Top 20 Tribes

DeletedUser

Guest
nguyenadam said:
Not sure why everyone is so negative about account mergers, if one can't cover an account around the clock, it's always a good idea to merge and bring on a Co. It's not always a negative thing.
Click to expand...

Because merges are a waste of tribal resources; think of all those nobles that could be used on enemy villages!
 

Pain.Carbon

Guest
I checked even ODA nobled 27 internal and merged with many tribes in this start time , so why CODEX is so bad because of internal and how come ODA is in top rank with doing same or worst thing ? (Thinking)
Nothing personal , i dont care about internal or merge its all part of game but i saw all bashing CODEX for it so i posted ;) Feel free to bash me :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
PeRvIs said:
The original Jammer0 quit W73. The account is now played by Shayd. This is Shayd's third account in W73 so far. His original account was anthills and it grew to 373 points. Then he played God of Sleep for a short while but then jumped to the much larger Jammer0 account when the original owner quit.

Nwaro had 5 cos (to my knowledge) at least 4 of them have left. The account itself may have quit and been replaced.
Click to expand...


Lol now this tribe is a joke :eek: Jammer was one of the only ones I had a shred of respect for over there and Nwaro seemed to be a good player to.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
BlueTattoo said:
Because merges are a waste of tribal resources; think of all those nobles that could be used on enemy villages!
Click to expand...

It's not really a waste of resources. If you think about it, merging into a better account, the vil will be able to be used in a more efficient manner in the long run. Also, if you think that it's a waste of tribal resources due to the loss of the noble that could be used on an enemy village, you aren't farming enough.

CasuallyGaming said:
Lol now this tribe is a joke :eek: Jammer was one of the only ones I had a shred of respect for over there and Nwaro seemed to be a good player to.
Click to expand...

Not all rumors are true :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
The only reason I figured that out with CODEX was because I checked all there top players and I noticed a fair amount of barb noblers in the conquer history as compared to other tribes and hence it was bought up. The internals and the total number of barbs were only bought up when another forum user brang up the stats and asked me to check them out as if my opinion was missguided, clearly it was not.

27 internals is not great for ODA I will agree on that but I do expect to see some internals as they are a given with Tribalwars, however ODA have only nobled 66% what CODEX has in internals and they have nobled even less than that in barbarian villages. Now, moving on I will admit I may be a bit more biased towards ODA simply because I know a lot more of the players within that tribe and I have seen what a lot of them are capable of, I recently stated that I could see C0v3rt comfortably reaching the top 20 players and now look at him at rank 17 without a single internal or barbarian village noble to his name. I understand he is just one player but when members of a tribe fulfill your expectations you expect to see them do well.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
carrot1009 said:
The only reason I figured that out with CODEX was because I checked all there top players and I noticed a fair amount of barb noblers in the conquer history as compared to other tribes and hence it was bought up. The internals and the total number of barbs were only bought up when another forum user brang up the stats and asked me to check them out as if my opinion was missguided, clearly it was not.

27 internals is not great for ODA I will agree on that but I do expect to see some internals as they are a given with Tribalwars, however ODA have only nobled 66% what CODEX has in internals and they have nobled even less than that in barbarian villages. Now, moving on I will admit I may be a bit more biased towards ODA simply because I know a lot more of the players within that tribe and I have seen what a lot of them are capable of, I recently stated that I could see C0v3rt comfortably reaching the top 20 players and now look at him at rank 17 without a single internal or barbarian village noble to his name. I understand he is just one player but when members of a tribe fulfill your expectations you expect to see them do well.
Click to expand...

Yeah, internals don't tell the whole story. It's TW anyway, like you said, people quit. They can't really do anything about it, they just have to roll with it and move on. How long they will be able to roll with it though is debatable. I wasn't trying to support or bash anyone in general, just wanted to throw some counter-arguments out there since all the talks seemed to be anti-Codex and were based on some pretty debatable reasons. Everyone measures success differently.
 

DeletedUser113394

Guest

DeletedUser

Guest
nguyenadam said:
It's not really a waste of resources. If you think about it, merging into a better account, the vil will be able to be used in a more efficient manner in the long run. Also, if you think that it's a waste of tribal resources due to the loss of the noble that could be used on an enemy village, you aren't farming enough.
Click to expand...

It was a bit of a tounge-in-cheek comment, but I'm happy to expand on it.

At early stages.. 1 or 2 villages, I do think it's a waste. If you are merging simply for a co, take the co, and screw the villages. They are 3k-4k at best. Cat and farm them.

When you are talking more villages, take the co, share the villages equally between the tribe. Better that a larger number of people get a freebie to improve their growth than one person wasting all their time and resources gobbling up villages instead of participating in an op or improving their area.

So yes, a pure merge, one person taking all of another person's villages, is a waste. I've played for a lot of tribes where this is not allowed, not done, and I'm a fan of the rule. One person growing big and fat, blowing all their nobles on a bunch of freebies does not benefit the tribe. All it shows is that they are greedy and not a team player. I'll pass on a tribemate like that any day of the week.
 

DeletedUser113394

Guest
Unless You have tons of nobles because you were internalled and then decide to re-build. I dont see why I have to give villages to my tribe if that were the case.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
BlueTattoo said:
It was a bit of a tounge-in-cheek comment, but I'm happy to expand on it.

At early stages.. 1 or 2 villages, I do think it's a waste. If you are merging simply for a co, take the co, and screw the villages. They are 3k-4k at best. Cat and farm them.

When you are talking more villages, take the co, share the villages equally between the tribe. Better that a larger number of people get a freebie to improve their growth than one person wasting all their time and resources gobbling up villages instead of participating in an op or improving their area.

So yes, a pure merge, one person taking all of another person's villages, is a waste. I've played for a lot of tribes where this is not allowed, not done, and I'm a fan of the rule. One person growing big and fat, blowing all their nobles on a bunch of freebies does not benefit the tribe. All it shows is that they are greedy and not a team player. I'll pass on a tribemate like that any day of the week.
Click to expand...

How can you defend stunting the growth of a player who is clearly ahead of the rest of the tribe in terms of farming/nobles? If a player is growing so fast as to have a combined noble count of more than multiple players in a tribe, how can you say "hey you can't noble all of that player's vils because we want to help the rest of the tribe grow." This may not be the case all the time, but in my opinion, you can't say, 'no don't noble those vils save your nobles for an OP.' For all you know, they could be nobling these vils and still have more nobles saved up.

*On a side note, I like your sig.*
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
nguyenadam said:
How can you defend stunting the growth of a player who is clearly ahead of the rest of the tribe in terms of farming/nobles? If a player is growing so fast as to have a combined noble count of more than multiple players in a tribe, how can you say "hey you can't noble all of that player's vils because we want to help the rest of the tribe grow." This may not be the case all the time, but in my opinion, you can't say, 'no don't noble those vils save your nobles for an OP.' For all you know, they could be nobling these vils and still have more nobles saved up.
Click to expand...

I disagree with this, I think players who have been hit fairly hard, lost nukes to bonfires, had sitters not dodge incomings or some other reason for why their growth being stunted should recieve these villas. If you are ahead of the rest of the tribe then there is no real reason why you can't take enemy caps because if you have a lot of nobles you probably have a lot of troops as well. If we had 8 internals in my tribe and gave them all to one player and then further down the road he get's OP'd and quits or he has some RL issue and quits it's a wasted investment, much better to share those 8 internals between 3-5 players or so.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
nguyenadam said:
How can you defend stunting the growth of a player who is clearly ahead of the rest of the tribe in terms of farming/nobles? If a player is growing so fast as to have a combined noble count of more than multiple players in a tribe, how can you say "hey you can't noble all of that player's vils because we want to help the rest of the tribe grow." This may not be the case all the time, but in my opinion, you can't say, 'no don't noble those vils save your nobles for an OP.' For all you know, they could be nobling these vils and still have more nobles saved up.

*On a side note, I like your sig.*
Click to expand...

If a player is growing so fast that he has nobles to spare, then why is he sitting on them in the first place and not taking enemy (or non-blue) villages? Seems to me he is stunting his own growth. Why does that entitle him to gobble up a bunch of freebies?

Anyway, merges in general, it's simply a difference of opinion. My opinion is that villages belong to the tribe, not the player. And villages should always be used for the benefit of the tribe, not a single player. Feel free to disagree with me :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
carrot1009 said:
I disagree with this, I think players who have been hit fairly hard, lost nukes to bonfires, had sitters not dodge incomings or some other reason for why their growth being stunted should recieve these villas. If you are ahead of the rest of the tribe then there is no real reason why you can't take enemy caps because if you have a lot of nobles you probably have a lot of troops as well. If we had 8 internals in my tribe and gave them all to one player and then further down the road he get's OP'd and quits or he has some RL issue and quits it's a wasted investment, much better to share those 8 internals between 3-5 players or so.
Click to expand...

Topic was merging I believe. Internaling is an altogether different story :)

BlueTattoo said:
If a player is growing so fast that he has nobles to spare, then why is he sitting on them in the first place and not taking enemy (or non-blue) villages? Seems to me he is stunting his own growth. Why does that entitle him to gobble up a bunch of freebies?

Anyway, merges in general, it's simply a difference of opinion. My opinion is that villages belong to the tribe, not the player. And villages should always be used for the benefit of the tribe, not a single player. Feel free to disagree with me :)
Click to expand...

I will agree to disagree with you so that everyone can move on from this topic :) I think we have the same thoughts but you are approaching it on a broader basis than I was. There can be many reasons why a player would sit on his nobles (waiting for tribe OPs for example), but in my argument, I was basing it off of that player having enough nobles and participation in tribe OPs where the act of him merging another account did not hinder his ability/participation in OPs against enemies (ie non-blue) vils. In my thought process, the player with a bunch of nobles is merging while also nobling other vils outside of the merge at the same time. Anyway, that'll be all from my end. It was a nice and productive debate we had going, I enjoyed the civility that you showed.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
nguyenadam said:
Topic was merging I believe. Internaling is an altogether different story :)
Click to expand...

Merging and internalling are basically the same thing, with the small exception of someone gaining an additional player. Seems to me if someone is gaining a co (the real, supposed reason for the merge), then villages on top of that are just frosting. Or gravy. Take your pick. The same rules should apply.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I understand exactly where you are coming from but I believe that the villas belong to a tribe and I don't see why the player with an abundance of nobles should noble them all (even if they are merging) when there are other players who can benefit from those more so they can actually participate effectively in OPs.

I have always considered merging/internals as the same thing however I understand that you at least gain something from a merge (I.E. a new co player) I just believe these things should be shared and I am not saying the player who wanted them all should get nothing but instead of him taking 8 villas (all of them in this example) he should get 2 or 3 instead?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
BlueTattoo said:
It was a bit of a tounge-in-cheek comment, but I'm happy to expand on it. At early stages.. 1 or 2 villages, I do think it's a waste. If you are merging simply for a co, take the co, and screw the villages. They are 3k-4k at best. Cat and farm them. When you are talking more villages, take the co, share the villages equally between the tribe. Better that a larger number of people get a freebie to improve their growth than one person wasting all their time and resources gobbling up villages instead of participating in an op or improving their area. So yes, a pure merge, one person taking all of another person's villages, is a waste. I've played for a lot of tribes where this is not allowed, not done, and I'm a fan of the rule. One person growing big and fat, blowing all their nobles on a bunch of freebies does not benefit the tribe. All it shows is that they are greedy and not a team player. I'll pass on a tribemate like that any day of the week.
Click to expand...
At the 1-2 villages, it also depends on the settings. If it is a packet world and you have an offer to merge an account with someone that has a 3-4k village and 2+ Academy levels, I would jump on the offer right away. You would have a train very early on. In packet worlds I tend to try and noble someone with an academy or high smithy level as a first capture that way I can have a full train as soon as possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top