Kingdoms: Relocation

It’s a question of luck whether you get to have a good king when you start your game as a governor, or vice versa, whether you get to have good governors when you start as a king. If you’re dealt a bad hand, your king is an absolute beginner or the governors’ villages are more like ghost towns.

In the future, you will be able to take your fate into your own hands again and change kingdoms if your king does not turn out to be worthy of his name. As king you can take over the kingdom of another inactive king, provided you don’t have any active governors yourself any more.

Relocation_2

In detail:
As governor:
Requirement for relocation: You only have one village and you have at least twice as many inhabitants as your current king.
As soon as the requirements are satisfied, you will be offered two kingdoms in your area, whose kings have more than 50% of your inhabitants and who have been online within the last 24 hours.

As king:
Requirement for relocation: You only have one village and no active governors in your kingdom.
As soon as the requirements are satisfied, you will be shown two kingdoms in your area, whose kings are inactive since at least 24 hours, but that have active governors. If you confirm the resettlement, you will swap places with the inactive king.

What do you think about the conditions of resettlement? Or should resettlement always be possible in general?

25 Comments on “Kingdoms: Relocation

  1. I think it would be useful to be able to change with other playing conditions. The limit of one village who is now back in the game and has more villages discriminates against those who have only one village. To understand how, if the feature was added today, make it available to all of this server for once. And only after the next server rule will apply as you have now established.
    With the opportunity to comment on your post

  2. Sounds awesome! As semi-active player, who got inactive king on 2 different servers, this will be nice in future incase that happens again!

  3. I think its a good feature. But the requirements should be like this as well. not more than 2-3 governers can relocate into same kingdom.
    Also, the pop thing should be set as 100 pop or 200 pop. cause in other way it will be nearly impossible to relocate for governers.
    It should be good to have governers numbers are according to treasures/army/pop/hero lvl or other requirement. In this way, kings will need to make themselves best to get more governers.

    Good Luck

    • Hi Hamza and thank you for your feedback! We will closely monitor this feature once it goes live and find out the most reasonable factors for the requirement as possible. You definitely brought up some valid options there.

  4. in my opinion the requirements for a governor are great no problem there, but for a king they are no good, one player in his kingdom is very unfair specially if his governor is a player who checks in once every 24 hours. some kingdoms have two and three active governors so in the early part of the game that makes it a great difference since a king depends on tribute. if governors delete or go gray they should be replaced first before the other kings get their next governor. i have found that some kings get up to three governors in the first week while other king have had no replacements and are there with no governors. any way it is great that finally this problem is been addressed as it is one of the most dislike parts of this game

    • Thanks for your feedback Calysto. It’s true that there can still be a big difference between kingdoms. However, in your example we also couldn’t just take away the kingdom from the “semi-active” governor. Maybe we can find a solution for a “collaborative relocation” in situations like these later on though, for a second iteration on the feature.

    • Hi Miron! Relocation is always optional. You will not be forced to do it.

  5. Je trouve cette formule à priori excellente.
    Le montage des vivis est trop long.
    Les trajets aussi, pourquoi les possibilités de trajet plus rapides sont elles à 20 cases, une progression pourrait être active dès le départ : 5 %, 10 %, 15 %, 20 %.

  6. I do look forward to this option. Sometimes it is so hard to get into position where you can join any kingdom and sometimes you are under very inactive king or you have almost none oasis in your location (not talking about no posession of any oasis). Right now i am king in kingdom with one grey village….

  7. While this is a great fix for a huge problem — I think it highlights a key problem with the entire Kingdoms system. It’s probably better for everyone if all players were to start as a governor and become a king after reaching some arbitrary population minimum (say, 1000). Then you would not need this relocation feature because everyone would be free to settle their 2nd village as they normally do. Those that wish to become a king quickly have the option of pushing to 1000 population early.

    This relocation fix is a gold-standard band-aid for internal bleeding, however. Fix the problem, not the symptom. Until then, none of us veterans from T4 (yeah, we all still call it that; we see it as the real Travian) will take Kingdoms seriously. I have tried very hard to play Kingdoms, but I just can’t like it. Help me like it, please.

    • Hi Richard! We have indeed thought about pushing back the king/governor decision to a point later in the game. Especially new players have no way to reasonably make that decision (mostly they just play as a governor because it’s recommended, but then it’s not really a “choice” to begin with). However this will require significant changes to the game’s structure. That doesn’t mean we won’t do it in the end, but it will take time and we already have a pile of topics on our desks we need to tackle as soon as possible.

      • I think KEEN doesn’t take criticism too well. He figured it out the first time. Then he tried to reinvent the wheel. Didn’t work.

        Can you imagine the player base T4 would have if you guys had just dedicated this much effort to the interface over there? I have been playing Travian since 2007 and I have literally not met one player that has said “Travian Kingdoms is a good game.” Not one. And I’m very active in Skype chat with my alliances. Overwhelmingly, people say it’s not a good game and they would much rather play T4.

        But, you don’t really care about the old players do you? You just want new ones because you’ve already got these sheep in your flock.

        • I like your position Richard, and i have to agree about the mess here, some of the T4 players are still wounded by the new baby travian called: “Travian: Kingdoms” somehow still in beta (with gold and gold to support the endless beta). The game is not the same anymore and it won”t be the same in the future neither. I guess that’s why they now separately called them Travian : Legends and Travian Kingdoms. I don”t believe they don”t care about their old players , but as u commented it they rather just consider them as sheep golden support.

          +1 : Travian could have set up a better graphical engine for t4 and they still should have to do it so.

          +2: Travian legends: you now have towatch a video to be able to speed up buildings .. WTF FFS are you doing here ?

          +3 : Travian kingdoms is so different from Legends but it can be funny, but still too much political mess with alliances/kingdom stuff

          +4 Gold in travian is bad for the game play, but i bought some gold on kingdom and i like it, but the game is still unfair for people not golding. you should sell tickets 10/100/100000 dollars/euros and set an equal set for everyone with boosting cards only.

          +5 Severals more things:

          STOP only seeing us as golden sheep support, we need you to see us as your veteran players.
          Stop gold oriented game
          Free the game from the gold :: =>>> set gold limit per server and add a donation button (so real donators will donate there)
          give us the best and keep the rest

          FFS A great game Don”t need GOLD They need players! SO STOP asking GOLD

          THank you for your reading
          Best regards!

          Vz

  8. I don’t think that allowing resettlement without any reasons is a good idea, or you will have the experiment ones making coalition, a bit of lottery is very good.

    For the governors it seems a fine idea, and the requirements are good. But for a king, it is a bit more complicated. I don’t played yet as a king, but i understood that he needs stolen goods from his governors to grow as fast as his neighbors. So if he has only one governor active, it is still hard. But I just thought that the good governors from inactive king might be interested by his kingdom and quickly join him, so I admit that finally it could work, I let you run some simulations to evaluate this 😉

    Good work (and i hope my English is not too bad)

    • I strongly disagree with the idea that the lottery is a good thing. I played only once in the Kingdoms, as an ultra active king. Bar one, all my governors were dead. Even with 1 active governor ( which I made a duke in the first available moment so I had no tributes ), it is unfair to have to compete for the same goals with other people that have the advantage of active governors and kings.

      As it is, being a king has no advantage on the short medium term, especially if you are an active farmer. You get enough food from farming, so the treasure food bonus means nothing, and if the governors are not active, the tributes mean nothing at all.

      I got a few governors out of my borders using the duke mechanism, mostly because they wanted in, but there is no advantage to that, no tributes. Since they asked to get in, it would have been great for them to be able to relocate too.

      The mechanism will help active people, matching them with active teammates, meaning more fun, meaning less reasons to quit.

      And if I am going to play as a governor, I see no reason to get my village kicked because my king is an inactive player and the neighbors are active kings organizing attacks on villages around.

      This mechanism is an awesome idea. Looking forward to see it live! Especially when my country Kingdoms servers will be on.

  9. I do not think that’s a useful thing
    because it applies only to a game that is still at the beginning

    for me it would be better to establish a maximum number of kings at the beginning of the server, in proportion to the number of registered players and later it active, and the server itself will propose in order to everyone the chance to be king in relation to the experience of each individual player, so you you have all the data stored in your files and it is not hard to find someone who is more experienced, also from the servers classics

    is very detrimental to the fact that some players can be king in the game at their first experience, this should not be possible!

    I played as governor as Duke and king, and I must say that the best condition is to Duke if you have a king and governors active, you get a lot of resources from the treasures much more than they can collect a king of the tribute, and above It gets very useful grain to feed an army

    anyway back to the question, if a governor or a Duke is strong you can always attack your king, steal the treasure and become king himself, so I do not understand the need for this change

    maybe it’s just one more chance, but the damage is the fact that you can choose to be king with no experience, it was worth for the very first server, not anymore.

    thank you

    I hope google translator has translated faithfully what I wrote.

    • The translation is good, and I do agree on your most of your views. Though it is devastating for a first timer to be a King, he could become a governor when he feels he cannot play as a King. He can make the choice at the start or later.
      Now regarding Relocation of a Governor, I feel there is no real need for it as he can easily join a nearby (or remote) kingdom by settling his second village where he wants.
      For an experienced player this is not difficult.
      For a new player Relocation may help, but can he make the right choice without any experience?

      I have played in all three roles and I like to be a Duke.
      In the present server (com3) my king was not active, so I joined another King and made him my farm as soon as I got my second village.
      I like the game to be tough so that “the tough gets going when the going gets tough”

  10. Une relocalisation pourrait être gagné dans une aventure aussi, non?

  11. I think that this is a great implementation in the game so far. This will help with many issues, and would’ve helped me at the start.

    Some regulation to how many people are city-hopping to a king should be done. This is something that most people probably will do, and with the high population requirement there will be some kings who get all of the players, while those who aren’t Super Active will lose many governors, and thereby the game from the beginning. Things will get less diverse.
    Maybe there could be a limit to how many people who hops to a king, or the population limit is set down to perhaps +25%. After all, this is an implementation which can only be used from the start, and the difference in pop is not so great for most players.
    I also think that they should get transferred to the nearest active king.

    Being a king shouldn’t be implemented from the start of ones game. It should be a choice after perhaps 3 days, or 200 inhabitants.
    There are too many 12-inhabitant-kings. Making kings later on will work really well with this current implementation.

    All in all, a great implementation. If the choice of king would also be at a later stage, then the need for the king to swap cities would be unnecessary. Active Governors would rather come there, and I think the feeling of unity would be greater. You know, once someone makes a kingdom, you can see the villages moving in, and it would mean more than starting out with someone. This sounds somewhat like what you’re doing, but I still think that a king should choose this a little later than the beginning.

  12. I like Richard’s 25 January 2016 comment. Everyone starts as a governor and meets certain minimum requirements to become a king.

  13. What if i was in the process to relocate but my King got active all of the sudden and decided to abdicate the kingdom and got with a king of the wrong kingdom i was going to relocate?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *