As much as this game has been pushing a casual approach as time goes by, the game is still intrinsically a war game.
There are many passive building games around without war and this is certainly not made to be one, you can be attacked around the clock so pacifism is not a strong card to play.
Can't echo Jallu words enough.
Players are already making significant errors because the game subconsciously pushes them in that direction:
- "Overall rank" & "Village rank" pushes amateurs to believe building for building sake is valuable
- Quests/weeklys heavily promoting simming
"Noob-trap" is a perfect term.
This has been discussed a dozen times before and people just state that then people would use barracks as a cranny. Best way to fix this would be to remove the "default" option altogether and make the user pick of the troops himself.
Option gets cancelled with incoming attack/raid?
this is how I think a server could be interesting
1. it should cost 100$ to join.
( people would be more active)
2. all starts with 7000 gold and can not buy anymore.
( this would make it a more fair game and depend on skill)
3. if you delete you will not get they gold with you.
( this will make it more risky to have multi account and get caught)
I'd play it but probably not enough will join.
Right now, there are maybe 40 active players for each kingdom. The rest just plays along, profits from the defense a kingdom gives. Putting limits on the kingdom members will ensure those smaller players (who play just for fun and when they have time) will no longer have a place in a kingdom.
Kingdoms is all about the idea that every player, even the small ones, can play their role in a kingdom and get protection
If you limit the amount of players that can join a kingdom, it means that the smaller weaker players will remain without kingdom, since Kingdoms is based on your location of the map.
Or: people will start wings with those small players, communicating via SS or discord or something else. Move treasures from wings to main kingdom and force a win in this way.
At least those treasures will be in the "weaker" wings and therefore more vulnerable.
I'm not sold on the fact that this is any sort of solution to any real population issue though.
Surely, but how do you explain a handful of players quitting the game make any better revenue for Travian
Because there is another side to the ledge where you put in the expenses... so it doesn't matter if they lose 1 unit of revenue and save 2 units of expenses.
Rats can cause pretty bad infections and diseases from historical issues... if that helps your head get around it!
I thought you guys would be using the Russian flag by now.
I understand getting rid of the dead regional servers, but I can understand people being upset about language support.
This is a bit of throwing the baby out with the bathwater here I think..
Why not? What is the point in building a big hammer if you cannot feed it? It is not the resources which holds you back while building the biggest hammer possible. It is your ability to feed it. That is why some teutons prefer axes over clubs. Yes, clubs are stronger when compared (keep in mind: they build faster than axes), but you have to build so much more of them. Same for romans: building EI or EC will simply depend on your ability to feed those EC.
Feeding in TK is trivial..
When ranking on a great spot in a server is imminent you might "sell" a dual spot just for the medal.
They do deserve recognition but if you don't do it correctly it's like a participation medal which not only ruins the worth of it for the one getting it but also downplays the value of those who earn their medals.
The first bit is really unlikely, I can't foresee this being a thing at all. I
n any case to your next point about participation medals, there are already a damn lot of players that didn't do squat on a server getting medals for winning as it is - it's not like we remove their medals for only having a few villages and 10k troops that never did anything but hit robbers all server round.
Totally off topic, so shoot me.
Mayo. I saw that army in your signature and I just want to congratulate you on more than 6 months of rams built on a Kingdoms server. The first Kingdom's server I played was open beta and one of the best rammers I saw had 4k built with an account of only 5 cities. I just wish that you could have had a better opponent to send those rams against and maybe a building strength arti to face as well!
I will shoot you, but its because I did all the work for it
Do you mean the 3 kings within one alliance system?
Even in a 50 player kingdom you can probably get 20 villages into kingdom influence if its a top2-3 kingdom.
Anyone thinks probability of first week/second week quitters are more for tuetons (you cant be online 24 * 7 even with a sitter)
Merchants carrying capacity. Does tuetons score a point on merchant capacity while being slower than romans? Gauls has the best merchants in terms of speed and capacity.
I prefer roman for a king and duke (Tribute income helps on double build, and Attack/Crop as well as Def/Crop ratios helps to maintain effective armies)
To play a governor with higher online time, ready to spent effort on microfarming, Tueton is still best. Unless you have a person defender or a defensive team, avoid getting into conflicts where your barracks are catapulted by enenmies
Your effective coverage can be easily close to 24/7, but you will need the right help.
Doubt any tribe gets a win on merchants, its all a bit of a muchness really.
Roman treasury is not ideal if you want to consider min/max. The crop effectiveness is no different for a duke/king to a governor.
Teuton is certainly not the best farmer (have you seen the stats on the other off cav??), but it is the best (/only real ideal choice) for aggressive farming of actives.
Well you might recall with 4k a certain kingdom comfortably covered 4 WW (and lost, but still its potential is huge).
10k is good, it means you can reasonably cover 2 WW regions if you have a strong kingdom, but you can't paint the map.
So it is confirmed to show the current power of a kingdom?
That is super bad, like enemy spies can tell the exact attack and def powers, seems silly.. can some official guy please confirm it?
Make sure you know who you are recruiting.
Upgrading capital into city is the way to play.
Non-sense arguing for this evidence...
I think you have missed the points made here entirely.
Not one person here has said to not turn your capital into a city here.