Path to Pandora Discussion Thread

    • Imho we need some minor balancing changes.

      Because right now there is only one sensible option for every ambitious player: Get an Egyptian capital

      And that's a bit boring. We need more diversity in our choices and for that we need to boost the special buildings of the other tribes.

      Brewery to 25% (not sure if that really would be enough for me to take Teuton over Egyptian. Because taking Egyptians enables you to build ... hmm... far sooner far more offensive troops (hard to calculate how much more in percent) but you don't have the "you cannot aim with catapults" drawback... Even with 25% I'd still take Egyptians, so maybe better make it 30%.

      Horse ... fountain? No idea how that building is called in English. But it has to be boosted freaking significantly to even start to compare with Egyptians.
      I am thinking... maybe change it to the following: Once build in the capital it effects all horses in the account (only if you build them yourself. But no matter the tribe). Soo... you could go with a Roman capital and have only Gaul villages and focus on druids only. They not only build faster but they only need 1 crop. At that point it starts competing with WW... Same if it effects all the horses an offensive accounts builds. Your steppes only need 1 crop and they build even faster. Still... that Egyptian capital is significantly better in the beginning to midgame, but from midgame to endgame that would change.
      Also having a boost in the beginning (with Egyptian) has a ripple effect that should not be underestimated. Still... if the effect was as I described it, I would at least start to seriously consider such a capital. Maybe I would go with Egyptian capital for the first phase and change it to Roman capital for the second phase. Point is, so much more options and diversity. Everyone can go a different way and we don't have all to do the same.

      Gauls... well.... if someone ever wants to seriously consider a Gaul capital again we need a gigantic boost for their special building. Maybe having a Gaul capital is for "loners" and people who want to fight alone or don't trust their alliance to keep them save.
      We could multiply the traps x10 and the say that the trapper in the capital functions account-wide as well. So for example if you have build 5 trappers in the capital then you have 4k traps x5 =20k traps in the next village that gets attacked. As I said, that capital would be for people who want to fight on their own, because normally that is still totally useless. Maybe better make it x15... that way they'd have 6k traps x5 = 30k traps.. hmm... well, it certainly makes it unattractive to ever chief a Gaul again, as long as there are other targets. And maybe it would lead to people building slaves suddenly, who knows ^^

      And to justify a Hun capital... hmmm... maybe every single chief in the whole acc gets 25% stronger if you build a cc in the capital? That way you could chief with a single triple... but... well...

      Wouldn't nearly be enough encouragement for me to actually prefer a Hun capital over Roman/Teuton/Egyptian but ... maybe for some player it would be?
    • chainsawdaz wrote:

      Instead of boosting the others why not just nerf the Egyptians, halve the waterworks bonus for example and make the building even more expensive still
      I dunno if others feel the same, but I personally like the idea of tribes having a distinct benefit and reason to have them as a capital, with maybe the exception of Huns due to their OP start.

      Suggestions for capital only buildings:

      Gaul - Bring back the Armoury. All troops have defensive bonus (Suggestion around 2% per level)
      Teutons - Increase Brewery to 20 or 30%
      Roman - HDT affect all horses not just roman, in all villages. (Maybe reduce by 50% for other tribes troops)
      Huns - They have Command Centre and the amazing start for raiders. Make their capital undesirable. No Cap Building
      Egyptians - Keep the same, but Maybe increase Waterworks cost.

      Regardless, PTP needs some balancing and once it is sorted will be a lot of fun!
    • The Betting Man wrote:

      Suggestions for capital only buildings:

      Gaul - Bring back the Armoury. All troops have defensive bonus (Suggestion around 2% per level)
      Teutons - Increase Brewery to 20 or 30%
      Roman - HDT affect all horses not just roman, in all villages. (Maybe reduce by 50% for other tribes troops)
      Huns - They have Command Centre and the amazing start for raiders. Make their capital undesirable. No Cap Building
      Egyptians - Keep the same, but Maybe increase Waterworks cost.
      Hi ,

      Just saying if you are buffing everything else about everything else i think the WW should be rolled back.
      Egyptians have basic unit of slaves which do very little early game in terms of raiding or added benefits. Plus the serious lack of off makes it completely defensive. On a scale of a whole meta vs meta it makes evens out.

      But if a solo egyptian is to take on the solo brunt of other tribes a solo egyptian comes out loosing. Balance is key but if you do all of the above then whats the point of playing a egyptian ? Just a tech?

      I was in a local cropper conflict last round with my 150% threatened by a 100% of a teuton. I was the bigger gold abuser. I was more active ,

      yet the time for him to take me out and me to take him out varied. He was ready by the months end to demolish me while i was no where near the decent army to have a go at him in terms of off power.

      The only thing that helped was it was a mexican standoff where i had just enough def that he would splat 90% of his army (forwarding helped immensely here) and i could continue growing. while he was forced to raid like a mad man to keep up trying to feed the standing def vs the army i had.

      The other advantage was my army could defend too as it was kopesh + resh so i had more choices . I would not have survived had it not been for the low cost water works.

      If we are balancing the rest I would like stats for one unit of egypt atleast be decent in off and bring in decent raiding :) Like kopesh move at speed 8 and say carry 60 atleast .

      every other tribe has a distinct advantage of being a fabulous raider. Its quiet a task being a egyptian so all they have is the economy to rely on.
      A-nub-is me , I am a noob.

      ELE wrote:

      I actually agree with @A-nub-is

    • I don't have that much problem with Egyptians having by far the best capital, that alone would be ok. After all we all know WW must be built on teutons account and everyone is fine with it. Egyptians however have the fastest start as well so they are not only have best capital but best chances to be first to best croppers.
      Majority of competitive servers will ultimately be Egyptians with all other races hard to find.

      It is kinda easy to make Romans and Teutons competitive - more powerful brewery and capital HDT for account can do it.
      Egyptian hero bonus should go to Gauls so they have best chance to croppers. Huns can live without capital advantage - they have the only hero with somewhat useful skills after start and chiefing power (maybe drop the cost of CC a little).

      @Schneeente you need a proper name too. Fluffy Bunny will suit.

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

    • Seriously can we give Gauls some love already.

      Why are travian so adamant at leaving them with the worst building in the game, let alone worst tribe specific building.

      Something similar to the Teutons Brewery that allows them to boost defence by 10%. And if you want, an interesting drawback could be that troops stationed in foreign villages have a x1.5 crop consumption. Not useful for standing defence, but great for a mobile anvil.
      UKx13 - Spera
      UKx14 - Sperandromeda
      UKx29 - Chaos
      UK F&S 3x - Pharaoh
    • I think the best suggestion I've heard about this whole Gyp cap thing is that you can only hold a capital with the tribe you start with!
      As for all the complaining about the Egyptian start I have a couple of things to say about that...

      I was a top Egyptian in au19 (Phoenix) - 2nd to settle if I remember correctly but I was active and used gold. The hero resource bonus was helpful BUT came at the cost of FS which is something I tend to use more especially because I usually play Roman. I'm not that heavy on gold so wasn't buying ointments to compensate for all the health loss doing adventures and it made clearing oasis much harder.

      HOWEVER... I strongly believe that the AlexTurner account (Teuton) could of settled before me. We spawned very close, struck up a friendship early and started sitting each other. He was a top raider early and the res from his raiding more than outdid my hero resource bonus. I believe it was simply the fact that he was more focused on troop building and didn't pay enough attention to the timing of being able to settle. I strongly believe this would be the same for a Hun account - look at the top raiding stats early game!!

      I am willing to bet all those grouching about the Egyptian cap and start ability don't want to play Egyptian themselves and are probably highly active players. The Egyptian tribe is a good tribe for less active players which can balance against those that are more active. But of course they have their downside of expensive troops and not the greatest off or speed so probably aren't a 1st choice for more active players. That's good balance.

      Now quoting ELE...

      ELE wrote:

      I don't have that much problem with Egyptians having by far the best capital, that alone would be ok. After all we all know WW must be built on teutons account and everyone is fine with it. Egyptians however have the fastest start as well so they are not only have best capital but best chances to be first to best croppers.
      Majority of competitive servers will ultimately be Egyptians with all other races hard to find.

      It is kinda easy to make Romans and Teutons competitive - more powerful brewery and capital HDT for account can do it.
      Egyptian hero bonus should go to Gauls so they have best chance to croppers. Huns can live without capital advantage - they have the only hero with somewhat useful skills after start and chiefing power (maybe drop the cost of CC a little).
      ... I disagree that Egyptians necessarily have the fastest start for my reasons above and think if they lost the hero res bonus they would absolutely have the worst start because they have the most expensive troops (I don't count SM's!) Perhaps - and I only say perhaps - Gauls could get one too. However a good Gaul can get TT's out raiding early so can also be a serious competitor in the raiding.

      So now I'm going to put the shoe on the other foot and grouch about Huns. Just as the teuton clubby is often considered OP'd I think the Hun cavalry is OP'd and needs to be curtailed in some mix of being slower, weaker and less carry ability!! I think the Hun hero ability is OP'd and should be removed!!! Take that Huns!!! :p

      Now back to my first statement I will add that part of the reason I think this has been prompted by my reading through the thread which is nitpicking about the rules of multi's and friendly chiefings etc etc bla bla because everyone wants a Gyp cap!! This is a recipe for a lot of cheating and dubious play so that's why I say only being able to have a cap of the tribe you start with would be the simplest and best suggestion. You want a Gyp cap? Then start as a Gyp!!
    • @A-nub-is - are you talking to me? Were you in au19 and if so who?
      TIW will be though I'm not sure how many.
      I'm trying to resist because I want to enjoy my summer but probably will give in and play :p
      AlexTurner probably won't be - after getting banned twice in au19 he gave up and didn't come back. It was his first time back playing for awhile apparently.