A problem, other than the "pay to win" one, that Rail Nation still doesn't acknowledge

  • You didn't understand at all what I meant with my quote you think is complete nonsense. With only competitons for prestige you can not win a round, without city teams who haul from factories and make them level you won't gain investment prestige. When cities don't level there will be low prestige earnings every day etc etc. A prestige hunter can't get all the prestige to win a game round without the help of others who do the work of growing. Clearly you don't understand the full game. Indivudual wins are only possible if there are enough active city haulers.


    And my personal rankings doesn't tell you anything if I know how to play. I'm no prestige player and my goal isn't a personal nr 1 ranking, I'm a team player who plays for a city and or region. I have won enough game rounds with my city in an endgame, that is my goal.


    Kelot you only look at one way to play this game and that is gathering prestige. But clearly you forget also who is behind a prestige hunter to make it possible to gather the prestige.

    :engine1::engine1::engine1:

    Work for a cause

    Not for applause

    Live life to express

    Not to impress

  • Naike. Llewelyn1966 and others writing about "saboteurs":


    I think you don't understand, or you pretend you don't understand.


    I warn you it will be a bit.


    I do not know your motivation for sure, but I have met too many who, unable to win (because they do not carefully observe the game and the best players and do not draw the correct conclusions), shout loudly about completely different goals in the game.


    Nobody remembers them today.

    In this game is only one winner of the round.


    Therefore, with a high degree of probability I am able to describe your reasons for writing this and not another on this topic.


    But let's leave it aside.


    The winner of the round does not play alone.


    There are still "a few" people on the server and believe me, they do not want to help the winner.


    You don't want to either. but nevertheless you transport goods, invest in factories etc. and a good player is able to take advantage of it to win.


    Nobody owes any gratitude to anyone, quite the contrary.


    The "Beware of saboteurs" approach is de facto sabotaging prestige-gathering players more successfully than those screaming about sabotaging.


    Recently, a sharp exchange of views broke out in the forum of one city, which began with the fact that one person complained terribly that he had to spend millions on his own factory, because someone else was investing.


    As a result, it turned out that this person was investing millions to throw that other person lower, to he did not gain the maximum prestige for the promotion of the factory.


    The investments of this "saboteur" did not affect the property of the factory, even though it was the first site of the investment.


    Overall: the "saboteur" (3rd position in the ranking) has invested to get the maximum prestige without harming players who transport goods from this factory.


    But the "weeper" threw away all the collected money so that ... by any chance the "saboteur" would not get 300 pp, only 240 pp.



    "weeper" is in 365 position in the ranking and there is no chance of reaching the TOP100 until the end of the game with such a game.


    If he had invested the millions wisely in other factories, he would have raised more pp than the 300 he had earned in this single factory promotion.


    But he doesn't play for prestige. Why was he investing and knocking another player from the first position?


    Well, in order not to make it easier for this from the 3rd position to fight for the first place.


    And here you can discuss whether the "weeper" behavior was not a violation of fair play, because he himself gained nothing and tried to harm another player.


    This is one of the reasons why I do not like the use of the word "saboteur".


    To many players it seems (with an emphasis on "seems") that a factory is theirs forever and ever.


    In this game, the factory factory is those players, who will invest more in it.


    End and dot.


    You play not very actively, your earnings are low, you cannot afford to maintain the factory, you lose it.


    It's simple too.


    It's a shame that you have to explain this things on the forum.

    Just watch the game carefully.


    Does winning a round make any difference?


    Yes, because if you do not win and you are discussing how to win, or what others should not do, because it is not fair (read, because I cannot win under the current conditions of the game), it is like being a bricklayer instructing how to treat a doctor, or vice versa .


    It makes no sense at all.


    If most people cannot win the game in the current circumstances, it will be fairer when they start to write that they would like to change this or that, so that they can finally win.


    Such a thing would be understandable, not fairy tales about other wins than the actual winners in this game.


    I have already met those who boasted that they had already won the game with city many times.


    After checking, it turned out that they actually changed the city before the finals to the one that ultimately won, but they themselves were bringing a fraction of a percent in the finals of what the two leading associations of this city and their players brought.


    Or they entered the game at the end of 6 age of game , they in the settings they marked the city that had a chance to win.


    They did not carry anything in the final because they did not manage to build the necessary tracks and ... they won.


    But how does it sound! They won!


    (I smile myself as I write this)


    After introducing career points, many players played in parallel on all possible servers, giving a replacement and promising to be present in the final.


    Those who they replaced gained, because they had an additional set of locomotives to dispose of.


    Those who were not in the game gained, because the game added career points to them without any effort.


    Everyone from the final city gained, because sometimes the replaced ones kept their word and came to the final. (Substitutes do not work in the final).


    Fortunately, the number of days of replacement has been limited and the suddent and lightning careers of players with several hundred rounds played and a very high position in the ranking, but not having a clue about the game, ended.


    I get the impression that many of the people who write on this forum only have this experience with the game as described above.


    And suddenly we find out that the winner is not the winner, but the one who simply abhors winning!


    Complete paranoia!




    As if in a shooter game, lead the entire team to the open space so that the rivals shoot like to ducks.


    You won't get any point, but you win!


    Because that's what you made up !


    Or in Fifa we will only score at our own goal!


    Nobody does it, we will be the winners!


    And the rules of this game? We'll cry on the forums and they'll change them for us!


    Words are missing to comment on it.


    The worst part is that such entries are taken seriously.


    The rule of the game that the player with the most prestige wins is gone.


    Something that attracted masses of gamers and made RN one of the best browser games collapsed.


    We used to have 14 servers with an average share of about 600-800 active players.


    Today, during the city competition, the system showed 57 players online !!!!


    This is the scale of the failure of TG, because he listens to entries such as those above.


    Shame. The game is raining and you can't see anyone trying to fix it.

  • As has already been said ... there are many ways to play this game.


    I am constantly amazed at how many different ways players find to say "my way is the only way" ... and there's a lot of that in this thread.


    Kelot ... It is not a sign of weakness to want to play to different goals. I play the game that will give me the most enjoyment depending on where I have landed, who else is playing nearby and what is going on in my world outside of the game. Sometimes this means I'm a city hauler playing for the team and sometimes this means I'm a free hauler and independent of city allegiance.


    @ the city haulers in this thread ... yes I agree ... without the city haulers the free hauling would not be so much fun. However, I wonder if the city haulers really understand how much they rely on the free haulers. This is less true of the big multiple association cities but it is often true that some of the top 10 cities would not be there without free hauling help.


    I would also comment that there are some very poor investment and majority models amongst many city players. Just saying that a factory is yours doesn't make it so ... it needs to be looked after ... hauled to as well as from and invested in so that it grows.


    The big problems come when we don't respect each other. I have no doubt that there are people who set out to deliberately sabotage other people's play. The game allows that whether we like it or not ... and I am one who doesn't like it ... but I equally don't like the tendency to assume everyone who plays differently is a saboteur and that all free haulers are spoilers.

  • mgc49


    Bravo, straight to the point.


    I do not deny that someone may assume a different goal of the game.


    But under the conditions that are in the game


    I play the way I want, but I don't cry that someone else is playing this game as intended and using all the possibilities I don't even see.


    If you have time read this thread and you will see how many tears have been shed here as the game and other players are not performing as some would like.


    The most beautiful thing about this game is that you can't force anyone to do anything.


    If you want to play in the team and win the game with the team (win - collect the most prestige !!! - I haven't seen the ranking of the number of posts on the forum yet!) Then you have to convince people, gather in the team and manage it to achieve the goal.


    It's a challenge, and if successful, it may be rewarding, but it isn't game win!


    Most of the cries are about how cruelly some are disturbed by others in the game.


    Others who play by the rules of this game.



    Congratulations on taking a healthy approach to this game

  • True, the sabotage has nothing to do with racking prestige and unfortunately many players think that those seeking prestige are, by definition, saboteurs.


    After all, this game is all about collecting prestige and the winner is the one with the most!

    This has been discussed, or at least I have discussed it. This game is about the end game and which city wins. Being ranked 1st, as individual, or 1st, as association, are secondary goals. Alas, it's irrelevant to this topic so let's not debate further, please.


    Why implement a feature to correct bad behavior? It's just bad design overall. Not to mention that the focus for Rail Nation should be on fixing critical bugs and not on spending months on adding core features instead of simply writing two more lines in the Game Rules.

    I don't know that saying but players usually don't forget bad behavior. Take Ronnie O'Sullivan for example, great player, terrible person. That's how he'll go down in history. Regardless, on the server I'm playing, the previous 5 round winners (could be more but these I know for certain) never intentionally broke a majority or overinvested, never ruined golden hours, never thrashed industries during the end game, yet they've won. If you're trying to tell me that you have to do all those things to win, then you don't know how to play OR you're up against jerk players.

    RN does NOT accept that PP hunting other cities running their times up is classed as disruptive behaviour. In fact the encourage everyone to PP hunt and disrupt other players gaming

    Correct. The topic was about those players that are ruining the wait times during the end game, not prior to it.

    That's not a problem for an association. No player can outinvest a fully fledged association, and if the matter persists they can always set that player's association with rival status, and that will hurt. I know some complain about investments, I'm not one of them.


    And you can do it, you just have to try to win the round and not sit in front of the forum screen and cry how bad everyone else is, because I can't win.

    You keep thinking that this rant is because we cannot win. We aren't trying to win as individuals or association, we're trying to win as a city. If I were to race for 1st I sure wouldn't have cared about where and how much a competitor is investing, I would have cared solely about my game. This rant here on the forum is about the players, presumably multi accounts, that are intentionally ruining end game industries.

    Coming back to how people play: When investing facilities to gain PP, you can do that at any time before it levels. But time and again we see people making big investments right after it levels, and thus breaking the majority - which then slows down a whole bunch of people whose main aim was to advance their city. If that is not disruptive, then what is?

    I constantly see "well you should take care of your facilities" - which is code for "you must invest IMMEDIATELY so that I can invest and gain PP; and somehow it's the OTHER person's fault that the PP-hunters can't be bothered to wait a while, or to ask for investment room, or to invest moderately and respect majorities.

    That is an inconvenience, especially for passive (mostly offline) players. But that's just a downside of not being active enough, it's just how it is. In most cases you will take the majority back with ease, with the help of just 2-3 other team members.

    As for "sabotage" - if anyone thinks that doesn't happen you are naïve or ignoring it. Especially in endgames, there is certainly deliberate sabotage. Players from another city will come and haul some goods from all the 12 current goods, just to add wait time. It's clearly deliberate and some players on some servers are even well-known for it.

    This is not about gaining prestige. They would gain more PP by hauling a large amount of goods in their home city than by hauling a small amount in another city - one big source of final prestige is the rewards for hauling in EG - and of course, if you're in the winning city you get a PP boost right at the end.

    It's all fine to say a good caller can work around it, but then again, a good saboteur (or maybe 2 or 3) can thwart even the best caller. It takes very little to mean that instead of clearing 3 short goods easily in an hour, you only clear 2, or instead of clearing 1 hard good within the hour, it takes an hour and a half - and that, if done cleverly, can essentially decide the outcome of the endgame.

    Thank you for your spot on interpretation of what I was trying to point with my topic. Sadly I don't think we will get to see any changes.

    I know from experience that players who have achieved nothing in this game, with the passage of time and subsequent unsuccessful attempts to achieve a good result, search for the imaginary goals of this game in order to raise their own value in their own eyes and in the eyes of others.

    That is wrong, borderline offensive and shows how little you understand concepts like team play, community, fair play and player behavior in general. Just because the purpose of other players is to have fun, without seeking high rankings, doesn't make them unsuccessful or, as you've stated, thus needing to compensate and create imaginary goals. And this is coming from someone who is highly competitive and doesn't like to lose. Just because someone doesn't want to win doesn't make him a loser by default.

    So prestige can be or not be as important as the individual wants it to be. Those who dismiss any other player for any reason is only doing themselves a disservice because their are many goals in this game that are team based.

    Pretty much how what jvoodoochild has said above.

  • That being said, my issue is with the players (generally no star, one star or max two stars, presumably multi accounts) who are intentionally ruining end game sites, thus sabotaging a city. That's it. I have never seen a 3-4-5 star player intentionally doing acts of sabotage.

  • Mihai finally, you write like a human, so I will answer.


    I have never written anywhere that I play for prestige at any cost.


    I have never intentionally deprived someone of a majority stake in his factory, even though it is quite simple.


    Sometimes the best mishaps occur when, when investing on the verge of depriving someone else of the majority in entrepreneurship, at the same time someone else pays the minimum amount, but it happens and nobody's fault.


    I adhere to the principle that if my payment would deprive other people's shares, I do not pay.


    I also never wrote that I don't play as a team.


    Also, I never wrote that I don't play for an association or a city!


    I have achieved probably already everything possible in this game and I play for fun with great people. Now that's the goal for me.


    I try to help others, I show that there is more to this game than just a tedious TOP4 ride for weeks with no apparent effect.


    Many who were about to give up the game stayed and took up the challenge of finding out its secrets. And that's my success, but definitely not a winning game!


    As a result, they are to try to win the round. Several of them have already succeeded and it is only their merit, their determination, dedication and persistence, which I congratulate them on.


    But that still isn't me winning the game!


    I hope I explained it enough why the text like "I won the game because our city won and I was 256,890 in tow in the final" makes me tears with laughter.


    And I loudly protest against calling such a game "winning".


    Satisfying game - yes.


    But it's not about me.


    The point is that only the player with the most prestige wins this game, the association that did so, and the city that delivered the required goods the fastest.


    End of rankings!


    The city, not the player who joined the city an hour before the final and is not even able to bring all the goods because there are not enough tracks!


    Two years ago (I think I checked it recently), the rules of the game (from the beginning) stated: "The winner of the round is the player who collects the most prestige".


    This is exactly what the ranking reflects


    Not only that, because the all-time ranking shows only the prestige gained by the players.


    I don't know when and why these words were removed, which is a pity, as there would be no doubt. As it was not before.


    There is no ranking of winners under the name of "who transported goods in the final city"


    The introduction of Career Points caused confusion when people realized that they could be accumulated on multiple servers without actually playing on them.


    We are only discussing one aspect of the game (and there are a huge number of them).


    I am able to imagine a player who collects all possible prestige points from an investment, because he pays so much everywhere that he is in the first place.


    Not all factories will be deprived of most of the previous owners if the association pays such an amount that the first place does not jeopardize the majority of the shares.


    Not only can I imagine it, but I've seen it.


    to be continued

  • Whoever played Masters in the first game knows what I am writing about.


    Nota bene - this round and the idea was a complete failure. But this topic is for a different conversation.


    I can also imagine that burning factories in the final is part of a rival city's strategy.


    I have experienced it many times, and we have also fought it many times with the methods available in the game. Successfully.


    It requires a well-coordinated team and not one association, but it is possible to implement.


    Once in all my years of playing in RN it happened that in the final game we had factories zeroed (load time 0) and not one burned. Only once!


    In other cases, we had to react accordingly, because that's what the game is all about!


    We fought hard for victories, but no one thought of crying for a change of rules or calling rivals in the game "saboteurs"!


    You have to get to know the game, its rules, mechanics, own abilities, team abilities, rivals abilities and plan the game in such a way to work out a win from it all.


    In sum.


    In two of the three categories, winning is closely related to collecting prestige (there are many possibilities, and one of them is investments). There are no other ways to win the round.


    Investing in factories to gain prestige is normal in this strategic and economic game.


    Taking most of the shares in factories, "burning" the factories, increasing the loading time of rivals may be one of the elements of the strategy.


    Factory owners have the ability to "defend" their factories, but it is not always everyone's will to do so.


    Anyone who takes advantage of the possibilities in this game cannot be called a saboteur, because such calling is simply disgusting.


    Nothing from the above justifies changes in the rules of the game, consisting in the introduction of artificial prohibitions, and even less penalties, the actions that the game as a system allows.


    There are many other things in this game that have distorted the original assumptions of this game and about which nobody writes on the forum, for example about equal opportunities for players.


    This is the "topic - ocean" but somehow everyone keeps quiet and thinks that this is how it should be in this game, why such a retest for investments and carrying goods from factories?

    It doesn't matter if in the final, in your own city or ever?


    I know.

    Because it's easy to check on the company's payment list.


    The system itself suggests information about the loss of most, and in other matters you have to make an effort to look for, observe, compare, and this hurt, so they assume that it should be like this, and this is not true.


    First you have to get to know this game and not just regret that you cannot win it yourself because someone else has invested or carries a different product in the final than we wish.


    This is the smallest problem for ordinary gamers, and it takes up so many entries and space on this forum, as if nothing else in the game existed.

  • All the while there are awards for first place: prestige points, career points etc, there will be competition. The inefficient will have leant through like that if you can't win honestly and with integrity, then you win by cheatery. It is a question of realising that, and then rising above it and get on with the game. I know I have got where I am today by earning the respect of those who work for me/with me. I can sleep soundly at night. There is little you can do to dissuade the cheaters, but you can still come out as the better man (or woman, or whatever you want to be called).

  • The inefficient will have leant through like that if you can't win honestly and with integrity, then you win by cheatery.


    If someone is cheating, they obviously have to react to it, but under no circumstances should players be punished if they play within the rules and possibilities of the game.


    Investing in factories, transporting goods from them to cities (regardless of whether or not according to the plans of other players) are the basic activities of players.


    Guessing their intentions and punishing them on that basis would be an action in the category of forcing a recent Boening on Belarus to land.


    Interpreting a permitted game according to someone's guesses is simply unacceptable.


    What will the game be if there are no strict rules that can be turned into an algorithm so that the game itself doesn't allow you to break them?



    Where is all this leading to?


    As a result, we will see a situation in which someone wants to react with penalties for investments made, for example, by players with blue eyes!


    Or worse, because of players with a different skin tone !!!


    Sometimes is that some players who not play effectively suspect anyone with a better score is cheating in the game!


    And they shout about it loudly, insulting and calling effective players cheaters.


    Fortunately, the support sometimes responds fairly quickly to such entries.

  • That being said, my issue is with the players (generally no star, one star or max two stars, presumably multi accounts) who are intentionally ruining end game sites, thus sabotaging a city. That's it. I have never seen a 3-4-5 star player intentionally doing acts of sabotage.

    excuse the shameless self promotion, but one of my YouTube videos “The Zen of Rail Nation” proposes how I want to one day play the game. Ignore how other people play the game and just focus on the situation and what you can do to reach your goal. To me, getting upset about others is counter productive as that negativity gets me further from what I need to do to get to my goal.


    As I’ve said before, this game is designed to create conflict to encourage gold sales. Don’t fall into the trap. Someone playing the game as it can be played is not unsportsman, it’s Travian’s design. What good coms from getting upset at the player?


    If you suspect someone is cheating by being a multi, then report them. If they go away, likely you were correct, if they don’t then likely you were wrong or they were too cleaver to get caught. Either way, you still got to find the best place to haul from for the next good.

  • I searched, searched and finally found.





    "The winners are the player and corporation who have the most prestige at the end of the game round."



    Accordingly, any actions of players aimed at gathering prestige cannot be treated as "sabotage" or harming other players.


    Even if, in effect, other players or corporations are deprived of their majority stake in the factory.


    This probably is the end this topic.


    Now we'll can discuss about the real problems in the game.

  • Then why the game ends when megacity wins? It's either that statement wrong or the game design is wrong.


    If it was about prestige then the game would have ended when a player or team had reach a certain threshold :p

  • Then why the game ends when megacity wins? It's either that statement wrong or the game design is wrong.


    If it was about prestige then the game would have ended when a player or team had reach a certain threshold :p


    Mihai, our statement explained this already several times.

    The game several possible end goals for a player and so to also have cooperation possibility, there is also a competition of cities, and it ends when 1 city reaches the wanted stock levels.
    That does not mean that players who play for the most prestige can´t consider themselves winners.
    You can play alone on yourself, or you can play on a team goal to win the city competitions.

    The game has several ways to play and actions such as taking over the majority or hauling goods are clearly within game rules.


  • You are correct as this may as well be a matter of purchasing IDs, all the which I have completely missed it. Thank you but I rest my case, things are clear for me.

    Of course, when the IDs cause trains to loop endlessly and deliver nothing, like happened on the COM-202 EG last round, and RN hasn't even responded to the bug thread, then what good is spending money on IDs?

  • Mihai


    Really i need to give you everything on a tray?


    You didn't even make an effort to see the main screen element of which I showed an excerpt.


    You would not ask such ... I do not know how to put it delicately, so that you would not be offended, although you insult everyone with the level of your entries.


    I will explain to you as for my 4 year old daughter:


    The game ends when one of the metropolises will deliver all the goods in the final.


    This is the end of the game and this is the time when the prestige gained by individual players and by entire associations is counted.


    The game is won by the player and the association that has the most prestige at moment of end game.


    There is no need for a prestige limit, the limit in this case is the duration of the game.


    It cannot be explained more clearly.


    And I write about the winners of the round, not about the goals someone has in the game.

  • From what I can tell from reading what Mihai has written here and elsewhere, he already knows this, but considers the EG to be the most important objective to the game, and has a solid point that supports his view. His question was a challenge to Kelot who found something written by Travian which defines the winner to only be the Top prestige player and corporation.


    Both are victories, but as you and most people know a player defines their own victory


    From what I can tell from reading what Kelot has written here and elsewhere. He has a narrow view of the game based on legitimate official publications and objects to those who post on the forums “complaining” that they can’t compete with those playing the “true game objective” of top player and corporation.


    This thread, started by Mihai is about saboteurs of EG, yet Kelot has all on his own shifted the Mihai objections about saboteurs to be about those who farm prestige at factories.

  • Why implement a feature to correct bad behavior? It's just bad design overall. Not to mention that the focus for Rail Nation should be on fixing critical bugs and not on spending months on adding core features instead of simply writing two more lines in the Game Rules.

    Here is a partial quote from Kelot from another post: “As long as the players are playing with legal moves, no one has the right or reason to accuse them of anything,”


    To me, and I suspect Kelot, a mistake you are making Mihai, is dismissing EG sabotage as bad behavior, and something that needs to be corrected. I don’t call this bad design, I see it as purposely designed. As I’ve said, I believe RN to be designed to create conflict between players to promote selling of gold and creating well deserved profits for the game.


    If a player is doing anything that is allowed in the game, I don’t believe the game should be altered or support given more authority to restrict designed game play. I’m sorry if an individuals legal game play interferes with your team goal.


    You have the right to define victory anyway you want to and play for that goal, just as other players have the right to define victory as preventing you from reaching your goal. It’s frustrating, I’ve been there, but as I’ve also said, getting upset at the situation takes you further away from finding a solution to the situation.


    Now if multies are being created to do this, which multies not the behavior is illegal, then by all means contact support, however don’t assume support is biased for any reason because they don’t take the action you deem appropriate.