This is a list of ideas that have been brought up many times and the developers and/or game staff are well aware of them. Bringing them up again is not a new idea since they have all been discussed here multiple times; if you are going to suggest them again, at least go into detail and try to address any concerns listed here. Any threads created about these ideas may be deleted at the moderator's discretion, which is more likely if they are poorly developed or add nothing new to the idea.
1. New tribes: New tribes will not be accepted, regardless of how much thought or detail you put into them.
2. More types of troops: Travian Games is not accepting ideas for new troops. Again, this applies no matter how well-planned or how balanced they are.
Trapping animals / taming animals: <Removed, this has been implemented as of T4.>
4. Hiding soldiers (i.e., "safe houses," "troop crannies," "bunkers," etc.): Seriously, it would be a nightmare to implement, even if it was a good idea. Just send them somewhere safe, or raid someone with them.
Context: Ideas were being suggested (repeatedly) for buildings which would "protect" a limited number of soldiers, and not one suggestion offered a method by which it would be determined whether the soldiers would fight or hide.
5. More resource fields per village: Travian Games has no plans to make villages have a larger number of resource fields per village, either as the standard or as rare village types.
6. More building spaces per village: Travian Games has no plans to make villages have more building spaces, either as the standard, as "bonus" village types, or as a bonus from any building or artifact.
Terrain changes (e.g., mountains, hills, etc.): <Removed, this has been implemented as of T4>
Water (rivers, lakes, oceans, naval combat, etc.): <Removed, this has been implemented as of T4>
9. Mythological creatures, magic, or other fantasy elements: 'Nuff said. This is a bit more relaxed in regards to heroes and artifacts, but dragons, wizards, and other such things won't be seriously considered.
10. Holiday/vacation mode: This is not in reference to server-wide holidays. This is in response to individual "vacation modes" which would essentially give a temporary ban to a player, protecting them from attacks for a while at the expense of not being able to log in. This is what the sitter function was designed for.
11. More members per alliance: 'Nuff said. There are no plans to increase the maximum size of an alliance.
12. Official wing alliances: There are no plans to make any closer diplomatic stage than a confederacy. An official wing alliance would either be a confederacy by another name, or would involve giving additional benefits; there is no point in giving another name to the former, and the latter is generally viewed as a bad idea by many players.
13. Different ways to get members in to alliances: This is primarily aimed at auto-recruitment of new players. Players will never be placed into an alliance unless they willingly join.
14. Pictures/Animations in profiles: Not happening. This would require a lot more bandwidth than the current setup, and would require a lot of extra work to police. It isn't worth it for something purely cosmetic, especially when there are already lag issues.
15. Pictures/Animations when under attack or of people walking around in your village (You can use a Graphic package to do this): Same as the previous, and you can do so with a graphics pack.
16. Possibility to merge villages: This is aimed at ideas which would combine adjacent villages into one "super-village," giving it any sort of bonus.
17. Cancel training of troops: Travian developers say no, so no. =/
18. Canceling troop movements after more than 90 seconds: If the timeframe for movement canceling is increased, then people could potentially start abusing this to get "free" fakes. Seriously, a minute and a half is plenty of time to catch a mistake.
19. Stopping marketplace shipments while they are en-route: This is extremely abusable, as Travian does not distinguish between accepted trade offers and one-way shipments of goods. It would either be a very abusable system, or would require a significant rewrite of the trading code.
20. Killing prisoners / Slaving prisoners: No, this runs into severe balance issues. Whether it is killing the prisoners or gaining some kind of bonus from keeping them imprisoned, it greatly improves the value of traps, which are already a fairly good deal when fully considered.
Context: Many threads were being made asking for the T3 (Travian version 3) traps to be able to kill prisoners at the cost of having no traps auto-repaired; given that T3 traps cost about a third as much as the cheapest troop and were built much faster as well, this was highly unbalanced. Other threads asked for trapped troops to give bonuses to production or build time to represent them being used as slave labor.