Posts by GGvdH_NL

    This seems hopeless. There need to be less tasks, the game resources and hero influences need to decrease dramatically- or costs of everything, including crop count, should increase.


    The games start is already way too quick since, the tasks been introduced. The very small tasks prior to 3.2 was perfect (e.g. a field to level 3, lvl 1 of everything etc.). Just a little bit of resources and that's it.


    Costs should matter, and resources should be a hard restriction to progress, and decisions you make should matter.


    Another disadvantage of tasks is they force a certain game play, reducing freedom of choise, and repressing creativity.


    I can't think of a reason why you would introducd tasks. The beauty of the game was it's simplicity. Make updates that are simple, and stay true to it's core. Instant gratification is only fun on the short term, but significantly reduces long term satification.

    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.

    Tech = unpunishable multi accounts.


    Comparison is one account with everything the same e.g. Two village vs 2 accounts everythimg the same but 1 villages. Villages are identical.


    Not that it matters at all. Just the point is, more are accounts is a huge advantage.

    but my believe is the game should not be designed to satisfy the top 5% but to fit the needs of the mayority in the middle.

    This means it should be designed to be playable for players who play one account alone, are not 24/7 and are middle of the pack gold users.

    This is a very flawed kind of thinking, that makes no sense at all. A competative game should never cater it's focus on the casual player, because the nature of a competative game is that there's competition, and playrs strife to be better then one and other.


    People want to be the best and therefor you should make sure that there's something elusive about being the best, an incentive to become better, because this sense of improvement is what drives almost anything in game and in live. People like the feeling they are learning, because it's progression, even if it's learning in a very abstract sense what other might call "playing" or social interaction. I belief if you use this as a model, e.g. that every kind of joy is a sense of progression, you can describe human behaviour in a very detailed way, you just have to be very very creative with what you call progression.


    Ofcourse you can design the game that's more friendly to be played alone, and not 24/7, but as long as spending more time, and thuse playing with more players hold an competative edge, players will opt for it. There will always be a top percentage, even if you design it in such a way it's to be played alone, which is actually much more healthty for a game. And you have to spend most of your resources whatever you do in to those who are most competative because they will seek out the limitation you impose, be it balancing wise, or trying to have an additional account etc. The game design for the average player is an average job.

    Because a tech player means you have more then one account. And the number of accounts is directly related to strenght, even beyond linair, 2 accounts are more then twice as strong as 1 account. The additional advantage of skill decreases after a certain point rather quickly and every advantage (rounding up and down mainly) only give a marginal advantage similair to scouting and calculation production/village. Something rarely done nowadays since bots do it for you.


    1 player can win against "n" number of players, given the one player can create and (artifically) manage more then n accounts. Travian is a game without barely any skill and it's almost soley based upon activity and number of account working together. And this is comming from someone who knew every formula about this game for over 10 years, and how to take advatage of every single micro mechanisme. I am just wondering how I could craft a better game and revive the genre, so that someone likemyself would like it.