tribal families

[DeletedUser]

I find your statement amusing, and when I say amusing I mean a joke. No disrespect, but the idea that a single player can take on 10 people whom match him in power. Still has a advantage due to micro, when on the contrary he's being out matched in micro and macro. How(You must be asking)? All these 10 players have to do is send massive defense towards a village, that one player is attacking. Once he runs out of troops, which he will. He'll have to rebuild, within 24hrs all those 10 players combined will have 10x the amount of army populous he does. With a good Captain 5 villages go defensive and 5 go offensive, not only will he lose the next battle but he'll be farmed. Said process will repeat it's self, and that 1 player loses.

Good players are valuable, but noobs aren't completely useless. We're all noobs, but we'll get better from someone teaching and commanding, or perhaps from experience. It doesn't matter, out of 5/10 noobs will become good or at least useful. All it takes is 1 pro, and noobs who are willing to learn, which is why family tribes are useful. Teamwork is essential but not impossible,you may agree or disagree. But lets agree to disagree.

the idea that a single player can take on 10 people whom match him in power.

I have seen it personally in several stages of the world, several times. I have seen and jumped on an account that was fighting solo vs a tribe that was 20 mil larger than him holding his own, and also attempted to take out a player who my tribe was millions larger than (and we struggled massively, dhksththtl for anyone who remembers that from 43 ). I have also seen and been on top 20 accounts that have easily held mass noob attacks through dodging, backtiming, smart faking and consistent farming throughout.

It's not an "idea", it's fact. Skill > numbers.

All these 10 players have to do is send massive defense towards a village

Because a very good solo player (and obviously for the purpose of this discussion, the player in question is good) wouldn't both smart and spam fake? Wouldn't scout? Wouldn't check the supporting time distance, throw noble fakes around to move the support and relaunch the real once the support would be in transit, so that you would either miss or only hit half of the support? Mass stacks are not a 100% relaible defense. D is slow to shift, "especially" among a number of players who arent always on the same time vs a 24/7 pro account.

Also, offensive rebuilds far faster than defense, I think you are missing that.

5 villages go defensive and 5 go offensive

So let's say that 5 villages have 500 sp/sw each. So they put 2500 sp, 2500 sword lvl 20 wall, in front of, lets say, 3K axe 2.2K LC, 120 rams.

The O would clear it with roughly 1.3K axes, 1K LC (give or take).

1.3K axes vs offensive troops via backtimes are plenty to take out that O from the 5 noob players. (you seem to be under the impression that the noob attacks would actually hit anything rather than finding an empty village due to dodge and backtime :S).

1K LC will be able to outfarm any of those players and replace the units far faster.

This is ALL assuming that they can get the stack infront of it in the first place, with misdirection you could hit and clear half of that, or 1/4 of that at a time. Which takes forever to rebuild spear/sword (which is primary noob defense)

Teamwork is essential but not impossible

I don't think you quite understand that efficient teamwork in this game is not just supporting another player blindly. If all the noobs have 100 incomings, and even assuming they know how to tag, that there are random fake noble trains sent around, how are you going to co-ordinate a defense amongst 10 panicking noobs?

Also, I'm not hating on the noobs, don't misunderstand me, I actually do a lot to try and teach people when I play. But in my 4 years of TW experience, I seen too many good players demolish groups of noobs. Is it possible for a group of noobs to beat a good player? If they get lucky (for example the good player is offline, or net drops out in the middle of a backtime) And that's the only way, if the larger/better player does everything right he won't lose, because you have to remember the key element:

Attacks don't stack! The number of troops you have when attacking makes little difference if it's spread across 10 villages in low counts. You can stack on defense, but it's not hard to avoid stacks when attacking if you are smart about it. The good player will systematically work through each individual player.

 

[DeletedUser]

Excuse me for butting in at this conjuncture but what have these anecdotal reports of a family tribes success in other worlds got to do with WORLD 66, I'm not going to trawl through any world settings but is there a world running under the same victory conditions as WORLD 66, if so was there a similar scenario at the start of mass family tribes and how did it resolve itself?

 

[DeletedUser]

Excuse me for butting in at this conjuncture but what have these anecdotal reports of a family tribes success in other worlds got to do with
WORLD 66, I'm not going to trawl through any world settings but is there a world running under the same victory conditions as WORLD 66, if so was there a similar scenario at the start of mass family tribes and how did it resolve itself?

At the end of the world, merge accounts or cut the dead weight. By the end of a world there is barely 30 active people anyway. :3

 

[deomonkid18]

I am in this family tribe o nWorld 67, and we have like 10 or sumthin tribes. All maxed members and we rule 3 continents. Not to mention our allies own the other continents close by. We are still doing good. wats so bad bout fmily tribs anywayz?

 

[DeletedUser]

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!! WHAT?!?!?!?! You're missing the part where I say a pro instructs them, and when I say instruct I mean troop build and time coordinating. Which means all they have to do is kill is offensive forces, and game over. The game of cat and mouse is much easier for the mice, because they have so many numbers. Basically my idea involves 1 pro v. 10 good. You can turn a noob into a good player within day(s) of teaching, this game isn't that hard. And you can fake, dodge, train, or even nuke that one player. But you still have 5 players constantly attacking you, so how are you gonna fight at both ends?

5 players catting and nuking your village, reducing the walls, farms, and warehouse. While you have 5 other players stacking a village. Either way you're gonna lose 1 battle, which will lead to complete destruction. And your scenario only works if that 1 good player, as multiple villages. By adding more than one village into the equation, you can tie up the loose ends in your defense. By shifting your defensive troops into your nuke base, and constantly dodging, consuming resources, and etc. I have taken a entire tribe by myself with over 200 villages, but the thing is it's so chaotic even with a co-player it's a brain buster. And much more difficult than to have 9 other players share the load.

 

[spleen mage]

Whoa, spleen, you're still around? I just came back after a couple years of absence, if you are playing in this world too, that makes 3 people I know are in this world.

Hey man, long time no see - how's it going? Yeah, I'm the same - I literally just came back last week after being out for three years or so (annoyingly my original account no longer seems to exist!). Don't particularly have time to play to a competitive level if I'm honest, but I really came back for nostalgic reasons - I forgot how much fun I had on this game!

 

[spleen mage]

It's not an "idea", it's fact. Skill > numbers.]

I could not disagree with this more to be honest. Skill only beats numbers over short-term. Over a long time, vastly superior numbers will beat skill. It's not just about resources, it simply comes down to the man hours. There's only so many weeks straight people are willing to defend an account that's constantly being attacked and catted.

Early game, it's not so much of a problem. Later on, it's hell.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hey man, long time no see - how's it going? Yeah, I'm the same - I literally just came back last week after being out for three years or so (annoyingly my original account no longer seems to exist!). Don't particularly have time to play to a competitive level if I'm honest, but I really came back for nostalgic reasons - I forgot how much fun I had on this game!

Play competitively is a huge time sink, it's difficult to do solo, much easier with accnt sharing and even then, it's difficult for me right now unless my real life changes

I just got too burned out, after W1 and a brief stint in W8, helping Uritel and gang setup Clorox, passed down my knowledge and left. The world has changed a lot, there are so many planning tools for mass scale wars. I still have nightmares of how we planned those massive coordinated attack back in w1, before there was any tools to help us. We had to create our own.

You're the 3rd person on this world, tempting me to join, but man.....I offered to accnt share, but having my own accnt, argh....hard to do

 

[DeletedUser]

I could not disagree with this more to be honest. Skill only beats numbers over short-term. Over a long time, vastly superior numbers will beat skill. It's not just about resources, it simply comes down to the man hours. There's only so many weeks straight people are willing to defend an account that's constantly being attacked and catted.

Early game, it's not so much of a problem. Later on, it's hell.

I agree, and lets not forget no one can play this game 24/7 everyday for months. Even with a co-player someone will step out or make a mistake, and then you're screwed. Where as one player in a group of player slips up, he can be carried by the rest and not do any major collateral.

 

[DeletedUser]

Basically my idea involves 1 pro v. 10 good.

So you've completed changed the topic entirely. :icon_rolleyes:

I agree that 10 good players can take out 1 pro player but that's not what we were talking about. 10 noobs cannot take out one pro player which was the topic of discussion. Obviously 10 good players would be able to take out 1 good player, but for the purpose of discussion relating to the "swarm" tactics, if they were good at dodging and backtiming, they wouldn't be "noobs" in this discussion. :icon_confused:

And no, it doesn't take a "few" days to learn enough to be able to pull that off. If that's what you think, you have never actually tried to take out a genuinely good player before (Ie. Top 10, co/tri played, all vets, etc etc). It takes practice and more learning than that to be able to dodge a <500ms backtime, or blindsnipe a 150ms headed at someone else's village. It takes experience to be able to understand another players mass faking methods, to read into spam and smart fakes (or whether they try to slip the nukes into the spam fakes, which is hard to read at times).

5 players catting and nuking your village, reducing the walls, farms, and warehouse.

See, this is the problem. I don't think you are grasping the fact that as-long as their nuke isn't taken out, they can recover from that easily, and a lot faster than the damage done to the "noob" players. Not even their nuke, as-long as their LC isn't taken out.

If 5 players are attacking, 5 players will probably be systematically back-timed. As you have incomings you scout the attacking players and tribe members within his defensive reach (as scouts travel faster than any real attacks will), and if they are not able to get there in time you back-time and take out that player, come home, dodge and scout for your next opening.

Being attacked means little unless you actually take out their troops (which no pro player will get hit at home like that). If you cat someones village down, but they have 3K LC and you have a 1K village, they are still going to recover faster than you will grow. As-long as they have that nuke intact they don't even need a village behind it, just to take out their attackers without losing their LC, because they can recover. That is all.

I could not disagree with this more to be honest. Skill only beats numbers over short-term. Over a long time, vastly superior numbers will beat skill. It's not just about resources, it simply comes down to the man hours. There's only so many weeks straight people are willing to defend an account that's constantly being attacked and catted.

Early game, it's not so much of a problem. Later on, it's hell.

But for the purpose of this discussion, isn't it still a victory for the skilled player? I understand that RL attrition is a part of the game (and I genuinely hate that fact, but that's another topic entirely). Still, the fact that you could not take out that player, he got bored or too busy and quit, isn't really a victory (for the purpose of this discussion). I've had players that were better than me quit in conflict and I never felt that was a victory for me, just a flaw in the game. They were certainly better than me, they just had a life. :icon_razz:

 

[sidd 271]

i do remember dshkhthl from w43.
The best players of TW are those who are greatest defenders and she is one of 'em.Great defender doesn't mean a great turtle.

 

[spleen mage]

But for the purpose of this discussion, isn't it still a victory for the skilled player? I understand that RL attrition is a part of the game (and I genuinely hate that fact, but that's another topic entirely). Still, the fact that you could not take out that player, he got bored or too busy and quit, isn't really a victory (for the purpose of this discussion). I've had players that were better than me quit in conflict and I never felt that was a victory for me, just a flaw in the game. They were certainly better than me, they just had a life. :icon_razz:]

But it's not really a victory for the person who quits, moral victories aren't the same as actual ones. In later game, wars aren't won by taking all the opponents villages; there's simply too many villages and not enough nobles to do so. Wars are won by mentally breaking your opponent untill they can't take anymore.

I'm not saying it's a glorious victory or that there's any skill involved in it whatsoever. But at the end of the day, it's not "the most skilled player" that neccessarily wins this game, it's all about strategy, and pounding the enemy untill they can't take anymore is a valid stragey, albeit not a very exciting one. And while their extra production capacity is also very useful, that's the real advantage with ten noobs vs. one skilled player - they have ten times the amount of time and only have to put in 1/10 of the effort. If a couple of members go inactive in a big family tribe, it's barely noticeable; one or two members going AWOL in an elite tribe, and it puts so much more pressure on everybody else.

Don't get me wrong - I don't support family tribes, because I believe it takes the fun out of the game. But I've seen (and been in) my fair share of "family tribe vs small tribe" wars, and I know which tribe tends to come out on top in the long run.

 

[DeletedUser]

So how long does everyone think the tribe families consisting of 120 noobs will last? Personally, I look forward to seeing the massive ensuing war that will come. I already know the family near me took in a new group of 23 noobs.

Sorry for using the word noob so much, but when you have a huge group of players gathering under one banner for protection only, I can't call them anything else. I mean seriously, who don't you take in?

nobody in this thread has mentioned that family tribes with shared forums can be a lot more fun than a tribe of 30 with a ghost town tribe forum. i am the only active tribemember on my continent, but am in one of the biggest family tribes. i'm not in this tribe for protection, i'm here because i like my tribemembers.

 

[DeletedUser104941]

Three pages worth of time wasted on the oldest discussion in the game.



If they didn't work on some level, the map wouldn't be full of them every single time a new world opens.

 

[mattcurr]

I actually really think family tribes are a great idea. Centralized government for an alliance there are usually end of the world pacts anyways. And 99.99% of the people who claim to be good enough to go it alone are not good enough to do it yet they still have little diplomacy and try to pick fights with a lot of people and dont understand why they lose.

 

[DeletedUser29719]

A strong alliance and a well organized family does have little difference. People take the alliance word in another way however, mark someone blue and forget about it. W8 BLOC is the best example of "such strong alliance family" I remember from the worlds I played, (one tribe for each quadrant) until they thought they owned the world earlier than they did and dropped NG out. Anyway...

When an allied tribe gets attacked the reflection of %90 is " We regret to inform you that we have a NAP with that tribe so we can not interfere". One can not have a NAP with a tribe that is attacking their allies. You win together, or you lose and restart together.

If led by someone with enough time to organize everything and with smart recruitment numbers and will to keep playing always prevail.

Problem is smart people do not want to spend so much time to organize a family early because families eventually become a target by so called elite tribes playing for 5 months only, as a result early families usually fail. Rather, world winning coalitions is made once the world is shaped. And either way the defeated people complain about facing odds.

 

[DeletedUser89005]

The term family tribes from my own experience is a negative concept to implement in any stage off the game, yes it offers so much in the form off security, trade, having that extra few heads to account sit etc, but then it suddenly becomes one where if located in close proximity growth becomes a major issue and players grow tired and slowly fall off the activity train leaving exposed flanks, unattended accounts become vulnerable to attack, and if not then the issue off "we need support does" leaving one side at risk to bolster the other.

It then becomes a family tribe where the main tribe will end up sitting the smaller tribe, taking there support, draining there resources, using there nukes, in effect it's just another way off creating players to enable them to have 2 accounts, yes i have seen it work well in some worlds for a good period off time, but in the end it does eventually resort to being 1 active tribe and 1 sat tribe..

 

[DeletedUser]

Red = 1ns4n3 Family Tribe (1-6)
Black = DOGZ Family Tribe (1-4)

As you can clearly see that spells NOOB.

 

[DeletedUser]

I actually really think family tribes are a great idea. Centralized government for an alliance there are usually end of the world pacts anyways. And 99.99% of the people who claim to be good enough to go it alone are not good enough to do it yet they still have little diplomacy and try to pick fights with a lot of people and dont understand why they lose.

Actually to be fair, that's the most fun thing to do. Wreck a world then leave it, I rarely ever play a world to win because I know the likelyhood that it will happen is slim to none.. besides that everybody knows how it feels to have your hard work come crashing down.

Now with that being said I prefer people I trust and know what they are doing over numbers personally. History has shown time an time again that family tribes aren't the ideal thing but they can work. Personal preference i'd rather have 10 that listen and know what they are doing then 100 people that don't but that's just me.

I don't mind being gangbanged, infact usually more fun that way, especially if they don't succeed :lol:

Anyways easier to defend then go on the offensive. Fact

 

[DeletedUser]

[spoil]

Red = 1ns4n3 Family Tribe (1-6)
Black = DOGZ Family Tribe (1-4)

As you can clearly see that spells NOOB.[/spoil]

That's all I see