Posts by The SPIKE-Team

Jchym wrote:

The new kind of rewards is really very confusing. As far as I can compare, the previous system was intuitive, which led the player to start the game relatively correctly. The new system is chaotic, unnecessarily confused.

Why collect rewards? Why doesn't the hero get them in his backpack right away? Why do I see already selected rewards, but I don't see what will follow? They don't need to see the selected rewards, but I need to see what awaits me. Why they are not logically sorted according to the probable fulfillment. I would be ashamed of such work.

Completely shutting down local servers is also not a step in the right direction. Players evolve and learn, and a local background is needed for this. Explaining such a complex game to players in a language other than their native language will be very demotivating.

Yes, for experienced players, connecting to international servers is the right move, but are there so many? The number of players in the tournament is declining every year, the quality is declining, you can't watch the cheaters. Accounts, artifacts, plans are sold. Passwords are shared with multiple accounts. Focus on these issues and don't invent nonsense.

Year after year, the situation gets worse .

Show All

Not only does the order of the quests, and the quests, not make sense. The rewards dont scale properly either . It truly looks like someone just slapped a spreadsheet together without any thought about balancing the numbers.

Firebody wrote:

So I am supposed to do as you tell me?
Who is Gubbi? Why should I contact that person?
Why do you think that there is a bug that needs fixing when in your previous sentence you accuse me of crying and telling me to learn the rules?

Make up your mind, is it a feature or a bug?
I say it is a bug that became a feature, but that doesn't mean it should not be fixed in the future.

It definitely is a bug that Gubbi will have to fix, he is the main engineer at Travian Games. He will deal with this issue relatively soon.

Firebody wrote:

Sorry for triple posting but I just have to get this down:

In every "real" war of that period you could not just take a garrison of a fortress or city and lay siege on a well organised defender. You had to raise troops all over your country and make a concerted acting that took lots of planning and organisation. Why is it not the same here?

This game isnt meant to be realistic. This game has its rules and you play by it. Stop crying and get better at the game please. Also, you didnt contact Gubbi Like I told you to, so Im assuming youre only a troll who doesnt actually want to fix this bug.

jackyjoy123 wrote:

Hello,

I've encountered a player, who:

1) population does not grow

2) always gets rid of all the resources in time before my raid, ~ 4 resources of each are left in stock

I raided him like 5 times, every time I was able to gather little resources. And he always stuck on 140 population. I suspect he is someone's botted farm. I'd like you, the administration of travian, banned all his associated accounts.

thanks

jackyjoy

Show All

Now for the genuine answer. You simply dont report them because trav wont do jack sh$t with your report anyways, they might ban some, but those are only the idiots that forgot to make their proxy last longer or something. Rarely will they use any remote sense of intelligence, they will only cling to ''hard evidence''. And seeing how the chance of your lovely cheater being a total and completely utter idiot, is quite small, the chances of him getting ''caught" are quite small. Dont even bother reporting dude, its a waste of time.

Firebody wrote:

My village got chiefed, my troops and hero from that village were in another village and still all got destroyed, how does that make sense?

Yes, that is a commonly known bug. If you want help with fixing this bug (reverting back and undoing damage), do not hesitate to contact Gubbi

TurkC wrote:

Please when you write my name, put at the begin Mr.

Please show some respect to winners and use formal titles when you use our and ally names

Nuts were bigger winners than you, you've literally achieved nothing. Wake up from your delusionary world please.

foobarph wrote:

1 hour game play? Hmm... I agree but I can't help but to have my doubts.

Maybe, if I can see an 24 hour routine with 1 hour of playing travian between those times (splitted or as a whole), that would be fine. Cheers!

He instagolds everything. Just sets timers to npc, all in all not that much screentime.

TurkC has such a way with words, I think hes one of the modern great poets. TurkC Do you even believe anything that comes out of your mouth or do you yourself know it is utter nonsense?

IaaOkeoke wrote:

think about the differences of having a dual and having a bot.

when a player activated a bot, the real owner of the account stopped playing but the account will keep on doing the progress.

when a player plays with a dual, the real owner of the account stopped playing but the account will keep on doing the progress.

when a player paid for a bot to do his work on developing his account (automation) . His account will be banned.

when a player hire another player to work on developing his account (automation) . His account will not be banned.

the main purposes of getting a bot are:

1. Farming non-stop

2. Alerting Incoming attacks

3. Constant development

the main purposes of getting a dual are:

1. Farming non-stop

2. Alerting Incoming attacks

3. Constant development

For a more complete information,

https://www.travian.com/international/gamerules

=================

The use of scripts and/or bots to automate actions on the account or to resemble premium features is forbidden.

This includes, but is not limited to, the following actions:

• Raiding other accounts automatically (and sending attack waves automatically)
• Starting adventures automatically
• Building and upgrading resources fields and buildings in villages automatically
• Scanning the map automatically
• Scanning the statistics of other players automatically
• Pushing resources to other accounts automatically
• Training troops automatically
• Placing bids in auctions for items automatically
• Starting celebrations automatically
• Scanning own villages to display village resources and information in one place
• Any other automated actions performed by third-party software

=================

I don't see anything wrong here.

1. They are very different

2. I'm 100% sure that my duals will not perform those actions performed by bots

3. my dual is not a 3rd party. he is my cousin or brother or my mom or friend or whatever

4. It is absolutely okay and my duals will not result in unfair advantage against the majority of other players

Furthermore, dual feature is very good for travian community. Wondering why?

1. Players will be able to bully new players far more effectively! We can have more fun and kicking out new players means there's less competition right ?

2. We don't need any gold. Why buy Travian Plus when you can just get a dual to upgrade buildings nonstop and manage everything my ourselves ???

3. This method allows us to defeat even those gold players! We can get rid of those gold players without having to spend golds ourselves, so fun!

Lastly, since Travian surely operates as a business, we should think about the opportunity cost of course.
We need to evaluate the business decision's effect on profit and customer satisfaction.

So ,let's consider what we gain and what we lose when we keep the feature available

if we keep the feature:

1. Non-gold players who use duals will keep on playing the game ( They probably consist of only about 10% of the community or less )

2. travian's player base will keep on decreasing because the majority of new player will quit (from around 20% player growth rate into -5% maybe? )

3. Gold players will stop playing, or they will spend their money to hire a dual instead because dual gives more advantage than Travian Features.

(Loses around 15% income each year)

4. For gold players who doesn't quit but they found a friend to play with him as a dual, he will spend less gold (Loses around 5% income each year)

5. Old players will eventually stop playing due to unfair advantage (loses 3% player base)

if we delete the feature:

1. We lose 5% of the community because players who use duals get upset

2. 5% of dual users will keep playing the game (dual players have high motivation to win, they are addicted to the game and will just keep playing) LMAO

3. New players have better gaming experience ( from -5% player base growth rate into +20%)

4. Golds players will allocate their spending on golds as usual because they can't hire duals anymore (15% income increase)

5. Gold players who enjoy playing together will keep playing on separate account. An extremely high chance that they spend golds on both accounts

( number of active accounts on server increases by 5% and income increases by 5% )

6. Old players will stay because the game is still competitive and not overwhelming ( increase 3% player base)

Dual feature gives so much advantage for travian, we should definitely support it guys!

Show All

Youve never been on a top account have you? Dualled accounts still use gold, metric boatloads of it in fact. Yes, the entire point of duals is to not waste 24 hours of your life keeping your troops alive (when youre at a -1,5million crop/hour you kinda need to raid). But then again, imagine if all the duals on top accounts take their own account. Youd have a few accounts on like 50% efficiency, which is a whole load better for the ally than 1 account on 100% efficiency. Duals arent as overpowered as you think, it costs a lot to not have an extra account. Also, if youre hiring duals, youre doing it wrong m9, get some friends please.

Siny wrote:

I agree with your original post. I’m not a fan of dual accounts as I think they are in many ways unfair. I have played a couple of rounds as a dual though.

When I first started playing dual accounts weren’t really heard of and you could have fun talking with your enemies to play mental games and find out their online times!

That being said, they are allowed simply because it’s impossible to block them. How do TG know who is behind what computer? It’s the same reason the rules recently changed to allow tech accounts.

I can also sympathise with some people... many people just don’t have the money or the time to try and compete at the higher level of the game. Being a dual (or one of many) can help keep that travail addiction alive lol.

I’m afraid its a situation which will always be ‘If you cant beat them, join them’

Show All

Dual accounts are unfair if you regard individual account ''biggus di#kus'' stats, but team-wise, it is mostly better to split those duals over multiple accounts. So I dont see an issue here, you trade in an extra account, to make 1 slightly better than average account. This make sure the duals spend less time and still have a somewhat decent account, it means you can have a life. But it is by no means unfair against other teams, because again: Dualled accounts are not twice as good as 2 solo accounts!

Leoric wrote:

Sorry, but Travian has fallen because Travian has done what you are doing here: not listening. Ignoring the change in the behavior of its users.

And again and again, the point isn't about N dual accounts. And I am not crying about be one of the top accounts (and I was one of the top accounts in my time in my country) bc this time has gone, I don't understand why you have to try to hit me in any way.

People have less time to spend in a single online game like Travian with each passing day. When I say competitive account I mean it is just a good/enjoyable account, usefull for the ally. And yes, you can't if you want to play this game but not more than 1 or 2 hours per day ant not more than 4 or 5 days a week, or maybe less. Instead, for some people it becomes a commitment (or duty/obligation, I am not sure about the english word, but not enjoyable) and not a leisure. And more: in this case most of allys just quit players like these.

And yes, sitters helps but they are not a full solution. A good and steady sitter for most of regular players (different of top players) is not a reality.

I hope TG in T5 take the TIME conecpt in account.

Show All

You can build a good alliance account with 1 or 2 hours of play per day. If you don't want to work 7 days a week on your account, get a dual for the weekend, easy fix. Or, late game, accounts can nearly be automated (except for checking for incomings). Ive built top accounts where on the last few weeks on the server, all I had to do is log in occasionally to check for incomings, the rest was traderoutes.

Sitters not being a feasible solution is bollocks, you just havent found the right sitters. Ive done servers where the sitter watches and plays my account for 10 hours a day, and I do the same for him. Its not that hard to do. Get better sitters, theyre out there ;).

So no they wont take time concept into account because its not an issue. If you dont have the time, you wont 'win', simple as. Same goes for any other game. You can complain about not being in the top 10% of league of legends players when you only play 2 hours a day. But as you might imagine, stuff doesn't work like that. It is not unfair, suck it up.

Theres this awesome function called: Sitter. One player on an account, having 1 or 2 sitters can already compete with a 7dualled account, depending on the dedication.

But you do realise that you're measuring in a different measure of ''good/competitive". You're arguing that a solo account cant compete with higher dual counts. I am arguing that it doesnt matter. Thats 6 accounts (and thus 6 capitals and a boatload of villages) the alliance is missing out on. So large dualled accounts ''profit" as in, they can complete their vanity project of having massive hammers, or tonnes of def. But it might not be the best for the alliance.

But please dont cry that you cant be one of the top accounts, because you dont have the time. Just tune it down a little and become a good teamplayer for the ally, but perhaps not as good account-wise as the top dogs.

arjun-iyer wrote:

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.

Show All

A. The limitting number of IP per account rule, would just force dualled accounts to all use the same proxy. Thats by no means a ''solution'' to this ''problem''.
B. If you think Captchas cant be solved by bots, take a quick google around. People who are willing to spend money for bot licenses/proxies, probably wont avoid paying indian clickfarms to do the capchtas for them (or AI).

Teebles wrote:

Sitters and password holders cannot be compared. At all. Different worlds.

Also, Travian puts very strict rules on what sitters can and cannot do. Why not have rules for unlimited numbers of people sharing a password, and which gives them powers far greater than a sitter ever has?

So, Travian rules tightly restrict what sitters can do, but there is blank cheque for unlimited password holders to run amok? Makes sense? Fair?

Saying that the response is to "get friends" means that Travian will turn into a game that is only viable for groups of people running accounts. The message is: if you are a single player (or even just a couple) then, forget it. You can never compete. The "teams" will dominate the game, and everybody who does not have a team, has zero chance of winning or even close to winning.

Show All

Indeed, sitters and password holders cannot be compared. As you might have noticed, a sitter has its own account, which is why there are restrictions on sittership. A dual could have had his own account, but instead he decided to cut the playing time. A dualled account isnt twice as good as a solo account. Theres diminishing returns.

Good thing that you've only just noticed that travian is a team game. Obviously only teams win. And if you mean winning as in, getting the largest hammer or most off points? They probably couldve done a lot more damage if they split the duals over multiple accounts, so they only hurt their own alliance.

Davidease wrote:

U sure?

I read some posts where the player said that after demolishing the hero mansion he still got adventures near that village... I dont think that the hero mansion is the problem..

And the HM in that village is lv 10, i want an oasis..

So i need another alternative..

It takes time to update, he wasnt lying. You might still get adventures in spawn for a few hours, if it takes longer its a bug, or his eyes are deceiving him.

Having a 7 dual account is not like having a bot. Thats 6 accounts youre missing out on, and: Humans arent perfect! (minor detail)

BUYUKGOZ wrote:

HAHAHAHA

look who crept back up from the pits of hell.

matan R`Jex wrote:

the cows had evrey single ally in this server

just not ml turks DN and ils

so yes we know for a fact that all of themm with the cows and not just attacking us

for sure

So when people attack you, theyre part of our meta. When people attack us theyre not part of your meta (even though nominally the relationships are the same, namely an NAP). Amazing logic there bud.

matan R`Jex wrote:

just look and...

dude realy? you cows have like 800 accounts it was all the allys agaits ils defense ... turks and ml just attacked you ww dosent mean that they are with us so ...

NewOrder, RoTeam1+2 and BK just attacked your ww, doesnt mean that they are with us so.... (do you realise how stupid you sound atm?). Complaining about losing while having an NAP with 2 gigantic metas, and not building wwks (ok, you built 2), great job.

Smelly Cat wrote:

cows sure built some very nice hammers. Also the 5x steal was a very well executed ops.

But I think you ended up recruiting a tiny bit more than the 120 accounts you mentioned above to support your ww and hammer trains.

If you add the RoTeam and LoL hammers, its pretty much the firepower that destroyed ILS ww. So in fact cows shot down 1 ww, not 2.

Still a decent achievement for sure.

Still doesn't account for the fact that without ML, Cows would have never been shot down. (or maybe RoTeam would have, who knows) It is quite weird to complain that you lose when you bring next to no WW hammers to the table, you're basically setting yourself up to lose at that point (unless they're hiding 5 wwks somewhere, doubt it). Without ML, Cows would have cruised to victory.

Also, the recruitment part of my comment was purely to retort his comment: ''An 80% recruited ally was able to be in a leading position in the WW race". Cows are literally almost at the same rate of recruitment. And the second wing ended up being so questionable in terms of capabilities that it isn't currently in the confed. Also, if you don't have wwks, you were never in a ''leading position in the ww race'' to start with.

Considering your meta size comment, and the ''fact'' that we shot down 1 ww, not 2. If you count RoTeam as ''recruited accounts'' to the cow meta, you have to add ILS to the ML-IST meta too, if ILS and/or IST had any wwks they wouldve flown our way (the only logical target). You cant ignore them in the meta size comparison simply because they dont have wwks, thats their fault. I never said that we shot down 2 wws (that would be lying), I said that we HAD TO shoot down 2 wws. ILS only had to shoot down a grand total of 0, because their buddies ML were already taking care of that. Btw, still impressive def numbers from ILS, didnt expect it. (but the game isnt won by def only).

P.S. Yes, shouldnt have walked together with RoTeam. Much love, Timon.

Potato wrote:

Seems like you're the only one here with an ability to read a complex situation in a critical manner and reach the correct conclusion.

ILS played practically solo this entire server, we started as a small group from Israel of 45 players and then continued to recruit.

An 80% recruited ally was able to be in a leading position in the WW race, it took 3 Cow allies, StayHome, LoL, VR, RoTeam1+2, NewOrder and BK to fight that, we stayed true to ourselves and continued as ILS without any help from other allies.

If it took 486 players together to beat us, I'd say that's a bit embarrassing for you cows.

Show All

Cows had to shoot down 2 wws, you guys, well, what did you shoot down exactly? ML did all the work for you. Also, cows also were a group of 60 accs, recruited the other 120.