• I don't mind Natars training troops or random spawns but it could've been nice if each Natar village were training some specific troop type; so we could raid them more intelligent way by sending specific troops against them which also create a difference between good raiders and bad ones as who adapts better into this. For instance if one Natar village is specialising on pikeman, I'd not send there my cavalry troops as I lose a lot, and I'd send my cavalry troops to Natar village who is training thorned warriors etc. I don't know all about Natar troops off/deff stats (still rookie) but I lose a lot more against pikeman with cavs than infantries. So I guess there are smarter ways to deal with them with specific units.


    If i am mistaken, sorry. It's just a thought...

  • I don't know all about Natar troops off/deff stats (still rookie) but I lose a lot more against pikeman with cavs than infantries.

    You can see their stats here:
    Travian :: Troops



    Natars arnt for farming purpose.. if u know what I mean though...

    lol, yes they are. Just because you can chief them, doesn't mean you shouldn't farm them. Majority of natar villages are below your limit of 500 pop anyway.

  • Tbh, why not if you are looking for billas close to you with rich oasis. Or if a player re-spawned as natars.


    I'd rather chief a natar villa as support knowing fields are decent level and is really close.


    Natars also aren't stupid enough to gold down all infrastructure and spam crannies like some people do. :D

  • You can see their stats here:Travian :: Troops



    lol, yes they are. Just because you can chief them, doesn't mean you shouldn't farm them. Majority of natar villages are below your limit of 500 pop anyway.

    Thanks, I couldn't find those ingame instructions so I thought they are not shared information.


    ---


    For the other matter; I see lots of people are farming Natars which makes it a purpose for those people; -also I believe it's debatable if it's worth raiding them or not; that's why I bring this subject as suggestion to make them more worth raiding...- nevertheless in my viewpoint, chiefing farms and AI is not something I prefer generally; I've only conquered one Natar village so far which was 1 field away from me and I needed a feeder close. As Gilded Goat mentioned, I'd rather expand through weakening my enemies and conquering them, so I'd save my CP slots to them mostly. Especially F&S mode requires this kind of aggression towards other alliances I think.

  • I can't speak to Fire & Sand but for Travian 4, natars are probably 75% of the raiding income by the end of the server, and provide 100s of villages to conquer. Natar villages are super annoying to farm because they can insta-build a wall, residence, barracks, stable, or any other building the AI wants.
    Trust me, I've tried to croplock a natar farm, and yet it instantly has a barracks and can train infantry troops after getting catapulted.
    In the longer term though, natar villages are great farms, you just have to accept that unlike an inactive account, residences/walls will get rebuilt and occasionally troops will get trained. Once the reports started turning orange, i would just move the farm to a different list until i could cata/ram the natar village and then continue as usual.


    The best part about conquering a natar village is that you don't have to fool with expansion slots. Any natar village you chief will have all slots open, unlike a player village you conquer where you might grab a village and have 2/3 slots full.


    I'm newly coming back to the game after 3 years, so I might be misinformed, but unless there have been drastic changes I hope I'm giving you useful info. cheers,


    regards,
    Paulpd

  • Chiefing Natars is fine, I have no problem with it. However when there are so many enemies nearby, and people still opt to chief from Natars. It's a little problematic.


    On a recent speed server I played, our account chiefed something like 15 or so village entirely from an enemy alliance. Almost everyone else in the alliance seemed perfectly happy to just chief Natars and inactive accounts, hampering raiding potential and not bothering to help weaken the enemy.

  • Chiefing Natars is fine, I have no problem with it. However when there are so many enemies nearby, and people still opt to chief from Natars. It's a little problematic.


    On a recent speed server I played, our account chiefed something like 15 or so village entirely from an enemy alliance. Almost everyone else in the alliance seemed perfectly happy to just chief Natars and inactive accounts, hampering raiding potential and not bothering to help weaken the enemy.

    It's mostly because people are lazy and scared. They think that if they attack the enemy then it would paint a target on their backs and they wont be able to sim peacefully. Plus it takes a little work to chief from the enemy, gotta watch out for snipes, re cheifings, walls and so on ...

    Dead. Everyone's dead.


    As4 - Apocalypse

  • It's mostly because people are lazy and scared. They think that if they attack the enemy then it would paint a target on their backs and they wont be able to sim peacefully. Plus it takes a little work to chief from the enemy, gotta watch out for snipes, re cheifings, walls and so on ...

    It will 100% paint a target on me