Posts by Skyler

    I have used the fast settling method myself to settle a 15c, although I did get options to relocate my 15c once I had destroyed my initial village I did not take them. I feel that the fast settling method coupled with resettling a 15c in a more favourable position is definitely beyond what is intended with that feature.

    I think to continue allowing this would go further towards alienating more players as a lot feel the fast settling method to be beyond what should be allowed.

    Not really. I'm not using the map at all when adding new farms atleast, probably neither does most of the top robbers. Inactive finders don't care if a village is grey or not, they just see if that guy has gained population in x days.

    This is also how I go about adding my farms also but people have been focusing on grey inactive villages and thus it seems like a possible solution.

    I think this is the more viable solution to this problem and also the easiest to be implemented in the short term. It solves the complaint without having to fundamentally alter current game mechanics.

    I don't see either side on this discussion being able to disagree with this point. I am open to hearing peoples opinion on a change like this? With so many options being discussed and thrown around we need to come up with at least an agreeable solution that would work for the players of the game that the developers may implement.

    It will make farming a more time intensive task than it currently is with identifying where the farms are but drastically lowers the chance that a large majority of farms could be spiked. I am not entirely against farming taking more time with an update such as this and it will potentially make farming more lucrative.

    The downside here is that the whole report system would need to be overhauled, every defender will be named whether they defend an inactive or not. This is probably highly unlikely to happen also. Remember you have to take into account the design of the game when suggesting changes.

    There is multiple ways to send an attack or raid, if you choose to do it through the farm list you also choose to attack blindly. If you make a choice to attack blindly then you are the one at fault here. I do it myself and get spiked as well but do not see this as justification to outright give you information where you wouldn't get it otherwise.

    I believe the only solution here is to remove inactive villages outright but then you have to look elsewhere for your resources prompting people to attack players that are active and creating a farm out of them. Yes they will disappear if they go inactive but you'll be in the same position if they don't disappear when someone begins to spike them.

    My suggestion is that no village is marked as inactive on the map, the villages that are inactive get deleted automatically after 7 days of inactivity.

    You will not find out who is defending someone if you scout or attack an active player and thus is true for inactive villages as well. On a deeper level the whole combat system is effected by the changes that are being suggested. It would also be a logistical nightmare to have to overhaul the combat system to appease people that don't like being spiked on there farms. You could of scouted, but you don't once the farming of that target begins.

    You are getting angry because you are being led into a false sense of security over attacking an inactive player and thus demanding changes where they are not needed.

    Jallu's suggestion is a possibility but it's not entirely realistic in my opinion as scouting someone should only show details that you could obtain from a realistic scout. I.e. the scout can see the wall, the scout can see the troops, the scout knows where the troops are at that time but the scout didn't see where those troops came from.

    I don't see any problem with any player spiking a farm. It's understandable that it will annoy a lot of players and could cause issues for some although this in itself is not justification to remove reinforcements of inactive villages. If you want to remove reinforcements of inactives, you have to remove the ability to raid these villages also.

    As much as it is an inconvenience it should always remain a part of the game as allowing such a rule change would be essentially handing everyone free resources with absolutely no risk involved. When you use your troops, no matter what you are using them for there should always be a risk.

    You take a risk to gain a reward. Taking no risks and sitting back hitting your farm list raid button with no risk involved would be "game breaking". Travian is a war game as people have mentioned, you should expect to lose troops no matter how you use them, whether that attack is on an inactive or active player. To allow the ability to do raiding with absolutely no risk does not take skill.

    It definitely takes more effort to be a top raider while spiking does not require the same time investment. Although both are valid strategies and neither is unfair on the other. Again, don't use your troops if you don't want to lose them, from spiking or otherwise.

    The only solution to this problem is to remove inactive villages completely. There is no other solution to this problem as stopping reinforcements just allows an unchecked source of income, yes that might be great but it's highly unrealistic.