Let's talk about the new rules and sitter function changes

  • You can find the original post for rules > here < and for sitter changes > here <


    One of the features requested during the Legends on Tour event in 2019 was changes to the sitting function so that sitting is only possible between co-allies or members of the same confederation.


    What are your thoughts on this?


    Any questions or feedback about the new Gamerules?

    samisu_sig.png

    Post was edited 1 time, last by Samisu ().

  • About this sitters change, I'm not sure what problem it's supposed to adres but I think it's a bit ridiculous I can no longer preform a sittercheck before I invite someone into my alliance. Am I supposed to invite someone in, check his account and then kick him out if it turns out that person is lying?

    Twee keer naar rechts is hetzelfde als achteruit

  • About this sitters change, I'm not sure what problem it's supposed to adres but I think it's a bit ridiculous I can no longer preform a sittercheck before I invite someone into my alliance. Am I supposed to invite someone in, check his account and then kick him out if it turns out that person is lying?

    Yes that seems to be the best case they're going for. :/

  • About this sitters change, I'm not sure what problem it's supposed to adres but I think it's a bit ridiculous I can no longer preform a sittercheck before I invite someone into my alliance. Am I supposed to invite someone in, check his account and then kick him out if it turns out that person is lying?

    Sittercheck is the literal problem.

    Forcing other players to put you as their sitter is against the rules and has been for years.

    Sure some people gladly put you as their sitter for a chance to get into the alliance... However that is not the case always nor even usually.

  • Sittercheck is the literal problem.

    That actually wasn't the reason it was suggest at the 2019 Summit. Some Ambassadors felt it was a way to help combat multi-accounts and techs by making it more difficult to manage them. That said given other game elements like res/troops within the confed it does make sense imo, regardless of any other reasons.


    However the issue regarding sit checking of players to get into alliances has been brought up and I proposed a solution to the Game Center. A short explanation is there would be an application function for alliances which would allow players applying to set a leader(s) of that alliance to have a "view only rights" sitter connection.

  • That actually wasn't the reason it was suggest at the 2019 Summit. Some Ambassadors felt it was a way to help combat multi-accounts and techs by making it more difficult to manage them. That said given other game elements like res/troops within the confed it does make sense imo, regardless of any other reasons.

    This change does nothing to combat multi-accounts nor techs?? They are not ran by sitters, since that would put a cap on the ress you could recieve/farm from them.


    I reckon this change should just get halted untill they have a solution for sitter checks.

  • I reckon this change should just get halted untill they have a solution for sitter checks.

    Eh I don't so see that happening. I've raised concerns but no other Ambassador seems to share them and it takes a few of us to get the Game Center's attention.

  • Eh I don't so see that happening. I've raised concerns but no other Ambassador seems to share them and it takes a few of us to get the Game Center's attention.

    Well thanks for the response. Basically Travian is making it impossible to cooperate with anyone outside the confederacy, which I guess is fine. That said I think think this will not do anything against tech's because like LemBot pointed out, no one manages a tech by sitting. And even if you are, if you'd want to send defenses too yourself you'd need to have your tech inside the confederacy anyway.

    Twee keer naar rechts is hetzelfde als achteruit