Posts by Imperial_COM

    It seems like the general consensus is that fealty would basically benefit veteran gold users, metas, and doesn't really help new players.


    To me a way to balance that out would be to put these bonuses not on the kingdom but rather on the treasuries, making it so kings and dukes pay very close attention to where they establish themselves and makes the stakes so much higher for defending treasuries. I personally don't like how for any big operations its super easy to take down treasuries and move treasures around. It may not be the perfect solution, but it would give the little guys more leverage in conducting offensive operations and also gives defenders an incentive to be active in their kingdom to prevent the loss of their local treasury and the fealty bonuses.

    We first have to define a Meta, because there is often quickly people screaming about Meta.


    This is a Meta:


    .


    The 3 allainces in your picture are actually the same Meta. The opposition didnt even make it in the ranks. But what you see in the picture is the endgame ally hop

    I think the biggest structural change that can prevent Meta's now is that in order for influence to work your kingdom needs to be connected, and with some more tweeks could prove to be the key. If allainces dont have incentives to work together then the next best option is war

    It all depends on what you want to do with your account. With how fast you can settle villages in kingdoms the 6c is the best way to grow with out using gold, if you put it right next to your spawn. If your planning on amassing large amounts of troops from the start and are willing to dish out some gold of course you will want the cropper.


    You just need to find what is best for your playstyle

    Alright, fair enough.


    But what is your point in bringing up the diffrence of culture points between kingdoms and Legends? Was it just to defend Chip? Apparently I need this spelled out

    Oh Ya? Maybe I'm reading this wrong?


    Hint: You can only conquer a village when the residence or palace is destroyed, you have enough culture points, the village you are attacking is not the capital and not the player's only village.


    That sure is a funny way of saying you dont need culture points.

    Sounds like someone is afraid of losing their villages? Hows your Test server Meta going? I never played Travian Legends but i hear that game operates without CP. If you enjoy the game Imperial dont be so cheap. Support the Travian Team with some gold purchases from time to time so the rest of us dont have to support you. These games aren't developed for free.

    Test server ended randomly. Not sure what happened.


    Don't trust your sources, they are wrong. You do need CP for new villages just like in Kingdoms. I know there is a similar game to Travian that did not need culture points, and its a horrible game for new players. I think Kingdoms was the developers attemt at keeping the unexperianced players around by a more interactive start.

    Imperial, it's polite in public. I tend to sit Chip's accounts, so I see the abuse he cops in private.


    And I will get round to putting up my thread on metas at some point in time, because I find some of the stances on this topic... interesting.

    Ohhh stop VVV your making me blush!! :love:


    I would suggest eliminating CP requirements for new villages. its not really possible to tkae over an enemies area the way it is. cut the CP requirements in half would make the game a lot more fun i think. Chiefing is the most fun part of the game but you cant really chief and enemy allaicne when it takes a week to get each village if you are fast.


    Talking about the worst thing that could happen to Travian ^^^. It would seem you are in favor of letting the gold addicts dominate the game even more so than they already can and do. :thumbdown:

    I've been around this game long enough to know what most people think of metas, and why. Some of the Titans that are newer to this game don't understand the depth of feeling around it. I'm trying to educate them on the depth of feeling about it, but it's difficult to make headway given the amount of vitriol people spray on this topic.


    Travianhad some huge servers around the years 07, 08, 09 and maybe even after, when Ican recall the Metas asa serious issue. It was not uncommon for a single alliance to have 3+wings of 60 players, and then when you combine a 3 alliances joining a Meta you’re talking about over 500players. I have not seen Metas reach the same extent in Kingdoms, but Com 5 isthe closest server who can claim achievement.


    At least in the kingdomsgame play and forums discussion the Anti-Meta group, and Anti-WW groupsare polite and courteous. The only people who I have encountered with the samephilosophies of game play are downright mean and hostile.



    Anywayspeaking outside of Com5, Com3Round1 saw 3 alliances merge in the last minuteto “claim” the win. Now then of course it’s a strategy to work with a smallalliance to secure a better position. But in servers that have multiplealliances that are potentially even in fire power, and chances to win, thiswhole alliance merging at the end really gives the team who is absorbing thesmall alliance an unfair advantage.