Pinned Closed Beta Feedback Thread

Would you like to know what’s going on in the Tournament 2017 Finals?
Keep yourself updated by reading "The Corner"!

  • Flossie Schmumpus wrote:

    The term slave militia is a bad one to use. Travian you can do better. Using the slave is akin to using the nazi. Completely unacceptable.
    I have to disagree. Egyptians used slaves, that's a fact. Though it was not common.

    However, most of these were not the slaves as we know the term: involuntarily driven to exhaustion, and payment was only food and water.

    Egyptian noble families and shrines to the Gods actually had voluntary slaves and even paid slaves, but the slaves were the ones paying the copper to the slave drivers, not the other way around.
    There were even slave contracts.
    In other occasions, farmers or other citizens were forced to go into service due to poverty.
    Where banks would now foreclose your house, they had to serve the landlord to earn their keep.
    Mostly because back then you had to build your own house, and buying another man's house was not practiced: That house would stay in the family.
    So the only thing to start taxing was the land they lived on.

    Making the jump from slave to nazi is actually really far-fetched.

    Mod/MH/SH (aug 2007 - feb 2010) // MH (sept 2015)
  • Muchacho NL wrote:

    Flossie Schmumpus wrote:

    The term slave militia is a bad one to use. Travian you can do better. Using the slave is akin to using the nazi. Completely unacceptable.
    I have to disagree. Egyptians used slaves, that's a fact. Though it was not common.
    However, most of these were not the slaves as we know the term: involuntarily driven to exhaustion, and payment was only food and water.

    Egyptian noble families and shrines to the Gods actually had voluntary slaves and even paid slaves, but the slaves were the ones paying the copper to the slave drivers, not the other way around.
    There were even slave contracts.
    In other occasions, farmers or other citizens were forced to go into service due to poverty.
    Where banks would now foreclose your house, they had to serve the landlord to earn their keep.
    Mostly because back then you had to build your own house, and buying another man's house was not practiced: That house would stay in the family.
    So the only thing to start taxing was the land they lived on.

    Making the jump from slave to nazi is actually really far-fetched.
    it's not so much about the history of slavery in ancient Egypt as it is about the ways in which the word evokes more recent events, from sex trade trafficking to chattel slavery in North America.

    In ancient times, slavery was common - but it was also more like indentured servitude in most cases, in that slaves had some limited rights, could buy their way out, and were often reasonably well treated.

    The kind of chattel slavery that existed in the Americas was a very different matter, and the modern associations with the word and the practice make casual use if the term in a game problematic.
    And now I'll tell you what's against us, an art that's lived for centuries. Go through the years and you will find what's blackened all of history. Against us is the law with its immensity of strength and power - against us is the law! Police know how to make a man a guilty or an innocent. Against us is the power of police! The shameless lies that men have told will ever more be paid in gold - against us is the power of the gold! Against us is racial hatred and the simple fact that we are poor.
    - The Ballad of Sacco and Vanzetti, Joan Baez
  • Well, what if the term wasn't so 'casually' used as you claim?

    Naming a unit 'slave militia' is a deliberate choice.
    Namely because of the historical value, and staying as true to that history as possible.


    We, projecting OUR views about recent events in some other parts of the world onto this game is somewhat.... silly. (For a lack of a better word)
    If that were the case, there would be no way Travian would have set foot in the Netherlands, because most of us (from my age and up) were taught to hate Germans for what they did back in WW II.
    I wasn't taught that so much, other than listening to my grandfather (who was a kid in WW II) and my father rant about Germans sometimes.

    But yeah, if that was common practice, this game would not set foot in half of Europe.


    EDIT: Probably also why they won't allow discussions about real world politics ;)

    Mod/MH/SH (aug 2007 - feb 2010) // MH (sept 2015)

    The post was edited 1 time, last by Muchacho NL ().

  • m.hudson wrote:

    HQ are aware of the word slave and its history. A new name should replace it shortly
    Thank you for the swift action on this.
    Note:Any posts made by this poster should always be construed in the most innocent angelic way possible. The poster is not responsible for where your depraved minds go, if you have a depraved mind.



    Our Lady of Croppers ~Semper DOS~ ~Viva Toons~ || This area intentionally left blank. || The two most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity ~ Harlan Ellison
  • The Burninator wrote:

    QFT.
    It's not an excellent translation; to my knowledge, Egyptians (and most civilizations that survived longer than a couple years) didn't arm and train their slaves for obvious reasons. Besides, what's the distinction between a feudal serf and a slave? Calling one civ's militia "slaves" and another's "phalanx" is somewhat culturally heavy-handed.

    AgreED wIth THe slaVE bit. GLAD TO hEAR tHAT woRd is leAvIng.


    whilE tHIs UnIcOrn REAlIzes yoU arE cOMINg froM a perspECtIve OF The NOtiOn Of wAGE SLAvErY the QualitY Of LiFE IN medIeVaL/ANCIEnt HIsToRy BeTwEeN SLaVeS ANd SERFs WAs EXtrEmElY DiffErEnT anD vaRiEd GREAtlY bY GEOgraPHICaL REGIoN.


    FOr ExAMpLE the NOTion Of A "TOWN" verSuS A "CitY" Or "MEtrOPOliS" EvOlveD GREAtly OVer tIMe, aNd WhAT SERFs wERE AlLOWeD tO OWn (e.G. weAPOns) VArIED by rEGIon aND EvEn bY loRd. for exAmple iN lARGe, wEALtHy coUNTries MOSt oF a loRD's ArMY wOuLD've bEEN sworn vASAls; In poOrer fiEfS iT WoULd BasIcALLy BE "Arm thE PEasAnTs AND SEnD 'eM OuT lOloLOlOlolzZZZZZz!!!!"

    Muchacho NL wrote:


    most of us (from my age and up) were taught to hate Germans for what they did back in WW II.
    omGwtFLoL THeY teAcH you to HAtE GeRMAnS In mIDDLe scHoOl?????? 8| 8| 8|
    i LIkE to PRAnCE ThRU tHE wHEAt FIElDS ShOWING ofF MAI prETTy TaIL aND MAnE

  • SPARKELZ THE UNICORN! wrote:

    whilE tHIs UnIcOrn REAlIzes yoU arE cOMINg froM a perspECtIve OF The NOtiOn Of wAGE SLAvErY the QualitY Of LiFE IN medIeVaL/ANCIEnt HIsToRy BeTwEeN SLaVeS ANd SERFs WAs EXtrEmElY DiffErEnT anD vaRiEd GREAtlY bY GEOgraPHICaL REGIoN.


    FOr ExAMpLE the NOTion Of A "TOWN" verSuS A "CitY" Or "MEtrOPOliS" EvOlveD GREAtly OVer tIMe, aNd WhAT SERFs wERE AlLOWeD tO OWn (e.G. weAPOns) VArIED by rEGIon aND EvEn bY loRd. for exAmple iN lARGe, wEALtHy coUNTries MOSt oF a loRD's ArMY wOuLD've bEEN sworn vASAls; In poOrer fiEfS iT WoULd BasIcALLy BE "Arm thE PEasAnTs AND SEnD 'eM OuT lOloLOlOlolzZZZZZz!!!!"
    I should clarify -- I don't mean to equate their conditions; the underclasses in different places at different times obviously faced different conditions.

    What I mean is that they (a) all don't seem to quite be what we contemporaries call "slaves," and (b) all don't seem to be what we contemporaries call "full citizens."

    I don't mean for you to conclude that I'm saying "they're all the same!" or "they're all slaves!" I just mean for you to conclude that "choosing to call one of them 'slaves' and another 'phalanx' and another 'clubswinger' is a bit arbitrary, and given the particular choice of the African civilization to obtain the 'slave' title, somewhat culturally problematic."

    Thanks for pointing this out in your own, BaReLy LeGiBLe WaY ;)
  • SPARKELZ THE UNICORN! wrote:

    Muchacho NL wrote:

    most of us (from my age and up) were taught to hate Germans for what they did back in WW II.
    omGwtFLoL THeY teAcH you to HAtE GeRMAnS In mIDDLe scHoOl?????? 8| 8| 8|
    Not at school, at home. And not everyone from my generation, but one generation before me, definitely were taught at home to dislike/hate them.
    The damage was still fresh back then.

    Who said anything about Middle School, though?

    Mod/MH/SH (aug 2007 - feb 2010) // MH (sept 2015)
  • I think Hun Mercenaries should have their cavalry defense cut from 30 to 15. Huns are already too good at attacking, they need to be dependent on a team that will defend them. This would give the Teutons a bit more of a moderate role as the zerg tribe (which can still moderately defend itself without allies); and ultimately I think it would keep the Teutons from becoming old news.
  • Son of a Peach wrote:

    I think Hun Mercenaries should have their cavalry defense cut from 30 to 15. Huns are already too good at attacking, they need to be dependent on a team that will defend them. This would give the Teutons a bit more of a moderate role as the zerg tribe (which can still moderately defend itself without allies); and ultimately I think it would keep the Teutons from becoming old news.
    "Teutons... more moderate... old news..."
    I disagree. This never was, and still is not, the case. Teutons are still the highest offensive output of any tribe. They are also significantly cheaper than Huns. Offensively, and defensively, Teutons are in every way (except wheat consumption) superior to Huns. Where Huns shine are raiding. Here are the core stats for the three main attributes of the tribes:

    Attack/day (no equipment): (main attack stat)
    Teut 88021
    Huns 85296
    Roman 81824
    Gaul 72893
    Egypt 64655

    Carrying capacity*speed/res: (early-game raiding stat)
    Steppe 2.06
    Mace 1.68
    TT 1.31
    EI 0.99
    SlMl 0.70

    Def/res: (main def stat)
    SlMl 0.333
    Phal 0.286
    Spear 0.279
    Merc 0.241
    Praet 0.217

    As you can see, Teutons are still the best choice for standard hammers. The only way I see Huns having an advantage is if someone was trying to run over 3 full hammers and needed all the raided resources in the game to feed them. I don't see any reason to weaken the Huns at this point.
  • Armour_US wrote:

    Son of a Peach wrote:

    I think Hun Mercenaries should have their cavalry defense cut from 30 to 15. Huns are already too good at attacking, they need to be dependent on a team that will defend them. This would give the Teutons a bit more of a moderate role as the zerg tribe (which can still moderately defend itself without allies); and ultimately I think it would keep the Teutons from becoming old news.
    "Teutons... more moderate... old news..."I disagree. This never was, and still is not, the case. Teutons are still the highest offensive output of any tribe. They are also significantly cheaper than Huns. Offensively, and defensively, Teutons are in every way (except wheat consumption) superior to Huns. Where Huns shine are raiding. Here are the core stats for the three main attributes of the tribes:

    Attack/day (no equipment): (main attack stat)
    Teut 88021
    Huns 85296
    Roman 81824
    Gaul 72893
    Egypt 64655

    Carrying capacity*speed/res: (early-game raiding stat)
    Steppe 2.06
    Mace 1.68
    TT 1.31
    EI 0.99
    SlMl 0.70

    Def/res: (main def stat)
    SlMl 0.333
    Phal 0.286
    Spear 0.279
    Merc 0.241
    Praet 0.217

    As you can see, Teutons are still the best choice for standard hammers. The only way I see Huns having an advantage is if someone was trying to run over 3 full hammers and needed all the raided resources in the game to feed them. I don't see any reason to weaken the Huns at this point.
    It's not just about marginal cost, my friend. If we are talking about the tribe that is able to consistently deal damage to the enemy, then we need to discuss the limits of splatting and rebuilding (which is where the Romans are very weak). Yes, you'll probably add that maces produce attack faster, but I don't really know anyone good that builds maces in a serious manner after the first month. Maybe you do, but that's weird lol... I would say the majority of resources spent on infantry by Teutonic hammers is on axes (over the entire course of a server).

    Attack built per hour:
    Axe/TK: 3,399

    Hun Merc/Marauder: 3,554 (mercs are better than bows believe it or not on attk/hr, which further proves my point!)

    Back to margins -- though -- it's pretty insane that a Phalanx or Spearman is less efficient than the mercenary. This further devalues Gauls as well... I think the best way to bring on these new tribes is to keep them as specific as possible. The Egyptians have basically no traditional hammer potential -- that' great. They'll require other tribes to finish off protracted conflicts. The Huns need to be honed to have worse defense -- otherwise every top robber is going to build a million mercs for defense, and the Huns will have the 2nd most efficient defender in the game fed by the most efficient raiding army in the game -- and attacking with the best cavalry offense in the game. That's not balanced.
  • Not sure what servers you play on. In my alliances, whenever we discover an axe hammer, we post about it on Skype and laugh at them. Axes are more expensive and produce less attack. You're literally throwing away res that could go to A) more CP or B) more hammers.

    Also, "Romans have a hard time rebuilding." Romans are third here. All hammers rebuild at attack/day, which is why we use that metric to measure offensive potential.

    Also, mercenaries are just above mediocre defensively. Look at my numbers. I gave numbers for a reason. On a good anvil, resources should be the limiting factor. Therefore, defense points per resource is the most important metric, where Egyptians and Gauls still shine. Huns have the advantage of sacrificing their hammer as last ditch offense, but I can't see this happening much. But who knows, maybe we'll see a flourishing of hamvils.

    In the end, Huns will take a moderate hammer position above the high CP Roman accounts and below the high output Teuton accounts. They are not as strong as Teuts but, like the Romans, will have their own advantages: a stronger raid base and unghostable hammer. I'm not sure if that gives them the potential to outperform any Teuton hammers, but I guess my point is that I'd wait to recommend balance changes until the beta has played out a bit more.
  • m.hudson wrote:

    now the forum is back up and running all announcements will also be made here for such important topics.

    There is a process for the same information to be released on other media like facebook as well as here / direct people here.
    Not trying to start an argument here, but you say this... Then I randomly searched on fb "Travian News" because I didn't trust this statement. And look at that... More information about the birthday special being half the size of a normal map and on a map of Europe.

    So, where should I be looking?
  • Social media always needs content. They are managed differently to forums.

    Let me be more specific all key information hq task me to post IS posted here.

    The social media team are managed externally and i have no control over information that they post. If the information is not sent to me via the hq taskng tool im nither aware of it or authorised to post about it.

    I have to watch the facebook page also to get new information.
    CM mhudson
    Community Manager
    Travian: Legends US/UK

    128-10-93-85-10-128-98-112-6-6-25-126-39-1-68-78