Posts by Renuo#EN

    Am I the only one that thinks the early game is stupid with a lot of kings just sprawling all over the place? Why is anyone instantly starting as a king at all?

    Wouldn't it make a lot more sense that kingdoms are actually formed, not starting out of nowhere from a tiny undeveloped chief's village?

    Look at the start of any server and it's 25% treasuries - we all know that we won't have that many kings and dukes but this is how it starts.

    Pre-mades are now telling their members to all be kings so that they have more res from tributes and when they start forming the "actual kingdom" they have more treasures to start with.

    What we all really see as true kingdoms are the handful of groups that end up emerging out of the early game. So then, why do we need these "kingdoms" to begin with that an enormous majority of them won't exist over a very small time frame?

    My suggestion for criteria to become a king:
    1. 200 population
    2. Level 1 treasury
    3. At least 1 other governor invited to form

    As for some potential issues; maybe not being able to sell treasures to a king very early on, but often you don't start in influence even in the current format. I tend to save them for a bit myself anyhow.


    .. so get out, you cant say anything about players' questions

    I don't have any reason to stop posting and you can't do anything about it. I can make a response within the guidelines as I'd like.

    I couldn't care less that you get your feelings hurt everytime I post on the forums.

    This community is for all players not just the ones who yell and scream the most.
    They already said they are collecting the feedback. You don't need to keep harrassing them, it doesn't give you another vote...

    you are just incredible selfish people!

    This server wont be my last server and i know this abuse, so i can use this against many players and get its benefit in all servers (many players dont know this "hero scout" thing and i can get advantage easily) BUT i am not doing this and i am reporting this thing on forums! But ofc, you are hating me because i share this on forum you dont want other players learn this and want abuse this against them. Although i asked @FabianF , you all started to post irrelevalent things about me again.

    PS: you are even afraid that a question that i asked Game Designer, calm boys, this is forum ppl ask questions. Dont be afraid that all players will know this abuse, if they know the gameplay will improve. But nvm you are just selfish :(

    You are the selfish one here.

    Georgi already stated it was a game mechanic and not a bug and they will collate the feedback and discuss internally.

    Then you come here with hardly any time passing and demand a game developer to answer you personally. YOU are selfish.

    I already stated my opinion on the matter was neutral.

    I am not "afraid" of your words, what trash statement is this? Any player with a brain can think this idea up, are you kidding me?

    you are not getting the point, it's not about loosing troops, mehhhh, i am tired of trying to tell something to BM guys, your hatred is too strong, just good luck and have fun.

    Of course it has EVERYTHING to do with it.

    Where was this thread when your meta cleaned out the biggest hammer on the server at the time with this exact strategy?

    If your troops didn't die this thread never happens.

    My opinion on this is keep it or take it away good players will always adapt. I'm neutral on this particular suggestion but I think this thread is very hypocritical regardless.

    I've played since Travian was a brand new thing, there have always been different strategies using the mechanics that seem "gamey" and we as players have largely just accepted it.

    I could simply turn your own words back on you, but I'm bored of that.

    Duals should get prestige as the dual. It should not be accounted to any of the players of the dual, because none of them earned it as a single player.

    Simple really.

    Your arguments are just as dull as the anti-gold people.

    You are literally just saying "I don't like it so don't give them anything".

    I have played in dual setups for the majority of my time and just "being a dual" is not a reward there is nothing.

    I don't actually care about the medals and that so I'm not going to get upset about this, but there's no reason to take a dump on those that just want a little bit of prestige and end-game medals for their own account record.

    It does NOTHING to you and changes NOTHING intrinsic to the game.

    You think everyone will suddenly want to become a dual over this change?? No, people will not suddenly drastically change the way they play because of this.
    I have never heard anyone say they refuse to dual because of lack of medals and prestige...

    The fact you "don't like duals" has absolutely nothing to do with this thread.

    Also, this is the IDEAS WISHES AND SUGGESTIONS area. You can go place your "remove duals" idea in your own thread.

    If the number of players per kingdom is limited to 60, sending reins or resources to anyone outside your kingdom is prevented, and only kingdom members owning a WW can feed or rein it, this would be a simple solution. The per capita idea above could also be added. As always someone will find a way around it, but it's got to be better than it is now. So many governors in servers dominated by metas are deleting out of boredom.

    Maybe the developers could trial this idea in a special server?

    This is more important than people realise.

    Limiting the size of a kingdom or adding negatives alone is not enough. These guys aren't stupid they will just make Meta1,Meta2,Meta3,etc. etc. tiny kingdoms to take advantage.

    Stopping reinforcement is the only step you can take to reduce this problem (you won't be able to stop them attacking the same kingdoms).