Posts by Boredpanda

    I think I mentioned them, in the post.


    Check Faction 2.


    We just have no idea who's working with whom at this point. Since most of the allies have not disclosed their diplomatic status on their page.


    Obviously, there could be more than 2 factions in the server. If you know about them, then, feel free to post about them.

    wtf r u talkng about? We have couple of turks accs in out meta(simply friend of us) and its all. There are full turks-meta at server. https://group.europe.travian.com/allianz.php?aid=86 . And they have no relations with RU-team.


    The Faction 1 mentioned, has mostly Russians and Turks.


    There are other Russians (F&B afaik), and Turks fighting you guys too (probably, but none of us have seen it or know about that)


    Thanks for specifying, appreciate it.


    **As I mentioned in the post, the information is not 100% accurate, as no one has full understanding of all the server's diplomacy-dynamics.

    With artifact release date insight, here's a brief summary from my perspective on how the current server diplo-dynamics are (I may not have accurate info, if so, correct me where I might be wrong).


    Faction 1 (Russia + Turks)

    • Winter + Mafia + x3 Black + BAND + P&D are in it together
    • Outlaw, BAND., x3 Green, x3 Red, Mac, HELLO being their *wings* (basically, most of the Russians + Turks are and will be complimenting each other)

    Pretty much the entire server belongs to these ally's. Not sure how the other ally's are coping.


    Kudos to F&D, for being the lone wolf, fighting and still surviving them - its only a matter of time before they fall, but they've fought it tooth and nail (honestly didn't expect them to take this much damage this early and survive)


    Faction 2 (Rest of the world? :/)

    NewOrder (International) and CS (Czech republic) would likely form part of the 2nd faction, not sure who else will join them.


    The following are some of the major alliances, unaccounted for (i.e. I do not have any info who they are supporting or planning to support)

    • Squad, SPQR, FF - (Italian),
    • COC, ~IA~ - (German)
    • CØNQU£$T, FMD - (France)
    • FORZA - (Mostly Romanian)
    • POM - (Lithuania) - Some reports suggests that they are teamed with x3 team. But overall unconfirmed.
    • Химера, WhatsApp, Anime, HELLO - (Russia) - Not sure, but could be tied to Winter and Mafia and could comprise of their *wings* ;)
    • 300%.V - (International)
    • G&V™RIP - (Greece)
    • PL JZK, PL - BH - (Poland)


    There are a lot of alliances not covered here, but due to time constraints will have to end the compilation here.


    -arjun

    The SW of the american server does look interesting.


    Did all the pre-made allies just decide to land there simultaneously? :D

    Recently, one of our member who joined the server recently said that they do not see any extension beginner's protection button on his page.


    Has the rule regarding the extension of beginner's protection has changed?


    Thanks.

    Sorry for asking this (I did check the embassy info page, but I still have some doubts).


    Being an old timer, its baffling to see 60 member alliance so soon on servers.


    So, the question is: Has there been any change to the rule on the total no. of players you can have for an embassy level?

    A. Restriction on the total no. of active IP addresses logged in an account.

    What if, instead of *punishing* the accounts that have more than 2 players, we get a restriction put in that limits the total no. of active IP addresses in an account.

    For example, its really difficult to track if the logged in device. There's no certainity that its more than 2 players.

    But, what if.. we restrict the no. of IP addresses logged in at a time in an account?

    Travian can limit that.

    I don't see why any one particular individual would be logging in from 3 separate devices at the same time. Unless, its more than 1 individual.

    The act of limiting no. of online users in an account at the same time could force players to think twice before inviting more than 2-3 players.. since someone will constantly be logged out everytime the limit is hit.


    B. 2 step verification for accounts that are continiously logged in

    Being logged in 24 hrs a day, too isn't a sure indicator. Someone can simply log-in, and just keep it running it in the background.

    For this, they can add a 2 step process.

    1. Identify the accounts that see 24 hrs login-activity.

    2. Add in mechanism to log them out, say.. every 2-3 hrs and force a captcha (this will be difficult for bots, unless the player manually completes the authentication)


    If step A + B are enforced together, they won't stop multi-dualling (3-5 players in an account), but will rather discourage Bots + Teams playing in a single account.


    Am not against teams playing a single account.. but Travian would be a more level playing field, if we can have only 1-2 players in an account, rather than let's say.. 5 in one.

    :whistling:

    Hi ELE ,


    Point 2. Auction and silver exchange

    Consider the scenario, where you are about to be deleted.. but you end up out-bidding someone else..

    1. No one gets that item.

    2. The seller of the item ends up with a loss when the trade doesn't go through.

    3. If your account is deleted by then.. who gets the item?

    4. If your account is deleted by then.. who do the other players bid against? (This feature can be abused, to simply drive an item's price waay high.. since the account deleted has no issues giving up that silver)


    A workaround, would be to lock up the silver as part of the player's unique_id, but its against their own rules where if an account is deleted.. it should be completely deleted off the server.

    They can pool it part of some global-entity.. but that again just makes things much more weirder.. like the silver in that entity keeps growing.. or keeps getting items (they'll need to add another management system for this)


    Point 3. Participate in market trades

    Regarding blocking of market trades, I believe the reason could be.. consider the following scenario.


    There's just 1 hour left for the account to be completely deleted.. and you buy something off the market (and vice versa).


    Now, if the trade takes more than 1 hour.. it can create several issues:

    1. Who would the active player's merchants deliver resources to when your account is deleted?

    2. Where would your merchants return to?

    3. (Assuming you are a teuton, and the other player is a gaul), The other player delivers the resources to you.. but your merchants don't.. since during that time.. your account got deleted (there are some workarounds here.. like convert the merchants to Natars.. or something else..).


    So, seeing the tradeoff between how much extra work - special conditions travian need to consider to avoid running into bugs to provide that one feature, I guess the tradeoff.. of blocking the trades/auctions all-together sounds much reasonable for them.


    Also, that could be the reason they have the 72 hrs window for the account deletion.

    They want to make sure that most of the events triggered by the account finish before the account is disposed off for good.

    Sure, this part of the game could use some improvement.


    Not sure what you suggested if the best possible solution.. but travian could do something about it to avoid players literally losing 20+ hrs, on something frutile.


    Maybe something like..


    1. If there's 10+ hrs still pending.. the settler immediately turns back

    2. The player *notifies* his settlers.. and after reaching an appropriate distance from the settling area.. (maybe 40 tiles), the settler turns back

    3. The settler continues the journey.. and the player can choose either the settler

    a) dies

    b) returns back to the home village x2 speed, after dropping all the resources (the initial 750)
    4. From that tile, the settler can be redirected to a different tile (a small penalty of reducing the total no. of resources can be deducted.. based on the new distance the settler has to travel)

    It doesn't force all the other players to play alone either. They have the liberty to invite and get other players and share the account.


    With that being said...

    I believe its a reasonable suggestion. If we get a solution to this.. we could have a bit more level playing field.


    My questions to you or anyone would be

    1. What no. of players would you call - too many?

    2. How would you calculate the total no. of players?

    3. What should travian do, in case that limit is breached?

970x250_5Tribes.png