PVP as CTF

[MrH4m]

Now that we have lag free server, we can start implementing PVP which should be done like this.

Main developer should order 24 new maps by artists which will then forward those maps to tactical map creators (placement of bandit camps and units in them).

Maps should be medium sized and then doubled (separate them with river, mountains or what ever) and then goal for each player / team (2, 4) is to defeat the last bandit camp.

I see PVP in this game only as CTF mode (Capture the flag) where reward for one team (1 player) will be certain amount of resources and all players get XP for the amount of units they personally killed / defeated.

When those 24 maps are done, at the end of each month - one map is then released and there you go, you got regular and already prepared updates for the next two years and PVP implemented.

Most, or at least, half of these maps should be made with idea that players can use camp blocking ability - better skilled player will finish faster while other one will do regular, camp by camp, battle - or lose part of his army for mistake which he did (if the player "fails" to properly block camp).

Players on these maps will have to think and act quick - there will be no time for community to release tactical map in time - by the time they did, there will be already new map /zone implemented and inserted as chance to find it with explorer.

This is basically it.

It requires 2 months of hard work for 3-5 map creators and few map artists/designers but after that, they are fully paid and you got solved a) PVP b) updates for PvP zones in the next two years. After that, there is no actual need for new maps regarding PVP. Community does the rest - releasing tactical maps and players themselves have an option: to play adventures for "safe" XP and loot or to risk little more to get, little faster, same amount of XP and loot by playing PVP zone/map/island vs other players.

I, personally, do not see how can PVP be implemented in this game if you choose other idea over this CTF style.

Thumbs up if you like it or... don't xD

Mr.H4m

p.s.
Of course, each player is limited with 3 or 4 generals (same amount).

[KillerCore]

I am not sure what you mean with this as a pvp aspect. this seems *pardon me if i read it wrong* as you kill bandit camps and not the other player. What i see in pvp is that you attack an other player. Just killing bandit camps is pretty boring as you can calculate everything. It would be way more fun if you could battle each other / groups battles.

Again correct me if i misunderstood.

On a side note this is still a cool idea though. it could be some sort of a race against other players whoever finishes his part fastest will get the reward.

[Saraptheold]

My suggestion is that we can have battlefields with a limit to how many troops of each type you can bring. That way new players won't just end up being "harvested" by the ones that have had time to build up resources (like in Travian). Also you would have to pay a certain amount of resources to play a field and the winner gets these + the ones that has been looted from banditcamps. Just to spice it up a little.

[MrH4m]

Well, with what ever ideas we come in this thread, we should storm brain this idea fast as possible because I see too much players getting bored with this game and developers are going slightly in wrong direction - wasting energy on irrelevant stuff and not pushing this game in right direction.

It will be a waste for this kind of potential (this game) to end in, for example, me and other players saying: "Been there, done that" as most of online games that I (we) have played.

I am sorry for blunt expressions here, sometimes it's hard for me to express my self in proper words while trying not to offend any one - this sounded as a criticism to developers - but I am out of "walking around hot soup" ammunition.

We all appreciate what have you done so far and we are thankful for that.

We want this - give it to us. Simple as that.

When I wrote Market Guide, I did it because I was furious - I said: "I will either teach people how to trade properly so I can get my granite when ever I desire (no1 wanted to sell ANY granite few weeks back) or I am quitting because there is nothing for me here anymore". I told that, in exact words like this, before I started to write a guide to some of my friends here.

So I wrote it and guess what, people actually started to trade granite. Good.

And now, when I solo easily finish 3 player adventure in 2 days - I hear other players talking that there is a level cap of 50 in this game.

What, I will play this until level 50 and then what? Watch the monitor? Do silly day quests for 10 gold coins in rewards?

You are aware that there are more than few players with more than 15.000 gold coins on them, right?

Remove the cap for player leveling, put that "5x" button below center in window for trading with another player and give us PvP on separate zones, which we will find with explorers, to time race with another players - keeping in mind to release new map EVERY month for the next two years so that players won't follow various guides but to think and calculate by them self.

Simple, isn't it? So do this, make everyone happy (including yourself) and you wont regret it - I am now talking to the main developer (one guy) of this game.

And you are very well aware what you need for this (what people and how many resources / money) and you a very well aware that it can be done in 3 months top.

Cheers.

Mr.H4m

[Empedokles]

Hi guys!

I found this topic rather interesting. I don't know how much we can persuade the developers, but at least giving a chance to it, by explaining our ideas here. So I hope it is not just a waste of type .

So, first I have to say, that I agree with many things that MrH4m said. The map releases, and pvp implementions soon should be done, or this game simply gets its end, when more and more player become able to play 3 player adventures alone. I have to say, that people with a good industry become do it around the first half of the 30 levels. So Actually with guides, this state (what MrH4m mentioned, that players get bored with the games challenges) will come much more faster then we even expect. There will be no real challenge for thoose, who are looking for professional competition. So I agree, that implementing PVP within half a year, or at least giving news, that developers are started to work on it is essential to keep TSO alive!
/I am saying theese as I have just registered 3 weeks ago reached lvl 31 and feeling that soon can bring out the hardest 3 player adventures alone with the aid of the guides far below the recommended levels. - I just wanted to say this in order to everybody be able to understand my point of view./

Otherwise I am going further, then MrH4m imagined. I played an other online strategy game for about more than 10 years long (for thoose who want to know what it was exactly I just say it was WC3). It is still online, but as I grow older, I feelt no more dedication to it. I is not that I got bored with that, instead I still becoming excited from time to time to when I hear, that it is still alive. I just feel I lost that ability to play that intensively what that game needs to stay at that level I liked to keep. Its addiction came from its balanced online competition challenges. It was like chess, just with a different speed.
So I think that PVP should base on something that made thoose game also so "unboreable".

I dont have exact opinion how, here PVP should be, but have some hints, how developers could make it everlasting:

1. PvP MUST BE player versus player.

2. The other most important thing, is the ranking system. Sure it must be based on battles and the reached levels. Thus far the method of XP rewarding is the biggest question. Here is my idea:
Units have their own xp worth, and at the end of the battle, the winner (or may be the looser aswell- it is important to give some kind of reward for the looser aswell) should get the killed units total XP ammount. So Its XP can vary on the hardness of the challenge. An easily beaten player will worth much less xp-n than an allout total war victory and I think it is most important in a PVP. Otherway there should be also bandit camps, what players can take out for xp and loot -or just loot- and it adds to the final loot. In my opinion both winner and looser should get some kind of reward here. I think the winner simply should get some extra loot after victory.
Or on other method, that the xp reward after the battle could be based not on killed units (-I still hold my opinion that, this would be the perfect for this game to become eternal since massive armies can be gathered, which can ensure the high XP over battles-), but on the players level. For example by beating a higher level player should mean extra xp, and less for a lower level. But in this case, there must be some kind of restriction on the battle field, like how many generals can be used or something. I dont have exact idea.

3. The outcome of a battle. I think it should be total annihilation (all of the players general are in regenerating state, or travel -just no more avaiable at the battle field) or deadline based like adventures. If no one loose within a couple of days, then the one with the most XP gathered player (by killing enemy players units and camps together) come out on top. He gets the killed units total xp and some loot, and the looser just get the XP he killed during the war but no loot.

4. Well, if all of this is done ( :-) ), then there must be regular tournaments with extra rewards (special units, extra loot -or just coins whatever- and extra ornaments, like a triumphal arch for winnig a tournament would be very very nice ).

I hope someone will read this ideas from thoose who have the power and potential to consider theese ideas!

I wish you all the best, I hope soon we can meet on the battlefield ^^.

Cheers.

Empedokles

[unlucky]

Intriguing ideas on pvp. Perhaps that is one of the more interesting facits of the whole game - everyone has their own ideas! Probably the greatest challenge for the developers is to take the best ideas and develop something.

Oh sorry, that's called a committee and the result is a camel . . .

I suspect this is the reason why there have been noises about it coming but no details of when or in what form.

I actually belong to the anti-pvp camp, but am still pleased to see how some people are approaching the idea with positive ideas - perhaps they might convince me one day.

Having played table top war games for many years (all eras), I know how difficult it is to design both battles and water tight rules, yet when it does work it usually works well, BUT (sorry there is always a but!) once again often the experienced player will win, not because they have more tactical skill, but because they know the game through experience.

What happens for players when they get to lvl 50, I think is a far more important question to be resolved, what will the game actually have for them? Perhaps this is the key - pvp becomes available at lvl 50, with a max limit on further island development so that there will be a more level playing field for players after that stage in terms of resources etc. Perhaps a cap of lvls for buildings could be introduced - e.g. say hardwood mills - cap of 12 levels - player could have 4 lvl3 or 3 lvl4 or 2 lvl5 and a lvl2 building. This would allow flexibility within their production lines, yet overall give a more lvl playing field - a suggestion to start, not an answer, but it would also allow for trading pvp more easily as well, though there perhaps the computer would have to stay the buyer to prevent bias by other players!

[Killste]

I have suggestion for PVP. I like we can atack other player island, cause its much funnier and more challenging. There must be some rules, like 40 level player cant atack 18 level player, because its not fair. Well my opinion its fair, 40 level player has started game earlier, and probably is more potential game player and game buyer. But lower level as somebody call them noobs, TSO developers like Travian game Developers calls them income. That way is good, if 40 level can only atack, lets say 35 level and above. Also there is limit how long you must wait, until you can atack same player again, so you cant atack over and over same player. It is also good idea. like adventure seeker, there is something like war declare seeker, with explorer, what gives you right, to atack other peoples island. So bigger level, cant bash lower level player, and play king of the island, and stays highest level in TSO. I also recommed that there is time limit how long you can atack, another island, before battle is over, so you dont leave that island after you left a wasteland. Also, if you can those war declare, buy gems, it give more income, because player buy those, so they can atack other player. And if there is ladder system, and reward, player how is atacked most, or winned most battles or defended in 1 week or month, gives player more interesting PVP battles

I hope you understand, what was i suggesting. Numbers, and items, like war seeker are only leading idea. I hope you understand my english, if you dont im sorry, i have no intention make it better, because i really dont like this language, so suck with this.

[Saraptheold]

@Killste:I hate being a flaming troll, but your english is so bad that I didn't quite understand what your point was. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you wan't the same battlesystem as in Travian, but with some limitations as to whom you can attack and how often? And you want Gembuyers to have more advantages than they have now.If I understood you correctly I would have to disagree with you.

1.High level players would have to wait forever to play against one of his/her low level friends.

2.At the slow pace of this game it would take literary forever to recover from a moderately successful attack.

3.In Travian there was no way to stop people from ganging up on you and attack you one after another. How would you avoid that here. By giving players a sanctuary period every time they have been attacked and slow the game even more. Pretty soon it would be more interesting to watch grass grow.

4. I might buy some gems to be able to buy buildings like the silo and waterwheel, but if I have to buy gems for hundreds of euros just to stay alive, I would rather play WoW or WC3.

I hear that there is a new Travian out there, but I'm not going to play it based on my experience with the old one. The old one became really boring really fast. If you were among the first ones on a new server and bought gold to get a good, pretty soon your only goals would be to ally with other strong players and "harvest" all newcomers before anyone else did. (We even called new villages "farms" openly in the forums for crying out loud) .

Please, please ,pretty please dev's. Do not make this another Travian.

[Killste]

Saraptheold, what you say is almost correct, except few of misunderstandings, but with my bad english, i dont correct it, so I leave your comments fine to me.
If you want some corrections, something I writed, its easier to explain in game, in whisp mode.

One thing I agree with you, new version travian battle system is terrible and morale is boosted. I dont want this game travian either.

Anyway, is only suggestion, you can read between lines, what was I suggesting.

[MrH4m]

One more addition to this thread - as I said before - it would be best just to brainstorm this thread.

Definition of brainstorm - put ANY idea, which ever comes to your mind, no matter how silly /impossible it is!

More creative - the better!

Out of 9762349876234 ideas, few of them MUST be awesome!

I like how you guys think and I can disagree or I can not - that is not important here. What is important? Not to criticize ideas from other players or to debate them - at least, just not yet. Let debate and discussion be moved at later stage to another thread where I can, or any of you, make a list of all our ideas (by numbers) and then we can discuss each and every one of them.

So, guys, put criticism and debate, for week or two from now, out of this thread (I like it / I do not like it, maybe this / maybe that) and just write your ideas here - what ever comes to your mind. Boats, attacking other players, separate battle field zones, time race - what ever. If it seems "impossible" or "weird" - it really does not matter at this point.

Keep 'em flowin', that's all!

Cheers!

Ham