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

  • But let's move on to the last part, how should the end game be played, which is my main topic.

    To me this is the problem area. In my opinion, if through normal game play something can be done, then there should be no rule to restrict players from doing it. The one area I believe the staff is restricting is harassing communications not game actions


    This is a competitive game, and again one that I think is purposely designed to create conflict between players in order to generate gold sales. What is Travian’s preferred method for beating saboteurs? Purchasing instant dispatches for regain zero wait times. I’ll ask again, why would Travian restrict a potential money source?

  • After reading

    Thank you for your reply. Although you haven't made things clear, I for one got my answer, for which I am grateful. Unfortunately this will lead to more outcry during the end game but at least things are clear for me now.


    But I should note the lack of transparency and heavy censorship you are imposing lately, which is again unfortunate.

  • To me this is the problem area. In my opinion, if through normal game play something can be done, then there should be no rule to restrict players from doing it. The one area I believe the staff is restricting is harassing communications not game actions


    This is a competitive game, and again one that I think is purposely designed to create conflict between players in order to generate gold sales. What is Travian’s preferred method for beating saboteurs? Purchasing instant dispatches for regain zero wait times. I’ll ask again, why would Travian restrict a potential money source?

    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.

  • What the game needs is more tools with which to defend against sabotage. Sabotage is not against the rules, fine. The majority players who are trying to win the EG thus need better tools to defend against it: right now, there are essentially none - the only (weak) tool is to declare an association/corporation hostile, and thus slow them down. But that isn't much use against a solo player who may not even be in an association - nor can it be used if there are 2 saboteurs, since associations can only "hostile" or "friend" one other association.

    The solo saboteurs could be handled, possibly, by being able to declare individual players hostile. Might be that could be a short-term thing which put a very high wait time penalty on them, but only for an hour, say. It would limit the damage they could do without eliminating the sabotage option entirely: saboteurs would have to be clever to avoid anyone noticing what they were up to...

    Making it so each association can friend/hostile 2 others would, in my view, improve the game by allowing better co-operation between groups in a single city and making it a bit easier to defend against hostile moves.

    There's another issue we frequently see, that of the player who logs out before EG starts, leaving trains hauling from 3 or 4 facilities, and doesn't log in again for a day. Often it's a player in our own group - and it needn't be planned, could be something like a medical emergency kept them away from the game. There is no way to deal with this at present. One possibility there is for the chairman to have a limited power to force-park a member's trains. Might be it could only be used once in 24 hours, or something.

  • .......... One possibility there is for the chairman to have a limited power to force-park a member's trains. Might be it could only be used once in 24 hours, or something.

    This I absolutely agree with. A recent event in my team brought this home to me very strongly. There needs to be a facility to allow a chair or deputy to stop the engines of a player who does not return. If a good players, there will be a very good reason indeed why they have suddenly dropped from the game.

    In this world there is nothing softer or thinner than Water.

    But to compel the Hard and Unyielding it has no equal.

    (Lao-Tse)

  • Llewelyn1966

    Rhoswen


    In my opinion, the solutions you propose above will create another element of unequal opportunities for players.


    No one can guarantee that a player ranked 2nd will not lock a player in first place just to prevent him from earning prestige points for delivering goods in the final game and thus depriving him of the first place.


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


    I imagine a situation where no one will look at the so-called "Saboteurs" (I think this is a very wrong term) only your solutions will serve to deprive real rivals of the opportunity to gain prestige.


    Or it will have to block individual members of a rival association.


    It will only be very unfair.


    I think a much better peaks would be to be able to assign the "The person in charge of the finale" function in a given city with the votes of all players in that city.


    Such a person could block the delivery of one commodity to the city by one factories count for one hour


    Properly used blockade (after its completion) will allow the goods to be delivered from the factory with zero loading time.


    At the same time, the blockade would automatically park the locomotives transporting the goods for the duration of the blockade - just like bringing a package of goods in the final.


    The above solution will allow for equal competition in the delivery of a given product, will completely eliminate the "Saboteurs" and solve the problem of the sudden absence of own players in the final.

  • This game is brilliantly designed to create discontent amongst the players. Why? To promote gold sales, so they can get an edge over an opponent. Creating rules against unsportsmanship conduct detracts from that profit.


    This game is as much about managing emotions as it is about managing mechanics. Obviously these situations regardless of who started it, both side perpetuated the conflict instead of end it. Therefore it may be one players actions, but those actions are the "fault" of many players on both sides.


    And before the innocents are mentioned, players involved in the convict could have swashed this, but they didn't care about the innocents then, so to me they can't bring them up later.

    One solution is not to tick players off to the point where they want to see your EG city burn.


    As far as those trying to win by sabotaging the competition, I’m confident that no serious player wants to win that way and the saboteurs own people will yell at them enough to call them off.


    At the end of the day, it’s a competition. One of the skill sets a great caller must have is to know how to work around saboteurs.

  • As far as those trying to win by sabotaging the competition, I’m confident that no serious player wants to win that way and the saboteurs own people will yell at them enough to call them off.

    You know the saying:

    "Winners, no one asks for methods"?


    You think someone is a "saboteur," but from his point of view, he does nothing wrong because he gains prestige by investing in a factory.


    The goal is not to sabotage you, but to accumulate prestige to improve your ranking or win a round.


    This is in line with the rules of this game and has nothing to do with imaginary fair play.


    Nobody is playing to win the gratitude of those whom he has not taken a stake in the company, but everyone is playing to collect as much prestige as possible. It's easy.


    This is in line with the rules of this game and has nothing to do with imaginary fair play.


    I still think that the possibility of a blocking delivery of the selected goods per hour in the final will level the players' chances and eliminate the problem of "saboteurs" (I do not like this term very much).

  • Any player hauling by themselves is losing more prestige than they are gaining.


    Certainly someone can think they are coming out ahead, but those that know better can educate them in a respectful way and avoid that issue on the next good. Even pre EG instructions can go a long way to avoiding such troubles

  • Disrupt other players gaming?


    Let's turn the situation around.


    You play for the winning round.


    One of the ways to gain prestige is by investing in factories.


    You have the choice to either invest in the factory before it is promoted and earn the maximum number of Prestige Points, or you can choose not to do so - this is your choice.


    Since you are playing for the win, it is obvious what you will choose.


    At this point, the existence of some mechanism forbidding you to invest in this factory, or the screams of other players not to invest, are a real obstacle in your game.


    In the implementation of your plans to achieve the goal - to collect the most prestige.


    So this discussion and the approach presented here can also be considered "sabotage" against other players.


    On average, about a million prestige points are needed to win a round (plus or minus 200-300 thousand, depending on the players' activity).


    In order to collect it, it is not enough to sit in one city and cry that someone is investing in factories around that city, or that they are carrying TOP4 to the city.


    Practically 1/3 of the cities and factories or even all of them need to be connected.


    How do you imagine collecting prestige on a global scale, if the possibility of investing in connected factories is blocked, or a ban on transport to a city that is not your hometown?


    The game will completely lose its sense and charm of a team game with elements of competition and economy.


    The trick is to skillfully combine all the elements of the game and achieve the goal.


    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.


    There are many things in this game that can be improved, such as leveling the players' chances at the start, but certainly not eliminate the possibility of competition and "offensive-defensive" actions - because it is part of the strategy of this game and the basis of its great success in the past.

  • "This game is all about collecting prestige"

    I disagree. The game has much more to it than that. Prestige per se is not relevant to whether your city wins the endgame. That is done by hauling all 48 goods faster than the opposition - sure, you get prestige for doing it, but you'd still win the EG even if you didn't.

    If you want to win as an INDIVIDUAL, then that's clearly only about prestige but if that's ALL you see in the game you're missing a large part of it.

    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.

  • 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.

    myself, I choose to play a team game and aim for a team win. I freely admit this is partly because I'm not online enough to successfully challenge for the personal win - and I also suspect that, with the degree of competitiveness, on most servers I'd need to spend more actual cash than I wish to in any case.

  • Yes. Why do you think I used up time and electrons writing it? For me, personally, the group play is more important than PP. You appear to think the ONLY point in the game is to try to get max PP and win the INDIVIDUAL competition.

    Sure, that's ONE way to play. But there are others, including being a deliberate saboteur which you seem to think doesn't exist or you want to call it something else.

  • By the way, the team that collects the most prestige also wins.

    If this team includes players without leading positions in the individual ranking, the entire team will not win the round either.


    See the table of winners.


    Only the rivalry of cities is different. The city that takes all goods in the final round wins. This may have nothing to do with collecting prestige individually or as a team, but it does benefit those players and teams that play in the winning city.


    It's all about prestige and only about prestige.


    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.


    However, this does not change the fact that the player or the association that collects the most prestige during the round wins.


    Investments in enterprises are one of the sources of this prestige and it has nothing to do with acting to the detriment of other players. No sabotage.


    Ordinary competition.

  • As Llewelyn1966 wrote, this game is much more than ordinary prestige hunting. Prestige hunting isn't playing the game as it is intended to be, it's the smallest part of this game. What is the reason if prestige is the only goal the creators made the endgame between the best cities and regions?? It is in the basics a team play game with individual rankings on the side. Without the hard work of the city teams there is no personal prestige to win. That is what most pretige hunters forget. They profit (and most using their worst efforts) of others who grow the cities and industries.

    :engine1::engine1::engine1:

    Work for a cause

    Not for applause

    Live life to express

    Not to impress

  • One of the many things I like about Rail Nation is there are so many avenues one can take to consider themselves a winner. Once on American Dream, the top player, in the top Corp, that won top city I teased because they got the “Better luck next time” loser screen after their faction lost.


    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.


    Now I hold some controversial views on broken crests and investing. Do a search for Rail Nation on YouTube to see the video I made on the subject.


    The emotional element to this game is just as important as the mechanical. To truly be successful in any aspect of RN, both need to be recognized and nurtured.

  • Without the hard work of the city teams there is no personal prestige to win.

    Sorry, but the above is complete nonsense.


    You can very easily win a round individually without being associated with any of the cities and with any of the major associations without having your own extensive team and its "effort".


    P.S.


    I checked the rankings out of curiosity.


    I suggest you win any round first, and then speak about how to do it.


    At least you will know what you are writing about.


    I wish you both a three-month effort of your own (and not of the team), sleepless nights, daytime naps for the alarm clock and other fascinating things related to winning the round.


    And of course I sincerely wish a win.