Posts by Skywalker

    Wow!! Have you actually tried selling any item? lol. In dreams you get such kinda silver for any item.... Incase you don't know, the selling prices is the avg price of that item in the current auction system .... I liked the older T4 auction system (I know there have been some silver farming issues... they are solvable).

    Yes I have sold a 550 point club on the first day it was available to sell for 117k silver :D
    I have also sold a CP helmet for 80k silver :P
    Maybe you should go try again ^^

    hi iribuya

    in the first scrn shot you don't actually used only cavalry because siege unit are count as infantry so you used mix of infantry and cavalry and in this specific case the defense efficiency will count the defense against infantry and cavalry in its equation. You actually can't send siege with just cavalry because you will need 1 siege unit at least and that siege is infantry. please try it with just attack (normal) no siege and you will notice the different.

    kind regards

    the noticeable difference when he turns the siege off he will notice is that his losses are even higher, isn't this to help beginners? You're sabotaging them hahaha

    But top farmers also have to spend time, which was already at number 1. Well unless they use bots.
    It's also a tactic, although in most farmer's cases not a hard one as they just send lots of attacks on inactives.

    It also requires gold, because no way can you farm without the extended farm list.

    So really I don't know why Farming was shown as a separate thing on the list at all...

    Even on a test server you can get the farmlist, do you know how little gold it costs to get a farm list?
    You can just sell a few items you find in the beginning of a server and get enough gold for that.
    When they say using gold they're talking about players who use massive amounts, players that can drop 100k of silver on 1 equipment and not even care.
    So again no, you dont need real money to be a good farmer.

    Good list of roles, but i think the roles should have quotas and fixed permissions. Unlike how you were able to assign everyone roles and all permissions in TL.

    Yes exactly, TL had a bunch of noobs who over abused it and just made everyone have some useless title or the guys who were actually good who just made everyone have a funny title because why not lol.

    If these roles had actual fixed permissions like Dukes and Kings already have, except they stay governors, that would be the best outcome

    I like where you are going with this, back on the old TL we could assign positions to alliance members right on the front page of our alliance and give differnt players different roles, if we could do that here that would be awesome.

    If we must keep it in the "Kingdoms" style of things then it can be like so:

    etc etc.

    "As long as he is active, you are stuck with your King. Sure, if he was really bad everyone could gang up and boot him out, but I've only ever seen this happen early on for Kings who didn't know how to play. "

    In regards to this, on the most recent Comx3 server the #2 ranked alliance "OxY" was lead by a king named "ImperatoR" he treated his players terribly and I lead a rebellion which almost everyone joined our side due to his terrible treatment of us. The rebellion caused him to delete and 3 of his dukes to delete, although one submitted and joined us.

    Then I ruled over the new kingdom :P and this was in week 6 of 8 weeks by the way. ^^

    The constant saying that Samurai is abusing the game is keeping many members from coming here, although you do not bash the "individual player" by name, you do call out the individual players of Samurai saying their are only a few good ones and the rest are just hiding :p also my comments have been directed at Mouth, not yourself, because only the player with penalties on outside defense and yourself seem to be able to contribute to a game without meta's. The rest is just "mud slinging" :)

    My apologies for helping to hijack your thread:)

    I do recall you doing the same thing in the battle reports thread, although that was far worse completely derailing the thread.


    I like the players I have met in the META and worked with... they are good people, and yet constantly get smashed on the forum. I am tired of it and will stand up for them, most won't even make a forum account because of players like you constantly attacking them. It is really sad when players tell me things like that.

    I did want to fight the meta and I did fight them, but you didn't see me bashing them in the forum despite me disagreeing with meta's. Now I've joined one, so yes, I will support my team while I am apart of it. Not sure about you, but no matter who I play with I support. That's just me, I am here for fun, friending as many people as I can here. I already made a few that I have started playing with on other servers and agreed to join next round of kingdoms...

    I am also trying to learn how to play kingdoms, just like you, Alb, and everyone else that is apart of this BETA.

    And now you want to name bash me...? Ha, funny, I don't mind but "mouth" suites you, since its all you run here and in game apparently.


    Nobody who is new likes to be farmed or raided or catapulted constantly. I receive messages from new players quite often requesting to join and asking help because some player with a few hundred pop is catapulting them for no reason..... Meta's make players feel safe, even if they do not offer anything for defense... players in the game see they are part of an alliance with lots of players and will go catapult someone else who looks easier.... METAs usually are for show because you cannot defend hundreds of players no matter how large you are or your army is...


    "bunch of crying" - yeah right. its not like we have no insight in the way the game is allowed to be played. its just the lack of style.

    and when we are at it: i recall checking your profile early on, there was a "fightthemetas" tag in it. you apparantly took it out after joining one. no further comment necessary.

    I was fighting Samurai early on, my offense medals are from dead "SAMURAI7" players, which is a dead alliance.

    I was fighting the META, then after a disagreement between the members of USP/nLc/builders (my previous alliance and its wings) I split with several players, we farmed builders, we farmed USP, and we farmed nLc... all of them deleted/quit the server. and we joined a new group starting Samurai6, we all shared the same views and got a long well so I decided to play with them.

    If that bugs you so much, clearly you are crying over the METAs. I can choose who I want to play with and who I do not.

    Alb doesn't have a "lack of style" he is playing a whole new style, and it outclassed yours, clearly.

    Who are you in-game anyways? I have never heard of "mouthoftgr" yet you follow my profile apparently.


    These are not the biggest METAs of Travian. On US servers their was no limit, they don't even consider an alliance a META unless it is 10 or more alliances.

    As far as I can see the idea of defense limitation and resource limitation from outside the main alliance is the first real good idea coming from everyone here. The rest is a bunch of crying at Alb about his "unfair" advantage of playing the game how it allows it to be played.

    As far as I can see SAMURAI - SAMURAI6 - SAMURAI0 and maybe RONIN are the only real wings.

    I farm the little useless samurai alliances, they just through the name up to scare some players.... Yet they have never sent a wing/nap or message to my alliance... as far as I can see the alliances I mentioned Kings and generals work really well together, we have groups planning for WW already and current server goals. We are coordinating consolidations and making preparations for the future. We have individuals controlling different groups so coordination is maintained throughout most or all of our zones/areas.

    Please come up with something useful instead of crying that Alb is abusing the game, because he has broken 0 rules.

    As far as the defense idea...: 80% is a little to drastic, I'd say a 50% is fine, it makes nobody want to send troops because of the troop loss, yet still makes it somewhat of an option to use teamwork.

    -Lord Death