Anyone looking for a Kingdom early, PM me. We'll have a fun server together
This post makes me sad. Stop ruining the cheaper prices for everyone, don't talk about it
My group and I are looking to play next in September. We're hoping when the September roster comes out, there will be a COM x1 option
But how much gold is sufficient in your eyes? I spend +10K gold on a server for winning 500? Back in 2007-2008 I won a mousepad winning a dutch original server (farming trough tabs and such)
Does an olympian race for the money or the medal?
That'd be for them to decide, but keep in mind when it comes to Gold, we're investing real money, while they have an infinite supply at zero cost. The prize could be 1 billion gold and they still profit. That's the magic of digital goods.
-into improving the game.
I think Gold rewards are good because it gives people something of true value to compete for. There are plenty of veterans who don't care about Prestige, Achievement or Emblems. Think about competitive Esports, if there was no prize money it wouldn't get the funding it needs to grow into how big it is. The same applies here, where the bigger reward, the greater the competition. Though exclusive Emblems and Prestige would be great motivation for many players too.
I think it should require 1st place in a normal server in order to be applicable to join. If you make top 3 the requirement you could see a lot of normal servers where Kingdoms will team up just so they can finish top 2 or top 3 so they can qualify for Championship, which could make for some boring servers.
And yes I agree Championship servers should be only once every 4-6 months or so. This way they won't heavily impact normal servers.
I think limiting Gold spending is a bad idea because that's relevant to the reasoning of prize funding. Travian Team would benefit from these servers by the massive amounts of Gold that would be spent to win. Some would play for prize money, some would play for the thrill of competition, some would play for glory, some would play for exclusive Emblems. A lot of different reasons for many different people to enjoy it. And the more money this makes, the more money the Travian Team can invest into them, and also into impr
One additional thought on the idea of punishments.
Its not that imporant if Bots or Multiaccs are worse.
But if you want to fight rule breaking with punishments, then the punishment needs to hurt more than every advantage you have gained by breaking the rules.
The price of consequence must be higher then the profit. Otherwise punishments wont work.
100% this, please explain why punishments are so small that rule breakers don't even care to hide it in forums.
If you need the skill to be able to win, it cannot be called pay to win, a pay to win is a game where no matter the skill, if you just throw money at it you will win.
This is not the case with Kingdoms, with skill, even without paying you can win and be at the Top.
But I will agree that having gold on the account saves you time, if you invest time you get almost the same benefits, or may be even the same if you are lucky in your adventures and you know what you are doing with the auctions.
I disagree, pay to win is when you can invest money in order to have a gameplay advantage over other people, not just auto win with money.
I don't think it's possible to win with a Kingdom full of Free players. When you really do calculations on simming and army potentials, the numbers of Gold spenders are on a whole other ceiling level. And Auctions if Gold spenders are online for the items they want, they will never lose to Free players. Even with super lucky Silver gains from Adventures and selling items, a Gold spender who puts even a few hundred $$$ into Auctions will have multiple amounts of Silver.
It is an interesting notion.
I like the idea, but I wonder about how to execute it without the drawbacks already mentioned in this thread.
What do you think about the issues mentioned by Ms3ab?
Any other drawbacks or challenges we should think about in this type of scenario?
When winning gold is on the table I wonder what would some players be ready to do to achieve the goal.
It would require being very careful to not kill Comx1 servers. Maybe only have 1 Championship server at a time, so that not every group will be able to play back to back Championship servers. At the very least, try out the server 1 time and see how it goes.
I'm not too sure of other potential issues, but I'm sure others would be able to list some.
It's simple, a server with 6 competitive skilled teams means a LOT of Gold spent. Mainly the idea is for highly skilled players to have a competitive server that they can enjoy without it being ruined by multis or metas. Meanwhile TK Team makes a lot of money from the heavy Gold spent server. So it's a win for both the people and the developers!
You would probably need a cooling period of some kind to prevent people moving in and out of a kingdom. Maybe reinforced troops strength has to ramp up over a couple of days so you don't just join once you have an attack on you.
Sounds like a nice idea. There would be plenty of things to take into account in order to make this change work, but it's definitely possible.
Only being able to Reinforce Kingdom members sounds really interesting. That would make Wings a lot less significant, due to not being able to Def Main Kingdom Treasuries!
And say metas try to fix this by having all Hammers in Wings and all Def in Main. Then the hammers can't be defended! This is a great idea!
If devs decide to lunch a championship server then other comx1 servers d be dead, its really hard to get a competitive server nowadays. Comx1 are usually dead or 2-3 dominant teams per com
If handled well it could thrive. All the most popular games in the world now have competitive scenes, and it propels their game further, keeps it interesting and draws new faces regularly.
HamsterPro#RU, I can agree with most things you say, but the part of "pay to win" I actually cannot agree with it, mainly because I have seen real pay to win games and they are very different.
I have made tests and in Kingdoms, it doesn't matter how much money you throw at the game, if you don't know how to play, any good player will come along, take your villages/cities and thank you very much for your investment.
You don't need to invest money to thrive.
Of course 2 players that know how to play, if one has invested in gold, that one will have a few advantages, specially it been easier for him/her to manage the account.
But someone that knows how to play, how to get advantage of selling hero items, and invest time into the account, can eventually and with know how, match the battle ground and even win.
I am not saying this just because I want to, I am talking about many, many, many years of experience and seeing it in game worlds.
Yes it's true, a standard Gold player will lose to a highly skilled free player. However if it's good players vs good players, then Gold vs Free is night and day. That's when the game can feel very pay to win. Like if you see on COM3 right now I am 1st place in Pop at 4800 and 2nd place is 3300 Pop. I wouldn't even be top 10 Pop if I was a Free player.
what about kingdom union?
and when someone login once the server start is he already in the kingdom he signed in?
what about kings and dukes do they start as royal?
because it could affect fast settle, kings and dukes start as gov fast settle a 15c or 9c and then open a treasury
or do you mean every kingdom is randomly giving a WW that they and their member start next to it?
I like the idea btw
By 80 registered premade that would mean Kingdom limit of 40 until Union with 80. Royals shouldn't need to be assigned by the rules, so it shouldn't affect speed Settling starts. And no random assigned WW, just 6 different Unions so it would usually mean every outer WW will probably be claimed by speed Settle. Maybe a Kingdom could make things interesting by claiming Center WW instead of outer.
A lot of issues people have with Kingdoms is how flawed it is for fair play. Victorious Kingdoms usually winning in just raw numbers. Newer or casual players generally don't mind this. They just join servers and play, either alone or with a small group for fun. It's the veterans and people who genuinely invest in competition and enjoy large scale wars. Winning or losing by raw numbers doesn't feel satisfying or fair.
So here's some ideas for perhaps Championship Servers:
1. Only pre-registered players can join.
2. You pre-register with a premade Kingdom.
3. You can't change Kingdoms.
4. Every Kingdom has 80 member limit.
5. Only 6 Kingdoms can register.
6. Gold rewards + Special Victory Emblems for the winning Kingdom.
These servers would be for cutthroat competitive veterans, who want fair fights. 6 Kingdoms only means 1 for each outer WW, making the battle for Center WW super interesting. The only flaws left would be Kingdoms teaming up to take down another. But communication between joining Kingdoms to play fair is very possible with this. And since Achievements don't matter to everyone, having Gold as a reward for winning Kingdom would make people way less likely to want to be the sacrificial Kingdom to another to help them win. And since these servers would be full of HUGE Gold spenders, the Gold rewards would be more than affordable.
This is just some ideas. Whether or not it's possible, I just wanted to post this because I think this is really the only way you could potentially have a quality victory server.
I just wanted you to know that we have discuss this ideas and that we have the suggestions in our board of things we would like to see in future.
As you know, many things could influence its implementation, but for now there is no time frame for them.
I just don't see why it would take any longer than 1 month or so for things like this to come out. They're some of the simplest ideas code-wise, and discussion shouldn't take months to come to a decision. If things as small as these take so long to implement then I'm just curious where all the time and effort is being spent. I don't know how many programmers you have, or what hours they work, but these suggestions realistically, once approved, should be doable within 1-2 days.
1st - you dont need any report to king or whatever bs. Just make, so you attack only how much waves there is. If there is 4 waves, 4 players cant attack. You get error message, if you are 5th there. ( similar as if you attacked the one already)
2nd - makes sense.
3rd - 60 members per kingdom is extremely low numbers. No kingdoms play with such numbers anymore. Anyway, as in Legends, same in here. It wouldnt make any change at a bigger picture. Less people would get winner medals, that's all. You would have bunch of wing kingdoms and player numbers wouldnt be any different.
4th - as it would be a good change, but knowing TK programing speed and all, i'd rather see other changes happening. Every decent kingdom is using discord anyways. Only plebs using the ingame chats.
1. Also good idea!
3. 60/70/80 however much, so long as a member limit around that amount is implemented, it'd be a big help. I don't ever expect this would be the big fix to Metas and Wings. I just think it'd be a good first step towards the issue.
4. Problem with Discord is it shouldn't be a huge necessity. For leadership it's a good idea, but functions like linking Kingdoms/Players/Villages/Coordinates can't be used on there, which is where Discord becomes inconvenient. That and not all your Governors will tend to join the Discord, or aren't very responsive on it. So having in-game threads for things outside of leadership generally works better. Out of the 4 suggestions, this would probably take the most time and resources to implement, so I wouldn't mind if this was put on the back burner for the time being while other issues get resolved first.