The plus's have spoken... will Travian hear our call?
The plus's have spoken... will Travian hear our call?
XD Can you tell me which team you will be in? Just for personal stuff But fine, thee server will who which teeam how good anyway, but we first need a server to settle this down So good luck and hope for a good server for the team
(tbh that was a nice poke )
I played Dozer on the last com4 with Pirates/Rebels - I'm in Misfits.. not sure what name yet.
We don't want a night server.. we need a normal com server.
At the very start - 20 good heroes can provide a great defense.. and dodging is a suitable tactic since enemies do not have artillery - activity is the best defense.
I've played defense and offense..
Early game offense is a very busy time - the sooner you develop your resources and growth - the sooner you can start your army (eg level 20 workshop producing catas before day 30).. but after that you build a village.. turn on trade routes and ship everything to your capital for army and crop development..
I played defense last server - 11 villages/cities - 8 producing def 24/7 - it was a huge amount of work.. have to juggle resources - trade routes to the WW.. keeping everything fed in multiple places.. each village much bigger and more complicated than a resource feeder village..
There are good players and bad players - and mostly - activity wins..
Thanks lua - also - compliments on your approach to testing - using the hero from a different village to the defenders without having 2 separate troop villages makes it very nice and clean proof of the solution.
yes the bonus only applies to troops trained in the same village as the home village of the hero
Thanks - can you tell me how you learned this? I can't find anything official on it. Have you done any in game testing to confirm this?
Thanks in advance.
hero bonus is only for us, but the weapons bonus are for all troops in the village
Us - what do you mean by Us?
If by the word us, you mean all your troops from all your villages that you have trained and sent to defend the same location as the location you have sent your hero to defend - then you, like most players I know would think you are right, but according to BlackSwan - you are in fact, incorrect.
Weapons might apply for all troops in the village (that is being defended) but I have been advised that the hero bonus only applies to troops trained in the same village as the home village of the hero.
Don't trust any game information from support, players can't find out the truth without testing this and I don't think such a big change will be made without informing the players.
We are testing now.
This is not news to everybody, but was news to me, and I am sure news to a few others, so I thought I would share it so everyone is aware.
The hero bonus calculation as described in the wiki is wrong. If a player sends all their troops to defend 1 village, the hero bonus does not apply to all the players troops in that location, but only applies to the troops from the same village as the hero.
This is the WIKI link - it is wrong
Points put into this ability increase the defense value of your whole army (meaning all your own troops defending the village - where they come from is unimportant) by 0.2% per point (maximum of 20%) This bonus only applies if the hero is defending with the army. Other defending troops not under your control will remain unaffected by this bonus.
There is no mention of the hero defense bonus in the Knowledge Base. However during a discussion with a leader of Rebel/Pirates, I was told that the rule was the defense bonus applied to only the troops from the same village as the hero. Gob-Smacked is how I took the news.. so I raised a ticket to seek confirmation.
The reason for my surprise was... indeed my incredulity...
1. The wiki IS still linked
2. The Knowledge Base has NO mention of defense bonus.
3. A fundamental tenet of Travian is that Defense can be accumulated from multiple villages, but offense comes from 1 village. And having the hero bonus change from being the hero of the whole players account to now being ONLY the hero of the home village and not contributing defense bonus to ALL the players troops is a MASSIVE change - and does not appear on any official game information I can find.
This is the response from BlackSwan - and I asked the question multiple ways to ensure there is no misunderstanding.
I have 5 villages (A, B, C, D, E) - each village has 1000 troops - hero lives in village A - I send all troops from villages A to E - 5000 troops. Does my hero bonus apply to all 5000 troops, or only 1000 troops from village A.
Alright, I've reviewed your question, but I don't understand why you think I didn't answer it.
The hero defence bonus affects all troops that belong to the hero's home village. That means it won't apply to the troops from all five villages at once.
Unfortunately, Wiki is outdated, and we do not support it anymore. Sorry for that.
Firstly, mainly, I want to make sure everyone is aware of this because I think it affects the way defenders will develop their troops/account.
Secondly, I think this change is wrong, and as mentioned above, I believe the underlying rule of Travian is that the defenders advantage is the accumulation of defense. Defenders combine to work together to combat the risk/unknown of attackers.. Defenders do not get to pick the location of the battle and hence need to be able to rebuild, and since the hero belongs to the player, why does the hero not inspire greater effort from all the players troops instead of the one he is located from?
I had a recent experience with a Duke who was caught cheating.
As a kingdom, I am pleased that our leadership removed them from leadership and from their privileged position as a Duke.
Also, it was great to see that the punishment was suitable severe, with the players entire army removed, and as I understand it, multiple village fields crippled.
Whilst I understand the concept of not sharing it to avoid assisting cheaters... it would be nice to see some wins for the fair players.. and if you can't share them in here, make it obvious on the map that a player is banned.. having to click on potential farms or enemies and not discover it until you try to send troops is inconvenient.. So given that you can share this information in game about who is banned - Make it more visible.. make it easy for the enemies to see how many cheats each team has.. Make villages disappear.. make the punishment more demonstrative.. Please.. Put a prison bars icon on their village.. Have the villagers riot and abandon their Governor who was corrupt and jailed and left them undefended..
First response of another player in private discord was "the fealty system looks nice, but everybody will want to be in main kingdom from start."
Which appears to be a good thing.
However, given that players play as Dual with no chance of medals.. I believe that we will still have wings.. but they will not merge.
You will have main kingdom and wing kingdom 1 and wing kingdom 2. Players within each wing will still benefit from the fealty system. They will still collect tributes from main kingdom players in their area of influence.
The only thing they will not have is treasures.
Until you address this (find a way to punish big player wings with small numbers of treasures), you will not solve the problem of metas and wings.
This has been discussed before. You can add mechanics to make a limit actually matter. Maybe you cannot trade with non-kingdom members. Or cannot reinforce non-kingdom members. Tournaments where only members of winning kingdoms who played 66% of the server with the kingdom can participate. Camps and treasures already do create some incentive. You get way more wheat in a main instead of a wing. It isn't impossible. Just takes creativity and having a thought out plan about the dynamics.
This is where we should focus the discussion.. making the limit actually matter. This was the point of my first comment on this thread... (see below)
Perhaps based on people comments, the actual numbers need to change.. or the numbers in my 'settings/limits' needs to dynamically adjust for each game world..
The use of Wings at the moment increased the number of players and villages that can contribute to the end goal of treasures and VP accumulation. (not telling you all anything you don't know - just setting the scene to explain my logic)
Extra wings means extra royals means extra treasuries means extra camps and extra tributes.
So whether you make some Kingdom limit or not - players will happily take one for the team - and play in a wing, and then there are mechanics to absorb these players as the game progresses and treasures have been accumulated to cover the previously settled areas.
Suggestions so far (with pros and cons - i hope these could be expanded.. and if we can try to adopt this approach - there will be suggestions.. lets try to capture the pros and cons and see what we end up with as a final list).
|Limit Players in Kingdom||Makes competition for winning badges||Does not actually stop wings because players will play in wings and forego a badge (imo)|
|Prevent stealing own Kingdom Treasures||Aims to make more war because treasuries are harder to defend||Makes it more attractive to have wings for this purpose
|Punish Small Wings
(reduce treasures, increase robber cata, increase SG crop rewards in bigger Kingdoms, less incentive to def no allies)
|Drive need to be in main Kingdom
Make it more difficult for players in smaller kingdoms to play
More likely to punish semi active multis
|Really punishes newbies..
Punishes small non wing kingdoms
My take is that if you prevent Wings throughout the game.. it will force an even playing field for the top Kingdoms.. and instead of winning by having the most players.. you have to win by stealing them... which is what I thought the agreed aim for everyone was..
Kingdoms with less than 15% of total GWT treasures get absolute minimum crop from stolen goods. Players rely on SG to fund armies and manage the ebb and flow of army needs. No serious player can survive in a meta wing. Make sure that players in Kingdoms above the 15% threshold get at least 10 times the amount of reward of all types for those below. This percentage might need to be adjusted for the phase of the game.. I'm thinking from like day 50 or 60 onwards where the main kingdoms/meta have already been properly formed.
Block players from changing kingdoms earlier in the game. Currently you cannot change Kingdoms once WW level reaches 50. Why not make it based on a number of villages? you have 5 villages for Kingdom 1 - lock it in.
Just like greys... get no defense points or hero XP for defending another Kingdom
If you are in Kingdom A (a wing), and the main Kingdom B (main) takes treasures from you, then if you have a village in the influence area of a treasury from Kingdom B, you automatically and are locked from granting tributes to the king/duke of Kingdom B. They must attack you to take tributes.
I was there... 3000 years ago.. in old travian with limits in alliances.. com7 in 2008 had Poland First to Fight... 20 alliances.. I led the winning team on com8 we had 11 wings or more..
I don't believe for a moment that limiting player numbers will remove wings.. I full agree with your goals.. more action, more mid game fighting.. its the best part of Kingdoms v the old servers..
There has to be something else... player limits won't make a single difference.
Can someone fill me in on how locking the number of members to a set limit will reduce the metas with multiple wings?
Do you assume that because some players are locked out of the final kingdom and will end the game in a wing that does not own the WW, that this will stop wings forming?
Well, I am glad to report you are wrong regarding the fact that the TK team, don't listen or do anything.
We are listening, discussing options, finding solutions and implementing them.
We have done many improvements along the last few months, hopefully more will come.
Given track record, I really believe this concerns will get resolved too. Since we have already solved most of the things brought to our attention, we will be looking at the perception of cheating been a big issue in the game and improve the situation in that front.
Perception is reality...
At the moment, based on the continued memes, comments, and discussion around multi accounting and bot cheating, I would say that many others have the same opinion as I do.. nothing is changing fast enough to make a material difference to the impact of cheats in the game.
I understand the reluctances to share details to avoid educating the enemy, but do you have statistics such as how many accounts are banned on each world... how many troops you killed in punitive measures? how many kingdoms obtained an advantage through the benefit of cheating players in their ranks... how much bigger multi accounters armies are etc?
I believe I have achieved some changes, although small, in my allies.. not as much as I hope but it’s a start.
You are 100% correct. The only way to change thing, and as I’ve said.. delete my account.. that is the only power I have..
The discussion is about how to reduce the power of Meta. Our kingdom is surrounded by a meta. Previously 2 completely separate kingdoms working as 1 team, but now, after the WW have been released Kingdom Pyhr (on the west and south of us) settled and built treasuries in the middle of Kriss (on the east of us). They then activated the treasuries, sucked up all the treasures from Kriss and invited all the Kriss players in to their kingdom.
We’ve been battling 2 Kingdoms for months.. and you’re telling me defending treasures should be hard and if we can’t do it, then we should lose.
You seem to be missing the point that its too easy and too rewarding for 2 kingdoms to work together until they capture sufficient treasures to merge, even after WW has been released.
If you stopped these merges, if you prevented players from Kriss from joining and participating in the WW race, then maybe we would not be a small kingdom under attack, but we would have had a fighting chance to compete against one or both.
So my points above are focused on stopping mergers.. stopping meta power. I have NO idea how preventing kingdoms from defending treasures or moving them achieves anything like you’re aiming for….