Posts by Scorox

    One more thing that should be considered regarding this proposal.


    Not every location will now be viable as a a good 15C capital. Oases Bonus will still be a key determinant when deciding were to place your capital and start increasing the number of Farmlands. So there will still be contested locations on the map ( Sheila ).

    Thanks for sharing @Starx !


    I still wonder though if there are some kind of "spill-over" mechanic that pushed some people choosing a certain quadrant over to the adjacent quadrant if the one they choose is to "full". This is at least what I remember happening on one server to the team I was in.

    No mate. Be2 wrote "North means basically "more in the positive y direction than in any x direction". This is not what I'm saying. What I'm saying is completely different.


    And you are saying: "And when you select North, you can end in all Northern places:" .... well yes this is what I'm saying. But the argument here is about where the North is. And to this point I wanted to prove you wrong.


    you also say: "We did many tests last year choosing 'East' and we ended up in East (area 50/0)" ... some times you will end up here according to my theory. But according to my experience this is still the "theoretical south". BUT, if you did in fact choose East and got placed in (+ X/- Y) .. then I am wrong I guess. According to my experience you should never get -Y selecting East.

    Robbel & Be2-e4 . My experience differs from what you are saying. Each time I have selected North I end up towards the -50/0 WW .. either a little bit or a lot to either the "left" or "right of the line drawn between the -50/0 and the 50/0 WW. Similarly, when selecting south I have in the past always ended up towards the 50/0 WW. So my conclusion was that the North/South axis was between these 2 WWs.


    Just to double check my past experiences I registered on COM4 and COM5 just now. I selected North. Here are the results.

            


    My conclusion: (in terms of [Xcoord / Ycoord])

    North: [ Negative / No Restriction]

    South: [ Positive / No Restriction]

    West: [ No Restriction / Negative ]

    East: [ No Restriction / Positive ]


    This means that you are placed in a "Half" of the map.

    Dear all,


    Sheila have started a Vote in the thread: [discussion] 15cropper – your feedback is needed

    Since this thread now is closed I make this new thread to allow us to ask a few questions.

    To kick it off, here are my questions.

    a) What is a main village? Do you mean a capital?

    b) Assuming that you mean main = capital .... what the **** is going on? Obviously you cannot remove the option of making your 15C your capital? .... I'm speechless.

    c) Sheila could you please promote to the community to go and vote in the [Farmer Building] - Vote for 15C game mechanic thread? Some times the community may in fact have some good ideas..


    Sorry for appearing as an annoying complainer attempting to back-seat drive.. its your game. But don't you see that removing the option of making a cropper your capital removes 90% value of a cropper? You have previously stood your ground saying that 15C's should be something rare and highly contested... this new idea goes directly against this statement. I'm also kind of confused to why you choose to name it "main" instead of capital, and why you closed the thread. Anyway, speaking out of frustration, please excuse me.
    Thanks.

    There is no reason for the delay because this can't actually be called 'delay' at all. The announcements are being made as soon as the dates for the next servers are determined. In order for us to announce the servers earlier, they need to be planned and decided on earlier which involves a lot of people in the HQ and is not as easy as it sounds to improve this process and speed it up. We're giving you as much updates on this as possible, but at the time there is no further information we have to share.

    Ok, thanks again. But what I think we meant with delay was not the Delay of Announcement .. but rather the Delay of "determining" the launch dates of the next servers, and subsequently handing this information over to the people responsible of Announcing the decision. But it seems kind of odd that the people at HQ would at this point in time just shrug their shoulders saying "I don't know...." in response to someone asking "Hey, what about these COM1, COM6, and COM2 servers? .. " .. I mean, what can outsiders like us deduct from the delay of the "decision" other the speculations of short term business strategy or, alternatively, some sort of neglect.


    (I posted this before seeing BridgetB 's post .. which really clarified the situation I think. Thanks a lot.)

    Hey there Scorox

    I can assure you that this is not the case and the team is in no way delaying announcements on purpose. We're posting them as soon as the dates have been decided on and are working to do that even faster. Your feedback is appreciated and was already forwarded to the responsible people :)

    Best regards
    Georgi


    Georgi thanks for the fast reply. But, if you can assure us that the announcement is not delayed on purpose... then the only conclusion one can come to is that you know the reason for the delay, which if not being on purpose has to be caused by some unintended or unforeseen event. I'm sorry if I jumped the guns here, hopefully no one in your team have gone seriously ill or something like that. Anyway, sorry for bothering you with this... it all just seem so 8| without any update on the situation.

    Hi guys,

    unfortunately we don't have any dates for February yet but I'll let you know as soon as information becomes available. We know that you'd like to have the upcoming worlds lists earlier and our team is still working to improve the process and make it happen :)

    Best regards
    Georgi

    Georgi I don't want to the the guy spreading negativity around .. but can you please try to speak some sense into your Business Department on the behalf of us loyal fans of the game? It makes no sense to delay the announcement of the dates of launch in this way. The only explanation we as customers can see is that the Business side of this great game is trying to eat its own tail, trying to push players to get impatient and buy some gold on Speed and Local servers before you announce the COMx1 server(s). It's kind of humiliating to us players if this is indeed the case.


    /Scorox.

    Curtain wrote:

    I would like to chip regarding the whole "only clays, crops and forests" thing. I would just enable them all purely because it's better balance otherwise the capital meta will just be to settle a 3 iron field site for maximum gains.

    Yes, maybe that is the better option. Thanks Curtain .


    Curtain wrote:

    Also I don't think the field revert is needed if the capital changes (be it because of attack or because of you switching it). You can pretty trivially price out the "I will make 2 croppers" option from players

    Yes, you are most likely correct here too.

    Do not care for the idea.

    How about more 9c and 15c

    How about introducing some luck into the game play. LIke 9c that show up randomly on days 11 to 21 in forest locations.

    How about a Crop Builder Building that can up a 9c to a 15 c.

    How about capitals that go away when a player goes gray or 10 days after the player goes gray.

    Dawg420#NO I actually made the same proposal. Please check out the vote on this subject here: [Farmer Building] - Vote for 15C game mechanic

    Basically agree to transform a normal Villa into a cropper Villa. But why only in the capital? And what happens if capital changes?


    Additionally there should be a tool that 1 res field (lumber, clay, stone) could be transformed in any other res field (lumber, clay, stone). This would make more sense when claiming oasis and not being in first position. Like this, the FARMER would be a powerful item / building.


    Thanks for taking your time to comment Xenaydo#DE .


    Why only in your capital?

    The reason why I personally would like to see Croppers only being possible to obtain in Capitals is because the croppers should be something special. Furthermore, the Farmer will probably be very expensive, so it will really only make sense to build it in your Capital where fields can be upgraded beyond level 12. Capitals can furthermore not be chiefed, which hinder abuse of one player using multi accounts to prepare croppers from his main account to chief.


    What if you change capital?

    Just as with other Capital restricted buildings the Farmer building will be lost if you change capital. Also fields upgraded to a higher level than 10 or 12 will be reduced to level 12 if it is a city, and to level 10 if it is a village. With the Farmer lost, and the Capital village status gone, the clay pits and forests will again come back as there are no farmer to maintain the new Farm lands.


    What if your Farmer Building gets destroyed?

    As long as your village or city is a capital, all progress made by the farmer in terms of transforming Forests and Clay pits to Farm lands will remain if the Farmer building gets destroyed. Should you lose your farmer at level 7 you would need to rebuild it to level 8 in order to transform your nest Forest and Clay pit to a Farm land.


    Why not have the option to freely "Terra-form" between all 4 resource types?

    This is for a few different reasons. First being because I think it contradicts logic to be able to transform a forest into a mountain. Even removing a mountain and replacing it with a clay pit does little sense. It would be good to maintain some logic and reasonable connection to reality. Secondly, free terra-forming appear to have been discussed and dismissed by the Travian Dev Team as Sheila mentions in the quote below. The Developer Team fear it will create a "Noon Trap" to allow players to terra-form freely among all Res Types.

    Yes, the idea of terraforming the resource fields has been brought up and discussed thoroughly. This would be a huge game changer. After evaluating the pros andcons, our conclusion is that we will keep the resource fields as they are. The15c or even 9c should keep their importance and be rare on the map to keep themas valuable targets. Also, it could be noob trap and players might specializein producing one resource not thinking about consequences such a decision hason the whole round.

    Background

    A while back there was a discussion about the problems of the relocation of 15 croppers (link: Relocating 15-Croppers). In this thread an idea was discussed, which basically was to letting players themselves have the "expensive" but available option to over time transform the resource fields into farm lands. This thread eventually died down as the problem of relocating 15Cs were fixed. However, a new problem with 15Cs took its place, namely that players are using multi accounts to fast settle 15Cs with no intention of using them, with the sole intent of blocking others from using these 15Cs. As a response, game designer @Sheila have come forward with a new idea about the 15C dynamic (link: [discussion] 15cropper – your feedback is needed ). Although I did write my proposal in Sheila's thread, I think it would be interesting to see how you all feel about the idea I proposed there using this poll. So thank you if you decided to participate.


    Proposed Mechanics

    - All tiles on the map starts as 4446, 3447, 4347, 4437, and the "5346" variations.

    - Natar villages still exists as they do today.

    - Oases exist and works as they do today.

    - A new Building called "Farmer" is added to the game. It can only be built in your capital.

    - The farmer is able to transform Clay pits and Forests to Farm lands.

    - The number of Clay pits and Forests it can transform depends on the building's level.

    - [Example] For each level between level 1 and 10 the farmer can transform 1 Clay pit or Forest a Farm land.

    - [Optional] For each level between level 11 and 20 the farmer gives a bonus to crop production (Like the Mill or Bakery).

    - The farmer is a very expensive building, but it allows anyone whom can afford it to obtain a "cropper" over time.


    Re-using some of the games old art, and adding some stuff myself, I made an example of how this building could look.

    farmer2.png


    With this idea we can hopefully see a few desired outcomes. No more internal drama about who in your group will get the 15Cs, no more race to the 15Cs, and not more "theifs" of the 15C's by multi account cheaters. It's simple and plain, are you active enough to afford it, you'll get one eventually.



    Thanks you for taking your time to vote :thumbup: or :thumbdown:

    I would just again like to make a final push for the "Farmer" or "Terra-former" idea. Reading though the old suggestion thread for this idea I'll outline the key point of this idea below:


    Mechanics

    - All tiles on the map starts as 4446, 3447, 4347, 4437.

    - Natar villages still exists as they do today.

    - Oases exist and works as they do today.

    - A new Building called "Farmer" is added to the game. It can only be built in your capital.

    - The farmer is able to transform Clay pits and Forests to Farm lands.

    - The number of Clay pits and Forests it can transform depends on the building's level.

    - [Example] For each level bet level 1 and 10 the farmer can transform 1 Clay pit or Forest a Farm land.

    - [Optional] For each level bet level 11 and 20 the farmer gives a bonus to crop production (Like the Mill or Bakery).

    - The farmer in a very expensive building, but it allows anyone whom can afford it to obtain a "cropper" over time.


    Re-using some of the games old art, and adding some stuff myself, I made an example of how this building could look.

    farmer2.png



    This is the idea I absolutely feel would be the best for the game. No more internal drama about who in your group will get the 15Cs, no more race to the 15Cs, and not more "theifs" of the 15C's by multi account cheaters. It's simple and plain, are you active enough to afford it, you'll get one eventually.


    If you wish you can vote on this idea here: [Farmer Building] - Vote for 15C game mechanic

    I dislike the adding of even more PvE to a PvP game. It would be cool and interesting, no doubt, but it just doesn't fit in a PvP game. You would have to spend a decent chunk of the already short gameround to get your cropper, you have to blow a lot of troops into robbers, every now and then even more robber (camps) appear and then there's the natarian 15c. If you want to make a PvE game in the style of Travian fine, I'd probably test it, if it's fun play it, but don't force even more PvE changes to a PvP game with a PvP community - please.


    Be2-e4 , this post hits the nail right on the head for me. I could not agree more. Thanks

    Curtain wrote:

    Personally I think there could be other options that could be explored to limit the 15c rush (like say some ideas from earlier threads like cultivating/terraforming your own fields or capital auto turning into the type you want or something).

    Ye this was the one I meant too. This would be great. No more rushing and internal drama over 15C's ... and anyone who invest the necessary time and effort can build a 9C, 12C or 15C.

    Personally I do not care so much for NPC interactions, but removing the "short" race to 15 croppers is something I really like! :thumbsup:


    The only problem I see would potentially be the drama which could occur among players who both are setting up support villages around an Natar/NPC 15C with the hopes of chiefing it. More players will "prepare" for the 15Cs (over an extended time) than will in the end become an owner of one. Loosing the race just a few hours short to your competitor after preparing for several days can have a raging effect on many players.


    @Sheila Was the idea that was up on the forum a while back about letting players themselves "upgrade/modify" their capital to more crop fields and less resource fields up for discussion at any point among the dev team?