The number of waves is influenced by the population of the kingdom (as long as there's suitable spaces for them)
But the size of the waves are influenced by attack strength (i.e. number of troops but stronger troops are worth more) and resource production
Edit: There's also a random element so you can't actually figure out exactly what to you're going to get because it will be different each time
Basically though - the bigger and stronger your kingdom is the more camps you'll get.
Btw, title of post is incorrect.
In the end it ended on 180 ban across 2 servers.
And that's just the ones the multis found with the minimal effort they put into their job. At least double that for the number of dodgy accounts.
But let's just keep doing the same thing and pretend it's working when it clearly isn't
They could introduce a system that would delete banned accounts from the map after maybe let's say 7 days, unless a banned player creates a ticket and tries to get unbanned.
We shouldn't allow to automatically delete any banned account, but if that players doesn't get in touch with the devs via ticket or when his request for unbann gets denied, then these accounts should be deleted.
There is no reason for a banned villages to exist on the map indefinitely.
Especially when you consider that some players have started deliberately using multis to speed settle croppers in other kingdoms area knowing full well that when they get banned it still serves their purpose of preventing that kingdom from being able to settle the cropper.
I understand the frustration but banning players is the csr job, so you can help by writing to them and pointing out the cheaters so they can be checked.
compensation for other players cheating is not the way to go. We do not support not condone cheating in any
I don't think you do (understand the frustration)
We complain and we make suggestions and all you do is parrot the same old lines about how you don't condone cheating
But you refuse to acknowledge that cheating has become widespread and you refuse to acknowledge that the reason it has become so widespread is because the benefits players and kingdoms get from cheating far outweigh both the chance of getting caught and if they are caught any punishment they might receive
You claim to not support cheating, yet I'm yet to hear anything about what you intend to do about it except parrot the same old lines that have led to a situation where a kingdom thinks it's worth cheating 150 times on one server
I understand the idea but this is something that's impossible to do. the game can´t " compensate" because other players break the rules and afterward they get caught.
Why not?
Even if it's not the full amount, how about a few resource packs in their heroes inventory?
Or something - anything really. Something to acknowledge that you actually recognise that cheating disadvantages those of us who play fairly.
Because at the moment your response makes it look like you not only don't care about cheating but actively support it.
It's one thing to just repeat the line "cheating is bad" like a parrot but until we can actually see you even trying to do something about it than it rings hollow
Or you just admit that you don't care and allow everybody to use multi accounts and friendly farming - not just the players who bribe you to get away with it
Here's a suggestion:
If you don't think it's "fair" to punish an entire kingdom when you catch a cheat/s how about reimbursing those players and kingdoms that were victims of that cheating
So if a player gets caught cheating then the players/kingdoms they've attacked get reimbursed for all the resources, troops, treasures and victory points they lost to the cheater
That's fair isn't it?
I think there's plenty of options for smaller players to protect themselves
The problem (imo) stems from too many kings/dukes/etc that just see them as a source of a few tributes and nothing more and there's not enough effort being put in to help these players learn and grow
The kingdoms that don't have cheats in them are being punished though by not getting the same level of advantage that the cheats do
And the resource loss
And the troop loss
And the treasure and victory point loss
I get the idea that you shouldn't punish the entire kingdom for the cheats in them
But....they do still get all the advantages of having cheats in their kingdom
(I think) it should still be allowed - because strategies like attacking a friendly treasury to save the treasures is a valid strategy
But doing so should also come with some sort of penalty - such as the "cease fire" idea where for a period after as well as not being able to attack again you also can't reinforce. So players can still attack a friendly but they won't be able to do it again for at least a week
Or even something also like if you attack a friendly treasury you lose X amount of victory points depending on how many treasures you save - so you can save the treasures but you need to be confident you can hold onto them for long enough to regain the lost victory points.
From @Lovegod
Personally I would take this a step further. There should be also be a limit on the amount of resources one kingdom can plunder from any other kingdom without there being a public declaration of war between each other
I would even make it automatic - once the threshold for plundered resources has been reached the kingdoms automatically declare war on each other. Which can only then be stopped by the two kings agreeing to a ceasefire where for a certain cooldown time (say 7 or 14 days) neither kingdom is allowed to attack each other.
Giving 20m resources is a great friendship
It's a joke that they claim they can't do anything about this. Who plays Travian for fun just to build resource fields and have somebody else attack them? It's so obvious that these accounts are multis but they don't do anything about - usually (imo) because the accounts doing it are also gold spenders and they want that $$ and are too short sighted to realise that allowing this sort of behaviour is driving away other players (and even more gold)
Pure support villages are mostly/only useful for offensive players, because defensive players should be ready to train def-troops from every village.
And for support villages only thing that we care, is their resource and CP production, and marketplace.
I will use "support villages" as a defensive player to boost other village's smithy and barracks/stables to be able to produce higher level troops at a quicker rate
But yeah - not to the same extent that an offensive player would use them. Depends on the server and the reliability of other defensive players in the kingdom (and aggressiveness of attacking kingdoms)
The only thing I've learned from this whole thread is that Travian needs to find a way to fix who can become a king
Because I'm sick of trying to get back into this game only to end up with some idiot like Istonius as my king
One of the best attacks I've ever landed was being able to chief a defenders city in another kingdom because they thought I was faking. Landed just before the other attacks landed on the treasuries and wiping out all the defensive troops they had in them. Used a bunch of gold to build nothing but traps in that city in the middle of their kingdom and just annoyed them until they finally got around to wiping the city out.
Hi,
We currently have an inactive king but we are wanting to continue the kingdom
I am sure I read (somewhere) that after three days of inactivity the king automatically abdicates and it makes a duke king?
But it's been 3 days and he's still King
Is there a way to get rid of our king but keep the kingdom?
Thanks
Hello @Batcountry#EN
what Be2-e4 said is correct - we do care about the game rules and always enforce them firmly when needed, regardless of whether the violator has purchased Gold or not. We also do not reduce/alter standard punishments under any circumstances so please forward those cases that you saw getting lesser or no punishment to me or email them at [email protected] and I'll investigate asap.
Kind regards
Georgi
Well it was you (unless there are two Georgies working in the admin team) who reduced the punishment of one cheat after he had a cry about how much money he spends on gold.
Are you happy for me to publicly share the message exchange I have seen without getting banned from the forum, or would you rather continue to try and maintain the illusion that this never happens
The problem are the players who abuse their multiaccounts to funnel resources into their mainaccount and not the players who play two accounts on their own. If there was a rule like in T:L, that an account must be played on its own benefit (and that abusing accounts that aren't is bannable), questionable tactics like the TE metioned would be forbidden, "funneling-multis" could be banned without multiaccountingproof and so on.
Exactly - it's a two second fix that would greatly reduce the problem but they still haven't implemented it for some reason. And they wouldn't even need to run it on a test server - it's already been tried before on different versions and they know it works.
I realise that they'll never be able to completely stamp out the issue but there's a big difference between a few individuals doing it to try and make up for shortfalls in their own ability and an entire kingdom doing it so blatantly and with so many accounts.
I appreciate that you want to support the developers and I 'm sorry if my insults towards them have offended your fragile sensibilities. But they've chosen to ignore this issue for too long and will have nobody else to blame when Kingdoms continues to lose players at the rate it currently is.
like others have said MA's always have and probably always will be around, but they are usually still crap even with 2 or 3 accounts, so i've never let them get under my skin (I consider myself better than any MA with just one account, so if they want to make their life complicated then that's their problem)
In most instances this has been true - usually the players that feel the need to multi do so because they are shit at the game and can be easily dealt with.
Even the Zlf teams on com3 are still pretty useless despite the extent of their cheating and I doubt they will prove to be anything more than an irritation for the rest of the players who decide to stick around. I'm not even going to bother suiciding my troops against them - I'll target a real player instead.
But even if they're easily dealt with why bother continuing to play a game where your time is taken up dealing with them rather than playing against decent players because the developers are either too lazy or too stupid to find a way to fix the problem themselves.
Mate - it's the entire fucking Turkish alliance doing it on Com3, not individual players - with just a quick look at them before deleting there's at least 5 multi accounts they are using that they aren't even bothering to hide and several more that are incredibly suspicious
I'm not some frustrated player either - I'm one of the top players on the server, like I have been most times I've played. But I'm finally done - if I'm going to spend my time and money playing a game (win or lose) I'd rather find one with real players - not a bunch of fuckwit cheats like you.
Well your experience about how much extra leeway players are given as gold users is different to mine. And mine isn't (always) second hand information - I've had players share their conversations with the multi-hunters with me.
But regardless of whether it's because they use gold or simply because the multi-hunters are useless it doesn't change the fact that there are a lot of players getting away with using multi accounts and/or bots with nothing being done about it.
And even more players that have found ways to abuse game rules like village relocation, vacation mode,etc, etc against their supposed intention
Which still makes my original point valid - This game has become too much who can find the best ways to manipulate the rules rather than a game about skill and teamwork.
