Future Ambassador Workshops

  • Hello everyone,


    I wanted to provide an update on the Ambassador Workshops. There will be a break until September to account for people trying to enjoy the summer / time off & of course the annual Birthday Special. The Game Center has decided to use these workshops to focus on large topics as it allows us to dig deeper into a topic than jumping around to what may be unrelated smaller topics. The Game Center has asked the Ambassador's to gather feedback on what future workshop topics should be and so I am here asking for your feedback. I have collected a few below as a starting point and I will likely run a poll in 1-2 weeks to get a better sense of what the priority for the next workshop should be.


    • Tribe Balancing - Unit attributes, special buildings etc.
    • Game Tools - Think in-game versions of Getter etc.
    • New Mechanics - This could be a variety of things, perhaps the ability to upgrade a village into a "city"?
    • Techs - I personally don't think this topic is fully settled and there is more to discuss
    • Updated Map - Improve the map such as highlighting the oasis that are assigned to the village you are currently selected
    • Improved Farmlists & associated game aspects - I've got a large list of things that can be done to improve the general farming experience
    • New SQL Data and/or API
    • Reduce 1x Server Length + balance changes to various aspects - I've got some proposals on this as well


    What do you guys think? I'd like to hear your ideas and if you agree with any of mine I'd be interested to see what your top 3 are (in order from highest priority to lowest).


    -BB

    Former Anglosphere Ambassador 2019-2020


    • New Mechanics/Server Length (A little crazy and different of an idea.)

    It's no secret some servers are won long before they are officially won. An idea I have heard and fell in love with was having all Natar related artifacts/plans spawn day 1. I know what many are thinking reading this, "Some sweaty's are going to take plans day 100 and lock down a WW with millions of def and cheese a win." My solution, change Natar horns. Up the defense of Natar villages to much larger amounts and force Natar horns to be an important part of clearing Natars in a standard server. For instance, Natar horn tier 1 and whatever % it would have would spawn day 90, Natar horn tier 2 would spawn day 200 with whatever % that may have(They would need to be very large values I would imagine). On dead servers a runaway alliance might find it worth it to use late game hammers with only tier 1 horns to get plans earlier than day 200, and they would pay the price by needing multiple large end game hammers to do so. On a dead server those hammers would do nothing regardless. This would also be the deterrent to rushing WW plans on a competitive server, if the required sacrifice to acquire the plans early is 10 of a 60 man alliances EGHs this would clearly be a massively detrimental undertaking. Obviously it would need to be scaled to a servers troop counts to account for large metas.


    This change would provide interesting strategy for the bold/crazy, allow servers to end much earlier in non-competitive servers, and what many people haven't realized, make artifact spawns/strategy fair. No more of one quad being blessed with RNG uniques, and theoretically no more one team sniping 12/12 sets of plans and juggling them to the end(Not to say that doesn't require skill or isn't brilliant).



    • Tribe Balance (Huns & Egypts both have major problems, and are both not currently enabled in the servers I play. Not a major issue overall.)

    Huns invalidate Romans entirely. Their walls are both equally paper thin. Hun ghosts completely outclass roman ghosts in literally every single way, taking away a Roman niche. Roman hammers had the games only real cavalry focus and had a niche of being decent work hammers due to their ability to counter druid anvils. Huns achieve this role equally effective and do so while being far cheaper. Another niche gone. Roman WWKs were somewhat viable due to low wheat consumption and cavalry focus(though spears are common WW defense and perfect defense against Romans). Huns again just do the Roman idea of low wheat cost hammer better, by both being greater AP/time wise, and better cost wise(Also can compete with Teutons AP/time wise with mercenaries instead of wheat focus). The only niche Romans will truly have when Huns are implemented is as scouters, and hero techs.


    Egypts. Ready for 250% feed techs? When implemented this tribe will overnight change how Travian is played by top Travian players. There will not be a single top tier player without an Egyptian feed tech storing all their troops, and after artifacts, financing their troops production. Tech abusers will no longer have 75/100/125/150% 15cs. They will have 200/225/250% 15cs. The rich get richer, and the common Travian player is further left behind.




    • Techs (Those of you who know me know how hard I abuse them)

    As much as I enjoy running circles around the Travian player base with many techs, the game would be better without them, full stop. Avoiding the common arguments that have been talked to death, techs negatively effect Travian more than just the usual surface level complaints that have been regurgitated many times over. Techs trivialize accomplishments. This is one of the most egregious, yet not often talked about points of techs running rampant. Why would I try to make another 900k Roman hammer when afterwards I was marginalized as a tech abuser when I didn't that round? Why would any of you reading this even try to put the time and effort into something great when the first response to your time and effort is "Nice techs loser."? This is extremely harmful to the community as a whole, as it makes this 230 day + massive time investment endeavor ultimately glory-less.


    For a game that markets glory and achievement, there is none to be found in this iteration of Travian.




    • Natars (This is personally my biggest issue here)

    Natars are uninteractive and uninspired. Currently, Natars take over inactive villages and make troops in them making them completely uninteractable. Why? There are many ways to to make this feature unique, and make them into something more than annoying grey villages on a map. Why not have Natars do something with these villages? Maybe attack nearby active players and force response? Maybe allow them to be crop locked and farmed? I'm sure most people reading this have better ideas, but one thing is clear, this NEEDS to change.


    Natars attack grey villages. This is actually a cool feature that gives Natars some character. But sadly, that is just about as far as they go until WW waves, which are trivial. Why not have Natars be more active in the server? It would be fascinating to be forced to clear Natar villages for a reason, perhaps natar villages training and becoming hostile. Maybe Natar expansion surrounding some plan villages(So you need to clear Natar defense villages)? Many ideas to be had here to expand the PVE elements of the game and add some spice to rounds. Travian could do so much more with the fascinating and mysterious Natar threat.




    Also TG, make BB CEO please. It would be nice to have someone who cares pilot this ship. And think of it, if he succeeds and revives this game it's more money for you guys right? pls

    Post was edited 2 times, last by Inferno:) ().

    • Techs:

    The tech debate shouldn't stop until Travian Games gives in completely and stops techs as much as they can. I think that with the last workshop steps were taken in the right direction, but it's not enough yet. I think they still underestimate how detrimental techs/multies are to the game, and how much their existence stops new players from playing the game. Also see Inferno's post above.

    • New mechanics:

    About cities: I didn't particularly like cities in kingdoms, if that's where the idea is coming from. They're essentially villages that are upgraded with an extra unattackable wall and 200% loyalty for the cost of a village worth of CP, with the only rather weak downside being that if the city is ever catapulted below 1000 pop (it gains 500 after being turned into a city), it returns to being a village. They simplify (or rather, dumb down) the game by having fewer villages and were somewhat overpowered iirc since every capital and off village would be a city, you could stop conquerings by golding up a village to 500 pop and then turning it into a city temporarily, for the 200% loyalty, then catting it down a bit to get the CP back. If they are to be implemented, they need bigger drawbacks and counterplay opportunities for anyone fighting a player with cities.


    The endgame is and has always been boring - although I have to admit to not having actually played the game in ages. I just lurk and post on the forums now. Anyway - I'd rather have the endgame done away with entirely, and come up with something new that flows more naturally from the rest of the core gameplay - instead of doing things with natars, world wonders and artifacts. Not that I have any suggestions at the moment :-)

    • Game tools:

    Travian desperately needs an in-game gettertools-like tool to plan your operations. I've been working on something like that, on and off, and would state the following requirements:


    1. The ability to manually save troops information on your own players and on enemy players (this shouldn't be too automized, don't want to help metas and multies even more)

    2. The ability to plan in troop movements for other players

    3. The ability to show those planned in troop movements to the friendly players that have been planned in


    So essentially, the ability to create groups of players, the member details -> troops tab in gettertools, and the plan editor functionality of gettertools. But in a less inconvenient, clunky and old-fashioned way :)


    Beyond that, having more (meta-)information gathering tools would be sweet too. If anyone remembers travian.ws, it had information on timestamps of players joining and leaving alliances, timestamps of which villages were conquered by whom and where, things like that. To offense planners like me who are interested in seeing which alliances are doing which things, server-wide, tools like that were extremely handy to get insight on a server. There may well be other tools that do this nowadays (are there?), but having them in the game would be preferable, if they're well implemented.

    • Server length:

    Be careful with this one. What are the problems with the current server length? Is it really the length, or the gameplay that's the problem? Don't make the mistakes kingdoms made, where by shortening the server length they helped make any wars short-lived or non-existent. Wars between competent alliances are and should be long-lived, with waxing and waning strengths on either side, with enough time for an alliance to return to full strength in between fights. When one side wins, or the focus shifts to other alliances, there should be time for more, other wars to come into focus. It takes time to rebuild troops and villages. Don't simply remove that time, you'll upset the game flow and balance horribly.

  • Three subjects should be the focus:


    - not enough is being done for tech, even after the recent workshop. I'm suspicious of enemies and now I cant stop thinking every time I face someone if I will be beaten by a skilled player or a tech user. The doubt is enough to hinder my enjoyment of the game.


    - multihunter tools have to be improved and unjusts bans should come with a nice payback, otherwise players are lost for good


    - croppers distribution has to be improved.