Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 23

Thread: Chiefing Etiquette

  1. #1

    Default Chiefing Etiquette

    Something like the following should be sent to all players as soon as chiefing starts to happen on a server!

    1) Withdraw your troops and/or hero. When you chief a farm or Natar village please ensure you will be around at the time of chiefing to withdraw your troops. If you cannot be around at the estimated time of chiefing, wait until you will be!

    Why on earth should I withdraw my troops when I'm being raided? I hear you ask. Well, this is to avoid you killing friendly and not so friendly raiding troops which were sent BEFORE you chiefed. It might seem a good idea to kill enemy troops but this is not the way to do it. Remember the boot could be on the other foot next time.

    2) Rename the village to CHIEFED (yes, in caps) or similar. This is so that people with this village in their (sometimes very long) farming lists can see it has been chiefed.

    3) Spend up or send res away to avoid the raiding troops taking it off you. Let the raids through. Do not defend the raids for 24 hours.

    4) If new raids appear AFTER you have chiefed and renamed, IGM the player and ask them nicely to remove the village from their farming list. You should get a friendly acknowledgement when this has been done.

    5) If after a reasonable time (normally 24 hours) there are still raids coming in and the raiders have ignored your messages, feel free to defend against them.

    6) When all raids have stopped rename the village as you wish.

  2. #2

    Default

    as a def player i dont raid. and i dont cheif. so i cant afford to lose the res just to be nice to you.
    i was not aware we had to be nice to raiders who have all the skill of pressing a button to raid 100 players at once.
    your raids your risk.

  3. #3

    Default

    Yes, because everyone knows raiders are the most important people in an alliance and everything possible must be done to make sure they can farm risk free.

  4. #4
    Senior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton MemberSenior Teuton Member Elisa's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Berkshire
    Posts
    579

    Default

    Chiefing etiquette seems polite, but it favours raiders and attackers, and sort of treats other players as if their only job is to help hammers get bigger. Surely a bit unfair. As raiders we know we will lose troops. But that village's owner might like the kill points and keeping his own resources, as is his right.

    Alliances can set rules if they wish, and perhaps they will like this list. In my experience, the ones with rigid rules lose players. Some defensive players get pretty bitter at hearing complaints of losing troops, when they lose troops every time they defend a hammer. I try pretty hard to be kind to the defensive players who help me, since playing would be pointless without them (clubs are terrible at defending against Natar WW attacks).

    In the end, players themselves can choose how they want to play, as long as they respect the Travian rules. There is no "correct" way to play, thank goodness, and there are a lot of different, successful styles.

  5. #5

    Default

    What's the etiquette for when you chief a village and it has 6 same second waves coming in from a friendly player?
    THE
    NOTORIOUS
    CRUNCHIE

  6. #6

    Default

    Sorry... but this is a game of war. Why should we be polite about killing troops? If players are not active enough to notice a farm has been chiefed.. then that will teach them to be less lazy in the future.

  7. #7

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by notorious crunchie View Post
    What's the etiquette for when you chief a village and it has 6 same second waves coming in from a friendly player?
    Let them through. They were sent before you chiefed it and the player probably isn't psychic

    Quote Originally Posted by Ragazzi View Post
    Sorry... but this is a game of war. Why should we be polite about killing troops? If players are not active enough to notice a farm has been chiefed.. then that will teach them to be less lazy in the future.
    The point is that a) if a player sent the raids before it was chiefed or b) it hasn't been renamed then how would the raider know?

    I admit to being disappointed in the response so far. Surely you've all lost troops on a chiefed farm or natar??

    Also, this wasn't meant to be in favour of raiders and anti deffers. Both chief villages AFAIK.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Dockerty View Post
    as a def player i dont raid. and i dont cheif. so i cant afford to lose the res just to be nice to you.
    i was not aware we had to be nice to raiders who have all the skill of pressing a button to raid 100 players at once.
    your raids your risk.
    If you don't chief then this doesn't really concern you.

    Also, the etiquette guidelines don't ask you to lose res. You can spend/move/cranny it.

    Finally, yes it's easy to send raids via the farmlist. This is a fact of travian and won't go away so why not rename your chiefed village in a way that people with long farming lists can easily spot it?

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scoot132 View Post
    If you don't chief then this doesn't really concern you.

    Also, the etiquette guidelines don't ask you to lose res. You can spend/move/cranny it.

    Finally, yes it's easy to send raids via the farmlist. This is a fact of travian and won't go away so why not rename your chiefed village in a way that people with long farming lists can easily spot it?
    If i wanted to cheif then i could. But why should i rename it to help you. There is nothing in it for me. Id rather have the points. And not care about stupid crannies or moving my res. Selfish for sure. But i can. Its a war game isnt it.

    Just because they didnt know i would cheif it doesnt mean i have to let them through. I guess we can agree to disagree there. But telling all players what to do. No personally. Why should they its not a rule. Just my opinion but i see some others agree. We all have an opinion.

  9. #9
    MartinJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grimsby
    Posts
    1,854

    Default

    Yeah I've lost troops on chiefed villages/Natars , I just don't think that my losses mean anyone else has an obligation to do something about it. Personally I warn the ally in the chat first , a few times so they're definitely aware and message anyone incoming not to send any more, if anyone sends after then its their own fault.
    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)

  10. #10

    Default

    I just see it like this: a little courtesy goes a long way. It costs so little for the player chiefing to make a little effort in making the raids stop, and in return, the raider will aknowledge you as a polite player. On the other end, if you don't give a damn, and you defend ruthlessly (some players even deliberately take large farms that raiders have recently cleared of troops) against large amounts of troops, ie. 2-300 in each raid, then expect attacks in return.

    I have attacked players that defended chiefed villages against my raids instead of giving me a chance to stop raiding it. Then they ask "why are you attacking?". Well, there's your answer.

  11. #11
    MartinJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grimsby
    Posts
    1,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Placebo View Post
    I have attacked players that defended chiefed villages against my raids instead of giving me a chance to stop raiding it. Then they ask "why are you attacking?". Well, there's your answer.
    If I thought I could goad an enemy hammer into attacking I'd definitely defend a chiefed vill lol. Make it easy to make you splat!
    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)

  12. #12
    Mr Fantastic

    Well-Known MemberWell-Known MemberWell-Known MemberWell-Known Member MLGJ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Omnipresent
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    This whole topic as been discussed many times before and you'll never get everyone to agree to this, just as some people think it's perfectly acceptable to spike farms. Even if they're spiking their own alliance members out of spite.

    At the end of the day you'll have people like the Japenese army during WW2 who chose to ignore the Geneva convention as it's "war" and those who have some element of fair play. I've stated my position many times before, I see no harm in not defending a chiefed village for 24 hours but also understand other peoples need to think they're "tough" by choosing to get a few easy kills.
    This post was brought to you by "Mr Fantastic"

    Yayyyyy made it on to setbacks ignore list, can give it but not take it
    Let me guess, some kind of funny joke?
    This message is hidden because MLGJ is on your ignore list.

    Where is my apology from MLGJ, for his insult on the forums? - URSULA THE MINOR
    In your dreams Sunshine xx

  13. #13

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinJames View Post
    If I thought I could goad an enemy hammer into attacking I'd definitely defend a chiefed vill lol. Make it easy to make you splat!
    That depends on how you attack, doesn't it? Not every player sims a wwk and that be the end of it, some people curiously enough like to fight other players. If a player annoyed you earlier by defending chiefed villages, well, there's a perfect target to do some hits on during a nightly op!

    If you knew you had a high risk of ending up being the target of an op that launches your account back into the stone age, with the attacker not caring if he loses some troops since that's why he plays in the first place. Would you still defend that village?

  14. #14
    Mrs. Fantastic


    Prolific MemberProlific MemberProlific MemberProlific MemberProlific Member Ryder's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Somerset
    Posts
    2,846

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Placebo View Post

    If you knew you had a high risk of ending up being the target of an op that launches your account back into the stone age, with the attacker not caring if he loses some troops since that's why he plays in the first place. Would you still defend that village?
    I wouldn't usually defend a chiefed village but if this was the threat from doing so then yes, I would defend it everytime. Bring it on I say!
    Server 2, Round 4
    Server 3, Round 8
    Server 5, Round 8

    Current Servers;
    Com4 - IGN;Casper
    Uk5 - Gjenganger

  15. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ryder View Post
    I wouldn't usually defend a chiefed village but if this was the threat from doing so then yes, I would defend it everytime. Bring it on I say!
    Not saying it's a threat, but a risk. I don't tell people I will attack them unless they remove troops, I simply take note and save them for a rainy day so to speak. Would you still do it if you one day would wake up and have your entire account blanket bombed as a direct result of your deffing of an unsignificant village?

    Either way, to me it's almost unheard to punish someone for something completely out of their control. It's such a lowly way to "win", by slowly chipping away at an enemy's troops when he has no way of getting his troops home. I would go as far as call such players scum. And with that said, in earlier years players were much nicer when it came to this, nowadays it happens daily, while it used to never happen at all almost.

  16. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scoot132 View Post
    Something like the following should be sent to all players as soon as chiefing starts to happen on a server!

    1) Withdraw your troops and/or hero. When you chief a farm or Natar village please ensure you will be around at the time of chiefing to withdraw your troops. If you cannot be around at the estimated time of chiefing, wait until you will be!

    Why on earth should I withdraw my troops when I'm being raided? I hear you ask. Well, this is to avoid you killing friendly and not so friendly raiding troops which were sent BEFORE you chiefed. It might seem a good idea to kill enemy troops but this is not the way to do it. Remember the boot could be on the other foot next time.

    2) Rename the village to CHIEFED (yes, in caps) or similar. This is so that people with this village in their (sometimes very long) farming lists can see it has been chiefed.

    3) Spend up or send res away to avoid the raiding troops taking it off you. Let the raids through. Do not defend the raids for 24 hours.

    4) If new raids appear AFTER you have chiefed and renamed, IGM the player and ask them nicely to remove the village from their farming list. You should get a friendly acknowledgement when this has been done.

    5) If after a reasonable time (normally 24 hours) there are still raids coming in and the raiders have ignored your messages, feel free to defend against them.

    6) When all raids have stopped rename the village as you wish.
    I must say I do agree with this, the argument is sound, I do not wish to discourage active players, and killing friendly troops is counter productive, why I have even killed my own troops (yes I know noobish!). I have found messaging raiders 99% of the time elicits a favourable response. Yes this is a war game, but even in war there is respect for your adversaries.

  17. #17
    MartinJames's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Grimsby
    Posts
    1,854

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Placebo View Post
    Not saying it's a threat, but a risk. I don't tell people I will attack them unless they remove troops, I simply take note and save them for a rainy day so to speak. Would you still do it if you one day would wake up and have your entire account blanket bombed as a direct result of your deffing of an unsignificant village?
    .
    I know quite a few very good players who def chiefed villages specifically to wind people up, so I wouldn't assume you'd get the better of anyone who did it.
    Last edited by MartinJames; 21 Apr 2016 at 11:29 AM.
    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)

  18. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MartinJames View Post
    I know quite a few very good players who def chiefed villages specifically to wind people up, so I wouldn't assume you'd get the better of anyone who did it.
    If the purpose is to wind people up I must say it's a really childish thing to do. People have different playstyles I guess.

  19. #19
    Well-Known MemberWell-Known MemberWell-Known MemberWell-Known Member Cait's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Sheffield
    Posts
    1,891

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Placebo View Post
    Either way, to me it's almost unheard to punish someone for something completely out of their control. It's such a lowly way to "win", by slowly chipping away at an enemy's troops when he has no way of getting his troops home. I would go as far as call such players scum. And with that said, in earlier years players were much nicer when it came to this, nowadays it happens daily, while it used to never happen at all almost.
    I'm scum then

    I could alter that to 'its such a lowly way to win by slowly chipping away at other peoples resources when they're expected to just leave them defenceless'

    I don't go out of my way to def chiefed villages - If I get the village and see incoming *and Im going to be online* then I will usually message whoever is *currently* attacking, and alert them to take off their lists (and then don't defend) I also change the name to chiefed - As Im online, I can then spend down.

    However, Im not going to leave a village un deffed for 24 hours - especially if I want to go out, or sleep or somethiing, so that I can leak resources. Big raiding accounts may not mind losing their resources, I *being from Yorkshire* most certainly DO object to giving my resources to other people.

    Raiders RESEND to villages because they're yellow or green on their lists - especially if they get full reports.
    and if Ive left it undeffed for 24 hours there's a major likelihood that they will keep resending (ad infinitum)

    If I def - they see a red, and tend to check, and are a lot less likely to mindlessly resend

    I build a lot of defence, and I chief villages because I need to store my defence - so it seems a bit of a no brainer that when I get new villages I'm going to store some of my def troops in them.

    I do farm some too, If someone is kind enough to notify me if I am attacking them - I thank them and remove from my farm lists. But if someone doesnt want to notify loads of attackers, who are cycling through their raidlists, then I have no issue with that.

    I consider any troop losses due to chiefings to be my responsibility and part of the cost of farming - farming accounts get more resources, but lose more troops and that to me is part of the deal


    I will continue to change newly chiefed village names to 'chiefed' to help farmers
    But I will also continue to store defence troops in my own villages, and avoid giving free resources to people
    Don't think that justifies being called scum

    Cait
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    http://travian-reports.net/us/report/2261602b9eb That thing!
    http://travian-reports.net/us/report/442138afbca A fluffy hammer
    http://travian-reports.net/us/report/845573c4010 Titch the rammer with an inferiority complex. (5x - 4 weeks - worse ram tribe)
    and for the Faffing Hammer that got away
    http://forum.travian.co.uk/showpost....80&postcount=1

  20. #20

    Default

    I would understand your point more if people chiefed villages that weren't already farms. Way too many people chief obvious farms, yet are still surprised and panic when they see incomings, as if they expect farmers to magically recall all outgoing troops to that village when it changes owner.

    The risk to farming should be farms becoming active, not people who have no respect. I don't expect anyone to leave a village undefended and ress unspent for 24 hours, but I expect that they either change the name to chiefed, or just write me a short message (doesn't even need to include a link or coords) so that I can quickly remove it. Whenever I chief a farm, I immediately tell people it is chiefed, and 2 hours later there are no more attacks, everyone is happy, and I can use my deff for more productive things like defending actually intended attacks.

    So yes, people who deliberately chief an obvious farm, and then deff without doing anything to notify farmers are actually scum, because it's complete lack of respect. As I already said, the risk to farming should not be rude people, but rather farms who want to defend themselves. There is no difference between people who do this, and people who send deff to inactive farms to spike them.
    Last edited by Placebo; 24 Apr 2016 at 05:56 PM.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

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