Posts by PaultheGaul

amazing update! Some huge fixes mentioned here including for things that people were abusing. Hopefully these fixes work and we see more like this!

Quote from Kragh/Dan

I vote for X5N

you're missing a huge variable though - what time zone?

As long as it's US time zone based I am onboard

Quote from leo#EN(19)

If you move your hero to defend another village or provide another village a temp boost in resources, does it change where robbers spawn? That could get wonky.

I had this exact same problem last round. Wound up using option 2. Later on in the game I shifted to option 1 when wheat became an issue.

I will think on this and maybe come back with any additional comments.

I have had a few people mention this concern to me.

But my understanding was that a Robber Hideouts details are determined once you clear the robber. So you should not have to worry Robber Hideout spawning in the wrong village if you are just moving hero around.

Is this incorrect?

Quote from leo#EN(19)

One missing pro is the defense of the kingdom being able to see attacks on your hammer village.

Ah good point! This is definitely a pro to option 1,2 and 4

Edit: I reached out to Support and received confirmation on the Robber Hideouts, and so this swapping Hero should not be a problem.

Quote from Black Swan

Yes, this is correct. The robbers spawn time, and coordinates get set up at the moment when the previous ones disappear from the map.

Hello,

I believe that it would be beneficial to make it so Robber Hideouts spawn by your Hero's Home Village instead of your Capital Village. I see 2 good reasons to change it and I can't think of any reasons to not.

First, most people don't attack Robber Hideouts without their hero - it's just not a fiscally responsible - especially with the new Natar Horn changes, this also may help indicate to players who don't use their Heroes for Robbers to begin to, and possibly even convince them purchase a Natar Horn; there's your CBA.

Second and most importantly in my opinion, it negatively affects some players currently! For example, take a defensive governor; the main reason you have any offensive troops at all is for Robber Hideouts and Robber Camps. Now let's say you are maybe a bit casual of a player, and maybe were not fortunate enough to have secured a nice cropper in your kingdom's borders, and now unfortunately your cropper is 10 squares away from your kingdom's borders and hopefully not further...

In my opinion, this scenario above leaves you with 3 options:

1. Train offensive troops in only 1 village inside borders -
   1. Pros: You can get some Robber Camps OR clear Robber Hideouts with ease. Only have one offensive army to feed.
   2. Cons: Your sieges to Robber Hideouts will be horrendously long and so you will never get Robber Camps unless you take larger losses (or need more offensive troops) on Robber Hideout attacks.
2. Train offensive troops in a village inside borders AND your capital -
   1. Pros: You get to both siege Robber Hideouts AND get some Robber Camps
   2. Cons: Have to feed and train 2 armies, this interferes with your plans to be an defensive player and usually people with less time choose to be defensive players and unfortunately casual players are unlikely to get any Robber Camps to be honest.
3. Train offensive troops in only your capital -
   1. Pros: Clear Robber Hideouts with ease. Only have one offensive army to feed.
   2. Cons: Very unlikely that you will be able to siege your Robber Hideouts AND get a single Robber Camp.

All 3 of these options have their sacrifices and are not ideal. But I believe that by changing the rule to spawn Robber Hideouts by the Hero's Home Village we can add a 4th and better option which allows the player to train small offense troops in 1 village in borders to both siege Robber Hideout's AND clear a Robber Camp or 2.

• Train offensive troops in only 1 village inside borders -
  • Pros: You get the ability to siege Robber Hideouts and keep a minimal offensive army size. You also get an increased chance at getting some Robber Camps since your hero will be home in reasonable times. Most players will not notice a difference that this change even took affect.
  • Cons: I can't think of any...

What do you think? Can you think of any cons to this change above?

Thanks,

Paul

In hindsight of some of the wild comments on this thread; I'd like to clarify my opinion...

I agree that this game is seeing a decline in players and some change to make the game more exciting for the majority of players is necessary.

There are some really interesting and good ideas mentioned here, and I agree with direction towards smaller kingdoms and more involved players. Unfortunately though, these ideas need a lot of fine tuning.

Quote from Jak

p.s. thanks for remembering the def points to my knowledge the record is still waiting to be broken on any x1 server

Challenge accepted?

Quote from Jak

again with so many other great teams involved too

Humbled to have been part of these great servers.

Quote from Jak

Instead of having a Union happen at 30 days,

I'd like to request a server without any Union happening ever.

1 King & 2 dukes just the same.

But instead of the Kings being fixed in place at day 30, they would be locked in place from day 1 (this would stop a lot of abuse around making temp kings)

Even worth considering whether King & Dukes should be locked in as soon as the kingdom is formed (making leaders make more responsible choices in the early days)

Union is good for bringing 60-100 players together easily, but really it just gives a bigger area faster, making it easy for meta's & premades to easily get ridiculously Op a lot quicker than a "New" kingdom ever will.

also it would make it harder to recruit as many players & thus keep kingdoms smaller

Union gives 3-4 extra treasuries(with the borders they create) & they give a boost to treasures for VPs,

but I see a benefit in both those things Not happening to help balance the level of play on the battlefield.

Display More

I'm not sure what abuse around making temp kings you are referring to, but I don't think that locking in a king from Day 1 would be a viable option.

It seems to me that this would cause even fewer kings to spawn and a big problem with being outside of borders and selling stolen goods.

Does this also take away the ability to abdicate all together? Can a King become a someone's duke?

I agree that smaller kingdoms would make the game more exciting for all players, I'd just hate to see them have to take away some functioning mechanics.

Is there another way to get the players to not form such large boring kingdoms without taking away and instead by adding or adjusting something?

Is it simply that the King/Leadership role is too difficult and too much responsibility while the governor's role is too easy and uninvolved?

Hello,

I would like to be able to see and accept all of the trades in the Marketplace "Buy" tab that are being listed from my account's other villages.

My assumption is that there is some anti-pushing logic involved in the Marketplace that restricts who and how many trades you can see.

I can't see any reason why this restriction is currently in place for trades within the same account.

It becomes difficult to manage 15+ villages as a def player who is training troops in every village. I spend a lot of time going through each village and training troops and trading the remaining resources on the Marketplace.

Often times, I will have the resources available in my capital to trade with myself - unfortunately I am not currently able to see anywhere near the amount of trades I have listed.

Thanks,

Paul

Quote from kirkata#EN

simply more waves less camps does not fix the problem...instead of 60 camps if it spawn 30 with 10 waves each that mean most of them will be taken by gauls with TT's or nearest city's.

I'm not understanding your reasoning for why this wouldn't work... The "taken by gauls with TT's or nearest city's" is happening already. So you're saying by shortening the total number of camps and increasing the waves this will cause this problem to increase? Lowering the number of camps also lowers the potential benefit of splitting your army right? The current rule is only 1 attack per camp per account, but when there are many camps with few waves this is why we see players splitting their armies.

Also, the problem with your math here is you've left out a key component - the number of players in the kingdom... And I did not state what I think the right balance is, only that maybe it could be rebalanced to remedy this issue.

Quote from kirkata#EN

with less camps and more waves unit count in them will be increased aswell

This is definitely a valid concern and something they would have to validate that it wouldn't grow exponentially before implementing, but that sounds like something that could also be fixed by a simple formula adjustment.

Quote from kirkata#EN

That's why i said leave them as it is just restrict that 1 camp with 5 waves cant have more then 5 attacks

I think this is definitely a potential solution. This would help solve the wave sniping but doesn't resolve the greedy player who splits their army to take the most stolen goods.

This is something that is not really in the game currently, so this would be an entirely new mechanic they'd have to build. However, they have recently been testing the max attack limits on player to player so maybe that is laying the foundation for this change.

What if there was simply less Robber Camps and an increase in amount of waves per camp?

It seems the problem could stem from improper balance of an existing mechanic and there is already a limit of 1 wave per camp per person.

i know

Quote from Алёнка Алкашка

If you fail, then the game can be closed.

I think this is the exact opposite of what we'd want.

We're not asking for the game to be abandoned - we want it to be further developed.

Hopefully we can get TG to reconsider how their budgeting and balancing their team to favor developers.

Quote from Sca7ha

I would honestly like to know how many developers TK has. If Is it not just an illusion of German propaganda hidden behind a gaming company (jk). 👍

Even here on the forum I miss the old moderators (/wave Georgi), who also had some internal information. The BridgetB administrator is probably on vacation as well. It's a pity that the BIRTHDAY server was such a trash.

But the amount of gold for non-paying players was cool (for multiaccounts ofc too). 👌

This is a valid question that I have as well.

From what I've seen in some videos and such, they seem to have an excessive amount of artists. Which is why I assume we keep seeing the same capabilities just being re-skinned.

I assume they have developers who added some configurable options to the servers so that anyone can make some simple modifications, then sent the bulk of the developers away/

At least, this is how I've seen businesses run in the past when having custom applications built and seems to be what we're seeing here.

I believe he means Quest Book new Quest like this:

pasted-from-clipboard.png

Makes no difference. you can literally write the code for them and it wont matter. Kingdoms has no developers left who would know what to do with it. Just a bunch of CSR's with configurable options for servers.

Wow! Some interesting theories here that I have never heard before.

Travian keeps the specific formula a secret. But as mentioned by Qwr, it is well known that the troops in the Robber Hideouts will scale based on your army size.

Quote from Unknown

The point removal itself was done after a big discussion with the community.

In my opinion, in this case it is actually normal that is this way.

Normally the offensive players are much bigger and stronger than typical defensive players. So, as in guerrilla warfare, the only way to try and get ahead for defensive players is, doing as you say, hiding in the shadows and strike against smaller groups, since they could not take head on in open battle field the armies of big offensive players.

But that doesn't mean it is one sided or that offensive players are at a disadvantage. You have a way to counter that defensive guerrilla warfare. By simply scouting before attacking, you know what defenses are waiting for you and you can decide how much force to send in order to defeat it...
So, in reality, you as offensive player are still in control, as if you do the right way, you will still win every single time, either that or decide not to strike that particular village and just send your troops to another undefended one.

So, even as it is now, offensive players still have a way to come out on top, and it is not a complicated one.

Display More

From my recollection, the reason for removing the points was to stop awarding the spikers with Top Defender medals. Just stop and think about that for a moment - clearly there is some belief that it was not an intended playstyle.

The idea of spiking really takes away from the purpose a Farm List. What's the point in paying for a Farm List if I can not use it?

I can't even spy with my farm list, you expect me to manually spy 300 villages? But anyways, these spikers find greys with the hero + chicken boots and scouts at home anyways. I can't believe you are suggesting to scout every target before attacking.

I'm not sure if anyone here who is defending a spiker has ever built a WW hammer before - but Time is something you can not get back in Travian

Why should some casual player who trained 500 phalanx overnight get an advantage over me, a big spender, who has Golded my villages from day 1 to get Great Stable/Barracks running early paired with 24/7 active raiding? I cleared that village and made that player quit 1 month ago.

Day after Day- I am ensuring my barracks, stables, and workshop never run empty. Ensuring my massive insanely negative crop production does not starve my units. Doing calculations to ensure my losses are not significant and timely.... As you can see the theme is here is time and work - there is no reasonable amount of effort I can make to counter a spiker even if I wanted to in the current state.

Don't sit on the fence - give them defense points back to make them identifiable if you agree with spiking, or, find some other way to deter spikers.

What is the age of the server? And how much are you raiding currently? How do you compare to the rank 10 raider?

If you look at some record hammers on 1x servers , you can calculate that even the best players are not able to start running their workshop level 20 until day 15-21. Great barracks and Great stables generally don't kick in until a fair bit later.

If you're a Teuton looking to make a WW Rammer, if you build with clubs you can actually start pretty late and still build a very respectable army. Just make sure to start that workshop early

Quote from Unknown

Thank you PaultheGaul let me ask to make sure I understand it correctly.

What you want is that clicking Enter, it saves automatically, right?

So when you add a message, not to have to click another button, but just an Enter. Right?

Correct! Currently, once that form is open: you have to click inside the text field , type your text, then click on the save button.

With this small change you could start typing as soon as the form opens and just press "enter" key to act as the "save" button

Unfortunately every game has it's "trolls"

Try not to let them bother you, adjust your strategy if you must.

But don't waste your time with talking to them - it will only encourage the behavior.

They will never accomplish anything respectable with their strategy and they probably only do it because they can't compete with the others.