Cheap Tricks

[DeletedUser]

Thank You!!! Finally!! =d

 

[DeletedUser]

Its like you guys are becoming pro's at learning the balance between offtopic lock worthy and just skating the line of on topic. Just as its slipping off topic someone saves it. :lol:

 

[DeletedUser8472]

Its like you guys are becoming pro's at learning the balance between offtopic lock worthy and just skating the line of on topic. Just as its slipping off topic someone saves it. :lol:

Guys quick Jerran just spammed!!!!

 

[DeletedUser]

Its like you guys are becoming pro's at learning the balance between offtopic lock worthy and just skating the line of on topic. Just as its slipping off topic someone saves it. :lol:

Oooh second post. In any case, this was quite amusing about spies and what not.

 

[DeletedUser]

since Jerran spammed, a say you start grading this topics spam on a curve.


RTW has unit upkeep....Could you imagine if you had to pay an hourly upkeep for the army in this game?



Edit: No advertising other games.

 

[DeletedUser]

No offense for once high Land Scott <-there are two ts here

But if your tribe general has 80 points please tell me how he attacks people? I would love to know for the next world I join.

Actually lardingd,

It would be more : Highland Scot ........ a Scot from the Highlands; a Highlander.

As for the 80 point general .......

Your think in an old mindset for generals. You think Generals have to be in the fray of the fight, leading the charge, the biggest ans strongest of them all.

Yet that does not have to be so.

In my tribe we honor a person who can plan out a campaign and create tactics and let the members do their duty to the tribe, rather then to the general. IN my tribe it is ones duty to protect the tribe, help the tribe, and the same for it's members.

A strong general in might is only as good as long as where his army can be. A strong general can be weakened by aiding too many people, having too many offenses, or be strong and help very little to the other tribe members. IN our tribe, we try to have people send what they can to help another, so in stead of big 100 spear support groups, we send 10-15 each which turns out to be 300+ men, and everybody is still strong.

In Napoleon tactics, the center is the weakest spot. In this case the General is the weakest. You see, back in Napoleon's time, the center aided the two flanks. Let me interupt with a drawing ....

____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

This is an example formation, no tactical advantage really, but too explain Napoleon's idea. The Spearmen are the left flank, the Heavy Calv the center, and the axemen the right flank. The ______ are gaps between the formations, though not too big, just to neatly seperate the formation types.

Eventually in a battle, you start losing men ....


____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So the center reinforce both sides....

:heavycavalry: ___:heavycavalry:___ :heavycavalry: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So as you see, while the flanks have 4 men , the center has one, being so weak. That is what happens to Generals eventually when they help out their friends. Though their friends are still strong. That is why our tribe doesn't put much focus on a General, but rather squads of people to help people in thier own squads or too attack people in thier area only.

Though sometimes major offensives are required and all member are requested to send troops, if they are weak, then we usually ask them to send support too the tribes who are near the fighting, too defend them in case of retaliation. While the stronger members are attacking. Also, we have discovered it is best not to attack the tribal elite, but rather the more common (members) people who have no rank.

For a member will more readily quit a tribe then an aristocrat because an aristocrat has power and privileges and won't want to lose those privileges. So we target the tribal members, we have learned from this tactic that it reduces the size and power of the tribe drastically. At the beginning of World 6, the tribe had 13 member and had that amount for quite some time, but since we started attacking them, they lost almost half their members and now have 7.

Though we attacked the nobility there, becuase cut off the head, and the body dies. It works well in small tribes like the one we went up and still are against. The Baron and Recruiter of the tribe gave up and went to another tribe and so did 4 other members, which by the way, we promptly stopped attacks against them as promised.

The war in which my tribe is in is not one of land, power, money but rather revenge. Revenge is best served cold, and we have let it chill in the freezer for quite sometime. The only Aristocracy in that tribe now is the leader, so we have seized attacks against him, and diverted them to the members.

Real war tactics work well in this game, and if you look around many people quote Sun Tzu, Napoleon, and other military masterminds.

One such tactic we have also used, which proves very effective, is too use propaganda letters. Rather then drop them from airplanes, we mail them directly to the member. This creates a private agreement which is just between us and them, with them losing nothing at all, except their membership in that tribe. Does not the sound of peace of leaving a certain tribe and joining another sound better then the axes on your trees, swords cutting your wheat, and animals moaning in pain from enemy troops?

It works, and I advise each of you to implement this. Though in the other worlds it may be harder to implement since many are so entrenched in well defended villages and such. Also with them all leaving, it lessens the number of people to eliminate, for only the most loyal and radical will stay, and really in the end thats who you want to get rid of.

As for King Valkyrik, please do implement these strategies, and may they bring you glory, fame, and power. This is for all others too. If by chance you put my name in ranking, you will see I am not all big and powerful, but this is just one more instance in .....

POINTS ALONE DO NOT SHOW TACTICAL KNOWLEDGE!!!

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually lardingd,

It would be more : Highland Scot ........ a Scot from the Highlands; a Highlander.

As for the 80 point general .......

Your think in an old mindset for generals. You think Generals have to be in the fray of the fight, leading the charge, the biggest ans strongest of them all.

Yet that does not have to be so.

In my tribe we honor a person who can plan out a campaign and create tactics and let the members do their duty to the tribe, rather then to the general. IN my tribe it is ones duty to protect the tribe, help the tribe, and the same for it's members.

A strong general in might is only as good as long as where his army can be. A strong general can be weakened by aiding too many people, having too many offenses, or be strong and help very little to the other tribe members. IN our tribe, we try to have people send what they can to help another, so in stead of big 100 spear support groups, we send 10-15 each which turns out to be 300+ men, and everybody is still strong.

In Napoleon tactics, the center is the weakest spot. In this case the General is the weakest. You see, back in Napoleon's time, the center aided the two flanks. Let me interupt with a drawing ....

____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

This is an example formation, no tactical advantage really, but too explain Napoleon's idea. The Spearmen are the left flank, the Heavy Calv the center, and the axemen the right flank. The ______ are gaps between the formations, though not too big, just to neatly seperate the formation types.

Eventually in a battle, you start losing men ....


____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So the center reinforce both sides....

:heavycavalry: ___:heavycavalry:___ :heavycavalry: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So as you see, while the flanks have 4 men , the center has one, being so weak. That is what happens to Generals eventually when they help out their friends. Though their friends are still strong. That is why our tribe doesn't put much focus on a General, but rather squads of people to help people in thier own squads or too attack people in thier area only.

Though sometimes major offensives are required and all member are requested to send troops, if they are weak, then we usually ask them to send support too the tribes who are near the fighting, too defend them in case of retaliation. While the stronger members are attacking. Also, we have discovered it is best not to attack the tribal elite, but rather the more common (members) people who have no rank.

For a member will more readily quit a tribe then an aristocrat because an aristocrat has power and privileges and won't want to lose those privileges. So we target the tribal members, we have learned from this tactic that it reduces the size and power of the tribe drastically. At the beginning of World 6, the tribe had 13 member and had that amount for quite some time, but since we started attacking them, they lost almost half their members and now have 7.

Though we attacked the nobility there, becuase cut off the head, and the body dies. It works well in small tribes like the one we went up and still are against. The Baron and Recruiter of the tribe gave up and went to another tribe and so did 4 other members, which by the way, we promptly stopped attacks against them as promised.

The war in which my tribe is in is not one of land, power, money but rather revenge. Revenge is best served cold, and we have let it chill in the freezer for quite sometime. The only Aristocracy in that tribe now is the leader, so we have seized attacks against him, and diverted them to the members.

Real war tactics work well in this game, and if you look around many people quote Sun Tzu, Napoleon, and other military masterminds.

One such tactic we have also used, which proves very effective, is too use propaganda letters. Rather then drop them from airplanes, we mail them directly to the member. This creates a private agreement which is just between us and them, with them losing nothing at all, except their membership in that tribe. Does not the sound of peace of leaving a certain tribe and joining another sound better then the axes on your trees, swords cutting your wheat, and animals moaning in pain from enemy troops?

It works, and I advise each of you to implement this. Though in the other worlds it may be harder to implement since many are so entrenched in well defended villages and such. Also with them all leaving, it lessens the number of people to eliminate, for only the most loyal and radical will stay, and really in the end thats who you want to get rid of.

As for King Valkyrik, please do implement these strategies, and may they bring you glory, fame, and power. This is for all others too. If by chance you put my name in ranking, you will see I am not all big and powerful, but this is just one more instance in .....

i'm not reading a post that long...

 

[DeletedUser8472]

you

I have to congratulate myself for reading that. Thanks man, thanks for giving me a great history lesson in battles. Hey you want some history? Let's look at Napoleon he leads a huge force into Russia and most of them die in russia cold, we are talking 100,000s. Then he comes back and leads another campaign to failure loses everything. Then because he cares so much he escapes punishment rebuilds his army and is defeated again. Not that that had anything to do with tw. Ok I know your trying to be serious but your inexperience at this game is to easy to see. Ex: you think a general can suck at maintaining his own village but lead others to attack. You think 300 spears is a large force...Try attacking someone with that ok? You think this game reflects reality....

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually lardingd,

It would be more : Highland Scot ........ a Scot from the Highlands; a Highlander.

As for the 80 point general .......

Your think in an old mindset for generals. You think Generals have to be in the fray of the fight, leading the charge, the biggest ans strongest of them all.

Yet that does not have to be so.

In my tribe we honor a person who can plan out a campaign and create tactics and let the members do their duty to the tribe, rather then to the general. IN my tribe it is ones duty to protect the tribe, help the tribe, and the same for it's members.

A strong general in might is only as good as long as where his army can be. A strong general can be weakened by aiding too many people, having too many offenses, or be strong and help very little to the other tribe members. IN our tribe, we try to have people send what they can to help another, so in stead of big 100 spear support groups, we send 10-15 each which turns out to be 300+ men, and everybody is still strong.

In Napoleon tactics, the center is the weakest spot. In this case the General is the weakest. You see, back in Napoleon's time, the center aided the two flanks. Let me interupt with a drawing ....

____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

This is an example formation, no tactical advantage really, but too explain Napoleon's idea. The Spearmen are the left flank, the Heavy Calv the center, and the axemen the right flank. The ______ are gaps between the formations, though not too big, just to neatly seperate the formation types.

Eventually in a battle, you start losing men ....


____ :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: :heavycavalry: ____ :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So the center reinforce both sides....

:heavycavalry: ___:heavycavalry:___ :heavycavalry: :axemen: :axemen: :axemen:

So as you see, while the flanks have 4 men , the center has one, being so weak. That is what happens to Generals eventually when they help out their friends. Though their friends are still strong. That is why our tribe doesn't put much focus on a General, but rather squads of people to help people in thier own squads or too attack people in thier area only.

Though sometimes major offensives are required and all member are requested to send troops, if they are weak, then we usually ask them to send support too the tribes who are near the fighting, too defend them in case of retaliation. While the stronger members are attacking. Also, we have discovered it is best not to attack the tribal elite, but rather the more common (members) people who have no rank.

For a member will more readily quit a tribe then an aristocrat because an aristocrat has power and privileges and won't want to lose those privileges. So we target the tribal members, we have learned from this tactic that it reduces the size and power of the tribe drastically. At the beginning of World 6, the tribe had 13 member and had that amount for quite some time, but since we started attacking them, they lost almost half their members and now have 7.

Though we attacked the nobility there, becuase cut off the head, and the body dies. It works well in small tribes like the one we went up and still are against. The Baron and Recruiter of the tribe gave up and went to another tribe and so did 4 other members, which by the way, we promptly stopped attacks against them as promised.

The war in which my tribe is in is not one of land, power, money but rather revenge. Revenge is best served cold, and we have let it chill in the freezer for quite sometime. The only Aristocracy in that tribe now is the leader, so we have seized attacks against him, and diverted them to the members.

Real war tactics work well in this game, and if you look around many people quote Sun Tzu, Napoleon, and other military masterminds.

One such tactic we have also used, which proves very effective, is too use propaganda letters. Rather then drop them from airplanes, we mail them directly to the member. This creates a private agreement which is just between us and them, with them losing nothing at all, except their membership in that tribe. Does not the sound of peace of leaving a certain tribe and joining another sound better then the axes on your trees, swords cutting your wheat, and animals moaning in pain from enemy troops?

It works, and I advise each of you to implement this. Though in the other worlds it may be harder to implement since many are so entrenched in well defended villages and such. Also with them all leaving, it lessens the number of people to eliminate, for only the most loyal and radical will stay, and really in the end thats who you want to get rid of.

As for King Valkyrik, please do implement these strategies, and may they bring you glory, fame, and power. This is for all others too. If by chance you put my name in ranking, you will see I am not all big and powerful, but this is just one more instance in .....

I think that this is an extremely good post. I read it all.

 

[DeletedUser]

I have to congratulate myself for reading that. Thanks man, thanks for giving me a great history lesson in battles. Hey you want some history? Let's look at Napoleon he leads a huge force into Russia and most of them die in russia cold, we are talking 100,000s. Then he comes back and leads another campaign to failure loses everything. Then because he cares so much he escapes punishment rebuilds his army and is defeated again. Not that that had anything to do with tw. Ok I know your trying to be serious but your inexperience at this game is to easy to see. Ex: you think a general can suck at maintaining his own village but lead others to attack. You think 300 spears is a large force...Try attacking someone with that ok? You think this game reflects reality....

Ah you must always look at the negative and forget the positive. Though in darkness, there is light. In this instance we must congratulate the Russians in his winter campaign ... they used a scorched earth tactic, but used it retreating rather then advancing (Sherman advanced using this tactic). This can relate to long campaigns .... If a tribe mobilizes against another tribe, the defending tribe is best to defeat the nearby opponents rather then those far away , even if they are very powerful. For the nearer villages will be able to rebuild and send their troops faster then the far away players, and they will hit quicker and more often.

I did not say that strength was nothing, my tribe just thinks that tactical knowledge holds more then strength, too many times have thousands of men died in battles becuase of blunt force, while other times small armies have defeated much larger opponents by using tricks and taking key positions.

As for 300 spears, that is alot to me in World 6, in which I try to keep all my conversations about, unlike some who talk about the other worlds.

 

[DeletedUser8472]

ok

further off topic: Napoleon won russia. He had their capitol the Russians fled. However, since when he did something he did it all out, he went after them. Maybe some Russian intelligence, but it was the turning point of Napoleon's strategic superiority. Wait...am i supporting your point:icon_eek:

 

[DeletedUser]

further off topic: Napoleon won russia. He had their capitol the Russians fled. However, since when he did something he did it all out, he went after them. Maybe some Russian intelligence, but it was the turning point of Napoleon's strategic superiority. Wait...am i supporting your point:icon_eek:

I do not know, but too tell you perhaps why the Russians did so. The Russians knew that they could not win against Napoleon so they decided to let a faithful ally and sometimes foe of their to help ... Russian Winter. What use is a capital is your troops are starving because all the crops are brunt, many of the buildings are, and its cold?

The Russians were actually waiting for Napoleon to leave becuase they could just waltz right back into the capital and rebuild. It is better to loose a capital then a country. They did so too, becuase Napoleon left after a while, and his gains paled in comparison of his losses.

 

[DeletedUser8472]

hello

hi scot I think we both know about napoleon so reciting this is just spamming the forums. What I mean is that Napoleon was beat by newer tacticians with less experience...

 

[DeletedUser]

hi scot I think we both know about napoleon so reciting this is just spamming the forums. What I mean is that Napoleon was beat by newer tacticians with less experience...

Good observation, one I must admit I missed .... but yes I do think it supports me. None the less though, some things work better then others, and other times, not so well. Maybe I should create a strategy thread.

 

[DeletedUser8472]

yah

A strategy thread eh? Would anyone really post good ones? It doesn't seem like the wisest thing to do...

 

[DeletedUser]

i got qouted, i'm so excited :icon_razz:
my opinons..
the best strategy is the one you know but everyone else does not. this is a very simple and hopefully reason point.

let's not forget hitler. he strategically slaughtered millions of people and was an amazing general and he only had an 8th grade education :icon_eek:

i'm partial to any post having to do with strategic war or management and i agree with..reiner? i think..i forgot the who agreed as well.. that highland's ridiculously long post was very informative and good use for the spare time you have.

i think part of the reason any great general gets defeated in the end is he gets cocky and bites off more then he\she can chew. therefore other than being good with tactics a good war officer should also be humble.

*i'm very proud of myself, i took off topic conversations and fused them into on topic conversations without spamming :icon_biggrin: *

 

[DeletedUser8472]

hmmm

From my understanding of European history. It was lose lose for Hitler and Napoleon. Both their military might seemed to stem from over the top confidence. Without this they would have never gotten high up enough to lose. Unfortunately there are things we can learn from both to perhaps for scot's sake apply to t.w. For napoleon there are other tacticians and other strategies just because you took out the best at one point won't mean you'll stay the best(absolutly no bearing in world 6 for...a long time) For hitler you can't fight the world by yourself and defend itally. In tw not all allies are worth defending, not all people are worth making into enemies. <-both cases very simplified.

 

[DeletedUser]

Which is why I try to focus on the people, not the General.

The people supply the majority of the men to fight
The people supply the majority of the resources to fight.
The people supply the majority of the point in a tribe (making it look tougher)

The people are the tribe, and with the people the tribe would be little less then a tea party between powerful people.


.... can you imagine Napoleon, Hitler, and Stalin having a tea party?

A General is only as good as his army (size and usage), an army is only good as the people in it (size and usage), a person is only as good as they are.

So it all gets down to the individual. When I see a tribe I see 30 (whatever the size) separate people, and what can I do to change them into something I want to happen.

 

[DeletedUser]

also i find that when a general is aquainted with his army he can command them better by assigning them tasks suited to their strengths, *this has no historical refercne that i know of but it can be seen when any commanding officer forms a friendly relationship with his soldiers*
so sum1 with good people skills would in my mind also help one become a better general.

 

[DeletedUser8472]

ouch

It's slightly off topic guys, but I think an elite player 2 3 or who knows how many somewhere is skimming through this thread thinking n00bs.