Posts by Thetdoc™

    One of the attractions of the RN game is that there are different styles of play open to the players. They can play in different ways over time, keeping interest high. Workers strangely are an area where there is some balance. Clearly a city team needs to be a strong one to compete but if it has 25 good members there is no reason why they cannot compete for any workers. Additionally the goods based workers are usually only of interest to the city haulers.

    The practice of closing an association & reforming is used by smaller free hauling teams to get cheap workers and it is effective if the team is small but in so doing the players are opting out of the association competition so this affects personal rank only.

    The number of players is what makes playing style work - in a relatively lightly used server then free hauling is very effective. How often does free hauling do well on a really busy server where a majority of cities are active?

    If the aim is to eliminate closing & reforming then a penalty could be imposed on those that do this - losing pp for instance of delaying for several days before they can get workers (might be hard to program though i guess). Small associations playing normally should not be penalised though in the manner suggested - they are in the lower ranks due to being small & have fewer p[layers to contribute so it is fair that they have cheaper workers overall to my mind. If a full 25 player association pays 25 mill then the equivalent for a lower ranked 4 player association is 4 mill. That is paying the same per player.

    I would echo this sentiment. I too have been a chat moderator in the past & it is a privilege giving back to the game that I have enjoyed for so many years. I wanted to be there to make the game experience better for everyone but why should I not play the game I love as well? My role only involves me applying chat bans for behaviour on the chat screen that breaks the rules & then only after a warning & often a quiet word of advice.

    Volunteers make the game better & I never saw anyone behave with favouritism. My experience was that bans were last resorts & only for repeated offenders & I also agree that actions could only be taken when proof existed & if any doubt then I would double check with a colleague.

    Volunteer helpers should never be picked on - direct any anger towards the rule makers if you must, not those that just act to apply them. Play the game according to the rules & you can never fall foul of the helpers/support teams. If you do not like the rules then either petition for their change or leave. Treat others as you would like to be treated yourself & trust that action will be taken where it can be & that if it is not then there is a reason why & that reason is not favouritism or bias. Above all remember that this is a game & a place to have fun and a refuge from the miseries of the real world. Let's keep it that way!

    These are some fun ideas Dragoneyes

    We used to have graphics some years ago with trains coming & going to & from the station concourse & many of us have missed them.

    Your other ideas are also interesting & would add complexity & skill to the game play - they may not all be workable but I hope the developers will consider them

    The game is certainly still full of bugs & the video bug still does not seem to have been fully fixed based on some missed second video issues I had at the weekend.

    It may well be that some use of terminology has been an issue here but I believe we are all agreed that currently the game is not providing what it is advertised as intended to provide as regards bonus videos (unless the missing second video resolves).

    I agree that on one level Jalistair an unreasonable demand may make a company less likely to respond to that customer, but we must not let this excuse allow the company here to ignore a lot of it's customers. If all players who spent on a Plus account have not been getting their "guaranteed" second video then it would seem reasonable to suggest that some form of compensation is potentially due to any player who has spent on a Plus account. Clearly if Plus account has not been bought then no compensation is due. This is the all that missy amanda is focusing on I am guessing.

    So I would hope that everyone can agree on that as I feel that at the core of the issue we are not a hundred miles apart in what we all basically think is reasonable?

    Ok so Samisu told us that on 8th May the hot fix shut down would be fixing the issues with videos - I took this to mean that I could expect at least a second video when I watch having my plus account in place.

    Sadly not the case - I am still missing second videos today

    Was there any feedback on this from the team?

    Just a small correction: We do not WISH to reduce the amount of views. What I said is that it's not overly important, so it would be more accurate that a reduction of views (to some extent and depending on the circumstances) is ACCEPTABLE.

    Thanks for the prompt reply Salix

    I apologise if I misrepresented your position - I just got the impression that the intent was that you did not want the videos being watched in the large volumes that they were by individual players. Clearly these players and indeed players at large can no longer watch the volume of videos that were possible under the old system (due to the loss of the widget view factor) & so the total number of video views must have fallen with this latest iteration of the game. Clearly the additional bug with second videos will have reduced the viewing even further. Income from videos must be down :(

    So if I wrongly took the changes to imply your intent in the matter then I apologise once more - it is certainly the effect of the changes.

    What I was trying to get at was whether videos were paid per play, or on some other basis within the free gaming economy. Perhaps a fixed fee (which would seem illogical) or pay per volume of different individuals that played them & not for "re-plays" by one individual - I was just trying to get a sense of the "drivers" in this area of your business so as to better inform the community in suggesting the new solutions.

    Ok well Salix has shared that the two pillars of income for the free games are direct purchases & advertisement. The latter is the video element of what we have & unless we want irritating banners built around the game screen (which I do not) I guess videos will remain the advertising source.

    Clearly however, the payment for videos is not based on the volume of views of the adverts or the company would not have wished to reduce the number of views we make of these.

    In order to try to understand the situation better & to enable us to offer better informed possible new solutions to the problem we now face of finding a way for the lower budget player to compete, could you possibly share the range of ways that companies could gain income from advertising in this setting without of course asking you to divulge any details of how you currently do this yourself which clearly would not be appropriate. So a list of examples of the variety of ways that advertising interacts with the free game companies would be great. Clearly if other contributors to this discussion are better able to share this from their past lives then that would be good as well.

    Clearly we need to understand the dynamics so that we can make sensible suggestions.

    I think the presence of one star or 5 is irrelevant to the posting provided what the person is talking about is relevant. Klabbauter has shared his experience in a past phase of his life as a leader & in programming & therefore I feel his input has been very valuable in recent discussions.

    His suggestions for new vouchers are no more outlandish or less valid than any other.

    I hope we do not need to descend to knocking each other's credentials here - all opinions are valid

    I personally like the production series - the voucher is of limited benefit but I love some of the options & only bemoan that some of my favourite production series are on a train that I never run now with the changes to their attributes (The Mallard option for the boar is the best example)

    I also love the concept that sacroima has suggested for a whole corp reward - that would be amazing.

    Can I congratulate everyone on the discussion here today - it has largely been positive & there are some amazing ideas here. No ideas are bad ideas - I have seen some ideas put forward in other settings that clearly cannot work but an element of them is really exciting & that is extracted by the clever thinker who can convert it to reality.

    Keep the thoughts coming folks - the English language forum can add to & enrich the game like any other ;)

    Wow - an explosion of discussion - I like to see the brainstorming. I am at work so I will have to catch up this evening but I agree with the suggestion of a card allowing the opening of a special 4th worker slot - this would be a very valuable feature to some

    I am afraid that they are intimately linked Salix - firstly we need some functioning videos - a colleague took 9 videos in a row before getting offered one bonus video yesterday - so video functionality is the first issue given that I have pointed out how key having videos is to the low budget player. This thread is to talk about changes in videos & did start out featuring the second element but clearly can incorporate both under that title.

    I also think that whilst I can understand your difficulty with the back end developer's absence, you will need to look to make some concession on the Plus Account cost whilst you are not reliably offering an important part of the package given that it will not be corrected in the imminent future.

    Clearly the alternative longer term solution is going to take some while to deliver but I urge you to get those talks under way as you suggest & commit to giving us regular progress reports. The wider community here could be used to sense check your favoured options from the group once you have a shortlist.

    As my colleague Klabbauter has stated several times, where there is strong leadership & a will to progress something quickly with set deadlines, then it is amazing what can be achieved :)

    Ok so 11 days on since we started this thread. Game play is being badly affected. Colleagues who decided to start the round to see if they could make a go of it are becoming fed up.

    The main broken video issue - one might think a top priority for RN to fix - is it in the list of fixes for the upcoming 6th May update?

    I have not seen a copy of the changelog for the upcoming update?

    Players who have been using the videos to compete can no longer compete - previous round winners are now languishing in the top 100 rather than approaching the top 10 in era 2 of a round.

    Is this what you wanted RN? Sadly my predictions appear to be coming true in terms of the impact on game play & player satisfaction.

    Please sort this out - communicate when the second video error will be corrected & keep us updated regularly on progress towards your solution to re-balance the game for the low budget player,

    A list of the players working with you would be a great start.

    I have had more time to reflect on this & I feel that adding prestige for supply will skew the game play more towards the big cities & away from free hauling. The larger cities will have bigger supply chains & increased level related prestige. Whether this will be a good thing or not in terms of the overall balance of the game will need to be tested properly on the test servers. I would strongly advise against making free hauling non-viable as having two game styles is one of the attractions of the game.

    I understand that the German & then Russian communities are the two largest in this game but I really do think that if discussion is ongoing about such a major change to the game then it ought to be available in the English language forum as well, and all others if at all possible.

    We need to be as inclusive as possible rather than just listening to one section of the playing community, albeit the largest.

    The forum community managers in each language can be asked to raise the big items & then share feedback - this is not difficult!

    To ignore the rest of us is to ignore the potential for potentially even better ideas or to spot potential flaws in the plans. Big ticket items like this need to be brought to everyone. The more eyes on these changes the better.

    Come on Travian/BF - start communicating better. It should not be down to Hear Me Roar to make us aware of this!!

    That would be a decent idea but probably would need to be the supply items to the current RGs for the city to stay in line with the rest of the game

    We do not currently get prestige for goods that have dropped off the city requirements.

    I like that suggestion though - it would change the dynamic of running direct or integrated

    Hi Tom

    For home city there is also a new option - open the city screen that you wish to make into your new home city & then in that box top right - the left of the four icons enables you to make that city your home city

    A mentor should be able to advise you regardless of which association they are in.

    However, I suggest you send a ticket to support as they will be able to advise on how you get a new mentor

    I have had to do far less videos this round as we needed to share them around the team with the new system but those I have done have not given more cheap lottery tickets for me. With the formula for the lottery tickets being set on a probability basis you can have periods of common prizes without any of the rarer prizes