View Poll Results: I like more...

Voters
29. You may not vote on this poll
  • Scattered Empire version

    3 10.34%
  • Rise of Alliances version

    26 89.66%
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Scattered Empire or Rise of Alliances?

  1. #11
    Natarian Knight
    Join Date
    10.07.2012
    Posts
    672

    Default

    It would be better to list the features of each version that we are comparing. SE had goldron, if it meant to be a feature again there is nothing to discuss. Any version with goldron would be no-no for me, nothing else would matter, so I assume it's gone for good. ROA still wins for me, hands down.
    ROA pluses
    - no option to merge siege. Much better game balance. Thanks to hobbits/murxies for their cata show on beta and continuous push for removal;
    - boosted start, loving it;
    - no auction;
    - locked region (discourage pure simming in away regions)
    - bonuses - finally true alliance projects. Too expensive and kinda pointless after 2nd, maybe 3rd tier. It would be good to have bonuses that players can't get on their own - faster troops movement between account/ally villages for example. And please change merchants bonus to speed, not amount they carry. With high TS and boots it is quite often that troops can make it to CFD but merchants can not.

    Not sure.
    Small/unique assignment of VP. Small arts have more value as a game feature in my opinion, so assigning higher VP value to them does not make much sense and there are much more small ones which encourage simming vs fighting. However with current map concentration unique arts in SW would make that quad pretty much the only place to go and inevitable exclusive bloodbath on competitive servers if unique earned more VP. I suggested before, the map should not be the same every server, but it would be nice to have it published before start.

    I like no auction. However, for low/non-gold users this is big blow. There is no option to get certain features now unless you buy gold. One may say TG should not care about non paying customers, but liberal_with_gold accounts are hardly majority and to be interesting the game needs numbers. Not to mention that no one buys much gold on the first try, need to develop some addiction

    Negative.
    New pushing rules. I hate it. Merchants are often too slow to make it to CFD and a few close villages hit the limit immediately in remote regions. Maybe developers should explain the reasoning behind the change, I can't find any.

  2. #12
    Natarian Knight
    Join Date
    10.07.2012
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poet View Post
    I shouldnt mention the cauldron though, i dont want to trigger Ele. :P
    Why? I thought triggered ELE is hot.

  3. #13
    Natarian Knight
    Join Date
    10.07.2012
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Poet View Post
    Regional unlocking serves to trap beginners and slower starters within the grips of the stronger players.
    This is team game. The main goal of any new comer should be to get into a decent ally and learn how play the game properly as a team I really doubt settling undisturbed in boonies would do any good to learning curve.

  4. #14
    Thorned Warrior
    Join Date
    18.09.2016
    Posts
    52

    Default

    I like the changes brought up by Ele, if another round is started.

    There is already a way to increase the mass of resources carried but the speed is always a problem, So agree with that one.

    As there are pros and cons to change and keep the VP/arte ratio I would propose to simply give the same amount of VP to every region. You settle to the regions you want either way (small trainer/ unique eye, etc) and the quadrants are pretty irrelevant anyway.

    But for the glory of having it mentioned:
    If you want a Trainers Talent the SE is a bad region ( only the unique one available, and a small one even later)
    If you want a storage plan the NE is . (as well as for many other things)
    The SW is bad if you want a early small eagle eye.
    There will be something n the NW, didnt look to long.

    So in Summary: You probably spread not strictly in one quadrant anyway.
    I like the idea of changing the artifact of a region every round and dont see the need of getting it published beforehand. One can look at the map at the start of the game and then start settling his first two villages in the way they want to later on.
    Last edited by Templar Knight; 21.12.2016 at 00:20. Reason: removed star word

  5. #15
    Natarian Knight
    Join Date
    10.07.2012
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Planning first round of settling will put heavy burden on leadership in the first hours, unlike regular servers decision need to be made right away. The version is called "Raise of alliances" "One" should not decide on his/her own.

  6. #16
    Thorned Warrior
    Join Date
    18.09.2016
    Posts
    52

    Default

    well, if you preform alliances of good people where the trends is going to, the leadership could be able to do some work as well

  7. #17
    Thorned Warrior
    Join Date
    30.05.2015
    Posts
    48

    Default

    Why not just have Merchants use the TS?

  8. #18
    Pikeman
    Join Date
    16.09.2013
    Posts
    19

    Default

    RoA should be for all tribes. Why not to register as Natars or Animals ?


    Just joking.

  9. #19
    Natarian Knight
    Join Date
    10.07.2012
    Posts
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freetime View Post
    well, if you preform alliances of good people where the trends is going to, the leadership could be able to do some work as well
    This is 7 months commitment. I see no reason why major strategic decision should be made in minutes. I'm sure you have enough experience to sort it all out fast regardless on the start time, but I unfortunately don't practice such magic. It takes hours to figure out the map, some more to discuss options, some more to discuss it with whole alliance and distribute orders. It would be no problem on regular server (or less problem, because quad still matter) where you have 4-5 days to decide. With boosted start settler go out immediately. Or don't go out, but that is decision to make.

  10. #20
    Thorned Warrior
    Join Date
    18.09.2016
    Posts
    52

    Default

    Well, settling blind is provenly not the best strategy, as you hopefully would agree.

    So, yes, planning is key. But planning in the direct situation should be possible, everybody can wait about 1-2 hours sending out his settlers.

    So off course it would be easy to give the plan out 7 months in advance, but that would bring prebuild alliances an even bigger advance.
    So Travian could give you the map right when you start as a link in an IGM and the forum. This way (theoretically) everybody could decide where he wants to settle his first two villages with biggest impact.

    I dont dislike idea of changing map every round, or having a plan as an alliance, I dislike the idea of 30 people activating their accounts and exactly knowing where to go 26 minutes later.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •