Game improvements

  • While I understand the principle, I think any system like this is going to be massively open to abuse. What would stop me opening an account on a new server, pretending to be a new player and passing the res bonus over to my mate?

    Tit for tat?
    I'm sorry but both came in rather testy, placing blame fully on raider accounts with multiple duals (beyond what we on com even considered norm). Now Speed and Finals may have more duals on average; its almost necessary i think, but 8+ is not the norm, nor does it translate to dominance. I respect that they care about increasing member count, but the scope of their focus - that heavy raiding is the issue driving new players away, is too narrow in my opinion.

    A suggestion was made and it's being discussed. They weren't testy, just defending an idea they supported. That doesn't make their viewpoint any less valid than yours.


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png


  • Why is it so hard for them to cranny up? It's literally just clicking one button and poof! no more raiders at your door steps. From there you train deff to show those raiders than this is an active account and they will not come anywhere near it.

    Like I said before:


    Complaining that it's a war game is not really very productive. Neither is saying newbies need to learn to cranny up (we know this does not happen and we know they quit).


    It's not moving forward to say "newbies need to do x". Yes, they do, I agree with you, but the position we're in is that newbies aren't doing these things. Others have pointed out that the tutorial is terribly lacking and doesn't prepare newbies for play or how to survive the first few weeks. Unfortunately, this has been pointed out for years and the problem has not been addressed.


    Attention spans are not what they were 15 years ago. People want to play a game immediately without much brain involved, they do not want to study and visit forums and read game guides just to have some entertainment on a new game they've just discovered. Improving the tutorial would only partly solve it because people simply will not take in complicated info or large amounts of info in a short amount of time (ie, in the first few days). People need time. A game needs to be relatively easy and have more complex things added as they go. That means nerfing things in the beginning. I'm not just guessing this; I was a game admin on an RPG for several years. The introduction of a tutorial and various nerfing game mechanics for newbies saw us grow our player base by a factor of four and suddenly the established players were staying around far longer than ever before - and spending a lot more money. 20,000 player accounts on our server and about 100 other servers around the world. It had become a community where the competition was fierce.


    What keeps players in this game? It's not the game, it's the people, it's the feelgood aspect of playing in a team. I think almost all of us would agree that we are here for the people more than we are for the gameplay. Travian's #1 selling point is the social aspect and at the moment not much in the game itself supports that. So if you want players to hang around (and we do!) then you need to make the game enjoyable in the beginning, so that they play long enough to get the hang of it and make some friends.


    Slam them with red swords before they get to know anyone in their alliance and you have almost guaranteed that they leave. They are most likely to either think the game sucks or it's too hard. Let them be slammed by red swords a bit later, because by then they will probably have a community to talk to.

  • While I understand the principle, I think any system like this is going to be massively open to abuse. What would stop me opening an account on a new server, pretending to be a new player and passing the res bonus over to my mate?

    True, this still needs fleshing out. It is always possible to see if a specific email has been used in the past, but it's always possible to just use a different email, or have the old email deleted from TG's systems after a round has finished. You could limit the amount of mentees, but then another player might become unable to find a free player and end up a farm. You could time limit the partnership as well, but keep the mentor unable to attack their mentee, until the certain conditions are met, but then a player may decide that newbies are a better income by just being farms and just not help anyone. Everytime I think of a way to curb abuse, I also find a way to get around it.


    ---


    As for "Just cranny up", I don't know how it works in UK/US server, but at least on FI servers, this has historically proven to be ineffective at actually stopping raids. A raider will keep attacking you even if they are getting no resources, simply out of spite. If you start to train def troops, they will just increase the attacker numbers. If you actually manage to stand up, expect to be cata'd as soon as the raider manages to get them. This ofc doesn't apply to every raider here, there are people who would stop raiding you and even start giving advice to you, if you ask them to stop.


    And even then, most people just won't cranny up anymore, they just don't bother logging in anymore, because they got a bad taste in their mouth. The browser game market is bigger than it was in the past, if Travian gave a bad taste, there is always an alternative.

    This is a private account and messages posted from this account are of my own personal stance and do not represent Traviangames in any way. / Tämä on yksityistili ja edustaa vain omaa kantaani, viestit tältä tililtä eivät edusta Traviangamesin kantaa millään tavalla.

  • Completely agree with the second part of your post - which again would maybe lead back to the idea Locke had of having to opt out of BP when you are ready and at the end of the tutorial being given a link to decent game guides? I remember raiders hating when BP was extended from 3 days but even the current longer period isn't enough for people to really get the idea of what the game is about. Having said that, i do think a lot of new players don't even make it past the tutorial stage. I'm sure TG must have data on the length of play time for new registering players - it might be interesting to know when the spikes are for the numbers of players giving up. We can only go on anecdotal evidence and experience. Perhaps @Ameno might know if this data has ever been collected and analysed?


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png

  • I see a lot of talk about raiding here. Largely because of how it drives newbies away and creates drama. I do not have any magic solutions for this.
    For those that have been floating ideas around, though (and I thank them) they should probably take into consideration that we HAD farm lists back near the end of V3.6. They were manually built, and that took a bit of effort, but once the files were built with the proper links, it was almost as easy to use as the automatic farm lists we have now.

  • Wow. I walk away from the thread for 36 hours and it explodes! Lots to reply to.

    I am not a raider. I have only raided on three? of the servers I have ever played on and in the context of all of them it is an insignificant part of how I play the game. Raiding is a legitimate part of the game. Just like sending attacks, sending defense and scouting.


    Nerfing raiding is only going to drive existing players away. There needs to be a way that encourages new players, retains existing and brings back old ones. The reason servers have dwindling numbers is a complex culmination of multiple problems. Raiding is one element, but trying to fix one will not solve all of the games problems.


    So what can be done about raiding? Well Kingdoms (as much as I dislike) does have some redeeming qualities. Take the "treasure" element (or whatever it is called). Essentially it is a way to generate resources for raiders, without negatively impacting players. I am not completely sure on the mechanics, I've only lightly dabbled in Kingdoms.


    What I would propose is something similar though. Players would generate a second set of resources that mirror their existing ones. That second set of resources would only be available to raiders who raid the village. The player would have no direct access to them, perhaps though they gain some advantage for protecting them. They would also be able to set up automatic delivery to certain players as "protection" of sorts. I send these res, you don't raid me.


    The idea needs more work but it preserves the ability for raiders to raid, while protecting new players.

    Any experienced raider would not quit even if farm list was banned for a month. Hell, I have no problem in farming from my spreadsheet, its just nostalgic. There is absolutely no way for any war game to accommodate newbies by being partial to them. It defeats the purpose of a war game.


    The newbies must figure out how to deter raiders and there is only one thing they have to do. Cranny up. If they came into a war game, expecting kindness, then they are sadly mistaken. When someone pushes you down, you get back up. You don't cry and run to your mommy saying life is unfair. Because it is.

    Crannying up isn't a perfect solution but it is a start. It only protects them until chiefs and catapults start flying. I know players who will lean off a farm just to let them grow, opening them to be chiefed down the road.

    Agree on simple mechanics being emphasized. The current system teaches you nothing out of the gate. I remember when I was a newbie, it was trial by fire.


    Alliances are also important, though there is an issue of that fact that one alliance tends to dominate a quad now. It used to be that multiple alliances could exist and compete within a quad but opposition to the main alliance tends to fall fairly quick. So over time the advantage of being in a third party alliance decreases and most major alliances ruling a quad will only take in so many players.


    I like teaching players to be better. But it is impossible to take in every player in need of teaching. There is only so much time as a leader and a player and not that many players willing to teach. However a properly implemented mentor / buddy system might make it easier to teach in general.


    I like the idea of being able to select your experience level and having the tutorial etc. be based around that. It is a much more customized experience. However I would say that the gain from being experience needs to be the same as the lower ones. My understanding is the net resource value of skipping the tutorial right now is less than going through it.

    I am glad things are being forwarded but I think a lot of these ideas need more development here before they really get passed on. The more comprehensive and thought out we make ideas here, the better the chance they will be accepted and implemented by the Dev team. The only issue is that is hard to really constructively work on ideas in this format. It is easy to get sidetracked by different ideas and its difficult to keep multiple threads going. But there are some possible ideas to improve the process though. I don't have time to post about that now but at some point I will.

    I vaguely remember the Kingdoms tutorial sending an attack for the player to defend. Doing something similar in Legends could prepare beginners for defending themselves, since the current tutorial is only about simming.

    I believe this is correct. There needs to be a more interactive tutorial experience.


    The guide area needs a lot of work and we might see some efforts on that soon :)


    The newbie only servers do worry me. In theory great. But it is very complicated to implement and would also divide server populations even more if not done correctly. I think it would help if we could get the Single Account / Lobby System from Kingdoms here. It has a host of benefits, and making it easier to work with newbies would be one of them. It would also encourage forum participation by having a single account to log into both game and forum.


    Completely agree with the second part of your post - which again would maybe lead back to the idea Locke had of having to opt out of BP when you are ready and at the end of the tutorial being given a link to decent game guides? I remember raiders hating when BP was extended from 3 days but even the current longer period isn't enough for people to really get the idea of what the game is about. Having said that, i do think a lot of new players don't even make it past the tutorial stage. I'm sure TG must have data on the length of play time for new registering players - it might be interesting to know when the spikes are for the numbers of players giving up. We can only go on anecdotal evidence and experience. Perhaps @Ameno might know if this data has ever been collected and analysed?

    Regarding BP the ability to opt out of BP needs to return for everyone. Some people have no interest in being in BP and shouldn't have to if they don't want to. And obviously having a more hard end to BP for new players is an opportunity to make more detailed points about survival.


    We should keep in mind that for the "average" player it takes 10-20 days settle a second village. New players being closer to the 20 days and the less gold intense veterans etc. closer to 10. There are a few issues here. First I can see how players would be bored out of their mind before they hit Day 20. Second, BP ends after 8 days even with extended. This opens them becoming farms well before they even have the chance to settle a second village. On top of this, even if they do settle a 2nd village if they do so in their current area they will also be farmed if unprepared. If they go deep into the boonies for protection it will take weeks to get going and they will have little action.


    So:

    • New players need to know how to succeed better
    • How to become involved in activities that will encourage them to stay
    • Given better resources to learn

      • On this subject. I would change how "In-Game Support" operates. Everything related to game mechanics questions etc. should be funneled to the forum somehow. We need to encourage forum activity and we need to offer community to new players. Most of us don't play for the game, we play for the community we find and build around us.
      • I'm not sure if other domains had this but prior to the forum merge the US domain had a special group of players called Ambassadors (previously there were also Architects and Playwrights for different sections) These were players who provided extensive and quality posts in 3 different areas of the forum. What is now the Tavern, the Embassies and the help area. I would advocate for a similar program to be built. @ELE seems to have a tapped into the spirit of what I envision as part of the groups purpose. Spearhead the development and maintenance of guides, drive the answering of questions in the help section and serve as models for how to mentor new players.
      • In-Game Mentorship - It would be good if "mentors" could look at an account without being a sitter or having the account password. I would like to see this as a way for both players not on the server to mentor a player asking for help but also for players on a server to ask for and receive help from others on the server. They wouldn't be able to build, train or send troops but only see the account. Ideally this would be combined with a better in game note function and one available to none plus users as they most often need the help. Some potential for abuse. Any thoughts on limiting abuse?
  • Crannying up isn't a perfect solution but it is a start. It only protects them until chiefs and catapults start flying. I know players who will lean off a farm just to let them grow, opening them to be chiefed down the road.

    I agree. But I think that any newbie that has been crushed before should focus on excelling at a defense play style. Which is why I'm exited that many of you have proposed the Buddy system. I think that would be a great idea.


    Cranny up was a suggestion only during the beginning stages of Travian. Then they need to start to make defense. This is where the problem really happens. Newbies don't understand the concept of negative crop and feeding anvils or hammers. I had a short stint on the Support team on .COM and most of the new players kept asking questions like "What should I do, I have negative crop". So, this needs to be taught to new players via guides or mentorship.


    Another thing that newbies must learn is networking. Like someone pointed out earlier, most alliance are looking for more players to take on. It doesn't matter if they are newbs as long as they are willing to learn, the alliance will accept them. Newbies should learn to take the initiative to talk to alliances in their immediate vicinity and propose that they are willing to learn and help the alliance. If I was the leader, I would gladly accept him into the alliance and show him the ropes.


    I would also gladly write a guide on anything if I can get help from any experienced vet. Someone good with numbers would be good lol. ( I suck at math :D) So, if you guys have any ideas or wish to collab, just PM me here :)

    Yes, I've built my fair share of WWs. Won a few, lost a few. Played far too many rounds for far too long. Made a lot friends and enemies.


    Yes, I've played as an anvil and as a hammer. I'm only playing now because of all the friendship I have built over the past ten years. I love Travian but I love the community even more.


    Envy me for I have everything, Fear me for I have nothing to lose.

  • @Locke Lamora


    I like your post a lot, the main problem with current tutorial is that it does not explain why you do certain things.


    Except this part

    We have beginners protection right now that lasts 5 days and then it ends? maybe accounts should have to physically click to come out of BP else it continues

    First, that mean that accounts became inactive under BP will always stay under BP, meaning no farm at least in early game, meaning unbeatable advantage to cheaters with tech accounts and multies and pre made alliances who will push their top players. Explanation is needed ( I admit I never thought before that BP needs explanation) but still the action should be to extend it (after initial period), not to end it.
    Second, I hope you did not mean indefinite BP, I drool all over thinking about it for merely 10 minutes :D
    Scenario #1: An account stays under BP till the end, noticeable hammer can be build, not big but on small servers enough to be serious threat to WW and even on bigger once at the early levels. All that without any risk or involvement with an ally.
    Scenario #2: (and here it gets exiting): I as an alliance leader send 3 account next to your 150 cropper for second village, they will rush HM and with some luck and alliance push precious 150 will become 50 most likely or maybe even 0%. Nothing you will be able to do, accounts will stand under BP for awhile, maybe even till WW time and build defense.
    Scenario #3: I settle a village next to you hammer village, build a small hammer and one day when you are en route, chief your hammer. Nothing you will be able to do, not even scout to see what is cooking next to your doors, except keeping standing everywhere.
    Scenario #4: Accounts under BP with no alliance shown will settle all over unique artifacts radius and god knows who will steal u-diet from under your nose.
    This is what came to mind without even thinking, unlimited BP will get a big no from me.

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

  • First, that mean that accounts became inactive under BP will always stay under BP, meaning no farm at least in early game, meaning unbeatable advantage to cheaters with tech accounts and multies and pre made alliances who will push their top players. Explanation is needed ( I admit I never thought before that BP needs explanation) but still the action should be to extend it (after initial period), not to end it.




    Second, I hope you did not mean indefinite BP, I drool all over thinking about it for merely 10 minutes :D

    Well a change to BP could be that is automatically ends when a 2nd village is settled, no matter what. Then keep with the usual rules of not being able to send troops or resources. That would make it easier on new players. Add in some sort of limit where inactivity / other largish limit also negates the BP. Or perhaps they simply turn Natar faster, which I think in general is a good idea.


    There is a question about farming. If more players are in BP this will reduce farming potential in the earlier days of a server. This can be countered I'm sure. One possibility is dynamic Natars. They Natars automatically settle and grow new villages. Players who turn Natar also grow dynamically. Add in my earlier idea about that "treasure resources" bit which is raided separately from the usual resources, plus better guides, tutorial and mentorship and I think we've got the start of a winning solution.


    This would offer more farming and chiefing opportunity in the PvE situation. It isn't ideal. I prefer PvP but these changes taken together can help new players survive and learn the game, while maintaining the ability for raiders/chiefers to operate. And obviously as the game goes on PvP would become more prevalent, as these measures are largely targeted in the earlier days of a server.


    The way I see it, the hurdles for new players (in terms of server timeline) are:

    • Reaching 2nd village
    • Surviving until Artefact drop
    • Keeping interest until endgame

    I think most that survive until Artis keep can going to endgame but interest wanes if they aren't part of an alliance and have a sense of community.

  • I think Ele raised some really good points. I don’t have a clue what PVE or PVP are. But then I don’t suppose you would know what TRG or SKE might stand for in the meeting I was in earlier.


    So choosing to opt out of bp is a no goer for the very good reasons Ele pointed out, but also in the same vein, opting to stay in would need to be an account holder action only with password confirmation and a limited time. Second village sounds reasonable but it still bothers me that some heavy gold using simmers might abuse it. New players need more protection, veteran players need to not be able to capitalise on that. There must be a solution to this problem.


    /me puts thinking cap on.


    What about putting some restrictions on that force you out of bp which are things that more experienced players would do or that push accounts would do. For example, buying and using artworks, running a first party. Raiding, obviously as it already does. Sending reinforcements to another village. Sending resources to another account on anything less favourable than a 1:1 market place trade. Building troops at more than 50% of population. Just some ideas to chew on?


    Stand out Award 2017 UK
    illuicons_8_wonder-150x150.png

  • /me puts thinking cap on.



    What about putting some restrictions on that force you out of bp which are things that more experienced players would do or that push accounts would do. For example, buying and using artworks, running a first party. Raiding, obviously as it already does. Sending reinforcements to another village. Sending resources to another account on anything less favourable than a 1:1 market place trade. Building troops at more than 50% of population. Just some ideas to chew on?

    Good thoughts.


    Would you suggest BP being tweaked so that you could send troops on raids or reinforcements like the old days but it forcing you our of BP? As it is right now you can't send period right? Unless I'm remembering wrong, which is possible. Too much floating around in my head.


    So unless BP was changed in how it functions I'm not sure those would work. Perhaps utilize a combination of possible thresholds for automatic completion, using some of your ideas:

    • Automatic

      • Settle 2nd Village


      • 300 Population


      • Anything less than a 1:1 Trade


      • 50% Troop Ratio (This would require Travian to actually tell us the troop ratio, which is a good thing but obviously not currently available. Also sounds like something that might be plus material)
      • Maximum number of days? (Though this may work just as well by turning them Natar assuming Inactivity but in theory a player could be active all server and never trigger the automatic or optional actions)
    • Optional Actions

      • Send Raid / Attack on Player
      • Send Reinforcements
      • Send Merchants to another play

    Regarding the optional actions. What I'm thinking is keep BP as it is for X days (lets say 5). Then if you extend, either the optional (with you confirming before the action) and the automatic ones knock you out.


    I'm not sure about Artwork. Those are already unavailable until Day 14 and by that point a new player could probably really benefit from their use. Buying is a bit different but I'm not sure I'm comfortable with the idea.


    Any other obvious automatic or optional actions to remove BP

  • In our friendly similar game the Beginner protection ends after 7 days or 200 population reached. The game in general is more friendly to new players (you settle in the kingdom, which is a substitute for the alliance, and you get social aspect of the game immediately without looking at).


    So, there are already plenty ideas tested how to make the game easier for newcomers.


    My opinion as a player (not as a SCM) on that topic is that tutorial definitely could give more insights about what and why something is happening. I also think mentoring programme would be nice to test. When I started the game (I shared that story in Munich) I looked around, realized there is not much info, opened statistics and wrote to top-1 player, asking questions about the game.


    Surprisingly, received quite good answers which helped me at early stage. We'll think if something similar can be organized in here.

    Ameno.png
    When you contact me via PM, please, send your messages in English.

  • Good thoughts.
    Would you suggest BP being tweaked so that you could send troops on raids or reinforcements like the old days but it forcing you our of BP? As it is right now you can't send period right? Unless I'm remembering wrong, which is possible. Too much floating around in my head.

    Definetly because actually in BP you can't send raid (to other players), send resources, or doing trade different from 1:1.
    It seems we're talking about a BP that simply protect an account from incoming attacks and do not restrict interactions as it is now.
    If we talk about extending BP like it is now probably the second village, or 300 pop, or 7 days inactivity, training of catas can end it automatically.

    Pleased to meet you
    Hope you guess my name
    But what's puzzling you
    Is the nature of my game


    (Symphaty for the Devil, Rolling Stones, ages ago)

  • Is it just me or are scout artifacts really unfair because the scouts then become so OP?


    Look at this ridiculous figure.


    Travian :: Extended Combat Simulator 2.0


    Even 30,000 lvl 20 teutonic scouts cannot stop a meagre 5000 roman scouts with the small scout arti. And I bet even 40k or 50k scouts wont be able to stop 5k scouts either.


    This is absolutely ridiculous.

    Yes, I've built my fair share of WWs. Won a few, lost a few. Played far too many rounds for far too long. Made a lot friends and enemies.


    Yes, I've played as an anvil and as a hammer. I'm only playing now because of all the friendship I have built over the past ten years. I love Travian but I love the community even more.


    Envy me for I have everything, Fear me for I have nothing to lose.

  • Well @Eric Rasputin you forgot to make the wall 20...


    Artifacts are meant to be big game changers.

    Travian :: Extended Combat Simulator 2.0


    Is this fair? I don't think so lol

    Yes, I've built my fair share of WWs. Won a few, lost a few. Played far too many rounds for far too long. Made a lot friends and enemies.


    Yes, I've played as an anvil and as a hammer. I'm only playing now because of all the friendship I have built over the past ten years. I love Travian but I love the community even more.


    Envy me for I have everything, Fear me for I have nothing to lose.

  • Well @Eric Rasputin you forgot to make the wall 20... ;)


    Artifacts are meant to be big game changers.

    While I agree they should be game changers, I also think the the Scout Artis are OP. In general I think scouting is a little broken, though part of that may simply be players not building enough.


    In line with that what I would do is start by decreasing the Scout Arti multipliers. Perhaps 2x (large), 3x (small), 5x (unique). Combine that with increased defensive scouting strength for certain scout types - I'm thinking Tueton and at least 1 other tribe. (I think this would be particularly good if Egyptian scouts were made to be an infantry unit, or perhaps a "camel" unit that only consumes 1 crop). Right now the game already gives a big advantage to offensive scout use, 35 to 20 attack points. So some scouts should arguably be better at defending to make things more dynamic and balanced.


    To summarize in an easier to read list:

    • Decrease Scout multipliers 2x (large), 3x (small), 5x (unique)
    • Increase Scout defense of Tueton and 1 other tribe (Egyptian preferred if combined with suggestion below) to a higher amount (maybe 20 --> 40)
    • Change Egyptian Scout to infantry or 1 crop "cavalry" - think camel rather than horse and decrease unit speed
    • Apply Scout Arti bonus to troops you send elsewhere
  • imagine them with the UE

    ..And that is the Final Word.