to steal multiple victory points along with each looted treasure.


    To allow especially smaller alliances to catch up, this bonus would only apply when attacking higher ranked alliances (in terms of victory points). Also, when attacking the alliance that is currently in first place, an extra high amount of points could be stolen.


    Additionally, when a king leaves an alliance, it would lose one victory point per treasure this king currently owns. This makes constantly leaving and rejoining an alliance to prevent victory points from being stolen unattractive.


    What do you think of this approach?



    Best regards


    Fabian (Game Designer)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by FabianF ().

  • I don't think stealing ally treasures is good idea, someone will fight whole server bringing home treasures, while some other ally will build up in peace and than just hit this one ally who was fighting hard for 8 months and win the game ? No i don't think it's good idea sorry. But i like idea of leaving kings :)

  • Not sure if that is such a great idea, it doesn't really encourage alliances to work towards VP throughout the server if in the final week(s) you can make them up by crashing your saved armies at the number 1. As a number 1 having painstakingly build up victory points only to have them get stolen by the entire server rolling over you at the end of the server is going to suck. Sure you want to encourage fighting and create an exiting race, but there has to be some point to working all server long to build victory points. Losing treasures the last week is painful but it doesn't swing the entire game in another direction, having dominated a server for months only to get austed by simmers saving in some corner of the map .... please no.


    If you are going to implement something like this, there has to be some way to account for the above, by limiting the amount that can be stolen (e.g. x% of attacking alliance points, so if you haven't earned many points yourself you cant steal much either), or by allowing higher ranked alliances to steal points from smaller ones (the bigger the discrepancy the less you can steal).

    The post was edited 3 times, last by Natasha ().


  • I like all of these ideas. This will make Travian: Kingdom fulfilled by war between the Alliance and the Kingdom, since this game is designed for win the war (which is implement by victory points). :o

  • So how would this work exactly? Any lower (in terms of VP) ranked alliance can steal VP directly from higher ranked (in terms of VP) alliances but only if they steal treasures? Higher ranked alliances can't get VP from smaller ones? So would this work with attacks on governors? Or only on kings? Obviously the alliance should lose points both when the king leaves and when the king gets kicked then.


    I'll think about this some more, but perhaps this shouldn't focus so much on "stealing VP per amount of stolen treasures" but more on "destroying VP of the loser on succesfull chiefings or catapults ops" regardless of who's attacking who. You shouldn't want just the kings to be targets nor necessarily have only the biggest people/alliances to be the target, everybody should be a potential target with kings and bigger alliances a riskier but more valuable target.

  • Negative. Natasha said it. Travian rewards time invested in the game over long period of time, more than one time ingenious plans. I'm aware that TK is different game but I believe they are still after the same players' base :)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by ELE ().

  • Negative. Natasha said it. Travian rewards time invested in the game over long period of time, more than one time ingenious plans. I'm aware that TK is different game but I believe they are still after the same player base :)

    Yeah, victory points are great as it rewards commitment and strategic play over the duration of the server, and are a serious improvement over the wonder of the world victory condition of old. By implementing this idea in the current form you again end up with an end of server dash, while saving hammers for 95% of the server, boring ....

  • I do like the idea of stealing victory points if you chief a village of someone holding treasures, but not normal attacks, and perhaps the treasury has to be intact or something

  • Yeah, victory points are great as it rewards commitment and strategic play over the duration of the server


    Do they? In the current com2 it mostly rewarded simming, having big kingdoms and raiding/attacking weaker, smaller alliances. I'm curious to see how this changes in the newer servers (although I won't be playing for a while). You may be correct now.


    But they didn't reward fighting directly at least not on the com2, definitely not fighting between equal alliances. And where they did, the only fighting of importance is between the biggest few metas. The rest might as well not play, what they do doesn't matter this server, at least not if they're interested in winning. This game should reward commitment and strategic play as you put it and strategic play implies not just warfare, but equal opponents. After all, if a huge force is fighting a much smaller force, who needs strategy?

  • What about just destroying VP, rather than stealing it?
    Make it into some sort of prestige thing -- hitting a big king and doing considerable damage (perhaps as measured by treasure stolen, but could also be # of buildings destroyed) would reduce that king's VP contribution by some amount.


    Either way, you need to add in a way for the leading alliance to strike back against their attackers -- perhaps as direct retribution? Team XYZ took 5k treasure from us, so we can take X% of 5k back (where X is a ratio of VP comparison). You would also need to lock alliance membership for the duration of the attack, plus... 3 days(?) after. This way if you stole 10k VP, you have to bring them back to your real alliance or they just go to waste. Otherwise you will have kings attack their hammer players, kicking them from the alliance. They steal VP, and before returning home, are invited back to the alliance to bring the points home.

  • You're right, it actually wouldn't help against the support metas. And the "only lower alliances can steal VP" restriction stops metas from having a bonus in VP from attacks on lower alliances, so there's no friendly VP stealing in the first place. It was too late at night for that post for me :D



    What about just destroying VP, rather than stealing it?
    Make it into some sort of prestige thing -- hitting a big king and doing considerable damage (perhaps as measured by treasure stolen, but could also be # of buildings destroyed) would reduce that king's VP contribution by some amount.


    The game would still focus too much on hitting just kings. Besides they could abdicate and make another king in the same kingdom, never losing the VP contribution. And there's a lot of potential kings in most kingdoms.


    Why not allow VP to be destroyed, also stealing some amount of VP, when a lower alliance is attacking any higher alliance's member, regardless of treasures stolen? The more VP an alliance has, the more an attacker would take. Perhaps only on catapulting/destroying/chiefing a village? Big simming metas would still exist as they do now, but this way being a big simming meta at least doesn't automatically make you strong in terms of VP (since if you're not attacking strong alliances, you're not stealing as much VP).



    Either way, you need to add in a way for the leading alliance to strike back against their attackers -- perhaps as direct retribution? Team XYZ took 5k treasure from us, so we can take X% of 5k back (where X is a ratio of VP comparison). You would also need to lock alliance membership for the duration of the attack, plus... 3 days(?) after. This way if you stole 10k VP, you have to bring them back to your real alliance or they just go to waste. Otherwise you will have kings attack their hammer players, kicking them from the alliance. They steal VP, and before returning home, are invited back to the alliance to bring the points home.


    But the curently leading alliance should already be strong enough to strike back against their attackers. Otherwise they wouldn't currently lead. Do they really need a way of stealing VP back? Once they fall back to a lower place, they gain the ability to steal treasures.


    - - - Updated - - -


    Wait. Having two strong alliances fight eachother would be destructive for both wouldn't it, if VP can be stolen or destroyed and there's a nice simming meta somewhere else.

  • First of all, thank you so much for the feedback! :)


    To those worried about the end of the server mattering too much:


    1. You would not be able to steal all the victory points from an alliance. Just a certain amount per stolen treasure. Currently the leading alliance on COM2 has around 130,000 treasures, but over 3 million victory points. If the leaders managed to create a significant point advantage, chances are they'll just stay ahead. This change is meant to make the ranking closer and more exciting, but not completely dictate it.


    2. If an alliance actually dominated the whole server and is firmly ahead, it should also be able to defend decently well and not have all their treasures stolen within a few days (and certainly not all by the same enemy alliance).


    3. Keep in mind that as soon as an alliance drops in rank, the alliance that is now ahead can't steal any more points (but instead has itself become a target for victory point stealing).