lmao, Fallensteller auf Speed sind einfach funny. xD
(Um auch etwas Aufklärungsarbeit für Nicht-Gallier-Spieler zu leisten: Auf 3x Speed kann ein einzelner Fallensteller 3x so viele Fallen besitzen, also 1200 pro Gebäude, statt den üblichen 400.)
Wie heißt dein Account? Frage für einen Freund, der da nicht reinlaufen will.
Seite nicht gefunden
Die von Ihnen angeforderte Seite wurde nicht gefunden. Bitte überprüfen Sie die Adresse oder gehen Sie zurück auf die Startseite.
I often notice, that people mistake a ban for a punishment. Kingdoms staff bans you, because they need to force you to talk with them about the ban. If you do so, you get unbanned after a punishment, e.g. building level reduction. (I guess in case of multiaccounting only one account gets unbanned and the rest deleted). Players that are banned for a long period of time just didn't contact Kingdoms staff about their ban.
Source: Travian Kingdoms (§7 gamerules)
They recently reworked that process in Travian: Legends though, there an appropriate punishment gets applied automatically 72 hours after the ban, but the account can accept the punishment earlier (and therefore being unbanned earlier). Pretty cool imo, would love to see something similar in TK aswell, although personally I didn't experience banned-player-clot so far basically at all.
wieso kann man im königreich nicht die berichte der Räuberverstecke sehen wie bei t4 wo man jeden angriff der allianz mitglieder sehen konnte warum geht das hier nicht?
Ist ein wenig historisch gewachsen. Ganz früher brauchtest du keine Einladung, sondern bist automatisch in einem KR gewesen, als du auf der Karte gespawnt bist. Das ist natürlich eine offene Einladung für gegnerische Allianzen, Accounts zu erstellen, die im Gegner-KR liegen, damit man die Berichte lesen kann. Deswegen werden Berichte nicht so freizügig geteilt wie in T:L (und das, was du automatisch geteilt siehst, nämlich Angriffe von Gegnern in deinem KR, ist recht zensiert). Aber jo, so super viel Sinn macht das nicht, v.a. wenn der Gegner selbst eh einen vollen Bericht bekommt.
Everyone's mentality and understanding of play is different.
I'm sure if you knew a non-tech/multi playstyle, that current tribes severly lack the ability to execute, you would have posted it.
Just because you like the game this way, it doesn't make sense to keep it the same. Other races don't have to be in every game world. How can a night game world be separate. The game world of their race may be separate. Who wants to play the game world where new races come, who want to play the normal game world.
If you split up the community for every wish that occurs in the forums, TG would have to start one gameworld per day, each of which has 0-1 players. Kingdoms just does not have the player counts to be able to afford making many different servers to satisfy everyone. I would agree if Kingdoms had like 15k players per game world. But it doesn't, so I don't.
Night truce for instance did this. There are several players playing mainly (or only) night truce and several playing mainly (or only) non-night truce. So they kind of split the community. I know it's a bit of an overlapping split, but even if I'm generous and say 70% of players play night truce and 70% of players play non-night truce (so 40% play both) and even if I'm even more generous and say through the options there are 20% more players, efficiently you shrunk the player base by ~15% per servertype.
If you do that for each and every community wish, you end up with servers of like 1/5th the size. Also with a huge mess, because it will be hard to keep track of which servers has which features.
You might think "but if we do it only for new tribe servers ...", but no, what qualifies new tribes for that, but not other wishes like e.g. reverting Kingdoms-Alliance-Merge, adding hardlimits to kingdom sizes or removal of farmdeffing? Nothing.
This brings huge disadvantages to the defender. As there is nothing you can do to try scouting others attack during truce period
You can scout during truce (and the scouts will scout, not just visit).
There is a reason, why cities give max resource level 12 - that way they roughly produce twice as many resources as two villages (which is their counterpart).
Cities are intended as alternative to two villages and are currently quite fine from infrastructural balance. They give resources from 2 villages with much less effort, but less culture points IF you party in every village's townhall. So they're a very solid alternative for less active players. (Water ditch sucks especially with bunkermeta though, gotta mention that somewhere.)
Doubling the max level of each building for cities is probably the most overpowered idea that I have read in the forums at all so far. And I bet you did not think that through at all.
- Doubling max resource field level would basically make every city another capital
- Warehouse level 40 would cost 28.4 million resources (for 40th level alone) and have a capacity of 5.8 million resources (plus minus something).
- Barracks level 40 would produce ~8.22 times as many troops as a barracks level 40
- Academy level 40 most useful building xD
- Palace level 40 could train 7 chiefs
I could go on for a while, but I guess my point is clear. It just doesn't make sense at all. City's intention is an alternative to two villages and not to be a necessity to complete some buildings.
Honourable mention: You can build great barracks / stable only in cities.
I really miss the dislike button for threads like this. My stomach turns every time I read "I want to have egypts in Kingdoms", terrible tribe, terrible game design, just terrible.
That aside. If you want a new tribe, try finding a non-multi/techaccount playstyle, that doesn't have a proper tribe to execute yet. If you find one and it's a good one that adds positive experience to the game and that you can not possibly play with other tribes reasonably, think about how a new tribe would fulfill it. Adding content for the sake of adding content sucks and makes it even harder than it already is for new players to see through.
Also I don't agree at all that more experienced players would come back and enjoy the game, at least I doubt that these guys are more than the experienced guys that wouldn't play anymore because of it. Also how is it an "innovation" to take some existing tribe, change the unit icons + names, throw new numbers at it, add some building on top and call it a new tribe?
War doch sicher ne Hilfe, dich darauf hinzuweisen.
Aber ich spiel keine Nachtfriedenwelten, sorry.
At this point its all hypothetical...nobody can foresee what exactly are the results of this.
So your pro-arguments are foreseeable and a favourable result, but for my contra-arguments it's "nobody can foresee what exactly are the results of this"? I see.
F60.2 (GT link) chieffed his own "party" village around 8 times a day and ended with 33 villages
I am pretty sure that I chiefed villages even from other players and the parties were still running, but maybe I'm confusing it with Legends. However, if you destroy your village, the party is definitely gone aswell. xD
I did understand this correctly, that you want a village, that three players own simultaneusly, right?
*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.
1. No ... actually the contrary is the case, multiaccounting gets a massive boost by this. I could make three accounts and make an united village. Then I send all ress from my multies to that village and from that village to my villages to bypass pushing protection. But tbh I don't think multiaccounting should be a consideration when implementing game features (unless it's an extreme case obv).
2. Kings and dukes can currently do so by helping others with resources and def ... if they don't do it now, they won't do it with such a feature.
3. I guess that's kind of subjective. I would mainly find it rather funny than useful. Special buildings don't matter outside of capital (actually HDT does but only benefits roman troops anyway). I guess it would enable clubswinger-caesaris-hammers, didn't do the math on that but TKs are relatively weak, so I guess that would be strong af.
After reading your 2nd post, I realized you want 6 barracks/6 stables/3 workshops in there. Wtf? That's on a bunker-meta-level of broken. xD
4. No, not at all. Why would you even think that?
5. Which ones? I don't see anything new you can do with it (yes, club-caesaris-hammer, but building strong hammers is no new strategy).
6. Again, that's kind of subjective, but I agree, it would be very unique.
And why is it boring now? If anyone wants to use their armies during midgame it can be very entertaining.
Because playing defensively and not using hammers is ridiculously overpowered since the Kingdoms-Alliance-Merge. You have 1-2 villages per kingdom where 50k treasures are. Attack the kingdom = 99% def in the treasuries behind a level 20 water ditch and screw everything else that could possibly get attacked, because there is literally nothing relevant except these two giga-treasuries. Boring af.
If i remember right it doesn't reset party if u demolish/cata townhall. u can reset it only by re chieffin and then u can keep it as big party
Actually the opposite, if you zero a village, party resets; if you chief it, it doesn't reset. But 450k (+-) ress, settler training, settling time, all the work plus 20? gold per great celebration ... not nearly as op as just having 10 townhalls per village. xD
i'd like 20 merchants over a single trade office etc.
A trade office level 10 (5 for romans) already doubles your merchant capacity, for lower cost.
Removing palace/smithy/academy etc. isn't tin the questlog resulting in many newbies not realizing they don't need them after using them which usually result in them in croplocking themselves due to this problem
That sounds like a bolt and unreasonable claim, but I bet you have relieable source on this, which you will show. Also you can't croplock yourself, the game prevents that automatically.
Like if i want to have 10 parties running in a single city it could really focus a strategy and allow us to make specilist building.
That's absurd on multiple levels. Would definitely be funnily broken to have 90 townhalls in a 10 village account and settling twice per day. xD
The idea is to spear a building spot. The most gold consumer job is to play a hundred card games to get one additional building spot.
I got the idea, but the idea is just bad. Being able to manage buildings spots properly is a skill, that is required to make a decent account. I doubt that gold players use additional building slots in every side village, simply because it is not necessary. I never felt the need to use additional building spots in side villages at all and tbh I was fine in the capital aswell before the additional ones were introduced and I often don't even use them in hammer villages ... crop supply can easily be managed with trade routes aswell; also you can demolish academy and smithy when you're done researching and (if you have it) stuff like cranny, trapper, etc. to get more space if you urgently need it.
And worst case you can leave town hall out of the capital once you have a certain amount of villages, because capital parties will then only make a small percentage of your total culture production.
Celebrations are a huge advantage and offer a lot, so it does make perfect sense to require an additional building spot for them. Main building has nothing to do with generating culture points, but it's basically a place where the guys who contruct your buildings live. That's why building speed increases as you level up main building and also why you need certain MB levels for some buildings, as complicated buildings require more skilled builders.
Now everyone can celebrate from every village they have, speeding up the player’s growth. Player’s growing faster will make more troops, more troops will lead to better wars, and better wars will make the game more interesting for players. More interested a player is in a game, the more likely he is to spend money and buy gold. More money a player spends, more money Travian kingdoms make. Hope you see the benefits there.
Why not merge all buildings into the main building? Would save a lot of building space aswell, allow even quicker growth and would make the game even more "interesting" by your logic. Obviously, that logic is flawed.
If you want celebrations, you need to plan accordingly, if you can't, you don't get that juicy extra cp. I really don't see a point in rewarding players with such a huge advantage (ability to celebrate) for free. It just dumbs down the game and removes the ability to make a good decision and seeing the benefits of them. Not really a good thing in strategy games. Kingdoms is not only about troops and how you use them, but also how you set up a proper infrastructure required to train and supply these troops.