Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Limit the number of duals on an account

  1. #1

    Default Limit the number of duals on an account

    Hello everyone,

    Without rehashing things said in other threads, I believe the number of duals allowed on any one account needs to be limited by Game rule to 2 duals inaddition to the account holder. Let me first say that for a few years I have played dual accounts (one dual) exclusively myself, and I would not advocate prohibiting duals altogether for more than one reason. For one thing, players such as myself who depend on a dual to help run an account with help from sitters would not play at all without a dual. The player base is already so diminished that further loss of players would be disastrous.

    I have no suggestion as to how such a rule could be enforced, but am confident there are measures in place or available to be put in place which could detect when more than three players have logged into the account with the account password, or that it could be coded in to give each account up to three sets of unique login credentials (email and password). Then sharing passwords could be prohibited, and you would have no more than three players, total, on any one account. ( I am too old and too dadburned grumpy to play solo anymore, so please don't go there).

    I am also a gold user, and my dual also contributes gold to our accounts. However, when an account has upwards of six players on it, all contributing gold, then gold use can indeed get out of hand and give a group of sub-par players an extreme advantage over other players on a server - especially when that server has the "incorporate troops" feature like the SE server, UK20. Troops, both offense and defense, can be trained in several villages, sent as reinforcement to one village and for gold (or resources) then incorporated into that village. The incorporated troops then take on the upgrade level of the village they were incorporated into and can be used as if trained in that village. Six duals and an account holder can easily afford a huge pile of gold when all seven contribute. This can be a big problem, and should not be possible under game rules as it puts all other players who do not take the same advantage of what I see as a loophole at a gigantic disadvantage in effect breaking the server.

  2. #2
    MartinJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grimsby
    Posts
    1,848

    Default

    Should we ban anyone who's fairly well off from playing too? You know, cos they can afford more gold than you. The problem isn't really the amount of duals an account has, its the ridiculous mechanics in the game (specifically S20 and the servers like it) that make the game so easy with gold. I would just say don't play the SE servers, play standard servers where things are less ridiculous.
    Quote Originally Posted by antonio View Post
    You just jump around like a tart.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elros View Post
    MJ may be many things: a 15 year old who's raided his dads dress up box, a huge ego-loudmouth and a goat botherer to name but a few, but he generally writes a fair and unbiased analysis (except when I bribe him to say good things about me)

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinJames View Post
    Should we ban anyone who's fairly well off from playing too? You know, cos they can afford more gold than you. The problem isn't really the amount of duals an account has, its the ridiculous mechanics in the game (specifically S20 and the servers like it) that make the game so easy with gold. I would just say don't play the SE servers, play standard servers where things are less ridiculous.
    The concept of SE is sound, and could be a quite interesting game to play. While it could benefit from removing or even strictly limiting the Cauldron, perhaps placing a daily limit on the number of troops which can be incorporated into a village (or even removing this feature altogether, as some have suggested, though I do like the idea), and maybe a few other tweaks here and there, the biggest issue I see is as I stated - no limit on the number of duals.

    Gold use is somewhat self-limiting when there is some common sense involved. One player will not spend much more than each of seven on another account would spend. Let's say each spends 250 gold per week. On an account with a dual, 500 will be spent (My dual and I would average less). On an account with six duals in addition to the account holder 7x250 will be spent, or 1750. That amount would incorporate a massive number of troops, insta-build a large number of buildings, etc. And the price of 250 gold is small weekly pocket change for most youngsters in the US or UK while it would be prohibitive for anyone in many other countries. Not to mention that it seems ridiculous to imagine seven people actually playing a single account.

    Travian needs to maintain a playable game, regardless which version one plays. As things stand, SE can be unplayable for most even heavy gold users. The fact that it is broken is no reason not to want it fixed.

    And by the way, were I of a mind to do so, I could afford quite a bit of gold myself without hurting myself. That is not and never was an issue.
    Last edited by DanielHart; 08 Mar 2016 at 01:47 AM.

  4. #4
    MartinJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grimsby
    Posts
    1,848

    Default

    Maybe then a cap on gold make more sense for your aim. 4 duals might play and buy less than one gold abuser. We all know someone who spend considerable amount on early glad helms etc. If the problem is the amount of gold primarily perhaps you ought to look at that rather than amount of people. It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to address amount of players on an account as the cause of your issue.
    Quote Originally Posted by antonio View Post
    You just jump around like a tart.
    Quote Originally Posted by Elros View Post
    MJ may be many things: a 15 year old who's raided his dads dress up box, a huge ego-loudmouth and a goat botherer to name but a few, but he generally writes a fair and unbiased analysis (except when I bribe him to say good things about me)

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinJames View Post
    Maybe then a cap on gold make more sense for your aim. 4 duals might play and buy less than one gold abuser. We all know someone who spend considerable amount on early glad helms etc. If the problem is the amount of gold primarily perhaps you ought to look at that rather than amount of people. It just doesn't make a great deal of sense to address amount of players on an account as the cause of your issue.
    No, actually what makes sense to me is what I already stated, and my reasoning is stated clearly above. The lobby feature in TK allows two duals per account, added by ign from a different server or by email address, and allows two sitters per account. I am told the same lobby feature is not compatible with TL versions, so it cannot yet be implemented here - however, the two dual limit makes for a more even playing field as well as a larger number of accounts. The 7 player account I mentioned above would translate to multiple game accounts with a limit set.

    From my example above comparing gold use on a two player account to that on a 7 player account where all players contribute equally, it is clear where the potential problem lies. Saying one "may" do this or that while another "may" do differently is akin to saying some people may buy a lot of gold and others may not buy any. In making comparative statements, the examples used must be comparable. Limiting the number of players allowed to play an account, as is done in TK, is the most sensible answer.

    Of course, TK still gets complaints about gold features and exaggerated claims of gold advantages. I suppose that will never end. TG must generate revenue in order to remain in business and be there to provide us with a game to play. With a few tweaks such as those I mentioned Scattered Empire could, and I believe would, bring the player base up again.

    All that said, I cannot imagine playing an account with 3 other people, let alone with 6. My dual and I sometimes unintentionally step on each other's toes when both are in the account at the same time as it is, and there is just one of him. Why would you so strongly defend unlimited dual numbers? Am I missing something? I am truly curious to know the answer to this.

    Once, duals were not allowed at all. I would prefer that to having a virtual mini alliance all on a single account buying gold.
    Last edited by DanielHart; 08 Mar 2016 at 06:08 AM.

  6. #6
    Senior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton Member Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    593

    Default

    Yes, you are missing something But I'm going to PM you rather than discuss it here. Implementing what you're describing sadly isn't practical.

  7. #7

    Default

    You ignore the main reason for using duals though; to cover more time.

    Travian is a game that doesn't pause, you can't log off and log back in and expect the game to be in exact the same state as you left it, so you are encouraged to sit and play around the clock in order to maximize your account's potential (and not get destroyed randomly). Duals let you have a life besides travian

  8. #8
    Senior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton Member Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    593

    Default

    I must admit this has been my experience too. Not even just me - all the dual and triple accounts I've sat for, none of them were spending insane amounts of gold day-to-day, gladiator lids aside. YMMV on what's insane amounts, of course. There's also probably a limit on how much you can really spend on standard servers unless you just like throwing it away for nothing (up until now there's been no troop forwarding, for example).

    I suppose we'll have to wait and see what happens with some of these big-gold-spend features in the future.

  9. #9

    Default

    OKay, if limiting the number of players on an account is not currently practicable, then let me take another shot at suggestions to alleviate what has proven to be a serious problem with UK20.

    Before anyone points it out to me, I do realize the SE servers were special servers, however the basic concept is - in my humble opinion - the best of the Travian versions, and has more potential to bring a long-overdue reversal of the downward trend in the player base then any currently running.

    As we have seen, special servers seem to have become the launching pad for new features later introduced to TL standard servers. Sort of a beta testing of those new features? At any rate, there are tweaks which could be made in the features that have made gold use such a overpowering factor in the game, yet would still generate added revenue for TG.

    The price of the cauldron could be one free each day and 3 gold to play it again afterward, limited to 1 of each type of prize and/or a certain number of times each day.

    The troop forwarding feature is good and should remain, but incorporating troops from one village into another could be limited to a certain number of troops per day. That would avoid the situation we have now where spending "insane amounts" of gold can give an account a hammer which is totally overpowering by week six of a server (week 3 on a 2x server).

    Making these changes alone might also deter the practice of having 7 or more payers on one account since their gold would not buy a hammer so quickly. They might even see the value in playing together in different accounts. Perhaps some of you can picture yourselves playing on an account with 6 additional duals, but I cannot see any potential benefit other than sharing the cost of gold. In this way, especially if those who would all be playing on a single account instead played two or three independent accounts, basically the same amount of gold would be spent by the same number of people - but on more accounts.

    I can see the optional advertisements catching on, especially with those who can't or don't use a lot of gold and I see no real reason to limit them to 9 per day. Sales of ads charged per click would likely generate substantial revenue over the course of a server, and that revenue would be generated by players who do not ordinarily do so by spending much gold.

    As I said, we have seen some new features first in special servers and then later in T4. I am just expressing my own ideas here, but I do believe I am on the right track and that these features could add to even the standard TL if steps were first taken to prevent them giving an overpowering advantage to some accounts with players in them who spend those "insane amounts" of gold.

    I hope I am making sense here.

    Dan

  10. #10

    Default

    I do not believe that the amount of gold bought increases with the number of duals. In many cases you will find that there is 1 or 2 players actually buying most of the gold and the others using it. The point of duals is not to increase gold purchase but to ensure that the account is active 24/7.
    The SE servers were very gold heavy especially with the cauldron. The problem here was that the benefits were too great and there was no limits to their use. For example with troops and res stored from the cauldron and training troops in multiple villages and then merging plus the instant troop training vouchers. it was possible to produce a good sized hammer in a matter of days

Posting Permissions

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