Posts by Pippin

    Hello all,

    We hadn't meant to post again, but Flufie says it would be nice to look at how things finished. We have made some final maps, not of the alliance groups as we have seen them before, but of players in groups which have confederacies with the wonder accounts. If mistakes were made in assigning alliances to the confederacies, then apologies! These were checked with representatives of the different groups.


    IKEA, Duat, NoSpies and Strange in purple; GUNNERS, GUNNERZ and Goofers in green; TEN Y, TEN - AD, TEN X and 2.01-A in yellow; everyone else in red.

    The Nordic alliance and Gunners are quite straightforward. The zerg alliances are spread out a lot.

    It is Flufie's view that this map shows how things went so badly wrong for the zerg alliances. Maybe last time we played, 9 or so years ago, the zerg would have been effective. TG have been changing rules to try and make this style of play ineffective, and it seems they have succeeded. Had the zerg managed to take more construction plans, things would have been different, but as they didn't they could only directly support their wonders with members in four alliances. This excluded most of the zerg. Many accounts were left unable to send defense, and only providing resources indirectly via raiding by someone inside the wonder groups. We believe, had the server been ongoing beyond the new rules being actively enforces, there may have been serious issues around allowing resources to be transferred in this way to the wonder holder, pilgrim.

    There has been growing evidence of cooperation between Gunners and the Nordic groups. They are shown as autonomous on this map though.

    I don't see any point really in trying to show other data for the different groups, as having the zerg alliances mixed together in this way makes things very distorted.

    I will now reflect back upon the alliances in Flufie's first analysis, on day 21. If the group is still playing now, a map will be included.


    Remained loyal to the zerg. We are not sure exactly what they have achieved though.

    Duat and IKEA

    It has been interesting reading their thoughts on the server. Meticulous planning, well executed. Flufie says they are the most willing to adapt their gameplay in light of changes to rules and play of others, and arguably the most willing to learn.


    Errm.. they were assimilated by GoW??


    Short lived alliance. Now we have learned a bit more about how the game works, I fear Bubbles is no longer a viable option as a serious group (in the past we could get along quite nicely in a tiny group), due to the alliance bonuses heavily favouring large groups which can contribute more.


    Considering the main stated aim of the zerg was to put Gunners out of the race, they have done amazingly well. For their members to continue fighting to the very end in spite of the onslaught is admirable.


    Lost their name, but certainly their presence in the NE must have had an impact upon Gunners.


    Was a bit sad really they failed. Flufie suspects, had they been around still when the zerg was formed, they would have joined it and proved very useful in attacking Gunners members.


    Really nice group of people, with a great wealth of experience and knowledge about the game. It is Flufie's view that they have not adapted to the new ways as well as they could, and that if/when they do return they will look and behave a bit differently. It would be foolish to assume that because things didn't work out the way Goats may have hoped this server, they would be a push over next time.

    TEN and 2.01

    Flufie called TEN boring on day 21, and asked who 2.01 were. He was joking, but it does seem interesting that at the end of the server, despite our account (Pippin) being in a wing of TEN, we still don't know much about them. They have been loyal to the zerg though, and seem friendly enough.

    That is all.

    [...] So I would have used the population from around arti release as a added chart to see the difference then b4 zerg killing. Of the comparison.. [...]

    [...] Congratulations to my zerg brothers, no back stab all zerg.. [...]

    Thanks Brezz! Yes, you are right.. when I have time I'll do a chart or two comparing how the different groups have changed in size relative to the rest of the server since the previous data capture. It would be interesting to see how much GUNNERS wings have been impacted by the attacks they've received.

    And yes, the zerg have been very loyal to each other.. that is true :)


    ( /--\ )

    Hi all,

    It has been a while since the last update. Flufie is back, probably for the last time. This may read more like an autopsy than an analysis to those within the Zerg alliances, but that is where we have come to.

    Here is our final map. There is only one, as actually it shows everything which matters, in our view.

    IKEA, Potpot, Duat, Strange and NoSpies in cyan; GUNNERS, GUNNERZ, GUNN3RS and Goofers in green; everyone else in red.

    This illustrates the positions of those with Construction Plans and those without. On the 13th December, day 121, Flufie predicted that the Nordic alliances would take all of the Construction Plans. This was not far from what came to be. They have 10, and GUNNERS, who they are friendly with, took the other three.

    Let's look at some current data, from today. For the purposes of these charts, I have included some old alliances with members who may not be active. This is to ensure that off/def points accrued are more fairly reflected, though it may arguably have some impact upon current popultation.

    (IKEA includes Potpot; Duat includes NoSpies and Strange; GoW includes GoW., GoW.. and GOVV; GUNNERS includes GUNNERZ, GUNN3RS and Goofers; GOATS includes GOATZ and Goatters; TEN includes - AD, Y, X, -TSE, RH and ~LV~; 2.01 is -A and -D; DND includes DSD and 4H. WoW are dropped entirely from the data, despite having relatively high numbers of kills.)

    This shows how all the different groups compare. The final column shows the kills per pop, which seems like a reasonable measure of fighting activity, though could mean a variety of things.

    Can average pop be taken as a measure of account growing skill?

    As can be seen, Batman is a little bit right, in some regards.

    The data above doesn't show what is really happening, in diplomatic terms. This is more accurate:

    The Zerg alliances are very much united. GUNNERS and the Nordics are not. They have had some limited cooperation, but we believe this is a fairer reflection of teamwork at play.

    Flufie's thoughts

    You would think, if you looked at the above data and map, that it is terribly unfair and those poor Nordics and GUNNERS don't stand a chance. That couldn't be further from the truth.

    IKEA and Duat

    They have, quite simply, outperformed everyone. The fact that so much of what they have done was clearly planned long in advance demonstrates that they knew, or at least suspected, they were good enough to play this way. And they are. It appears to us that at every stage, they achieved what they set out to. They deceived others when that was their intention. They appeared weaker than they are when they wanted to. They took the areas of the map they wanted, they took the artefacts they wanted, they now entirely dominate endgame as they perhaps had hoped.

    I am yet to see any proof, anything whatsoever, that the Nordic alliances have played unfairly or cheated in any way. It saddens Flufie that some people are throwing accusations around without proof. So far as we can tell, they are simply very active and knowledgable, with clear goals and fair means of achieving those goals.

    These Nordic groups must be favourites to win, if that is what they decide to do.


    Have survived surprisingly well given the onslaught they've been subjected to over a considerable period. Perhaps, their resiliance will grant them some favour in the eyes of those who, up until now, have afforded them nothing but disdain and contempt?

    The Zerg alliances

    No matter how one looks at it, the Zerg must surely at this stage be described as experiencing abject failure in relation to what it set out to achieve. They wanted to stop GUNNERS at any cost? GUNNERS are now in a two horse race against Duat and IKEA. They wanted to use their overwhelming numbers to ensure an easy victory, despite the detrimental impact on the game dynamics overall? That didn't go too well either.

    It seems almost pointless to discuss the Zerg alliances one at a time, as they have lost their identities along the way. They have lost their signficance, and been eclipsed entirely.

    It is our hope that this isn't over. We want to see the alliances in the Zerg show how they earned their reputations. We want to see them fight back.

    Goodbye from Flufie!!

    [...] To your leaders and players I say to you don't give up, your chances are still very much alive with everything to play for. [...]


    Extremely well done to all the teams not zerging. I think everyone else should be humble, and accept you have played really well. You are right, the fight is not over yet, but I for one doubt very much the Nordic alliances would get to this stage without a few more surprises up their sleves.

    [...] the bots belong to Travian and its just another way for them to make money. [...]

    You are saying that TG make, own and sell bots? Do you have any rational basis for this accusation, or any kind of evidence? Even any suggestion of how it makes any sense whatsoever would be a start??

    I must say, and I am saying this as a fully confirmed zerg member here, 'better, more active, more dedicated and more motivated to perform on the server' is looking like a much stronger argument than 'you cheat and TG help you cheat so no one can stop you'. If you have proof, present it (ideally to MH also), and if not then let's not present supposition as fact.

    I, for one, do think GUNNERS have deserved the attention they have received from you all through their actions, plants and other borderline shady plays included. Do I see that as a justification for you to partake into a 600 account meta that not only attacks them together but also shares artifacts and defense beyond alliance borders? No. Even if the allies involved would split up for the endgame and go for their own victory, the currently ongoing scheme can well be described as a zerg. [...]

    Yeah no zerg, just accidentally timed attacks from 4 alliances on every op since artis were released. Players just accidentally jumping into other alliances everytime one of the 4 metas gets attacked. Artis just accidentally being transferred with no resistance between 4 alliances. Motivations may be individual, playstyle is definietly not. I understand you may be embarrassed over the whole ordeal, especially if you are still struggling with these increadiable advantages. Now please reply to this and cry zerg because we defended Gunners once, it's not close to the size, server duration and the level of cooperation of what you guys are doing.

    I think, if we were all being completely honest (a tall order around here, I know), it would be somewhat disingenuous to say that these views are false.

    Clearly, they are both with merit, and perfectly valid perspectives.

    There is one very strongly formed and large zerg on one side, and a mismatched, significantly smaller group of embattled alliances who cooperated on one occasion on the other. That, surely, is indesputable fact.

    I would pick up only on one word - no, Saravan, I don't think many are feeling embarrassed. Gunners were totally asking for it, and deserve everything they get. And you, with your Finnish friends, are too good. Take it as a compliment, and get on with showing why you deserve so much attention.

    Gunners are like that 3 am pick up at the bar you regret the day after when you release he smells garlic, swett and hade more makeup on him than I did. and will regret even more 2 weeks after it happened when they realise you got the clamp.... :| Okay, you got the pic.......

    Does anyone else think garlic smells nice?

    Seriously though, we need a bat signal or something.

    Just when I thought you have gotten yourselves together after the backstab incident, you pull it out from your sleeve again. How delightful. That's also the only point relevant to us, remaining two concern GUNNERS and them only and I do agree with you on those.

    And as a side note, I don't think anyone has called the process of zerging dirty by any means. Quite the contrary, if everyone were honest and straightforward about it happening.

    You misread my statements.

    Yes, we are zerging right now. That is not a dirty tactic. It is not my favourite, but it is ok and not rule breaking. Betrayal and plants are also not dirty, in my eyes. They are not rule breaking.

    I was merely saying, you should not expect me to feel embarrassment when there are such contrasts to be made. I don't like the zerg, as I am sure many others do not. There are other things I would like even less. But here we are, and I sense it will reach an end sooner or later.

    A weird take to call one of the most important artifacts on the game getting rotated outside your alliance uninteresting. Maybe you meant embarrassing?

    Embarrassing? Not in the least.

    I would be more embarrassed to be in a group which lies to their enemies about being friends before attacking. I would find it more embarrassing to be in a group which uses plants to steal artefacts. I would find it more embarrassing to be in a group which describes itself as Ultimate Warriors. All of these things, they are ok, but I don't think Goats have much to be embarrassed about when contrasted with 'dirty' tactics used elsewhere.

    You surely know it has happened though, don't you? Wonder what is your subjective take on the "extended trainer rotation" extending from GOATS to TEN and even DND?

    Haha no! I must admit, I find all the artfact stuff rather uninteresting. That is my subjective take.

    If anyone would care to send me in private a detailed account of all artefact thefts/transfers, I'd be happy to look at making a visual/pictorial/map based representation/analysis of the movements, which may be more accessible to people like me who find it all a bit tiresome :)

    Would you like to make a forum post on why goats gave up a small trainer without getting any arte in return? [...] Wtfqaz?

    I don't really know anything about that, so can't really make a post about it.

    Maybe, I should not have answered. It does seem a bit subjective though, this whole zerg thing. My position is that I don't believe it will last long, so what looks like a zerg today will be something else tomorrow. And I think if someone were to look objectively at the numbers, it would not be two thirds of the server united. That is a post I could perhaps make.

    I also, Sir_Kaban, have no idea what qaz means in that context. Suspect we'll survive without it though.

    Hi all, I haven't been here for less than ten years, but for some reason my account was deleted, I had to register a new one, and this was a waste of time, pity and strange. Ok, as long as I remember Travian (since 2007) so much I hear howling and crying about metazerg. Tell me, is there really a zerg or are the next losers commemorating the lost caps and hammers? :)

    There is not really a zerg. Just a little ganging up on the strongest :)

    Agreed your a joke meta 800+ 4 quad mega meta Ten/Gow/Goats/Dnd/2.01 and still not enough lol, you probably won’t even take any plans either 8o

    Flufie says a Bat Man analysis would be cool. But also has concerns he might not be well placed to unpick such a complex character..

    [...] last time i checked its not against the rules to "zerg" same as its not against the rules to use "techs" [...]

    I think that could be disputed.

    TG have been struggling with both issues since before I started playing the game, more than 10 years ago. Techs they seem to be allowing more, and reducing the efforts to resist. In contrast, large groups of alliances working together they are actively taking steps to prevent. Since August 15, 2019, the New Confederacy System was introduced, which restrics each confederacy to having four alliances within them in total. This put restrictions upon the sharing of resources and reinforcements.

    It could probably be argued that players leaving one alliance and joining another on a temporary basis to receive reinforcements, or other support afforded by the visited group, are circumventing game mechanics which are in place instead of game rules. It would be hard to manage massive cooperation via the game rules themselves - imagine how many bans they would have to put in place.

    It is clear that the owners of the game do not want large collections of alliances cooperating. Generally speaking it reduces competition, encourages others to do the same, and (for TG to take an interest) probably puts people off playing because it is less fun.

    I would add something about the potential spawn locations of construction plans. Nordics seem to have at least 5 plans on lock and looks to be in position to contest for another 3

    Hmm.. let's take a look :)

    We have an idea where they might be. I can't find these conveniently on a map, so have added them myself pretty much by eye. Please excuse any minor errors, though I would expect them to be accurate enough for this purpose.

    We see Duat in pink, IKEA in blue, all others in grey, and evidence of Flufie wanting everyone to get along better. (He says you are being a bunch of meanies lately.)

    Here is a close up:

    I'll let you count how many of the plans IKEA and Duat might have a realistic shot at taking. (Hint.. the answer is all of them..)

    This is speculative, and based upon approximations, though at this stage it would surely be foolish to not be considering such things?

    ( /--\ )

    Hi again. Flufie has been saying he wants to look at some groups in a bit more detail. Starting with Duat and IKEA. This is intended to be followed by similar threads looking at other groups, though that would work best if they were willing to discuss it with us.

    Please note that Flufie has visited IKEA, but not Duat, in preparing his notes here.

    Overall map

    IKEA, ME, ME 2 and Potpot in cyan; Duat, Strange and NoSpies in green; everyone else in red.

    Really not a big change here on the map. The middle grey zone is almost entirely encircled, and the Nordic alliances completely dominate inside it. There is virtually no expansion away from their main cluster compared to day 100 maps (we were going to show this but it seems almost pointless).


    IKEA main alliance in cyan with techs (ME, ME 2 and Potpot) in dark blue; Duat in green with techs (NoSpies and Strange) in pink.

    We find this interesting as it shows that IKEA have in fact relatively few tech accounts/villages supporting them certainly compared to Duat, and Flufie suspects compared to general perception. This is working on the assumption that NoSpies and Strange are tech wings, which may or may not be the case. Flufie does suggest though, the support afforded to IKEA through tech accounts is not very significant - only 14% of the overal group, as measured in population, comes from tech accounts.

    KORNSNÖ's leadership

    One of the pleasures of playing in the SW is that the leadership of both main groups, IKEA and Goats, are polite and couteous. They do not mock nor belittle others when enjoying success. And, in our experience, they are willing to talk and discuss issues.

    KORNSNÖ's account has been run in a way we have not seen before. The account itself is an integral part of the IKEA, and now the Nordic, setup. It has been clear since the early game that KORNSNÖ has been settling near others within the alliance.

    In this map, you see a faint image of Day 120 Duat and IKEA in the background, with KORNSNÖ's villages on day 44 in pink, day 100 in red, and day 120 in white. This clearly shows that from the early game the spread of villages was taking place, and since day 100 the spread of villages has been expanded to include Duat members.

    Here we see maps highlighting all areas on the map within 20 squares of KORNSNÖ's villages.

    It is likely clear to many that this is in the interests of utilising more efficiently the Unique Diet Control artefact. What we see is that the vast majority of IKEA and Duat members can benefit from halving crop consumption of troops, whilst also being able to withdraw those troops in a short time. The benefit here is immense.

    IKEA have been proactively preparing to use a unique artefact since the start of the server. With no way of knowing they would be able to secure that artefact. What else, might you suppose, have they been quietly preparing for?

    Flufie is of the belief that what we have been seeing from these Nordic groups, the level of organisation and preparation and the way in which it continues to catch others off guard, stands as testiment to the many years of experience they have gained on their regional servers. They have come here with prior knowledge of other groups on com2, and fully taken advantage of how returning players and leaders behave. Just looking at their accounts it is obvious that they have optimised account development strategies, and shared good practice amongst members. Legal methods which can give an edge, such as use of techs and deception in war, have been employed with intent and precision.

    It seems to us the onus now lies with everyone else to adjust our gameplay in order to compete, rather than with them to fit in with our expectations. Every time I read the phrase 'ultimate warriors' I laugh a little inside. Perhaps, we should take a closer look at Gunners next..? :)

    It is a shame to see some continually revert to pettiness and small minded insults rather than attempt to engage. I think this does nothing but reflect poorly on the individuals. Many nice people in Gunners that like to play the game hard but fair. But the past week or so has revealed some have different values.

    Totally agree, 100%.

    However, I think nothing is to be achieved by posting about it here. The leaders you reference are happy and will not change. Their members who don't mind are happy anyway. Their members who do mind can't do much about it besides leave, which seems unlikely.

    The rest of us, all we can do is offer an alternative vision. I am pleased the leaders of my alliance, while talking both in public and in private, set a positive tone which is an example to all members.