Server difficulty level

📝Farewell to Forums📝

The forum is currently in read-only mode that will last till July 07th, 2021.

You will find news and all relevant information about the game in our Travian: Legends blog.
For live conversations and interaction with the community join us in official Travian: Legends Discord server.
  • I like to compare Travian to sports. Basketball, for example, is being enjoyed on many different levels, from backyard hoops to TD Garden floor and players in The Garden are not the ones who have most fun, I am pretty sure, it is work for them. There is some rules variation between high school play and NBA play. Why Travian should be different? Current servers structure does not provide different environment for different groups of players and we are different, not only by skills and knowledge level but also by level of dedication and commitment, by playing style or simply by time we willing to put into the game. And often different settings are preferable for different groups. Examples: beginners would benefit from prolonged beginners protection and most experienced players say just get me out of it; on tournament servers defense at WW approaching 100M, a hammer that can even scratch the building above initial few levels can not be build by a solo account yet on a small server it can be done without raiding even.

    I want to discuss some sort of divisions system. Please keep in mind that schematic below by no means is a final proposal but rather illustration for the general idea, I think brainstorming it can be fruitful.

    1. Beginners servers. They should be crafted to learn account development and basic level of interaction between players. Probably more options to expend BP, maybe attacks restriction (no waves for example), comprehensive quest system, which will include tasks to cooperate with others (sending coordinated attacks for example), more active natars to compensate potential lack of action etc. Not sure if it even needs a WW, some other goals can be set. An account must be played on that server for certain period of time or till certain point (finish all quests, for example) to go on any other level or maybe with exception of level 2. This will also cut number of multies and bots for competitive servers imho.
    2. Regular servers. The regular servers as we see them now with standard set of rules and expectations of casual play.
    3. Rivalry servers. This will require formal recognition of alliance's leadership, i.e. a code sent to an e-mail(s) that belongs to account(s) registered as alliance leaders. Maybe top 3-5 population/attack/defense alliances from previous level or some other criteria. Once in awhile (3 months?) TG will announce custom servers, recognized alliances will proposed a set of rules (size and type of the map, speed, length of beginners protection, tribes, alliances size, whatever variables TG can deliver, I am willing to go as far as allow multi-accounting as long as there are people who is willing to pick up the glove) and as soon as there are at least 3, maybe 5 alliances registered for proposed set up a server is good to go. Everyone is free to join as long as they are graduated from a level 1 server.
    4. Tournament. As is now, maybe with variation of some rules as alliance size and confeds or something else - tournament players are better to say what they want.


  • I love the idea of Rivalry servers!

    Beginners server can be useful for certain aspects, not sure they can really help a new player to interact with big bad guys she/he may meet on a regular server though. What about a some very short servers (without WW) but where every kind of attacks are allowed? Defending from waves and sending waves are pretty crucial in regular servers. I like the idea of including tasks to cooperate with others.

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

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

    fnx wrote:

    I have to admit last year Villains played cleaner than us

  • Rivalry server sounds nice, but one could argue it would compete with participation in regular servers yet worth a try to see if it garners interest. Could make for a lot of variation.

    ..And that is the Final Word.

  • chris in the 2nd post has similar thinking to mine i think. Beginners server wouldn't actually be of too much help to beginners, it would just prepare them to sim and understand some basic mechanics of the game. They would still face a big challenge of competition and would be faced with every possible attacks and defendings which they wouldn't experience in that 'simming' server. But there should certainly be more comprehensive and actually meaningfull tutorial which experienced players could skip if they didn't want to take part of it on regular servers,

    With all that said, rivalry servers would be cool, but would probably empty regular servers of domains and make lots of them obsolete. And that would be pretty close to tournament system that is already in place. I doubt travian company would want that :p

    Post was edited 2 times, last by MarkokraM ().

  • Solid idea @ELE
    Is a good way to actually keep the new players which scramble upon the game.
    Also the possibility of progressing through leagues actually gives an incentive for newer players to stick around.
    The only issue is that there aren't that many players to begin with now. This would've been a solid idea in the 3.6 days, but now idk. Further dividing the current players will only split the population even more, resulting in even lower regular server counts.

    They see me rolling
    They hating

  • Beginner servers could just be players vs Natars. Players cant attack eachother, get an invite to "Humans" alliance early on, this way you could explain the benefits of an alliance.

    Then like grey zone, they would start getting attacked by Natars. Not with the same hammer numbers or even catas early on, but just so they can get help against 300 inf attack on day 20 or something. Then you can give quests like "destroy a natar cropfield" or "defend against a natar raid" "lose 0 resourses on the next natar raid" etc.

    This way there would be no benefit of an experienced player roflstomping beginers (since they cant attack em, only reinforsement), they could ask for defense in the alliance, get tips etc. I dont see any problems with this.

  • I like this 10x, maybe even expand the beginner servers to have those pro-volunteers in the sunday school to run the alliance(s) on that server wherein they can monitor, assist and teach new players

    UK20(1) - Infinity. UKx(28) - Kebab. COMx - Darth Jar-Jar. ASx(1) - Mikle. AngloNYS5x(1) - Doner Kebab

    Skype: chainsawdaz
    Discord: Daniel#7855

  • I don't think different speed than usual would help. Best would be simple x3 or x1 which are usual regulars but just shortened without WW like it was mentioned earlier. But that pro-volunteer thing sounds interesting because i noticed that lots of top players are actually willing to share their knowledge. Thats why beginners evennow now have a good chances aswell toif improve if they are brave enough to just message someone from top10 players when they start server :)

  • Oh lol I didn't mean 10x speed servers 8o I mean I like the idea 10 times :thumbsup: but yeah, I think 3x speed for a beginner server since these days, people want things ASAP so if they have to wait hours for low level buildings and wait hours to get 10 troops then they may log out and forget about the game or get bored quick :(

    UK20(1) - Infinity. UKx(28) - Kebab. COMx - Darth Jar-Jar. ASx(1) - Mikle. AngloNYS5x(1) - Doner Kebab

    Skype: chainsawdaz
    Discord: Daniel#7855

  • my bad, i though some new x10 official servers started and that i didn't notice them

  • Beginner servers could just be players vs Natars. Players cant attack eachother, get an invite to "Humans" alliance early on, this way you could explain the benefits of an alliance.

    Then like grey zone, they would start getting attacked by Natars. Not with the same hammer numbers or even catas early on, but just so they can get help against 300 inf attack on day 20 or something. Then you can give quests like "destroy a natar cropfield" or "defend against a natar raid" "lose 0 resourses on the next natar raid" etc.

    This way there would be no benefit of an experienced player roflstomping beginers (since they cant attack em, only reinforsement), they could ask for defense in the alliance, get tips etc. I dont see any problems with this.

    To add to this. Since we dont want new players wasting 200+ days on a begginer server, we should cut down the time it takes to finish a server. I dont think intruducing artefacts and building plans is a good idea. And making a WW to level 100 as a win condition as well.

    Have the basic quests at the begging like we have now. Then after those it would come a separate quest list v2. It would become more interactive with Natars. Natars would start attacking/raiding and according to that you have to defend/attack.
    The Natars are attacking you with 10 inf troops - defend yourself! (Reward: revive all the dead troops)
    The Natars are sending a big raiding party! Prevent the lost troops by spending down or building a cranny or 2! (Reward: 10 scouts)
    Its time to go on the offensive. Use to scouts you got to spy on a Natar town to check for resourses and troops! (Rewards: 10 inf troops)
    Its empty, go and try to collect some resourses! ...
    Etc. etc. etc.

    This could include some hammer building to take down the defenses of 1k troops etc.

    After all this, im still not sure what would be the win condition. Maybe some points based system?

  • ^looks good, but there don't actually need to be real winning condition as the server would only serve as one big tutorial. Although it would help to have something to look for. Maybe some alliance related goal, because new players are usually not willing to talk much with people out of fear i guess. So some goal that would require actual coordination and cooperation of more players would be cool.

  • Beginner's server, bad idea. Let's consider it like this. Years ago when I first played, what happened? Firstly, I found a good player in area. He helped me with resources etc, and some guides. Then what happened, through him, I joined the top alliance of the my quadrant. There it was where I got motivated - I bugged a lot of team mates in the top ten raiders etc, asking about this and that.
    No new player is going to wait for a beginner's server to start. This is the first thing you should know. They do not have enough knowledge, and if you want them to make a lot of research before starting - they'll quit before starting the game. And if you advertise beginner's servers - by the time it starts they'll have lost interest or diverted into something else. Their actions are simple to predict. They'll join whatever ongoing server is on the front screen.
    Basically, what I'm saying is - if you want to train new players - all yours ideas should be directed towards "how to do it during the server." You could start Academy wings from the members of Sunday School in every server. Joiners could be from all quadrants that want to learn. Ofc the leaders require to be putting enough efforts (top raiders or simmers something) so that the newbees can see they know the game. Just providing knowledge is not enough.
    Now this is where it gets tough - these wings cannot say no to any player FOR VERY OBVIOUS REASONS WHICH IS CAUSING ALL NEW PLAYERS TO QUIT FOR LACK OF ACCEPTANCE. So, members of these wings cannot get special tutorials etc, those members can still be attacked by all quadrants. The players requires open leadership too to teach them how to lead etc. And why zergs are not a good idea. Members being far from each other etc. These alliances might become the biggest ones per server too so it requires graduations of players and exporting them to other alliances ? xD
    Also during those servers, Travian should sponsor some of the gold for Sunday School teachers. We'll be increasing their player base. And personally, I do not want to pay to do it for them. Otherwise, if we have a mediocre accounts ourselves, we'd fail to attract newbees.

    i just want u to know i have no prob with u not knowing good English but don't act smart and use stuff i said that u don't even understand to try to hurt me bro

  • Conceptually I like it. But as has been expressed, how do you do it in a way that doesn't make servers even smaller than they are now? I don't have an answer to that.

    I think this system would also require a single account / lobby system in order for it to work at all. So things like who has "graduated" from a lvl 1 server can be easily tracked.

    I also am not sure you can run a beginners server that really prepares players to step up. They might learn the basics and a few other things, but they will still not be prepared for regular servers unless the best of the best stick to Tournament or "Rival" servers as you call them. I don't think they would. Some will take pleasure in smashing less experienced players on a regular server. You've also got the complication of the Birthday servers and any other specials.

    I would nix the Beginners servers in favor of a more robust tutorial etc. for "Regular" servers. I would also change "Rivarly" servers to "Championship" servers. Run 1 per year (per domain or group of domains in the case of smaller ones) and clearly mark them. You could also restrict registration with a lobby system, for those who haven't completed a regular server for instance. I suppose you could also limit registration to alliances that organize to go, but I'm not sure if that is ideal.

    This would all be easier with shorter WW servers too. A lot of people I know only do 1 server at a time. 8-9 months essentially means 1 server per year.

    Former Anglosphere Ambassador 2019-2020

  • I will come in here Ele, need to gather thoughts & time for serious input here, I have some thoughts on various areas TG could easily improve servers.
    have been watching the debates & the game, for many years, I see some avenues to correct some of the issues.. will come back in few days,, with what was to go to tg. (eventually)

    confidant there will be a roll back :rolleyes::D

  • A novice player will become a good player if he starts playing seriously and he's only going to do so if he plays with great players.
    As far as the more detailed tutorial I agree, even though the best tutorials are the players who know how to play and are willing to share their knowledge.
    The best school of travian are those servers of a ertain caliber, and as of now the only server of said caliber that remains is the Final Tournament. On every domain, servers generally have few people signed in and their value drops with every year. As opposed to dividing the servers by capabilities, I'd unify more domains, in order to create servers that are more hard-fought and have a certain value, so basically, more final tournamets.

  • I see different difficulty servers as an option to play with (more) equal opponent. I don't believe that best way to teach how to swim is to throw a kid in deep waters, most will die unless they are saved by a lifeguard and even those will develop fear for water.

    Just thinking out loud: Beginners server does not have to have a start and an end, can be ongoing. Spawning every week in different zone (half quad), rotating every week and in 8 weeks an account will be automatically deleted to make room for new wave. You have to achieve set goals ( x villages, y number of troops, z number of battles) to pass to next level. Tasks can be to attack (land in the certain period of time) or defense together with a group of people, can be an attack with at least 5 players with at least one cata wave in that group, can mention that you as a group can help one account to build catas to complete such task. Instead of just looking at cp tab, can write down a number you produce and do it for several days so people will be forced to keep track of it. Automatically generated sim can be added to a report to show the result with a proper wall and leveled troops. Ticking clocks will be an incentive to be more active, players can graduate earlier with a voucher for resources or gold to use on next server, can be set amount which will go down every day/week to encourage active play. In ideal situation a group of people will graduate together and go on next level already as a small alliance who knows how to play with each other, resources can be added to alliance bonus if a leader brings 70% of his group as an alliance to the next server.
    Natars can be awesome teaching tool but that will require a lot of coding, I doubt it is doable on big scale.

    There are people who wants to play casually, the way most local servers are now, that would be the second level. Competitive teams are looking for a challenge, not an easy win. Rivalry level is not so much as custom set up even though I would love to have such option but rather a formal option to find an opponent. I am not suggesting adding more servers but replacing existing ones, if at some point there is not enough teams to accept a challenge, the server goes as regular one with normal set of rules.

  • When I started playing was back in mid 2000 s and there were over 20k Accounts registered in first 10 days. Nowadays hardly a server

    can survive with 5k accounts after 1st month 2-3k accounts at artifact period and 1k accounts at end game period.

    Unfortunately for us who loved this game , the game itself cant keep the newcomers . They just dont survive enough as to be addicted to the game. So I believe that having different type of servers with even different type of rules applying in each (Newcomers' servers with 1 month BP if chosen, or Rivalry Servers with zero BP ) would be challenging for all and give the time needs a new player to get used to a totally new game for him and become addictive to him. So I totally agree with the idea of having balanced servers with same type of players . Would be more challenging for all.

    Al Capone (Chaotic War Lords/Immortals/Twelve Monkeys)

  • I like the idea of considering how new players could be better mentored and supported in the game so I would like to add a couple random thoughts.

    I don't know if this has been suggested before, could the medal system be used here. For example, the obvious one is a veterans server. You have to have a veterans medal to play. There could be a bootcamp medal for newbies to play a training server after which they become a recruit. Recruits can play regular servers as can veterans.

    Recently, I played an Arkheim beta server. In Arkheim, you are immediately placed in a group. To steal an idea from that experience, could newbie be placed in a quad and an alliance.

    Or another thought, could all alliances be required to have 10 spots for recruits?

    :elephant: Elephant Hunter

  • Anoris_COM

    One of the issues is that there isn’t really a system in place to say who is new/inexperienced and who isn’t. I have about 8 years experience but I don’t have a single veteran medal due to different emails.There is also the issue of people who would use new emails to play on new player friendly servers to wreck them.

    Don’t get me wrong I like the line of thought. It’s just really hard to do with what we have to work with. One thing we have discussed is making it a bit easier to join alliances. Part of that was making l3 embassy 60 players to start. Another is adding a mechanic where an alliance can be “open” and players can just click a button to join. There would also be a an application button. Plus you can be restricted where you need to be approved and closed it you aren’t accepting apps. They aren’t big changes but they would reduce the friction a bit if players finding an alliance as they can more readily view their options and get started on getting in. This could also be paired with some in game content with an example of the types of things you should say along with your application.

    Former Anglosphere Ambassador 2019-2020