Posts by Thorsson

    It is not a harsh move, it is a dumb move. I lost a fight, i don't want those that attacked me to be able to keep farming me too.

    I imagine they would say the opposite - having done the hard work they'd like to enjoy the rewards...

    The idea that truce would stop new players from quitting imo is just wrong, people who do that probably don't have what it takes to complete a round anyways. Of course it might help few players here and there but that's not something outweighs the drawbacks in my opinion



    Maybe that's just not true and I'm talking out of my ass though

    Maybe, but I agree, it's certainly not the most common cause. I do believe it is one cause, but will these people (those who get farmed and give up) ever become Travian players? It's a tough game and other people are actively trying to spoil your day.


    I've played 5 servers to the end now (2 on my Australian account - it's a long story) and also quit a couple. One was because I got busy and had no time and the other I decided I didn't like the people running my Kingdom. I've come near to quitting a couple of times for game reasons, but I always knuckle down and give it a go.

    @Thorsson Perhaps I worded that poorly or you just have a different opinion. I personally think fighting it out with your mates and playing till the end even if you can't win is lot better than just going grey after the first splat, at least so long as the actions you take make sense.
    Well at least compared to the other 2 groups I mentioned being the quitters and the angry guys who take the game too personally.

    Or perhaps my understanding was lacking. Certainly it's better to fight than go grey.

    There is a point in this. Perhaps there could be some kind of vasal deal. You could give tribute for peace to kingdom or a seperate pool. This would encourage the stronger players to stop attacking and get resos. Again this is a bit wierd for veterans but it would leave a window open for new players who get ganked like mentioned by thread creator.

    Sounds like something that would be all too easy to game. You have a way out now; the weaker Kingdom can join the stronger, which funnily enough echoes what would have happened historically.

    Just remember the days when you are still the runt of the little, you got bullied often, no player in travian never got bullied in attacks.

    Nope. Never happened. I read the forums, read a couple of guides, knew I needed to join a good Alliance, so I asked nicely. Showed I was active and wanted to learn and listened to the more experienced players.


    @Curtain I have no respect for those who get farmed rather than join a Kingdom. If you're a good King then by all means set up a Kingdom and fight, but if it's just about your ego then you deserve everything you get.

    A NAP is different from the truce that I imagine, A truce is a like a function within the game that restricts you from attacking the kingdom you are in truce with. (like from players being banned). This will last for maybe 3 days.

    Are you saying that you want one side to be able to call the truce single-handedly, or that you want the truce to be a bit like beginner's protection, where they are unable to attack each other? I don't think the former is fair and I can't see the latter working - why would the stronger side agree to it?

    Hey! Have you ever played in a server where you got in a fight with another kingdom and you lost, then that kingdom simply farm you till you quit?

    Do it unto them before they do it unto thee.


    You can already call a Truce, it's called a NAP.


    As to the scores, what's the point? It's not hard to work out of you're winning or losing - either they have no troops or you have no troops. :)

    back then, the europeans didnt consider africans as humans, they considered them as below to humans.

    The Romans thought that everyone was below them.


    As to "africans", Africa is a large place and I doubt any Roman saw more than a fraction of it. It was the place that beasts came from to appear in the Colosseum. I doubt that most gave much thought to the peoples outside of the Egyptians - do you have any documentation that evidences your claim?


    The Teutons probably weren't even aware of Africa.

    I looked at the stats of the new tribes on TL and thought that neither looked as attractive as existing tribes and nor did they introduce anything new to the game.


    Seems a bit pointless if the same thing happened here.

    We've just been in this position. Luckily we didn't take too long to decide that our King was a useless sponger (a couple of weeks), but still, we dropped from being one of the top alliances (top 5 in every metric) to being well down the lists; plus of course the other issues (most already identified). Seeing as the rest of us were the ones that had done all the hard work (captured treasures, persuaded others to join, etc) it seems wrong that the King should be left with all the scores, a big chunk of treasures, etc. when all he'd done was collect tributes (when he could be bothered).


    To sum up, yes it shouldn't stop you dumping the King, but what happens to the Kingdom is essentially unfair. I agree with the OP; if the King is removed by a vote then the King gets kicked and the biggest Duke becomes King, just like if he'd deleted.

    Agree with Curtain that early doors Scale is very useful, because you will likely take lots of small damage from adventures, clearing oases, and then clearing out the small inactives around you so you can farm them. The alternative, if you get lucky or have lots of silver, is to get regen and either breastplate or chainmail - this will allow you to fight more often without needing piles of ointments, which are always very expensive in the auction early game.