LoT 2020 The Tech Talk (COM)

  • Pointless to have discussion with you, as you seem to know it all and only focus on your opinion.

    You came with a personal attack on me, claiming that I only talked about garages and no one cares about garages - when I literally spent a single line talking about garaging, and then 10 lines talking about private farms. I will quote it to make it even easier for you, since you refused to just go back and actually read my post:


    Amendement to rule 1.1: something like adding "an account is only allowed to willingly give away x amount of production (I'm thinking 1/10th or less). This is intended to handle private farms.


    This of course raises the question of enforcement. The RET team have limitied tools to track resources raided and such too, as far as I'm aware. Likewise, they don't have the manpower to track it. However, I believe there's a large proportion of players that take issue with private farming, especially legitimate top raiders. These would also be the first to notice private farms - seemingly inactive/farmable account suddenly being defended, only against their raids, but not against other raiders.


    Keep in mind, being inactive, or being a bad player, doesn't mean punishment under this rule. This is meant to target private farms - i.e. accounts that will be farmed by one player or one team, and then defended against all other teams. Inactive accounts obviously won't be defending against anyone. Likewise, noob players who are being attacked would presumably defend against all attackers.


    There are obviously some drawbacks to this: it leaves the enforcement to the discretion of the RET team. It also requires vigilance from the playerbase itself. As for the later point, as mentioned, I think there are enough players that actually care, that private farms would actually be reported, and generally, I actually think it could be a good thing if the playerbase was given incentive to be a part of reinforcing the rules and fair play.


    Exceptions to the restrictions should obviously be made for WW feeding (or perhaps even outright at WW plan drop?).

  • it makes the game too complicated. Even now it takes years for new players to know the game well, and these calculations and crazy rules going to change gameplay for worse

  • Glad you figured we dont'talk about the same stuff, might explain your conflict with others about the topic. Nobody argues deffensive playstyles should be forbidden. Or helping/ cooperating with other players is wrong, it's the fundament of the game, and it's what makes the game fun, working together. The problem with a tech account is that it is unpunishable. You can not ban them, you can not combat cheaters.


    A game with fewer world/player interactions are less fun. and interactive.


    A game with too much world interaction is very prone to get unbalanced, and quickly relies too much upon those world/player interactions/cooperative play styles. If "simming" is the dominant strategy the game early on get very very dull, a bot could do it perfectly.


    A real time strategy might make activity too rewarding (travian), and without restrictions too "play" intensive (idealistically you farm and scout non stop, build a lot of scouts and continiously scout to scan activity etc.). But with too much restrictions it becomes dull and lack choise, and dept, and restrictions means it increase adeption complexibility.


    Idealistically you have as few mechanics/rules as possible. And you have a very fine balance between risk and reward. Examples were travian could have incoperated a better risk/reward system is for exmaple the cranny. Your resources are 100% save and there's no punishment for saving them. Also it makes defending early on not rewarding at all. I think T4 got a concept were you can loot unprotectable items/resources is for example a kind of solution, again a good concept, just not excecuted that well.


    A good example of a punishing/drawback system is the crop use of troops. But what happened of the course of a few years is that production increased (25% production bonus), and a 1.4! production bonus in T4. And its even worse on speed servers.


    But it's really hard to think of a way to construct your game so that having multiple accounts are relatively low in reward, and might benefit others more. Solutions other games have tried is to make player interaction seemingly random. But that's not that much fun, because it makes the game boring again. Other games restrict player interaction only based upon a ladder/pool system. With demotion and promotion, but again you restrict player interaction, and makes your preformance very dependent upon who you face. Although it could be part of a solution. There's just not an easy solution/concept to come up with.

    Gebruik jolijt wanneer gij zijt in uwe jonge jaren

  • You came with a personal attack on me, claiming that I only talked about garages and no one cares about garages - when I literally spent a single line talking about garaging, and then 10 lines talking about private farms. I will quote it to make it even easier for you, since you refused to just go back and actually read my post:

    You might want to consider that in that 1 line, you referred to your opening post in this thread that was 80% text about garages?

    I'm worse at what I do best and for this gift I feel blessed . . .


    History:

    Dirty! (nl1/de1), Violence (nl4), Avoid (nl7), Bazen (nl4), MUG (nl2, nl5, nl4), Cocktail (nl6), Prandur/Camorra (nl2), Vandalen (nl5), Borgia (nl2) and many more not listed.


    Valhalla, Carpe Diem (t3 .com classics), CS! 2017 finals (Croatia)

    CUP 2018 finals, X3 2019 finals (Russia)


    ~ The special one... ~

  • Not sure how many people would like this, but i would rather TG make the game info easier to access. Some people dislike techs, some like them, but instead of forcing any kind of restrictions, just make techs easier to notice.


    # NAP / Confederacies should be showed on alliance pages without a possibility to remove it;

    # once Confederacy is signed, it should take 3 days to come in effect (1 day in speed servers) - to avoid hidden techs to get spiked or them sending reinf quietly;

    # if someone gets chiefed multiple times without defending (or even once depending on TG thoughts), both accounts should be highlighted in surrounding reports;

    # if someone is being a garage (x % production being used on other people troops while barepy having any of your own) - make their villages have a different colour or some kind of marking appear on map. Anyone with enough time spent scrolling map, could find garages and take some actions about;

    # if someone is being heavily raided, every time lost res milestone is reached (100k / 250k / 500k etc), account should pop up in statistics new section - Best farms. If you being a good farm, then everyone should be able to find you.


    Just some random thoughts how to combat teching. These would actually have zero impact on actual tech users, but anti-tech players could find techs easier and actually take siege action against said accounts.

    Biggest Noob of them all

  • The notes from the workshop should be published next week, so I'll happily discuss things by then (will be easier) - but I can say that I'm happily surprised. There's still some stuff to do in regards to teching but.. TG actually did more than I expected and already had a solution ready to something that I thought we would have to discuss at length how to solve instead (well, basically they did what I was talking about in this topic too - fixing private farms through a rule change).



  • fixing private farms through a rule change).

    So it comes down to rule enforcement. Hopefully they do it right...

    W6 2020 - Lockdown - Havoc Squad™ - TtP

    W1 2019 - Hive - Havoc Squad™ - PROJECT

    W29 2018 - SCV - Havoc Squad™ - DEAR (Sieg)

tg_TL-DQ4_970x250_181126.jpg