To Munich we go.

    We've implemented the New Combat Simulator and combat reports on the PTR server.
    Check it out and provide your feedback here!

    • ELE wrote:

      Marduk_COM wrote:

      The forums have just a small number of players active on it... the majority do not visit the forums even if they have an account... so beware to take any decision based on just a few "I like it" that hardly represent the majority of the playerbase.

      Marduk_COM wrote:

      Implement a change that the majority will hate and get pissed, and be ready for a storm of cataclysmic proportions. Be warned, seriously
      The decision (assuming it is already made) was made even without consulting the forum. People, generally, are resistant to change so consulting whole players base not necessarily will give you reliable result. Or the result you want for that matter, because you also don't represent all players.
      I want to remind you that change first will be rolled out on special servers and, I will take a liberty to speak for majority if not all of special servers crowd, we welcome it. Not because everyone admires specific change but because we like to try new things and poke around with new strategies, by definition of annual special server
      The problem is that who plays the special servers not necessarily represent the playerbase of Legends.
      Lot of people play Legends because they like it.
      Who decided that wanted something new went to Kingdom or special servers.
      Who is only on Legends don't care about the other 2 utterly.

      What the special server that has a lower playerbase than Legends think about the changes has nothing to do with Legends.
      I don't want that Legends is forced a change that Kingdoms or Special likes , as I would not want that Special is forced a change that Legends etc etc.

      KEEP THE 3 SEPARATE, they are DIFFERENT GAMES played by people that , with exceptions, do not like the other formats.

      Also, we are at the point we are now due to repeatedly, years after years, having decisions made even without consulting.
      Marduk , R.Unite leader on old S5.com
      MCE member on s4.com
      Ass , Best/Nest on old s6.com
      Teoavo75 , Rep SW - now *****Rep - leader on s1.com , GF Hold member
      Teoavo75 , marduk , tiberius , nexus - SGR
      Drei - CWL
    • Marduk_COM wrote:

      Who decided that wanted something new went to Kingdom or special servers.
      Who is only on Legends don't care about the other 2 utterly.
      That's your opinion, I prefer Legends, but it's sometimes fun to test out new things. Sometimes changes work, sometimes they don't, but that varies too much on the opinion of others.

      Marduk_COM wrote:

      I don't want that Legends is forced a change that Kingdoms or Special likes
      I believe it was said the other 2 tribes will NOT become a regular part of all Legends servers, so for an audience such as you there will always be normal 3 tribe server.


      Marduk_COM wrote:

      KEEP THE 3 SEPARATE, they are DIFFERENT GAMES played by people that , with exceptions, do not like the other formats.
      They are separate, you just need to know where you register, that's all. And Legends and Specials aren't a different game, it all basically works on the same principle, just the 2 tribes were added. Fire & Sand I guess can be classified as something else, but I haven't played that yet, so can't really base much opinion on it.


      It's basically perfectly fine as it is now. Though keep in mind, separating completely would mean that the community might get divided even more and the problem of a dropping playerbase would become more severe.

      Sure some things might sound fine in your head, but you've got to put consequences and everything into consideration, 1 positive change can lead to multiple negatives.
      bla bla bla kys
    • Kingdoms is different game and it is completely separated, annual special is sandbox/playground of new features for Legends. Yes, the map makes it quite different, I agree, but mechanic is the same. I doubt that many people would try new feature announced on standard Legends server, NYS with new tribes is no different from annual special in numbers and number of exceptions is quite noticeable.
    • "I believe it was said the other 2 tribes will NOT become a regular part of all Legends servers, so for an audience such as you there will always be normal 3 tribe server."

      I was never referring to this ( I was referring to what Ciliatus wrote, so please don't shift the focus away from what was being made for ). Actually I think we likely ALL want ( on Legends ) to have the whole 5 tribes on every server. I will let all comment on this point, but I think that this will be the consensus.
      All the people I spoke with in the past months all are looking forward to have Huns and Egyptians added.

      "But" it's true that we do have some concerns at the way Egyptians can be misused as parkings for 3rd party armies. Concerns that could be quieted by some change like dunno ... if the waterwork building is present in the village, foreign troops eat 2x crops ( thus offsetting the oasis boost ), maybe.
      Marduk , R.Unite leader on old S5.com
      MCE member on s4.com
      Ass , Best/Nest on old s6.com
      Teoavo75 , Rep SW - now *****Rep - leader on s1.com , GF Hold member
      Teoavo75 , marduk , tiberius , nexus - SGR
      Drei - CWL
    • Marduk_COM wrote:

      All the people I spoke with in the past months all are looking forward to have Huns and Egyptians added.
      Wait what? suddenly no balancing is needed?

      Marduk_COM wrote:

      "But" it's true that we do have some concerns at the way Egyptians can be misused as parkings for 3rd party armies. Concerns that could be quieted by some change like dunno ... if the waterwork building is present in the village, foreign troops eat 2x crops ( thus offsetting the oasis boost ), maybe.
      Would not it be lovely to see that "but" limited to alliance members?
    • Marduk_COM wrote:

      I was never referring to this ( I was referring to what Ciliatus wrote, so please don't shift the focus away from what was being made for ). Actually I think we likely ALL want ( on Legends ) to have the whole 5 tribes on every server. I will let all comment on this point, but I think that this will be the consensus.
      All the people I spoke with in the past months all are looking forward to have Huns and Egyptians added.
      Ah, didn't see you reffered to him.

      Regarding all 5 tribes on all server I'd kind of oppose that, but I'd definitely prefer to see them in more than specials. Maybe a half or a third of a domains servers could be all 5 tribes, but sometimes I know I'll simply want to go for the classic 3 tribes.


      Marduk_COM wrote:

      "But" it's true that we do have some concerns at the way Egyptians can be misused as parkings for 3rd party armies. Concerns that could be quieted by some change like dunno ... if the waterwork building is present in the village, foreign troops eat 2x crops ( thus offsetting the oasis boost ), maybe.
      I guess that could be fixed in a way, your suggestion isn't even half bad, but maybe 1.5x consumption, since if you held an arti or whatnot there and you were constantly being bombed 2x consumption would be quite a nightmare to uphold.

      Yet there's a way to bypass that rule, simply by setting trade routes to a villa without waterworks full of granaries and you'd just feed foreign troops there. It's even more lowkey to stash it in a completely random villa, rather than directly in a cap or its oasis. Unless any foreign troops consume 1.5x in every village, regardless of waterworks or not it can be bypassed.
      bla bla bla kys
    • "Yet there's a way to bypass that rule, simply by setting trade routes to a villa without waterworks full of granaries and you'd just feed foreign troops there"

      I know, it's something that for sure requires a bit of thinking. Or maybe just make all "offensive" troops located on an Egyptian account and not belonging to the account itself consume 1.5x as you suggested ( as proportion ).
      All in all, parked troops are off troops at the moment. This allows to send defs to the Egyptian player without any malus.
      Marduk , R.Unite leader on old S5.com
      MCE member on s4.com
      Ass , Best/Nest on old s6.com
      Teoavo75 , Rep SW - now *****Rep - leader on s1.com , GF Hold member
      Teoavo75 , marduk , tiberius , nexus - SGR
      Drei - CWL
    • New

      Hi. I only like the Huns they should remove Egyptians.

      And normal servers are a joke, no "zerg" balancing needed.

      As for detecting multiaccounts, it's so easy to detect I don't know why mh can't find themselves without being reported first by players. Maybe get a MHs who are experienced with using bots and multiaccounts.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Strategic ().

    • New

      Bugs
      TG has 5 dedicated for Legends testers. They are transitioning toward more automated testing, currently cover 80% of the game (5% year and a half ago).

      The process is:

      - internal testing
      - PTR - I mentioned it earlier and opportunity has arrived. Please read the announcement. If you have time and will, register on ?server=com80#register and test new feature. Keep the account on the server - more to come. Discussion thread.
      - roll out on selected servers
      - roll out on all servers

      The biggest concern was why updates are being rolled out on all server even with bugs discovered on previous steps. The answer we got: if we try to fix all bugs we will never introduce new features or fix current bugs. Bugs are the price for greater good. Only most severe bugs stop a roll out and severity is judged by developers.

      Bots
      TG recently created dedicated team to fight them. Previously developers dealt with the issue and they only could do so much. Nothing unique here - TG stops some bots, bans hosting sites only to see new and better ones emerging. With new team in place hopefully we will see some progress in the next few months, but not before September.

      We were asked if it is acceptable for community to use technologies that track mouse movements and movements of a device (in case mobile is used). Everyone in the room agreed that it is acceptable but if you have a concern please voice it. Using more "stable" identifications such as phone or FB accounts were also suggested but not everyone agreed with that.


      Global entry (or lobby) was discussed in connection with bots and multiaccounting. Details should be discussed farther, but generally it seems good idea. Global entry will allow to track bad behavior, at least we would not see veterans medal on known cheaters profiles, as well as good behavior, continuous bugs reporting, for example, and in-game achievements. Some privacy should be kept, imho, i.e. accounts not visible to public without player's permission.



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

    • New

      If i want to help my enemiefriends, what will I do? just cry in a corner?

      I really dont like this.
      If like this.. a enemie(friend) are under attack from the same enemieally that my ally have as a enemie, and I have my villages close to this enemiefriend, it can be good to help them with defends.
      With this new I cant do that. :(

      Great offplayers cant be outside the ally and have the defenders inside a ally. You all know about farm-stealing and thats why offplayer sometimes are outside the allys.

      This will only benefit great allys, not small.
      06-09 3 rundor s1 och 1 runda s1.com
      sez 10 The Body, sez 12 Old Sparky
      x10.com The Sun sez 13 Trassel sez 14 Katla
      sez 15 Borderline dkx 16 Thenoob
      sez 16 Hel sez 17 Roxette
      comx Johan&Linda Nox 18 Sven-Sten
      sez 19 Kärlek comx 50ShadesOfLove
      sez 20 Sommar sez 22 Tsunami Ukx Fenrir
      TT MyLittlePony, Titanium,
      Lady Galadriel, Lady Marmelade
    • New

      ELE wrote:

      Restriction to all resources shipments (except market) and all reinforcements to the members of the same alliance/confederacy.
      I would like to discuss here that topic. If that restriction becomes a fact what will happen to some secret missions and tasks for some accounts where membership to a certain alliance/confederacy is not desirable to demonstrate and which mission will be impossible to complete without the support of other accounts? I suppose that the opportunity to try some non-standard tactics is the only reason for many experienced players to be still interested in the game. Restricting the opportunities to make improvisations and surprising moves will make many long-time players to withdraw from the game. Such restrictions will leave legitimate only just boring and routine actions which could be interesting for newcomers, but not for those playing for years.
      It seems that TG in their difficulties to limit the multi-accounts, want to punish the majority of players who respect fair play but also want to try surprising and non-standard actions on the map.
      The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.
      Edmund Burke

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

    • New

      Well, so far it's discussed only for Annual Special. This will make old strategies less attractive, maybe, but from my prospective it would also bring completely new ones. No hidden defenders, no spikers (or at least they are revealed immediately) open confederacies, servers where more than 2 sides compete to each other. I wouldn't have made any definite opinion about that before I'd actually played one server with that restriction to see how it feels in reality.
    • New

      Final Word wrote:

      Lot of Russians and tourney players worried for their techs I guess. Played so long using special "tactics" can't see themselves playing without.
      How will this rule even stop tech accounts?
      You cant send res after x amount of res farmed anyway, this just stops big alliances to help eachother since you can only be allied with 3 other alliances + your own almost every meta on tournament is bigger then this....
      TT final 2015 - Das Båt (SE)
      TT Qualify RU 2016 - Das Båt (Cerber-DD)
      TT final 2016 - illicit Ping, Pong & PangPang (Def&Dest)
      TT Qualify RU 2017 - Chip&Dale #1 off (CerbeR)
      TT Final 2017 - Chip&Dale (CerbeR)
      SE3 2017 - Krokodil
      Se1 2017-2018 Garbage Bag #1 Def (SKRÄP)
    • New

      Final Word wrote:

      Lot of Russians and tourney players worried for their techs I guess. Played so long using special "tactics" can't see themselves playing without.
      Come on... I will be happy to see if you will be able to explain how this proposal will help against this... Logically... Because there is NO explanation. The only benefit will be - it will limit selling res for money at the very begining. But again 1% benefit against 99% negatives.

      In addition - Travian is a team strategic war game. If you remember in 3.6 or even earlier (I don't remember the version) we were able to choose what way do we want to follow - economy or war. The tutorial was a bit different for both ways - we built either markets or baracks. So TG themselves brought in our heads that we need offensive players, defensive players, economy supports. Team game means - lots of players play for 1 main target. And it's not their own account. If my boss will ask me to build account to support diets instead of buiding troops - I will do this as it will help my ally to win.
      CerberBg
      skype:igor.i26
    • New

      I don't see 99% negative :D

      How it will help.

      - resources shipments in the beginning and mind you beginning is kinda important;
      - later in game they all are raided, sure, but you also need to protect you tech/private farms/whatnot. If you already build troops on such accounts you also use them to defend yourself later, not an option any more. It will not completely eliminate shady accounts but it will make it harder to maintain and less profitable;
      - this is why I suggested sitters restrictions as well, not to fight spies as people concluded, but to make it harder to maintain techs and multies.

      Generally, I don't believe there is a big chance to fight multies and tech account by hunting them. In-game mechanic should be changed to, again, make them harder to maintain and less profitable. If you have other ideas - chime in.

      Loffe wrote:

      just stops big alliances to help eachother since you can only be allied with 3 other alliances + your own almost every meta on tournament is bigger then this....
      and that is another aim and for me personally most important.
    • New

      Wow.... I would sing one amazign song of Uriah Heep... :))
      - lots of the players will stop playing if it will be accepted. You want to let everyone go one direction with limited options to show creativity. But most veterans are interested to see some beautiful solutions as they've enough wins in their life. Limit this options and most of them will leave
      - non-gold accounts will be affected
      - the explanation works for bots and res sellers but TG should be able to identify those groups easily. What about the rest - they can create a conf and continue playing without any issues

      I'm interested how team game became playing for our own. Does it sound like - play for the medals and rate? ;)
      CerberBg
      skype:igor.i26