Gorky´s wish list of game changes (wall of text)

  • I actually wanted to make really pretty shiny post with images and different fonts and stuff....way too much work.
    Ain't Nobody Got Time for That.
    *******************************************************************************************************************


    there are couple of things I would like to see in game
    some of them are not original and were mentioned before at some point somewhere
    and some of them might be original
    but all of them would be nice in my opinion


    notes :
    biggest problem currently is that even though travian is TEAM game, but the balance of game is kinda ignoring this fact.
    of course diversity is good thing, but differences should be within reason and not extreme (like egypt waterworks)



    there might be some grammar mistakes here and there... and feel free to completly ignore them.
    yes, I know my mspaint skills are awesome



    the weird village name in images is ⎝⎝⎝⎝⎝⎝⎝⎝♥⎠⎠⎠⎠⎠⎠⎠⎠ if you are curious.


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CONTENT :


    general stuff :


    HOTKEYS
    FARMLIST MASTER BUTTON
    MORE PLUS ICONS
    BUTTONS for ally reports filters
    BB code buttons for IGMs
    ALLIANCE INFOBOX
    IN GAME CHAT
    CHANGE BUILDING PLACEMENT IN VILLAGE
    DAILY QUESTS / SCALABILITY
    TRADE ROUTES - HH:MM specific.
    CHEAPER MASTER BUILDER


    balance / nation changes :
    NEW CROPPERS (c12/c18)
    INCREASE SPEED OF MERCHANTS
    MORALE BONUS SYSTEM REWORK
    WALLS
    SPECIAL BUILDINGS
    LIST OF UNITS BALANCE CHANGES



    under construction (I will get to it sooner or later) :
    INGAME OPS PLANNER | DEFENSE CALL SYSTEM


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HOTKEYS



    more hotkeys in general and hotkeys for link list


    what would be great is to have more access keys available and better yet have option to customize them.
    I personally would like to have option to bind hotkey to specific link in PLUS links list.



    list of existing hotkeys
    http://t4.answers.travian.com/index.php?aid=251#go2answer


    alt+7 AND alt+8 is buy gold
    alt+9 does not work.


    seems to me like these hotkeys were made for T3.6 and just didnt get updated for T4 interface.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FARMLIST MASTER BUTTON


    send all farmlists button where you can select which farmlists to send.
    of course it should remember settings for next time
    something like this : JdFP.png



    if sending all stuff at once is problematic due to high load of server - just add some delay between each farmlist on server side and it will be just fine
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MORE PLUS ICONS



    two icons are obviously missing here
    GB [gid 29] (great barracks) and GS [gid 30] (great stables) as icon next to regular rax / stables icons.
    preferably to have it invisible if building is not present
    or having option to turn those buttons on/off in settings since not that many people would use them
    8EE3.png


    Also having icon for TOWN HALL town hall seems pretty


    this shouldn´t be complicated, right?


    note :
    currently you can make links in plus link list to those buildings
    GB - Travian comx
    GS - Travian comx
    TH - Travian comx
    (replace TX3 with your server and .COM with your domain)
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    BUTTONS for ally report filters


    so we do have filters for regular reports on account
    and there are also filters for ally reports, but there are not buttons for them anywhere
    not sure why
    but here´s the list of filters that works right now :


    ALLY LINKS
    OFF - green
    Travian comx


    OFF - yellow
    Travian comx


    OFF - red
    Travian comx


    DEF - green
    Travian comx


    DEF - yellow
    Travian comx


    DEF - red
    Travian comx


    DEF - gray
    Travian comx


    SCOUT OFF - green
    Travian comx


    SCOUT OFF - yellow
    Travian comx


    SCOUT OFF - red
    Travian comx


    SCOUT DEF - green
    Travian comx


    SCOUT DEF - yellow
    Travian comx


    OFF - mix
    Travian comx


    DEF - mix
    Travian comx
    ******************************************
    (if you want to use it - change TX3 for your server and COM for your domain)


    soo... filters already exist - just add buttons for them. shouldn´t be hard.
    -----------------
    BB code buttons for IGMs / IG forum


    very similarily there are BB codes that can be used in IGMs, but there are no buttons for them.


    Not sure if this is the full list though, I had to try ton of general BB codes to find these, so it´s possible that there are more.
    *********************
    // quote
    1. [ quote]
    2. [ /quote]

    Quote

    this is quote


    (case sensitive)


    // list
    1. [ list]
    2. [ /list]


      1. [ color=option]
      2. [ /color]


      aqua
      blue
      fuchsia
      gray
      green
      lime
      maroon
      navy
      olive
      purple
      red
      silver
      teal
      white --- WHITE !
      yellow



    BB codes in travian are of course without space after left [
    *********************


    same thing as ally filters.
    this already exists - just add buttons for it already.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    ALLIANCE INFOBOX


    really simple idea, but it could be quite handy to remind players of current ally goal.
    One infobox for alliance "message of the day" kind of thing.
    Obviously only players with rights to change should be allowed to change it for everyone.
    There might be even option to autodelete message in specific time/date.




    h64A.png




    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    INGAME CHAT


    make ingame chat. just something REALLY simple. like tlk.io


    yes, I know this is really old suggestion and yes, I know the reason why there is no chat right now is because players migrated communication elsewhere and you can´t make better chat system. (

    External Content www.youtube.com
    Content embedded from external sources will not be displayed without your consent.
    Through the activation of external content, you agree that personal data may be transferred to third party platforms. We have provided more information on this in our privacy policy.
    )


    but, it does not have to be better than dedicated chat/voice apps like skype/teamspeak/discord, it just need to be accessible by every player and at least somewhat useful.


    key features should be :
    store history
    have option to create chat rooms with specific players - if they accept of course.
    have alliance/meta chat room created by default
    moderateable (kick/mute players from chat) by admin user.


    ideally to have another box for chat like it´s for daily quests - just small info if there are new message or something and when you click it it opens new window with chat.


    I am not asking you to reinvent the wheel here.
    Just make simple functional chat.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------



    CHANGE BUILDING PLACEMENT IN VILLAGE


    don´t you just hate it when you conquer new village, but all the buildings are just on wrong places ?
    well a lot of us can´t stand it really, but only option to fix them is to raze buildings and rebuild them, which is obviously REALLY BAD


    but imagine you have option to just move buildings around. that would be great wouldn´t it ?


    so my suggestion is to make option to change placement of buildings.
    and this could cost some gold each use so there is actually incentive for TG to make this happen.


    How would it work ?
    My idea would be to implement simple editor :
    1.on one side you would have your village and/or list of current building placement
    2. on second side - you would have blank village
    3. when you would click on empty space in right side - popup window will show - with list of available buildings to place there.
    after you select building you want to move there - you save/cancel placement for that slot. obviously once placed building should be remove from list for next one
    4. when you go through all slots / buildings and you have nothing more to place - you save it all and pay gold to rearange it.



    something like this :
    TRwY.png



    note :
    -obviously wall and rally point placement have to stay the same
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------


    DAILY QUESTS / SCALABILITY



    overall daily quests are great addition to game in my opinion.
    in the beggining all the rewards are nice , but they become totally irelevant quite quickly.
    because they are static (except newest one - invest resource to ally bonus) - they become obsolete fast. reward is not good enough and challenge is almost non after a little while



    So my suggestion is to make quests and rewards scale up over time (ideally with account size just like "invest resources" quest)


    most of quests and half of rewards(ress/cp/xp) shouldn´t be problem to scale up



    Let´s say the scaling system would be based on village count :
    0-5 villages = tier 1
    6-10 villages = tier 2
    11-15 villages = tier 3
    16-20 villages = tier 4
    etc


    (or maybe next tier every 6 villas ? )


    *
    QUESTS :


    easy to scale up :
    raid oasis (3/6/9/12/...)
    raid natar (3/6/9/12/...)
    expand building (3/4/5/6/7/...)
    build infantry (3x20 / 5x20 / 7x20 / 9x20 / ....)
    build cavalry (3x20 / 5x20 / 7x20 / 9x20 / ....)


    a bit problematic to scale :
    win auction - might be hard for non-gold users to get cheap stuff multiple times a day
    expand resource field -- in later stages it can easily happen that you dont actually have any village where you can build new fields for a day bcs you either saving CPs for chiefing or you just golded everything already especially on x3 servers)
    celebrate -- problematic bcs if you are doing only great celebs and you dont have enough villages, you just cant do it on x1 server daily. but it should be still doable


    not scalable :
    adventure .... just dont scale it. on x1 server you get only 1 adventure a day (after day22), so without changing it - it´s just not possible to scale this daily quest.


    *
    REWARDS :
    25point - [ (mix ress 200/400/800/1000/...) | (1type ress 1000/2000/3000/4000/....) | (XP 50/100/150/200/....) | (CP 50/100/150/200/....) ]
    50 point - well even though they can be scaled, I think that´s not gonna happen :D so probably just leave it as is
    75 point - they can be scaled, but since they affect prices on auction, they shouldnt be scaled or should be scaled REALLY carefuly
    100 point - [ (mix ress 4000/8000/12000/16000/...) | (1type ress 20000/40000/60000/80000/....) | (XP 400/800/1200/1600/...) | (CP 400/800/1200/1600/...) ]




    or something like that.
    when you look at this and see possible 80k ress reward it seems a lot, right?
    well if you have 17 villages it´s really is not that much, but still worht doing all quests to get it.
    obviously the exact numbers have to be tweaked a bit


    and maybe even some new quests could be nice altough I can´t really think of any right now



    ****
    Oh and there is one more tiny problem and that´s
    25 point quest - 50CP reward in the beggining of server. the first cycle of rewards ( first 4 days in the beggining) should not be random since it really messes up settling on x3 servers a lot.
    ****
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    TRADE ROUTES - HH:MM specific.



    Another simple idea - adding option to activate routes on specific minute, not just hour. that´s it.



    Also having some more user-friendly way of making new routes would be really nice. Maybe some have option to check multiple times when making new route.
    And if that´s technical problem, just make button that would open multiple tabs with copied values - that´s should be really easy to code.


    something like this :
    http://docs.google.com/spreads…bxXXY4/edit#gid=104690978


    note:
    I am aware that it would cause high load on server.
    But even having option to set routes to every 10th minute (hh:00 / hh:10 / hh:20 etc) would be really great and it´s only 6 times more load compared to 60times more for once/minute routes check.


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    CHEAPER MASTER BUILDER


    really short one.
    just make it cheaper.


    right now it´s 1 gold per 1 building.
    problem is that you can either spend 2 gold to master build two buildings OR you can spend 2 gold to finish those 2 buildings right away (with PLUS. roman can ofc do 3).


    So if I am gonna spend 2 gold on two buildings - obviously it´s better to finish them right away than to have them slow-build for same amount of gold.
    Therefor the master builder feature is kinda useless (except for building residence/palace)


    However it´s useless only because of gold consumption.
    If you would change the price to let´s say 1 gold for 5 buildings - way more people would be using it and that would mean more gold spent overall - which is something TG should like.


    note :
    spending 0.2 gold per building seems weird and messy, using silver to pay 0.2gold doesn´t seem right either.
    so technical solution would be that you use gold for master builder tokens. 1 gold = 5 tokens. there could also be autobuy feature when you run out(just like autoextend for ress/plus)


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    BALANCE CHANGES :


    ---------------------------------------------------
    NEW CROPPERS (c12/c18)


    c12 / c18 crop tiles


    C12 = 2/2/2/12 tile
    C18 = 0/0/0/18 tile


    I think it would make things more interesting.
    And it could be just so that C18 tiles would be gray zone exclusive thing, so there would be only a couple on each server.



    not much else to say about this.
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    INCREASE SPEED OF MERCHANTS


    I´d like to see a way to increase speed of merchants.
    there are 3 possible things that would make sense for this effect
    ***********
    A) tournament square - same formula used for units would apply to merchants
    ***********
    B) trade office - in addition to increase of carry capacity


    +1 speed (on x1 server) for every 5 levels of trade office ?


    roman gaul teuton hun egypt
    L0 16 24 12 20 16
    L5 17 25 13 21 17
    L10 18 26 14 22 18
    L15 19 27 15 23 19
    L20 20 29 16 24 20
    ***********
    C) ally bonus commerce - in addition to increase of carry capacity;


    +1 speed (on x1 server) for every tier of commerce
    roman gaul teuton hun egypt
    L0 16 24 12 20 16
    L1 17 25 13 21 17
    L2 18 26 14 22 18
    L3 19 27 15 23 19
    L4 20 29 16 24 20
    L5 21 30 17 25 21
    ***********
    D) combination of ally bonus commerce AND level of trade office


    +1 speed (on x1 server) for every tier of commerce
    roman gaul teuton hun egypt
    TO0+C0 16 24 12 20 16
    TO4+C1 17 25 13 21 17
    TO8+C2 18 26 14 22 18
    TO12+C3 19 27 15 23 19
    TO16+C4 20 29 16 24 20
    TO20+C5 21 30 17 25 21
    ***********
    in my opionion last option would be the best.
    well... D can´t be bad, right ?
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    MORALE BONUS SYSTEM REWORK


    okay...
    if you think about travian as "single player game" it makes sense to give smaller players some advantage to be able to defend themselves against bigger players.


    however, travian is TEAM game and morale bonus is being abused all the time.


    accounts with 3 villages holding 2 arties + WW....
    accounts with 2 villages - capitol and hammer villa that will produce HUGE WWk in the end...
    stashing blueprint plans to small accounts...


    makes absolutely no sense except exploiting morale bonus system.


    other problem is that overall current morale bonus system actually pushes players to keep population low even if they are able to expand more.
    For def players - it´s not so obvious, because of course more villages = more ressources = more def and that´s clearly way to go.


    But for offensive player it´s not universally true.
    If offensive player wants to make just 1 hammer - once he get enough resource income he has absolutely no incentive to make more villages because it´s not going to increase power of his hammer at all, but on the contrary he has incentive to keep his population as low as possible just to avoid morale bonus problems.


    And obviously the problem is that morale bonus is for defender account REGARDLESS of whose units are defending there.


    What morale bonus system does is actually punishing offensive players for being too good. And that´s just plain wrong.


    So on one hand - we want to have system that would give new/smaller players some advantage so they can keep up and on the other hand we don´t want that system to be abused by powerplayers nor we want have a system that would push players to stop expanding



    There are possible solutions here :



    1) make morale bonus go away completly after some point.
    a)specific day of server - like release of artifacts
    b)specific day of account age - day 50(x1) after account registration


    this would completly stop the morale system bonus abuse and actually gave players incentive to keep building when they would know they are not gonna have it forever.


    2) make morale bonus flat (+ X defense). No % bonus for all units.
    problem here is that it would REALLY mess with farming of inactive players - solution for that is - that it can be linked to level of wall
    for example where now would player get +10% morale bonus - he is gonna get +200 defense strength for each level of wall


    3) exclude accounts meeting certain conditions like :
    a) holding artifact (having artie at least once during the server would qualify)
    b) holding WW village
    c) having high troops : pop ratio
    d) after reaching specific hourly production (including farm)
    there are sure many more ways to make it better and more balanced overall and pretty much anything that would make abusing morale bonus impossible is definitely good thing to do.
    note :
    too lazy to look up morale bonus formula and do math about it. kinda pointless anyway at this point
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    WALLS


    @ lvl 20 ; durability | bonus
    huns ; x1 ; 34.7%
    egypt ; x5 ; 63.9%
    gaul ; x2 ; 63.9%
    roman ; x1 ; 80.6%
    teuton ; x5 ; 48.6%
    -----------
    before new nations it kinda made sense even though it was still unbalanced.
    but now it doesn´t make much sense (at least to me) and it´s hardly balanced because of how rams and durability works.
    I think this concept was made bcs devs thought of players just as individuals and not really as part of bigger alliance.
    On map with WW obviously only egypt will build wonder due to vastly superior wall.
    And huns will be harderst to defend - but why?
    Honestly, I don´t see good reason why walls should differ that much.


    The best balance here would be to make all walls the same.
    but sure there can be some differences just for the sake of having diversity, but not extreme like it´s now. maybe x2-x3 durability and bonus in range between 45-65%.


    note:
    same overall problem. travian is TEAM GAME and current walls stats makes no sense


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------SPECIAL BUILDINGS



    ***
    teutons have the best special bulding, but problem is with duration a little bit. seems weird to me how it works.
    way interesting it would be if those "beer celebrations" would last only briefly and had cooldown longer than duration.
    something like - effect will hold for 12 hours, but you cant use it within next 24 hours after it ended.


    in my opinion that would make it a bit more interesting
    *******


    gauls have better crannies, which is nice. but trappers are totally useless.
    they make sense maybe first couple of days after protection, but that´s about it.
    Gauls being mainly defense oriented nation - it would suit them much better to have brewery-like building for temporary increase of def power, same cooldown system as suggested for brewery and of course there should be some negative effect as well to compensate for bonus.


    something like :
    A) weaker def power during cooldown phase
    B) higher crop consumption during active phase


    both would be interesting


    ***
    romans - actually overall good building. do not touch it.
    ***


    huns - having options to have 3 chiefs in every hammer villa is cool. really like this one and it doesn´t actually provide some overpowered advantage


    ***
    egyptians - this is ridiculous. 100% extra ress from oases ?
    if you get c15 with 150% crop oases you have basicly +50% more resources / hour than any other nation. that´s insane
    and waterworks can be build in any village. so if you are gonna sim in boonies and get 2x 50% oases to every single village you have - with waterworks it´s like having 4x 50% oases to each villa ( okay. it´s probably not that efficient to make waterworks to L20 everywhere, but L15 is still cost efficient and that´s 75% bonus. )
    this is just way too much.
    I assume the goal was here to give them something that could feed a huge amount of units (slaves ?), but this solution is overpowered.
    And problem is that it kinda forces egyptians to get as much 50% oases as they possible can. If they are able to secure them - they have huge advantage, if they are not able - they are out of luck. Not that balanced concept.


    Few ideas how to remade waterworks :


    A) have building that would provide permanent diet-like account-wide effect. of course not too much, let´s say 1% per level, 20 levels maximum.


    B) change waterworks to work like 3rd crop-boosting building like bakery/grain mill. extra 25% crop should be just fine.


    C) different resource boosting structure - maybe have it affect all resources, but only in capitol. eg 25% extra ressi / hour in capitol.



    With any of these changes egypt´s special building would still be good, but nowhere near as overpowered as it is right now.
    And those changes would also mean that egypt will have resource advantage, but be less depended on oases which seems to me like more balanced solution generally.


    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    LIST OF UNITS BALANCE CHANGES





    *** note :
    @0 OR L0 = at level of upgrade 0
    @20 OR L20 = at level of upgrade 20


    training time is in - hour / real training time at lvl20 building on x1. so if unit is taking 0:02:42 to train - number used will be (2*60+42)/3600 = 0,045



    keep in mind that when considering statistics of units different rations are more mportant than others for specific purpose


    for defense
    def / cost is the most imporant thing really. players can jsut make more barracks / stables in more villages, so def / time is irrelevant (and GB/GS are never gonna be used... hopefuly)
    crop / time is second important ratio, but it´s not actually that important as it might seem


    for offense
    attack / time and
    attack / cost are both important almost equally


    there are of course speed*carry_capacity and crop consumption to consider - but players will just choose units that fit their style so it kinda matters less in overall offense balance




    sooo, keep that in mind


    ********************************************************************************


    before new nations were introduced there was kind of a balance.
    you want great cheap offense ? you go with teuton
    you want awesome def and don´t care about offense ? you go with gaul
    you want to make strong army with low crop consumption or great farm potencial? you go with roman



    and even though there was balance here, it could be a bit better.
    Every nation have some units with flaws that makes those unit just meh.... and that would make you reconsider nation choice




    however with new nations huns and egyptians it went to .....


    you want BOTH great cheap offense AND great farm potencial AND low crop consumption ? you go with HUNS.
    you want awesome def and don´t care about offense ? you go with egyptian.



    If all players would take the time and compared the nations properly - only huns and egyptians (and maybe teutons) would be still in play.


    bad balance between units and nations is pretty much the worst thing you can have in strategy game.


    so here´s the list of changes I propose to make things more balanced overall and to make every nation actually viable option for both offensive and defensive playstyles while keeping them diverse enough.


    ********************************************************************************
    ROMANS


    prateroian- speed 5->6 ( 10->12 on x2/x3)


    no other unit is so slow and i am not sure why.
    praetorians are good unit, but the speed is unreasonably low.
    no other unit except chiefs is as slow as praetorians which makes roman def players just bad compared to every other nation.
    increasing speed by one won´t make them superior, it´s just make them somwhat useful


    ******************************


    imperian - currently they are the worst offense infantry in game.
    they have bad attack / cost ratio - 0.117 @lvl 0 ; 0.145 @lvl 20
    and worst attack/training-time ratio - 973 @lvl 0 ; 1207 @lvl 20


    to make imperians more worthy unit and keeping the idea of romans being "strong but expensive" kind of nation - it would make sense to boost both attack and cost of imperians. thus attack / cost would be the same (or even worse), but attack/time would increase


    my proposed change is to boost their attack 70->75 ( 86.9 -> 93.1 at lvl20) and changing cost to 700 ress / unit.



    that would change ratios to :
    attack / cost ratio - 0,107 @lvl0 ; 0,133 @ lvl 20 ( a little bit worse than before)
    attack/training-time ratio - 1042 @lvl0 ; 1294 @ lvl 20 ( a little improvment here)


    overall they would be even more expensive, but a little bit stronger overall
    even with this change they would still remain worst "attack / time" off infantry unit and still second worst "attack/cost" off infantry unit ( worst with that ratio being kopesh warrior)



    and if you are wondering how this would affect overall attack / time of whole roman army...
    it will boost it a little bit, but they will still be worse than teutons and huns, so overall it won´t actually mess things up.
    ******************************
    another problem of romans is that they don´t have proper def horse
    EI is fast raiding/attack horse


    EC is slower / stronger / more expensive attack horse


    but romans really could use some horse that could be used as def unit.
    EC should fit that role, but it just does not
    if we think of EC as def cavalry, it has :
    worst def/cost ratio
    worst def/crop consumption ratio - 46 ; 62 with HDT20 - even with horse drinking thingy they are still worst def/crop def cavalry unit there is
    surprisingly good def/training-time ratio with HDT20


    but as proper def unit they are just worthless
    nobody in right mind is using them for defense
    def / training-time is not really important number for any def units since you can just make units in more villages and end result is the same.
    adjusting them to be more def viable can be done by increasing def or decreasing cost.
    deacreasing cost would mess with offense balance



    right now they have :


    def-inf : 80 @lvl 0 ; 117 @lvl 20
    def-cav : 105 @lvl 0 ; 146 @lvl 20
    def-total : 185 @lvl 0 ; 264 @ lvl 20
    cost : 2170 ( most expensive non-workshop unit )


    def/cost ratio -- 0.085 ( L0) ; 0.122 ( L20) ;;; just for comparasin @ lvl 0 : druids=0.156 ; haeduans = 0.115 ; paladins = 0.139; Resheph = 0.150; Anhur = 0.147




    two possible solutions to rebalance ECs :
    A) just increase their def power a little bit


    lets say to 95 / 120 @lvl0 ( 138 / 166 @lvl20)
    that would change ratios to : 0,099 ( 0,14 @lvl20)


    they would still be worst def cavalry unit there is, but they could be at least somewhat viable as def unit


    B) change all stats to keep them same attack-wise, but improving def/cost ratio


    that would mean :
    increase def | AND/OR | decrease attack + decrease training time + decrease cost |


    not gonna bother doing the math on this one.
    ********************************************************************************
    TEUTONS


    axe dudes - even though they are overall second best infantry off unit - they are pretty much useless at the moment just because clubies are so good.
    I think the goal here was for teutons to have a bit weaker infantry that would consume less crop over time.
    and sure, they kinda fit that role, but we don´t see many axe hammers, do we ?
    Why ? They are not good enough for this purpose.


    what should happen is
    increase attack while increasing training time so they have same ratio, but eat even less over time.


    at the moment numbers are :
    attack 60 (L0) ; 75 (L20)
    time 0.045 ( 2m42s)


    attack / time = 1333 (L0) ; 1675 ( L20)
    crop / time = 22,2


    --------------
    proposed change :
    increase attack to 70 (L0) ; 87,9375 (L20)
    time to 0,0525 ( 3min9seconds at lvl20 building)


    attack / time would be same 1333 (L0) ; 1675 ( L20)
    but crop / time would be 19,04


    not that significant difference, but even this little change would make them fit their role a little bit better while not messing up overall balance.
    and to balance out farming capability they could get extra 5 carry capacity to even out lower troop count.



    ********************************************************************************
    GAULS


    haeduan...
    these guys sure could use a little bit of boost with both offense and defense to make them more viable and to make gauls a bit more useful with their funny hammers.


    gonna cut this short :
    off = 140
    def-inf = 60
    def-cav = 165
    cost = 1965 ( second most expensive non-workshop unit)


    for this cost they sure could give a little more punch
    they are not bad, but they are just not good enough in anything.


    pumping off to 155
    would make them more viable and gaul hammers somewhat more useful



    ****************************************************************
    new nations...


    well huns are basicly mix between teutons and romans as far as offense goes. they are really cheap and really strong plus they have best farming horses in the game.
    defense-wise - they are actually very good and both their "def" units are not really pure def units at all since they have huge attack as well.


    end result is - they are best or second best offensive nation. they are somewhere in the middle with defense. and they are definitely the best if you want to do both with one army
    does that sound familiar? Well before new nations this description would fit romans. but now huns just overshadow them in pretty every way, which is kinda sad.



    ********************************************************************************
    HUNS


    overall they look pretty balanced except two things
    Steppe Rider is WAY TOO CHEAP


    they have good attack, low crop consumption, insane farming potencial, good training time
    but they are overpowered due to their low cost


    they are the third best unit as far as attack / cost ratio is concerned ( and best unit for farming by far )


    if you are building hun hammer as raider and you opt for steppe rider + mercenary composition of army (merc>bow for farming). It´s actually more efficient to go for great stables instead of great barracks for attack power increase.
    yes... steppe riders have cheaper attack than infantry.
    this is the only case where this occurs as far as hammers are concerned


    so I say it again
    Steppe Rider is WAY TOO CHEAP



    they currently cost only 895 resources.
    increasing cost to at least 1000-1050 would make them more balanced overall




    marksmen - they are weirdly good at everything
    both attack and defense and speed and carry capacity and low cost.
    they pretty much have it all



    but since huns have already two great offense horses is there really a point for having third one with so good attack ?



    my proposed change is to deacrease their attack from 115 to 65. (maybe even less), just to make them significantly weaker for attacks


    ********************
    and same can somewhat apply for mercenaries as well, however there i am not so sure what their real purpose should be. they are pretty much the most universal infantry right now with both attack and def ratios really useful.



    that´s pretty much it.


    ********************************************************************************
    EGYPT



    they are definitely the best def nation with decent fast def horse and totally useless offensive potencial.
    just like gauls used to be :D



    overall they are just extreme on all ends.
    slaves being absolutely overpowered when it comes down to numbers
    reshep cariots ridiculously good for defense and just the worst offensive cavalry there is
    bonus from special building is actually making them the most inbalanced thing travian has ever seen


    ****************************************************************
    infantry - i actually like concept here, but numbers could use a little bit of adjustment really.
    slave militia is way tooo... well everything.
    even though I understand they should be really fast producing (and REALLY hungry) massing def units - their stats are actually extreme.
    you can make 50 of those dudes an hour. so crop consumption is gonna sky rocket fast and obviously waterworks should compensate that ( more on waterworks later)
    but it´s a bit too much and here´s one thing devs probably ignored. bcs hero weapons are adding flat bonus based on troop count - salve weapon would boost them massivly.


    let´s just compare them with phalanx (previously best def unit overall)


    slave (lvl0) - def 30/20. you can make 50/ hour (x1, rax 20) with T1 weapon every slave gets +3/+3 so weapon adding 300 def in total ( it´s 12% increase to total def)
    phalanx (lvl0) - def 40/50. you can make 25.7/ hour (x1, rax 20). with T1 weapon every phal gets +3/+3 so weapon adding 154 def in total ( it´s about 6.6% increase to total def)


    basicly thanks to their extremly low training time - hero weapon is WAY TOO EFFECTIVE for them


    with just a little bit of adjustment
    bit longer training, , bit increased cost, maybe bit increased def - they would still qualify for role they are supposed to fill, they just would be more balanced




    horses ....
    well
    this one´s easy
    Anhur dude was supposed to be fast def horse
    and Reshep slow and strong universal horse, right ?



    you need fast def horses ?
    sure, they can be useful.
    but if you consider that :
    A) vast majority of def power will come from slaves, so having speed horses as egyptian - not that efficient
    B) other nations can make better fast def horses
    C) reshep are just better def horse overall


    are you still gonna make them?


    if egyptian players can do basic math they don´t have reason to research anhur guard at all.



    thing is...
    problem is not with anhur guard. they are stat-wise comparable to other def cavalry and are overall actually balanced.
    problem is that reshep are way too good for defense



    egypt have another problem that comes down to reshep chariot as well.


    even though egypt is definitely def-oriented nation - they are totally useless for offense compared to other nations.
    infantry (kopesh dudes) is quite expensive, but at least provides decent amount of attack over time.
    however reshep chariot - as offensive unit ? garbage. just garbage and egyptians don´t have any alternative for offensive cavalry so they are stuck with expensive and weak reshep.


    solution ?
    decrease training time and increase attack
    that would make them bit more viable for offense
    ********************************************************************************


    I didn´t double check numbers here... So there sure are some errors.
    Altough I don´t believe it really matters.
    There´s not much point of putting effort to tweaking all numbers to perfection if concept is going to be dismissed as bad.
    Ideas behind every suggestions are important.




    that´s about it ¯∖_(ツ)_/¯


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • About the croppers, here you go:


    The Idea of a 2-2-2-12 was brought up multiple times, but it never caught up because:


    -A 15c is what it is, you need to import a lot of res and spend some gold on it if you want to develop it fast.
    -A 9c being somewhat self-sustainable by having 3 res fields of each, does need some res import, but not so much and gold is basically not a must.
    -A 12c would be the perfect middle between those theoretically, but yet 2 fields of each resource means you're not getting nearly enough of other res for it to be self-sustainable and you'd probably have to import a lot and spend some gold on it regardless. In which case you're better off with a 15c.


    And regarding variations, it's just not worth with this few fields. You don't see variations of 9c already.

    You're not the first, nor last to question this, but if it hasn't caught on since 2008, it probably won't now.

    really simple idea, but it could be quite handy to remind players of current ally goal.
    One infobox for alliance "message of the day" kind of thing.
    Obviously only players with rights to change should be allowed to change it for everyone.
    There might be even option to autodelete message in specific time/date.

    You alliance could resort to using the in-game alliance forum, where such things could also be addressed.


    Yes, time/power ratio they're really overpowered, but have you ever considered about the consumption/power ratio? If no, you'll realize that you will have extremely large numbers of them quite soon and I can't see anybody liking them as def, since the person being attacked is going to have nightmares feeding those.


    GAULS


    haeduan...
    these guys sure could use a little bit of boost with both offense and defense to make them more viable and to make gauls a bit more useful with their funny hammers.

    I'd leave them as they are, they're actually very balanced, because nobody in his right mind would attack a gaul hammer with haeds behind a gaul wall. They're actually perfect if people want to snipe you at night, because of their extreme defense versus cavalry and large bonus of the gaul wall. From this point I feel the gaul hammer is actually a bit less endangered as others, because of this. Infantry wise the Swordsman is fine.


    Other points I've skimmed over and I agree and disagree with some, but just wanted to express my point these few.

  • You alliance could resort to using the in-game alliance forum, where such things could also be addressed.

    the point of having alliance infobox is that it´s REALLY obvious , everyone sees it and it requires no additional effort to look at it.
    even TG is using infobox to notice people about stuff on forums ( contests usually ).
    forum is meant to be place for discussion - not for 1time announcements - but infobox is perfect lpace for such things



    Yes, time/power ratio they're really overpowered, but have you ever considered about the consumption/power ratio? If no, you'll realize that you will have extremely large numbers of them quite soon and I can't see anybody liking them as def, since the person being attacked is going to have nightmares feeding those.

    yeah, feeding is problem - and the way around that problem currently is waterwork´s bonus from oases
    it should even out and it does if you are looking only at slaves + crop consumption/production.
    but waterworks are way too overpowered overwall and need to get nerfed - that would leave slaves way too hungry and thus useless - therefore they need to be adjusted as well



    I'd leave them as they are, they're actually very balanced, because nobody in his right mind would attack a gaul hammer with haeds behind a gaul wall. They're actually perfect if people want to snipe you at night, because of their extreme defense versus cavalry and large bonus of the gaul wall. From this point I feel the gaul hammer is actually a bit less endangered as others, because of this. Infantry wise the Swordsman is fine.

    sooo the best thing about OFFENSIVE unit composion is that they have good DEFENSE ?
    that makes no sense to me


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • sooo the best thing about OFFENSIVE unit composion is that they have good DEFENSE ?

    Have you heard of versatility? Maybe... just maybe the haed was planned to be more versatile than strictly offensive? The gaul tribe is more known for their defensive ability rather than their offensive, why change that? You want to make an offensive army, you go for teutons and romans, but with gauls you are at a small disadvantage.
    You want to make a defensive army, you go for gauls, but with romans and teutons you're small disadvantage.



    You're trying to balance individual troops, but the way it's all made is, that the tribes all together are balanced. If you start nitpicking small details and try to balance individual troops you will unbalance the tribes in general.




    yeah, feeding is problem - and the way around that problem currently is waterwork´s bonus from oases

    Yes, but try sending 250k reinforcement of that junk to someone who's not egyptian. Maybe someone has their off villa under attack and they need def... unless you're going to snipe and quick retreat the troops Slave Militia is good, but otherwise they're a plain nightmare.

  • the way it's all made is, that the tribes all together are balanced.

    they are not.
    that´s the whole point.


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • they are not.that´s the whole point.

    Speaking of T4, not T4.4 and Fire&Sand.


    Just Romans, Gauls and Teutons are balanced. Not sure what you're on about, but if a tribe isn't meant to be focused on offense you can't force that into it. End of story.


    You're speaking of what you'd prefer to see and what you think would be better, which is fine, but what one thinks is better doesn't always necessarily turn up as planned.



    The Egyptians and Huns are still fresh, so there's still some optimal changes that could be made, but I believe there's other topics where such discussions were already made.




    Also, there's a topic where people post their opinions and wished, so you could've posted your wishes HERE! But please, do try to tidy it up a bit, makes it more understandable. if not I could do it for you if you want.

  • Not sure what you're on about, but if a tribe isn't meant to be focused on offense you can't force that into it. End of story.

    I am obviously considering new nations as well here, not just old ones.
    but...


    Are teutons viable as off ? YES
    Are teutons viable as def ? YES


    Are romans viable as off ? YES
    Are romans viable as def ? YES ... bit to slow with praets (which is one of suggestions)


    Are gauls viable as off ? NO ... too weak and noone smart would pick them to play serious offensive account
    Are gauls viable as def ? YES


    Are huns viable as off ? YES
    Are huns viable as def ? YES



    Are egyptians viable as off ? NO... too weak and noone smart would pick them to play serious offensive account
    Are egyptians viable as def ? YES



    see the problem there ?
    if not, I am done ¯∖_(ツ)_/¯


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • Are teutons viable as def ? YES

    Yes, but they're far less stronger as you think. Hence you see so few teutonic troops in WW holders, while gaul numbers of druids and phalanx are absurd.

    Are romans viable as def ? YES ... bit to slow with praets (which is one of suggestions)

    Agreed, but they're very limited with speed and the defense vs. cavalry is not that special. (Legionaire and EC's)



    Are huns viable as def ? YES

    Care to explain how exactly? They are viable, but they have poor-mediocre stats AT BEST.


    Are gauls viable as off ? NO ... too weak and noone smart would pick them to play serious offensive account

    There have been gaul hammers before, not as often, but the combination of :gau02: 65 attack power & :gau06: 140 attack power is not that bad. The teuton counterpart is :teu03: 60 attack power & :teu06: 150 attack power. There is the cost and training time to take into consideration, but they can still be used as offense. I've made a gaul hammer before, they're not the strongest, but definitely not to be ignored.


    I feel like you underestimate the gauls, they're not as bad offensively as you think. Not perfect, but definitely not bad. :D



    But whatever, let's just agree to disagree. We're obviously not going to find a mutual opinion. :D

  • Yes, but they're far less stronger as you think. Hence you see so few teutonic troops in WW holders, while gaul numbers of druids and phalanx are absurd.

    if you are playing def account without farming - sure gauls is clearly better
    but if you farm as well - teutons are actually better than gauls because you can farm a lot with paladins and use those resources for barracks in the end you will have more defense than gauls.
    exactly same thing goes for huns. you can effectivly farm with both sharpshooters and mercenaries and both can be used as def units.


    you can´t really do it with gauls - druids and phalanx are useless for farming


    and haeduans / EC are not good for this either.


    ------------------------------------------


    There have been gaul hammers before, not as often, but the combination of :gau02: 65 attack power & :gau06: 140 attack power is not that bad. The teuton counterpart is :teu03: 60 attack power & :teu06: 150 attack power. There is the cost and training time to take into consideration, but they can still be used as offense. I've made a gaul hammer before, they're not the strongest, but definitely not to be ignored.
    I feel like you underestimate the gauls, they're not as bad offensively as you think. Not perfect, but definitely not bad. :D


    well swordsman + haeduan are more expensive and gives you less attack over time than axe + teuton knight.
    "definitely not bad" --- if you consider 3 old nations then they are definitely the worst. and if they are worst that qualifies as "bad"
    now egyptians are even worse tho, but that´s problem as well.


    how many gaul off players you see usually ? I bet it´s very few and for a reason of course...
    however if you would do the math on my proposed changes you would see that it does not change it that much. just a little bit to make them a little bit more viable.



    But whatever, let's just agree to disagree. We're obviously not going to find a mutual opinion. :D


    ¯∖_(ツ)_/¯


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • Wouldn't this changes also refresh the game, and make some people wanna play it again? Gorky's ideas are quite radical imo, but implementing some of them, expecially buffing some units would be really refreshing and nice. After all, game is same for years now, we need new stuff to keep the game interesting, to try new stuff, to reinvent new strategies, to improvise etc. Take a look at any popular multiplayer game, what they have in common ? Answer is constant updates, buffs, nerfs... that is what we need here, at least once a year (probably best time would be after tournament finals).


    To sum up:
    1. Game needs ballancing to keep things fresh and intrest for the game higher
    2.Timing for ballance patch once a year would be nice

  • While it's fairly useless for 24/7 accounts, it's useful for solo accounts to start a building (and spend down resources) while they are offline. Remember that it's not just useful for starting when your building queue runs out, it also can start as soon as you have the required resources.

  • Remember that it's not just useful for starting when your building queue runs out, it also can start as soon as you have the required resources.

    I know, but nonetheless players are not using this feature very frequently and it´s only because of the cost.


    2x The Legend of 2017(com+SK)


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    My english is not perfect, but it´s most likely better than your slovenčina :D

  • i believe the reason there is less tuton in ww is that whoever plays good enough with them go for off.. nothing else... whoever make them as def are pre planned account..