Posts by 50 Calibre

    I am pretty sure the limit is in place to help the server from jamming up like it used to on T4 servers.

    This was always the case when WW's would come out and the servers just could not handle the movement that was going on.

    Maybe someone from TG can clarify this a bit more for us. ?

    - Me not being able to correctly dodge an attack due to spending my resources on NPC badly (Math errors by my side)

    You really need no tool for this as it is just a matter of getting your resources below any cranny level, if you use crannies. If not then just a matter of spending down and letting the rest go as collateral damage.

    - A conversation between me and my alliance leader about how he couldn't find a tool that would give him the data he needed (such as travel times) precisely for Travian Kingdoms.

    I understand what you said about the other tools listed and just to add more fire I will say that the best tool still out there for what you are saying is the one made by getter. It is what I use and can do many things with precise timings. I am not sure I can post the link but you can ask your alliance members about that or just shoot me a PM on the forum.

    I look forward to trying out yours when it is ready so will keep an eye out on this thread to see your work. Please add something that will show me the winning lottery numbers. ;)

    Yes, I don't think you need two diplomatic entities. Kingdoms are pretty much the defining feature of the game. So we should focus on them, make them more stable, make the structure and teamplay within a kingdom more meaningful and interesting etc. And that might be way easier without alliances getting "in the way". That's basically the core idea this thread is about.

    I am glad you are getting back to the KINGDOM being the focal point and with the 1 king concept. This will make the king position one that should not be take for granted and to just collect free resources from your governors. As 1 king you will be very busy running your kingdom. I also believe that there should be some form of revolt concept put into this too so that kings can also be overthrown or somehow lose their title if that is something the governors want to do in the event of a slacker king. This will make the position even more difficult but also give the title a round of respect as you will have to be a clever & self motivated person to play this position. Activity levels would have to be thru the roof but with some of the players I have run across it should work out okay.

    I can relate to this too. I'm pretty convinced that if we had worked on this from the outset, our alliance on Com1 could have easily fit the whole alliance into 1 kingdom with the strategic placement of dukes. In my opinion, this would be a positive thing.

    You are correct Paul. If com1 was a 1 king server then we would have made our settlement phase way different then what is was and focused on settling so that one king would be the borders.. Since it is still 3 kings we made our move as that and did it early in the server as we had planned prior to the server start.

    If the 1 king concept is done then we may need the ability to have more dukes (I would still cap this at about 10 if not just leave it at 7). Kings for sure would have to settle more villages and would not be able to cluster as the governors or dukes. Some kings on servers are not doing that at all even when taught and then come back asking why their kingdoms will not grow. I try to teach ingame to any alliance I am in on test and even enemies and you would be surprised how many times I am told my help is not needed because they have been playing Travian for 100 years but first time Kingdom players. I have seen a lot of kings kingdom shrink to nothing and then they end up deleting or pissed off cause they have no governors. It takes a lot to be a king and will be even more under a 1 king version. When a server starts kings need to recognize if they have had a good spawn drop or a bad one. Then have the confidence and not an ego to determine if staying a king is best or dropping to a governor or joining elsewhere as a duke.

    There has been many debates about this and most have come to the conclusion that it is all about time.

    If you are very active the smaller adventures are better since your hero is back soon while the longer adventures ties the hero up for 2 hours.

    As for items received, everyone gets basically about the same as it is all random. So you will find nothing more on the long adventure then what I could find on the short ones.

    The only way I can see myself liking them a bit more is if they also give the option for a marker to not expire like putting a flag on something.

    Right now many are using these markers instead of flags for certain things and 24 hours is not long enough for some things.

    Now imagine as a leader using markers and then trying to keep tabs on them and resetting them all every 24 hours.

    So markers expire and do not get reset and now bad things happen and kings are screaming but markers expired so info was not known.
    In some alliances this is becoming a messy thing. Much like the chatbox with someone starting a new chat just because they can and still no way for the leaders to remove unwanted or unneeded chats.

    So add "never expires" to the time options and I would even use those markers myself. As of right now I have mine turned off, I do not read any of them on the map and basically ignore them as much as possible. :(

    Just do the following......

    - Go here and uncheck that box.....

    - Then go here.... and it does not need to be a village with a marker already visible

    - Click on the all markers tab.....

    Scroll down thru that list of markers and there will be options for hiding or deleting the markers.
    When they rolled these markers out they did not give much explanation on it so took us a few days to figure out where all these were.
    There may be even more options then what I have shown too so if anyone else has knowledge of any more, please do share

    I personally do not like the markers and think they should just be scrapped

    Agreed VVV

    I honestly think that the best way to fix this is just raise the storage capacity for dukes to 5K and if it is where they are going allow the dukes to have 1 in every 4 villages a treasure village

    For kings they should be allowed in every village if they wish to. Since the king is the main influence factor then there really should be no restriction for him.

    Getting back to to what VVV said about the server life. If Travian wants to test out the 1 king per alliance thing then you must give them a shot of CP % bonus. Kings need to spread faster then the kings around them if you want to create bigger kingdoms. This was how it was on the alpha server so the system works. It just needed to be lowered a bit cause that was too fast even in my opinion. I will support a CP boost for Kings but not as strong as it was on alpha server.

    p.s. To anyone playing king....When settling your second village, it is more important for you to take a regular village in order to spread the kingdom borders then worrying about taking a 9 or 15c. My very first king on alpha server did not take a cropper till his 5th village and ended up with about 8 croppers when it was over. As a king you main focus needs to be on the expansion of your borders. Don't put all your expansion pressures on your dukes neither cause those could also be very weak points in your kingdom. So make those choices wisely and not just to get alliance rank.

    .... The number of treasuries a kingdom can have caps out at 42 max. Is your suggestion to reduce this number?

    Your numbers reflecting the cap for treasuries and dukes are correct but there is no cap on a kings active treasuries because a king can keep expanding and adding indefinitely.

    The kings only restriction is the time of the server and how fast he can spit out villages.

    I have advocated adding more storage capacity to duke (5K) and allow the king to have at least 1 active treasury that can hold 10K

    Be sure that your rally point is level 10 at least. Targeting buildings open up at level 10, 15 and 20. Of course the double targeting is only available at level 20 to.

    Yes, there would be one mutual border for all players of a group. Dukes would probably have to get a tribute collection radius.

    Then that is what you all wanted from the start. :)

    1 king creating a kingdom/alliance then taking neighboring territory thru war or diplomacy. Then of course the king selects his dukes who will also be able to spread influence

    You just have to limit an alliance to 1 king.

    I imagine that the king(dom) would be the highest instance. So alliances between kingdoms would just be treaties, either as loose as we have them now or potentially a little more involved gameplay-wise. But "leaving an alliance" would not really be a thing anymore. So the scenario you're describing couldn't happen any longer. Basically the kingdom would me more or less stable. Even if a king left, stopped playing or whatever, this should not lead to the whole team breaking down. This would in turn probably require a reduction on the maximum number of treasuries a king can have (and an increase of duke treasuries).

    I have described a couple scenarios on how the treaties could be used to be part of the VPS process in the feedback thread but here is part of it........


    For the other treaties (confed & nap) maybe code it in so alliances gain vps when they work together by hitting an enemy target at near same times or helping to defend one another.
    VPS could be taken when alliances break the letter of the treaty (like when you click on a target on the map and you get the warning about attacking allies but attack anyway)

    I think we can keep the kingdom invitations mostly as they are.

    I think that has turned out okay. makes the start a bit more hectic as you look for or land in a good area or alliance

    Ideally they would get more protection. That's what the idea of having a king was about in the first place. So with dukes being "small kings", smaller groups of governors would each get their own responsible protector. Some players will still want to play a governor because it's generally a smaller time commitment and less stressful. And if they get really into the game and do well, then they will probably get the chance to become a duke anyway sooner or later.

    Many players are wanting to be king only because they are receiving tributes from governors for free. I have had a couple tell me that they even deserve the tributes more then the governors and that's why some even charge a high tax. As more and more find this easy money then they will use the back of their governors instead of actually farming or attacking for themselves. So maybe give the governors something that no one else gets like maybe a 1-3% more resource production or adventures spawn quicker. They will need something to keep up with the lure of free resources.

    I personally don't really like this mechanism. While it can be interesting to plan out an "act of treason" using this rule, it can also render large portions of playing time irrelevant for many players. So ideally I would like to fix this in the process. And as I indicated above, maybe there simply wouldn't be "alliance hopping" at all.

    I and many others will be in agreement here. Like i said it is unique but not a favorable action.

    The post is intriguing but if you could give us a bit more information if possible as it is hard to give a thought with what you have given us.

    - Will this mean alliances will be set more like in Legends where there is just one border and not for each king?
    - If a king leaves an alliance will he still take his governors and his own borders till they find another alliance?
    - Will the way you invite players into an alliance or kingdom change from what it is now?
    - If dukes get ability to collect tributes then what will the governors get? (Put too much glory into kings and dukes then no one will want to be a governor)
    - In regards to treaties..Not sure I get this as once you are in an alliance you observe the treaties made and could not have your own.

    One of the things that makes Kingdom's unique is that kings can leave an alliance at any time and take with them a % of the alliance plus vps that will have a dramatic affect on an outcome of a server. So how would this merging affect all of that?

    I know it may be hard to gives us all these answers since as you say it is still in the thought process but any info would be great to help you with some feedback. Right now there just is not much to give a good think about it.

    This has been asked for since the alpha server so hopefully this will be the thread that ignites that fire under the TG staff.

    I know there are many things we as players are still crying about and seems like we go unheard but I would have to say that overall Travian crew does a good job at listening to us as the game has evolved quite a bit from those late July days 2 years ago.

    Everyone keep posting your thoughts and ideas and TG staff keep listening and making those changes and of course it is your game and we should not expect to get everything we ask for or want. It is a compromise on both sides when game building.

    Peace out and long live the queen!

    I have been thinking on some of this VPS stuff and thought I would drop some thoughts here........

    - In order for an alliance to get any VPS it must declare war on another alliance (VPS can only be generated thru war and treasures)

    - Treasures can can only be stolen if hero is involved, attack mode & war has been declared.

    - After a war has been declared then the combatants gain or lose VPS based on battles.
    VPS is gained per battle victory
    VPS is lost per battle defeats

    - War can only end under 2 scenarios....."Come to Terms" - the losing side will lose a % between 30-50%
    "Surrender" - the losing side will lose 100% of existing VPS

    - During war the battles give VPS based on any of the following types of battles...Attacks, Raids, Chiefings, Defends (scouting but only if you lose 50% of your scouting force)

    When it comes to the king part of kingdoms there seems to be a lot of mistrust and backstabbing in Kingdoms versus T4. Of course this falls right into how it really was in those times. So Kingdoms seems to be better geared toward
    pre-formed teams even more so then Legends since you have less control over who is within your team then the T4 version. So here is an idea or option that may work well with Kingdoms

    - Allow pre-formed teams to become part of the game play by creating a "pre-formed team list" that would be located in users lobbies. If a team is playing on a server then a governor would be able to have an option to join this team. If no governors join this team after a set amount of time then this team is removed from the list.

    - To get on the list a team must have played at least 2 rounds with a designated king or kings (up to 3 and designated by either a lobby account or email) It will then be up to the king(s) to activate the team name on whichever server they intend on playing when it is ready to go. The king(s) will then be given a code to give to those core members who will be joining.

    - The governor should get an option ingame when the tutorial asks what area on the map do you want to settle, another option will be included about joining a king. They could then insert a code that was given to them by their kings. This option will still allow the random players to drop into a kingdom but assure that those who wish to play together start the server together in their chosen kingdoms.

    To help generate influence on the map change the amount treasures that can be stored and how many villages will generate.

    - For kings the system now is place (half + 1) works well. Allow 1 treasury (capitol only) to hold 10K and all other treasuries to hold 5K

    - For dukes, upgrade their storage to 5K as well and still hold to 1 village only (maybe expand the influence generated to expand 1-2 more square then presently allowed

    - Drop the levels of the WW down to 50 and have them spawn on day 150

    - Allow an alliance founder to set up to 3 alliance members to be the WW holders/builders (each designated member would have access to ww village from their own accounts)

    - Remove the option that allows kings to collect tributes at any ww village. This is now preventing non kings from getting a chance to hold and build a WW as kings feel only kings should build based on the tribute factor.

    Guess that is it for now but got some stuff coming soon about the prestige.

    p.s......Please remove "Nothing valuable found" These are heros and should always find something.

    Easy fix here! Give us the ability to type in the amount of resources we wish to trade on the marketplace. The slider is TERRIBLE if you're going for exact ratios. It's even harder when I'm trying to drive and play Travian -- so please, don't get me killed guys.

    My grandmother was killed by a clown just like you who decided it was okay to text his friend on FB while driving down the road. Punk never even knew he went thru a red light at an intersection and t-boned my grandmother on the drivers side nearly decapitating her head from her body as it was estimated he was traveling at 50-60 mph.

    You think your pro at doing both but just a matter of time before you kill someone. My grandmother left this world to early because a donkey could not just drive the car instead of being on the phone. No sympathy here for anyone who thinks their phone is more important then another life.