Posts by Sir Cin Sincere

    More thoughts about the merged village..

    What if the village union happens between 2 players only. Both have to send 1 senator or 3 settlers to a wilderness tile, whereas the type of the wilderness is going determine the resource fields of the village.

    When examining the map I saw basically 8 types of wilderness areas

    There is mostly pure clay, iron and woodland wildernesses. =3

    Then there are about 50/50 mixed wildernesses of wood/clay and wood/iron. =2

    There is no iron/clay one, but instead wood/water wilderness....for the sake of simplification lets say these count as Iron/clay ones. =1

    Also a mostly pure crop wilderness and a mixed crop/woodland wilderness aswell. =2

    No mixed ones of crop/clay or crop/iron...for greater harmony and diversification, these could be added to the map. (=all 10 possible combinations between different types wildernesses corresponding to resource type)

    When the 3 settlers or 2 senators have both arrived on the wilderness tile, then the pure tiles turn to a village with mostly corresponding resource fields and less of other complementary resources.

    So pure woodland wilderness turns to 7335 tile, other pure wildernesses to 3735, 3375 and pure crop wilderness to 222 12 tile or 00018...keep in mind that 2 players are occupying 1 village.

    Mixed tiles could give the following tile types: 6633, 6363, 6336, 3663, 3636 and 3366.

    Now the questions of CP, how many troop training facilities and which special buildings can be in that sort of village.

    For the issue of CP I propose both players receive the maximum amount that village produces, so players losing expansion slot can get no extra debuff in CP generation...the players are already debuffed in ability to produce resource by sharing fields.

    As for troop training facilities, might be right to not overkill. Maximum number of facilites might be 4 for a little extra push, because players are handicapped for having fewer villages.

    Workshop count cant be greater than 1...1st player to build a workshop there, will determine the tribe of siege weapons.

    The extra 1 training facility creates the ability to try out more unit combinations. 1 tribe can build both barracks and stable, the other only 1 training facility, either stable or barracks....which combinations do you like the most? I feel Druids and Paladins or Paladins/Haeduans creates strategy of mobile and active defensive or semi-offensive player. Then 1 tribe of infantry only spices the possibilities.

    Both players can control the whole army there..which means there is small effect of merged village attacks. The effect is about 1,5 villages offensive force, not counting the effect of siege weapons or brewery celebration.

    I would like to see that merged villages special buildings effects expands to every tribe using it, but im afraid of the effect of HDT to other tribes...gauls gain freakishly massive advantage with TTs, druids and Haedus, but then again it eliminates the possibility of brewery, so maybe the 2 crop worth TKs and 1crop paladins have the upper hand here. The special buildings could complement eachother excellently..defensive gaul/teuton cavalry combos can gain extra defense behind traps and offensive gaul/teuton gain better ability to protect fragile teuton clubs early on...TTs and clubs looks like a mighty potent raider combination aswell.

    This doesnt conclude the question of special buildings yet. What about the walls? Does this also works as whoever is first to build the wall there, determines the wall type. Here is where I would go the extra mile of adding another wall to the village. The total maximum wall level would be still 20, but in that case only pure roman, gaul or teuton wall and every combination of 2 tribes in between. Building level 10 of either tribe wall doesnt seem to be very beneficial total defense % and wall sturdiness against siegery, but this means that village is able to build wall quicly up between attacks and therefore adds some safety and also a bit of room to try how for examle teuton and roman wall complement eachother with def % and wall sturdiness.

    ...What do you guys think...does this idea have some quality to it?

    or maybe with every smithy level infantry gets to move around 1 damage points on the spectrum and cavalry 2 points...then even low level smithy builders could have access to that effect

    Seems this idea has so many new parts that needs to be introduced, that its harder to implement.

    My idea of an enhancement on troops, is that when the unit type is researched to maximum level in the smithy, then the player can reallocate 5 damage points for infantry troops and 10 damage points for cavalry.

    Creating coupled groups of units as Haji mentioned in the persian tribe suggestion, is also quite attractive one. Say when you have 1000 legionnaires, then you could form a legion for a certain fee in academy. A legion cant be broken apart, so now it acts as a single unit. The benefit might be that it could be controlled from whichever village the player has just like hero when the home village is changed.

    Other units would have their own respective group formations with some special abilities. Could be that marauder group made from clubs could bring even bigger loot etc.

    For not overpowering this features offensive side, maybe a restriction of only 1 group unit could be sent on attack together and without the assistance of any regular troops. Maybe its also not that complicated for combat simulators and troop sending tabs this way. Grouped troops can only be stacked on the defensive.

    At this point its all hypothetical...nobody can foresee what exactly are the results of this.

    What I think of broken mechanics in multiplayer games-If everyone has access to the mechanics, then this itself gives everyone equal chances...I also explained in the start of the second post that multiple troop training facilities or any new features should have some controlling mechanisms to keep them from going array.

    There are a lot of ways to make it work.. The troops could either be used by each tribe commanding their units separately or every member can use all the troops together. I like the latter version since this way the village has better chances of reacting to incoming attacks plus it introduces the idea of merging attacks with units from different tribes.

    Merging attacks might need to have special effect of some negative attack bonus for not overpowering the feature (could be explained with bad coordination between different tribes) or possibly make it impossible to be faked. Another way for not letting the feature to be overpowered is to cap the unit amounts that sort of village can train.

    The exact picture how the change would look like should be discussed during team meetings of developers and other other concerned parties.

    The answers to previous points made:

    *It might help the multiaccounting situation by helping honest players cooperate more closely.

    The fact that these kind of villages get buff in their combat capabilities should incentivize people to not multiaccount. Even if someone thinks to make 3 accounts to have united village all to him/herself, then its really hard to compete with authentic players who can invest much more energy into upkeeping those villages. Also I bet its easier to detect if same person is keeping that village.

    *It would help kings and dukes to contribute their tributes back to kingdoms in a way that governors can also benefit in development.

    If a King and 2 governors reside in 1 common village, then the King is most capable of helping to build it up thanks to his surplus of resource from tributes. The other 2 governors can then focus on building troops without wasting too much resource on village infrastructure.

    *It gives an extra step in long and boring midgame to make it more exciting.

    I have heard a lot of players complaining about the midgame stagnation because many are just training troops to prepare their lategame hammers and doing the daily tasks to manage villages. By creating a village where more players invest in and where some buffs to combat can be achieved, then it raises the stakes and therefore brings more fun to the game.

    *It incites more battling.

    The buff of faster troop regeneration encourages players attacks more..and players who dont prefer to be offensive get to be part of the action more closely by operating in same villages.

    *It brings whole lot of new strategies to the table.

    The main effect I would foresee from this change is that players could build different special buildings in same village and also have possibility of having 3 barrackses and stables for fast regenerating offenses that can spam attacks for extra aggresive playstyle. And when the village is defense oriented, then it could bounce back from defeat quicker.

    3 workshops in endgame gives extra spice for WW hammers and this should alarm other kingdoms to try and take those kind of villages down.

    Since the village layout stays the same then its not that easy to just go ahead and build 3 racks, stables, workshops and all special buildings right away, also it might not be the most optimal strategy. Instead players need prioritize their building sequence and choose wisely which type of units they need the most.

    *Its never done in any of this type of browser games.

    I bet the reason is that its hard to implement, yet the payoff could be huge in terms of inviting new players to the game and differentiating from competitiors while innovating the industry.

    These are just few points that came into my mind at first, there are also the benefits of :

    *Improving the learning curve of new players.

    By getting to share a village with other players they get a chance to see more strategies during single gameworld and also communicate more with others.

    *Smaller kingdoms have better chances against bigger ones.

    Usually smaller kingdoms are made of players with less experience and many times there are no other ways to exist in the server than by acting according to the saying "If you cant beat them, then join them".

    When there is easier to create highly specialized villages and easier to cooperate between kingdom members, then smaller kingdoms have a better chances against the bigger ones and incetives to join meta kingdoms decrease.

    Since I havent gotten any feedback, then I thought I should make a separate thread about my idea.

    3 different tribes commit to settling a united village, where everyone can build simultaneously their own troops, wall and special building.

    The bonuses might seem at first too OP to even consider, but then again every player loses 1 cp slot and gains only 1/3 of the income of normal village so this should balance it out.

    Reasons I think this is beneficial:

    *It might help the multiaccounting situation by helping honest players cooperate more closely.

    *It would help kings and dukes to contribute their tributes back to kingdoms in a way that governors can also benefit in development.

    *It gives an extra step in long and boring midgame to make it more exciting.

    *It incites more battling.

    *It brings whole lot of new strategies to the table.

    *Its never done in any of this type of browser games.

    I elaborated more on this idea in the thread "merging troops"

    This this and so much this. The mobile "gaming market" is huge missed opportunity, and if people try travian on mobile with the app (which is to put it nicely flaming pile of dogshit) they get experience of buggy game with horrible UI and where the notifications come when ever they please to come if they come.

    E: As it stands the app is more likely to turn players away from game than bring them in. A WORKING "companion" app would be nice where you could get quick overview of your villages(on iOS app you can't even see who is attacking you...), attacks, troop ques, warehouse/granary levels etc.

    what about a widget of your capital

    Give the newcomers power of multiaccounting and dualing together in the form of a united village that multiple players can control might be counterintuitive, but tell me...

    Which other game lets different players to cooperate in the level of controlling the same village as different accounts in the game?..could be one of a kind reinvention of a genre.

    And merging tribes could be nice what I wrote about in the other topic "Merging troops"

    And in that case mixing also different player accounts in same village.

    And a special type of village the "Keep", where 3 different tribe players can settle and build together...when in that village could be the option of different tribes teaching each other, then the effect of tinkering on unit damages could be achieved with some sensible storyline to the gameworld evolution.

    I like kickes your troops the direction you want during the game.

    Nobody is ever 100% clear of what the next gameworld is going to look like,

    everybody is just conforming to the map and giving players the versatility to tweak their strategy depending on the needs of the kingdoms and the self.

    There are basically no offensive infantry that has more cav def than inf besides legios..a robuster version of that would be nice..

    If each tribe basic unit(club,legio or fala) could choose to move around even 5pts of the damage and cavalry 10pts if smithy is fully developed, then that could give some spice to the gaming experience

    Some extra ideas to give little buffs to the Keep-

    By having a Keep inside borders, it increases all surrounding friendly villages def by 25%...inside enemy borders it supports attacks from all friendly villages by 25%

    The Keep will slow down armies that move past it

    act as scouting tower so you see if passing attacks are fake or not?

    Might lower influence on enemy kingdom.


    Extra ideas for special skills and external buildings:

    Roads work when village is placed next to it then merchants and troops move quicker to next village that’s been made near to the same road.

    Roads can be made from 1 treasury to another treasury and villages that create Keep, get a road connected also.

    When villages are on that road then there is influence of kingdom.

    Roads can be attacked and catapulted by attacking either treasury or villages on that route.

    Ability to build trenches few tiles from their villages- where troops from that village can be placed temporarily and make another raid so they get better surprise element. These trenches are visible on the map at 1 side of the tile. They can be attacked there with no defense, but attacks incoming there cant be seen.Teutons can fool enemies, by pulling out from the trenches back to home villages so others have to make empty trips there and when attack from trench has been made, then troops return to home village after.

    Ive been thinking a bit more about the idea of an outpost as a collective effort of a kingdom to build rally points for multiple tribes and it doesnt even have to be working as adding offensive forces together in 1 attack. Though this would help for smaller kingdoms to make juicy wall breakers with the right set of skills and too powerful kingdoms might have to change their game strategies.

    They would rather get to use their own units separately from common rally point. There are still a lot of benefits and new options that mixing tribes is bringing to the table. For starter a variety of units to choose from assures that a defensive roman and defensive teuton could operate from the same village without the fear of sweeping cavalry or infantry attacks that they haven’t prepared for alone.It also lets you introduce offensive gaul with the mix and that is very versatile trio and highly functioning to correlate surplus resource with the correct unit.

    This idea gives a lot of ground to play on:

    How many stables, workshops or barracks in the village?

    What sort should the wall look like?

    Are all the different special buildings allowed in the same village?

    What is the building order like/ can everyone build it simultaneously?

    Which tribe merchant types are working in the marketplace?

    Is travian plus or res/crop bonuses allowed in that village if 1 of the players has them activated?

    Can it settle or chief any other villages?

    Would not be sure about settling from that village since who would control the next village…still all of them?

    I will try to give my minds eye view of how it should look like…

    Comes with its own plusses and minuses and not being able to settle from 1 village would actually not have too great effect. The benefits far outweigh the losses in terms of user experience and many new strategies are brought to the game. Better chance for those villages to spot an attack since more eyes are checking on that village from time to time. There will be more of incentive for player over the world to look out for these villages and new to the game players can have quicker learning curve when managing same village with more heads to think with.

    A weak side effect might be rally points limit of sending out attacks for mass raider, but yet again if the other two don’t send out much attacks, then even that strategy is still on the table in hybrid villages. A Bonus would be that all 3 players support that village, so it grows quicker and it therefore doesn’t have problem of building troops and buildings at the same time.

    It also inspires communication and opens many doors to take travian next even in the further future. (One could even think of the idea of mixing tribe units at some point in the development of the game, like TTs getting even faster from learning from training in the same village as roman cavalry or teuton scouts learn to ride horse and become EL etc, but that is too farfetched for now).

    At the same time hybrid villages lessens the major problem of multiaccounting because what would be the point of merging with your own fake accounts…that’s too much to hassle, especially if mixed villages of different persons have greater potential to be strong foe so multiaccounting strategy has less chance of successful outcome. I also have a kind of feeling that it helps smaller kingdoms to fight metas…only if they don’t let sabotagers join their forts of course.

    Think of it like a village becomes city at some point during evolution when players have enough CP. The same way 3 players use CP to make a united village. Each tribe sends 1-3 settlers and then they all get to reside there. Or maybe more suitable if senators and chieftains are sent since it’s a big leap in village strength which also looks more political representation of unification of tribes in a certain point in the game.

    I think this should be 1 time deal like merging of 2 kingdoms or making a village into a city, but hybrid villages are able to chief other hybrid villages because then 3 players lose a village and other group of 3 players take over that hybrid village which gives possibility to acquire a stronghold inside another kingdom that could disrupt its integrity.

    I would leave the basic village layout stay the same, but give some other little perks. Because when 3 players lose an expansion slot on 1 village, they should gain something special in turn.

    Therefore I suggest that there can be built maximum 3 barracks and other type of troops training facilities simultaneously for each tribe to use on their own, but if the building slots are limited, then they have to choose what needs to be built there because its hard to fit 9 war buildings in 1 village and leave enough room for all the other necessary buildings. This naturally keeps room restrictions on those villages and makes player want to change some buildings during evolution, but also introduces idea of fast growing offensive army in one spot and faster regeneration of defenses after taking a hard hit.

    An Another perk I would give the ones, who choose to settle in same village is making that village with 18 fields of crop(6 crop fields for each player), because it wouldn’t be able to keep all the troop count fed in any other way. They would already have to share resource production of 1 village with 2 other players so that’s a loss for the net income of the kingdom.

    For creating a non crop resource income for these villages, I would even bring an option of claiming external resource mines from the empty wilderness areas on the map that look like forests, claypits and iron mountains. The hybrid village itself could be founded only on wilderness areas that look like crop fields or lakes since some crop oasises look like lakes aswell so the idea of 18c village would be concise. Its also a method to create satellite buildings, keeping kingdom infrastructure intact and give guarantee for each tribe to get boost of their own essential resource income.They can upgrade these satellite mines level by levels with much bigger values so there is more incentive to build them , but the satellite mines/woodcutters/pits can be raided(resource collection work a bit like tribute collection), but only be catapulted when attacking a Keep itself? So it kinda acts as a single village, consisting of external fields on map that provide it with wood, clay and iron and the crop comes from itself.

    These villages should have simultaneously 2 fields upgrading and 2 town building slots plus the idea of multiple walls surfaces when picturing 3 tribes in 1 village. 3 Walls that every tribe player can separately build, so this village gets possibly 3x less time to get it strong again. But the downfall could be that they cant all max out their own type of wall…if one built to level 20 then other 2 can only build theirs to level 15 and 10. So its possible to try different variations and find out the best one (or maybe all tribes max to lvl15 and every player can only repair 1 wall). When letting simultaneous upgrading work for other buildings in that village and bring about a new era of travian experience, add another layer to kingdoms union, an extra step in gameworld evolution and invent a flash town which built by multiple kings or governors gets 4x building speed(2x from roman and 2x1 from other two tribes). Almost looks like 4x server speed village has appeared in 1x server, but only in building time, not resource. Resource wise 3 times slower because 3 expansion slots go in 1 village if its chosen to not put other types of wilderness working as satellite mines or use these ones as non-crop Keeps. Other tribes also bring bonuses to this village with their special buildings to compensate the loss of resource with tons of strategic maneuvers.

    Mixed tribes and pure crop villages gain a big motivation for players to play a server until the end by allowing virtually every player in the game get a good chance at having access to excellent cropper at some point

    in the game, which also makes it harder for those who managed to fast settle the first gameworld best croppers and make it possible for governor trios to match the power of a king. Kings should also be able to join these triple player villages so they can give back some taxes by helping build a united village, so virtually every player has the chance of becoming part of the kings bonuses during the game which also grows the number of successful kingdoms and therefore weakens the metas.

    I would like to call this fast arising and hybridized village the “Keep”

    Give it a great story and draw some fine art in there and call it “Kingdom Keeps” least that’s my vision of it.. has some extra layers of meaning there by saying kingdom keeps it together ..or can you keep your Keep?

    So the Keep has its plusses and minuses… having access to coupling a Keep with oasis can also compensate for the loss of kingdom total resource income plus it enhances the chances of cropless players. Also this could be arranged like the mother villages have to be cities or at some certain pop or need maximum level residence/palace for a Keep.

    This idea could go even further and let the same sort of tribes also settle in same villages and create hybrid villages of their own sort.

    I do really think it prevents multies from the soul since it promotes cooperation between individuals from across the globe since that’s the best way to keep the villages up…24/7

    Though it doesn’t prevent multies in the sense of people making accounts that are just built up to be raided for start bonus by raiding em empty, but it instead gives a little extra benefit from teamwork of those who choose to work together and the reward from cheating doesn’t account up anymore against cooperative gameplay. So the multies die out when 3-player teams from all around the clock work together.

    Mmmm it worries me that it could make some offensive accounts too over powered...

    What do you feel about this possibility? Merging troops, specially offensive could be dangerous in that front...

    Merged offense troops should have a countermeasure in the form of that the attack cannot be faked.

    A way to incorporate this and at the same time also bring a new infrastructural element to the game is to create some sort of an outpost/rally point outside of the kingdom where either 1 player can collect armies from multiple villages and send out attacks from, or even the whole kingdom can send some %(maybe 1k troops max) of their army and maybe the king could initiate the attack.

    Would also create a strategy for kingdom to sneak some closeby field near opposing kingdom where they can wage war on them(in case if they are able to hold that point). This would be of course a clear indicator of malicious intent so it makes an active point of target similar to treasuries as in the current game version.

    This outpost should cost some culture point of course and maybe have only walls/water ditch/granary/WH.

    *Other way to create some better offensive effect is to be able to use natarian troops from these kind of outposts. I feel that every player new to the game hits that point where they understand natarians will only ever be NPC and it somewhat disappoints them.

    Travian legends has some features of collectively paying resources for some effects... this could be done the same way and this would work as some kingdom wide quest aswell.

    Effects on attack and defense strength might not be most optimal..maybe teutons and gauls could affect incoming attack speed and crop production instead.

    I would love to see also if incoming attacks could be intercepted on the way or terrain could affect the fighting strength and every tribe has some bonus on different types of terrains. But I doubt that these kinds of improvements will be implemented since it would probably need some complicated coding and even more strain on the servers that are already struggling with the game in its current state of regular lag waves.

    Since there has been some requests to share our ideas how to improve the game, then here is my vision of making the game a bit more captivating.

    The current version of travian kingdoms lets players build their own villages that collectively make up a kingdom, but what I would like to see is that they can also build some infrastructural elements for the whole kingdom. But what could these elements be? ...Well as we know from history then the romans were famous for their roadbuilding skills and quality roads let their empire to be connected better and supply their armies on far away conquests. What if this feature could be applied to the game by having all roman players able to invest in paving their kingdoms roads so the effect would be maybe a 1% faster army and merchants traveling speed inside kindoms borders. This effect would be cumulative so if there are 20 roman players in kingdom that have built the roads buidling or maybe bought the road feature in mainbuilding or embassy then every member of a kingdom gets 20% faster traveling inside kingdom borders.

    The other tribes could have an effect on overall attack strength and defense strength in a similiar manner. Or maybe gauls could slow incoming attacks down as a part of their traps feature and teutons raise defense strength.

    Another idea would be a new type of troop that can also wield hero items so every village could hide troops with chicken boots or send troops between kingdom or own villages faster. This troop should be limited to 1 for every village. Another possibility is to have extra hero if primary hero reaches level 100, but that negates the effect of being able to defend every village troops on earlier stages of game.

    Also some buildings outside of villages such as watchtower that could detect if the incoming attacks are real or fake from kingdom borders onward or a building, where you can hide your army so a swifter attack can be made with the downside of not having defense bonus there. Could be found out by randomly checking empty fields with a scout. These building could be built for CP by a type of troop like settler , only called an engineer.