Forum & Game, what would you like to see changed or brought in?

  • A special server that prohibits the use of gold... would make it a lot more interesting and fair game


    Highly unlikely, but maybe to pay for the server.. you could pay a one off fee at the start at registration?

  • Maybe as a one off 'survival' mode if you like... if they increased the normal res production and lowered the times to build things... I dunno I'm just spitballing to creating something that isn't paytowin, but what isn't these days so meh

  • I find this thread very interesting as I've been working on and off for about 10 months on a whole line of proposals for the game. Right now I have about 80 at various stages of development. I am currently in the process of getting more people on board to work on them and hope to make a public announcement of the projects goals and intentions soon. This thread is a good opportunity to throw some of them out there though. Here are some things I plucked out:



    001 | Domain Merge
    Game Version: WoW & Regions --- Importance: High
    Description: Merge English language domains into the .Com Domain (US, UK, AU/NZ)
    Value: Player numbers have decreased dramatically since 2009-2010 (peak player numbers). Merging the domains and reducing the total number of servers should help
    increase peak, average and final player numbers on each server. More players increase the competitiveness of each server and generally make them more enjoyable.


    007-1 | “Supremacy” Rank


    Game Version: WoW & Regions --- Importance: Low
    Description: Points calculated from average of population, attack & defense points. Default overview ranking instead of population, “largest players” moved to own tab. Add to top 10 for movement in supremacy points.
    Value: Population is not a major metric by which to evaluate a “good” player. With the change of defense point attribution to the owner of defense troops it is now possible to calculate a value that more accurately reflects the quality of a player. Population is still included because while on its own it is not a major metric, it does influence the raw potential of account (i.e resource production, troop production etc.) Attack and defense points are important because those are metrics of a players effectiveness. This combined rating would provide a more accurate picture of player quality and reduce the impression that simming population is important to new players.


    010 | Improve Raid List Management


    Game Version: WoW & Region --- Importance: High
    Description: Improve the utility and ease of use of raid lists.

    • Inline editing of number and type of troops
    • Bulk updating of number/type of troops
    • Bulk transfer of targets between lists
    • Bulk duplication of targets between lists
    • Bulk delete of targets
    • Right click add village to raid list on map

    Value: Raid lists were a great addition to the game that made raiding easier and more accessible. However raid lists have not reached their full potential and can be difficult to work with. This proposal is designed to improve the utility and ease of using raid lists.


    That is just a small sample of ideas. They are by no means all mine but are a product of things I have noticed or that have been brought to my attention in conversation with players since I returned to the game at the end of 2016. If anyone is interested in helping out, please PM me. My intention is for these proposals to be a community effort to make the game a better place for everyone :)
    ____________________________________________________________________________________________

    A day counter.

    This seems like a fairly easy thing for them to do and would help solve a question I and others frequently need to ask.

    A better guide for new players, and an all chat so they can ask people questions

    Generally "Guides" as such have been the product of player creation. Though there is the initial tutorial / quest system in game. It would certainly be nice for a better overall on-boarding process for new players both in and out of game. HQ could design a better in game tutorial and perhaps highlight community guides in game as resources. Of course over the years with new Travian versions and the forum change, a lot of old guide material is lost or out of date. Part of my project includes a compendium of information, in an attempt to have a more definitive source of game knowledge. I haven't actually gotten to that part yet but it is good to see I'm not the only one thinks there is a gap in easily available knowledge.

    What I’d like to see brought back is the old farming system where they were ranked in your list by profitability. I’d also like to see raiding totals by player and alliance at the end of the server back again. Since it’s such a big part of the game, there should be a comparison ability for who raided the most in a server.

    When was this? I don't recall it in T3, but then its been so many years it is hard to remember exactly what was what. Regarding the robbing stats I do agree there should be more of them open. One of my proposals calls for the top 50 robbers over the life of the server to be displayed in a list, similar to the defense and offense rankings. The idea being that the top 50 should all have net positive robbing numbers, and prevent looking up and picking on weak links from the rankings, while offering a better picture of what is going on. For alliances this would probably need to be pared down but I think 50 players is a reasonable figure.

    And if they could be included in the village overview too

    For those that use them this would be welcome. Even better than just more buttons would be a modular interface where you could customize different kinds of buttons.

    A search function on your rally point so you can find specific troop movements quickly. Absolute mare trying to find the right one to cancel when you've got 1000+ going in and out and page keeps refreshing as your raids are landing.

    The rally point is one of the biggest things in this game that I would describe as barely functional. Top raiders, locations being defended, heavy attackers etc. are all a absurd to work within the rally point. I would say a search function needs the ability to search by village destination or source village (coords and name), IGN of sender, as well as by troop type and troop number. I hate sifting through WW rally point pages to find those 100 TT someone sent.


    In addition to search, there needs to be better filters. Split the outgoing attacks/raids into individual attack and raid filters. Also a quick button for outgoing troops that are within the 90 second recall window would be great.


    Also I would suggest splitting this thread in two. One for the forum and one for the game.

  • In terms of the technical aspect of the rally point suggestion I agree with what you've said, but also I think filtering based on land time windows would be super useful too.


    Also maybe the GB/GS buttons could be toggled on in settings if the concern is not everyone has a need for them?

  • The day UK/US merge with .COM is the day I stop playing :(


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png

  • Would be nice to see shortcut icons to GB and GS along with just standard barracks and stable with plus.

    Can you not do this in the link list? If you can have the farm list link open in your hammer village, then surely the same can be done with GB and GS without the need for an added feature?

  • 001 | Domain Merge
    Game Version: WoW & Regions --- Importance: High
    Description: Merge English language domains into the .Com Domain (US, UK, AU/NZ)
    Value: Player numbers have decreased dramatically since 2009-2010 (peak player numbers). Merging the domains and reducing the total number of servers should help
    increase peak, average and final player numbers on each server. More players increase the competitiveness of each server and generally make them more enjoyable.

    If you read all English sections of the forum, which I guess you do, you should see that this is not that obvious. And I am not even talking current brexit stand-off.


    Com is international domain. There is always good portion of players who does not understand English beyond simple sentences, in every alliance, more so if you recruit from the map. Some alliances are coming from local domains with people not speaking English at all and leadership is to run all communications. MHs are also often not native speakers, I believe. That results in much striker rules regarding language. In theory I can imagine someone seeing red with the phrase "cocky behavior" when in whole sentence only one word is familiar, but I would flip out myself the if I were the player who got banned for that. Partially as result of such rules partially as result of smaller portion of people who can participate com diplomacy forums are boring or dead. I believe only comx has any current posts. And not just language, where are topics which I would not dare to see in ally chat. You must be politically correct, cultural background is as different as it gets on some issues. All in all, communities are backbone of travian, it is why the game is still alive, IMHO. It can be done if someone experienced with the matter thinks it through and slowly moves on, but I doubt TG has such resource. As much as I would love to see more populated servers more would be lost than gained, IMHO.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by ELE ().

  • Can you not do this in the link list? If you can have the farm list link open in your hammer village, then surely the same can be done with GB and GS without the need for an added feature?

    How many links is reasonable to have on an account, you think? :)

  • The day UK/US merge with .COM is the day I stop playing :(

    I am not at all surprised by this reaction. I realize that such a move would be divisive and result in some attrition.

    If you read all English sections of the forum, which I guess you do, you should see that this is not that obvious. And I am not even talking current brexit stand-off.
    Com is international domain. There is always good portion of players who does not understand English beyond simple sentences, in every alliance, more so if you recruit from the map. Some alliances are coming from local domains with people not speaking English at all and leadership is to run all communications. MHs are also often not native speakers, I believe. That results in much striker rules regarding language. In theory I can imagine someone seeing red with the phrase "cocky behavior" when in whole sentence only one word is familiar, but I would flip out myself the if I were the player who got banned for that. Partially as result of such rules partially as result of smaller portion of people who can participate com diplomacy forums are boring or dead. I believe only comx has any current posts. And not just language, where are topics which I would not dare to see in ally chat. You must be politically correct, cultural background is as different as it gets on some issues. All in all, communities are backbone of travian, it is why the game is still alive, IMHO. It can be done if someone experienced with the matter thinks it through and slowly moves on, but I doubt TG has such resource. As much as I would love to see more populated servers more would be lost than gained, IMHO.

    I do understand the language issue but I also think the lack of players on a server is a bigger issue. On the last round of Us2 we ended with around 330 players. 3 weeks to end game on Us1 and we are down to 500 and change and that is a server that was heavily recruited for on the US Domain and supposed to be a super bowl server of sorts. The number of accounts that are actually active are even less than the accounts on the server. Less players means less competition, less fighting. Your enemies are usually quite obvious, since there are only 2-3 major alliances in contention to build a WW.


    To me the community is Travian as a whole, I think the domain division is arbitrary and a product of an over-expansion in the early days of Travian. The group I play with now originated on the COM servers but has taken a few rounds on US now. I play with them because I have had good experiences with them. It doesn't matter what domain they play on.


    Further I think the combining of the domains would also mean a combining of staff i.e native speakers would be a part of the combined domain. I also think you will find players who are non-native or non-English speakers on domains beside COM. Last round of Us2 we had a contingent of a dozen or so Chinese speaking players. I don't think they spoke a lick of English. We made it work and they did good work. On Beta we merged with a Finnish alliance whose English I think mostly came from Google Translate, again we made it work. I think language is less of a barrier now than it was a decade ago.


    Now lets say your concerns are warranted and a reason not to merge into COM. US/AU/NZ/UK could still be merged, which can have a positive effect on server numbers and side-step the non-native language concern.


    I think communities have developed in line with domains but I don't see why we can't co-mingle. There are so few of us left.


    How many links is reasonable to have on an account, you think? :)

    I personally find the link list annoying to use, especially as it gets longer. Yes there is convenience in it but ideally one would not need to scroll to access them. I think the UI in general could use reformatting and a modular UI would be even better, allowing players to customize it to their liking with the buttons and info they want.

  • I should also mention, I do not believe this is the only possible response to dwindling player numbers. I see this as more of a quick stemming of the bleeding, while more comprehensive measures can be worked on.


    There is another option (though I would prefer doing both) and that is to reduce server lengths.


    015-1 | WW Server Length
    Game Version: WoW --- Importance: High
    Description: Reduce WW server length by adjusting major event timeline and Natar build speed.

    • Artifacts drop day 84 (1x), 42 (2x), 28 (3x)
    • Plans drop day 168 (1x), 84 (2x), 56 (3x)
    • Natars begin building day 202 (1x), 110 (2x), 75 (3x)
    • Natars build (2) levels per day (1x), 4 (2x), 6 + 2 last day (3x)
    • Maximum server duration is 252 days (1x), 101 days (2x), 84 days (3x)
    • Reduce aggregate WW build times from approximately 30 days to 20.
    • Best done in conjunction with other 015 proposals (proposals that increase game pace)

    Value: Servers routinely start with many more players than they end with. This suggests game length is too long (among other things). Reducing server length should result in more players sticking out a server. It also means servers turn over more frequently and casual observation and general understanding is that gold use is highest in the beginning of a server. This could translate into more revenue for HQ.


    This would be a drop by 98 days from the current maximum 1x server length. I'm not full sure how different that is in the context of 3x, as I haven't played that since the T3 days.


    Also pulled some quick server pop numbers from Getter.


    UK = 1,051 (3 WW, 1 F&S, 1 NYS, 1 Speed)
    US = 7,724 (3 WW, 1 F&S, 1 NYS, 1 Speed)
    AU = 2,352 (2 WW, 1 F&S, 1 NYS, 1 Speed)
    COM = 37,100 (2 WW, 1 Closed Beta, 1 F&S, 3 NYS, 1 PTR)
    Finals = 7,129


    These numbers pale in comparison to the height of the game. I think merging at least some of the ENG domains is justified. Also with the creation of the Travian Tournament, it is obvious that it is possible for players from different backgrounds, languages etc. can play on the same server.

  • I don’t think merging domains with COM is feasible. The thing that would worry me about merging UK/US/AU would be the difference in cultures and time zones. As one alliance goes to bed another starts attacking. Part of the battle strategy is hitting your opponents when you know it’s the most awkward time possible. That would be OK if alliances stayed UK/US/AU but they wouldn’t for long.


    There are domains with even lower player numbers than ours. Language is the barrier to merging there.


    The lower player numbers is an issue. My personal favourite for an ideal domain would be one classic server, one speed server, one special and two or three slow servers running at a time. Playing a server that ends with 200 or less active players is no time fun. I would really like to dig into the data to find why so many players have been lost over time when other TG games like Rail Nation succeed. I suspect it’s because there are so many other games similar to Travian that are more accessible, better marketed, etc.


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png

  • I don’t think merging domains with COM is feasible. The thing that would worry me about merging UK/US/AU would be the difference in cultures and time zones. As one alliance goes to bed another starts attacking. Part of the battle strategy is hitting your opponents when you know it’s the most awkward time possible. That would be OK if alliances stayed UK/US/AU but they wouldn’t for long.


    There are domains with even lower player numbers than ours. Language is the barrier to merging there.


    The lower player numbers is an issue. My personal favourite for an ideal domain would be one classic server, one speed server, one special and two or three slow servers running at a time. Playing a server that ends with 200 or less active players is no time fun. I would really like to dig into the data to find why so many players have been lost over time when other TG games like Rail Nation succeed. I suspect it’s because there are so many other games similar to Travian that are more accessible, better marketed, etc.

    Well when it comes to quad vs quad wars, time zone isn't that big a deal. Travel times tend to be long enough that you will have plenty of notice regardless of when they decide to launch. As it is I play in a heavily mixed group from around the globe and that is on the US domain.


    And while I haven't looked at other domains I have no doubt they have lower numbers. I did look at the .DE domain a while back and that showed a sharp decline. But as you say language is a very clear barrier to merging those.


    I would be careful of using the word classic, since for some that means T3 or T2 even.


    Regarding why players have left I will posit the following reasons:

    • Time requirement. Servers used to be able to last forever if someone couldn't get a WW up. While they have chopped down server lengths they are still long. Beyond server length is the effort required to play. You can't log in once a day, it just isn't enough. You really need to be on multiple times per day checking for attacks at a minimum, even if you manage to automate a lot of the account. (master builder, build queue, long build times, trade routes etc.)
    • In most MMOs you "raid", here we do raid but we often call it "farming". New players either had to get good enough to survive or the big raiders would eat them alive. This game is not fun if you are a farm.
    • Cost. Yes you can play a non-gold or low-gold build but gold definitely provides a leg up and can get expensive, even in moderation relative to other things you could spend the money on.
    • Bad Tutorial etc. Being new to this game can be hard. There is a lot to learn and the game doesn't really help that much in giving you the knowledge to succeed.
    • Toxic Community. I don't read much of the non-US embassies, focusing on US embassies and the suggests/game discussion stuff. However the amount of drama, personal vendettas etc. that are present in the "main" segment of the US community is nothing but toxic. That is a turn off for players new and old. Right now the "super bowl" server is being brought down by grudges that began a decade ago. (among new issues of course)
    • Lack of evolution. I retired circa 2011 and came back late 2016. The game was almost unchanged when I got back. Since then they haven't done much to improve the game, other than slap a new coat of paint on it. They are also holding the new tribes hostage behind specials currently.
    • Competition. As you said there are a lot more games out there now competing in a similar space. Also browser based games have taken a back seat to app based games on mobile devices. Travian missed that train and because of the state of the current code, are unable to do much about it. They also don't seem keen on spending the money developing a version that might work in app / mobile form. The team working on Legends is way too small. (The Dev video from that fall outlines the staff dedicated to this game, I forget the exact number I worked out but its too small to make any substantive changes, instead we get snow)
    • Kingdoms. They tried to design T5 and they made Kingdoms. Something that a large segment of the player base didn't seem to like, so they had to make it a separate game. I wasn't here for this but this is representative of the lack of understanding from HQ as to what the community needs, wants and what will work.
    • Bots & "Tech" accounts. I've seen a lot of obvious bots appear on a server. They don't do much but they are still there, it doesn't look good. Similar to that are the accounts that just act as feeders / storage etc. for other accounts. While not that prevalent on regular servers, the qualifiers and finals are full of them, which puts off players who don't have such an advantage. Similarly cheating in general needs to be kept in check, it took months for someone using an obvious raid bot to be banned on my last Us2 server.

    My proposal would be at a minimum to merge UK/US/AU/NZ. Setting up 3-5 WW servers at a clip, running 2 off-set speed servers. Plus the birthday and NYS server (assuming the latter is made a yearly occurrence like birthday servers). I would also like to see at least 1 region based server that runs after the birthday servers end, whether that occurs in the NYS format or as a regular server of its own. (Also assuming the Birthday servers stick to the region theme) I think some players much prefer that format and waiting for the birthday server each year means they aren't playing several months out of the year (that is not buying gold!). But that is moving into a separate discussion of what kinds of servers to run.


    The makeup would be a bit different if they all went into COM. I would say 5-7 WW servers, 3 speed servers, 2-3 Birthday and NYS each. Plus at least 2 Region servers, maybe turn 1 region server into a speed server in lieu of 3 WW speed servers.

  • Well when it comes to quad vs quad wars, time zone isn't that big a deal. Travel times tend to be long enough that you will have plenty of notice regardless of when they decide to launch. As it is I play in a heavily mixed group from around the globe and that is on the US domain.

    I disagree with this. Timing is absolutely vital for successful offensive ops the way servers run here. Having a big op land at 4am when last minute splits or instant tablet use for chiefings etc is a common tactic, as is sending out attacks very late at night so they only get spotted in the morning when defenders aren't around.


    Classic could be anything pre T4. They won't run one though because the coding isn't secure enough.


    Everything else I agree with. The bots are an issue, but not significant enough to stop people playing and they were around on the 3.6 servers. Anyone remember when those lovely farms used to pop up early game called things like efgg1234?


    Toxic community. Hmmm. Yes and no. I started playing in 2009 and the first bit of advice I got even back then was that "Travian loyalties run deep". I think that has always been the case to an extent, it's just more noticeable now as the main core of players are the same ones returning over and over again.


    Bad tutorial - yes. And a lack of decent guides and walkthroughs. There used to be a lot more. The direct connection from the game to the forum came late. It isn't too late to change, but Travian could do with getting some decent official Guides written to put on the forum rather than relying on players to make them. The FAQ/help page is OK but it doesn't help strategy. There are some decent hints and guides written on the Blog but they don't seem to make it to the forum, not sure why. Things like this Travian for Dummies should be on every forum. If you are going to spend time and money getting people to write these, get them on every platform.


    Time constraints - also yes. The vacation mode was an attempt to ease that but hasn't worked. Gold eases some of the time constraints, but to play at the top level you still need to spend too much. The competition became too divided between those who would spend £15/£20 a month or more and those who wouldn't/couldn't. So if you can't afford it, you play a third rate game or a support game. Bringing the cost down to a much more competitive level (ie spending more than perhaps £5/£10 a month doesn't buy you any more advantage and enforcing the rule that accounts must be played to their own benefit much more strongly might encourage more competition. But at the moment, the very top players may be spending £30 a month on their own account, plus another £5 to £10 each on their personal defenders. Perhaps buying gold for accounts you sit should be the next thing banned?


    Really good points you are bringing up. I hope they are being read and noticed.


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png

  • I disagree with this. Timing is absolutely vital for successful offensive ops the way servers run here. Having a big op land at 4am when last minute splits or instant tablet use for chiefings etc is a common tactic, as is sending out attacks very late at night so they only get spotted in the morning when defenders aren't around.

    I didn't properly explain my point I think. You are right, land times are important and aiming to land in the early morning hours before people get up and after they have gone to bed is important. But at least in my experience, targets can be 24+ hours away, which gives clear indication an offensive is coming. Some OCs will work to minimize travel times but some long ones are unavoidable.


    As a DC, I don't make defense calls more than 12 hours out, trying to average around 9-10 hours. So for 4am land times, I would make the call around 6-7pm, which is perfect time of day for most players. (assuming of course being in roughly the same time zone) A handful of night owls and global players then sit and manage everything during the actual landings.


    In general I think a mix of time zones helps make the game more competitive, which is something I prefer. So yes timing is important, but a good team will minimize the advantage it provides, at least in my experience.


    I haven't run into the personal defender game much. It is something that my alliance doesn't believe in, all defense is the alliances defense. I have heard its prevalent on servers like the Tournie. I can see an advantage to not let sitters buy gold, but it is something that could be gotten around by sending money to someone via paypal or a similar service and the player themselves just buying the gold. Plus on occasion I've bought small amounts of gold for someone simply because they are under attack and I need to NPC/Insta build etc. and I've blown through a bunch of their gold. Its hard to strike the balance between something that reduces the problem but allows non-damaging activity.


    And thank you, I hope they take notice as well.

  • 1k players on UK? Did you only look at one server for the UK?


    And those numbers means absolutely nothing, there's currently more than 10k bots on servers like COMX, that's another reason a merge would be bad, if we can keep most of the bots away from the UK (which is the biggest English domain, that would be great)


    I do however think that merging US and AU makes sense, same with all the Scandinavian countries.

  • 1k players on UK? Did you only look at one server for the UK?
    And those numbers means absolutely nothing, there's currently more than 10k bots on servers like COMX, that's another reason a merge would be bad, if we can keep most of the bots away from the UK (which is the biggest English domain, that would be great)


    I do however think that merging US and AU makes sense, same with all the Scandinavian countries.

    My apologies I wrote down the wrong column of information, and ended up adding up part server day numbers and part account numbers. The adjusted figure would be 4,888 for UK, which is actually more sizable than I thought but still lower than the US domain.


    I have heard concerns about rampant botting on the COM domain, having not experienced I can't really comment. However in theory if they can be kept off one domain, than they should be able to be kept off all the domains. If they are indeed a rampant problem why? Is it due to staff being unable or unwilling to quell the problem? Either way it is a problem if the situation is as bad as your present. If the system is working the way it should, bots should represent a minimal number of accounts.


    Regarding the Scandavian countries, a quick glance at player numbers suggests that is a good idea. Kingdoms already has a "Nordic" server.