Discussion on the Game

[DeletedUser]

While yes point wise i am weaker that does not say my troups are any diffrent.

You just proved yourself to not be intelligent enough in regards to this game to even bother debating with. Both players mentioned are top 10 on the world. Both have most likely hauled very close to 1,000,000 resources from farming to get and maintain said ranks. Therefore it's a safe bet that while they are only four times your points, they have at least ten to twenty times your troops.

 

[DeletedUser]

points are an indication of troops. You could not be rank 1 without a very nice troop count, you could also not have an even comparable troop count to the rank 1 player (or even most of the top 20) at 314 points. The farm/building levels just don't add up to enough.

Only just saw this and felt I should reply.

You're just another player who plays for himself. You want rank 1, you like the attention it gets you, yet you are probably utterly useless at trbal coordination, and have most likely played on 90% of the worlds released since you joined TW. Now, I'm not flaming you, so don't start yelling and waving your arms int he hope that it will deter me from posting against them, like some people are on these forums.

A player like silverflyingwolf is obviously in it for the long-run. If you stay low points, build up troops and wait before building an academy, you can get a better village that you won't have to waste resources building later on, and you can continue nobling the bigger villages and producing troops. But as I said, anyone who strives to be even top20 early game is in general a short-term player, and will leave when the next world comes out, or when their rank is threatened by war.

I have played 3 main worlds in 4 years playing, all very successfully. Even managed to get a top10 rank in the most recent one for a shot time. Each time I've played, I've seen the long-term players start outside the top20 and eventually move into the top20 when the top20 early gamers quit.

 

[DeletedUser]

But as I said, anyone who strives to be even top20 early game is in general a short-term player, and will leave when the next world comes out, or when their rank is threatened by war.

Clearly.


1 cer-berus Devils 12.008.207 1221 9835
1 cer-berus Hug 1.190.987 123 9683
15 Barney.Stinson Mafiya 1.298 1 1298

Or not. He's rank 15 here, and rank one on two other worlds, both of which he has over a million points on.

Next theory?

 

[DeletedUser]

Remember the story that is told as we are kids. The rabbit lost to the turtle, slower is sometimes better if done right. Goodnight everyone and I'll be expecting hate-mail, attacks and such tomorrow morning ^^

 

[DeletedUser]

Clearly.


1 cer-berus Devils 12.008.207 1221 9835
1 cer-berus Hug 1.190.987 123 9683
15 Barney.Stinson Mafiya 1.298 1 1298

Or not. He's rank 15 here, and rank one on two other worlds, both of which he has over a million points on.

Next theory?

Re-read my post, and try and find where I said 'Every single player who ever gets in the top20 ever in TW history'. Please read properly before trying to flame me.

 

[DeletedUser]

Re-read my post, and try and find where I said 'Every single player who ever gets in the top20 ever in TW history'. Please read properly before trying to flame me.

Your entire post was fundamentally flawed.

"A Humble Player" has been top twenty on one world ever, and he had two other co-players, not at all the elitist startup whore you painted him to be.

Being "in it for the long run" requires growing fast enough to survive long enough for there to "be a long run".

For some reason rubbish players are always claiming to be "late game players" without seeming to realize that on every world you must start with 1 village and work your way towards late game,and that it doesn't matter how good you might be at 5 million points if you can't survive till that stage.

simply put staying "low on points and building troops" is stupid, to the extreme. Any player worth mentioning has the ability to run barracks, stable, workshop, and HQ, all 24/7 resulting in rapid point and troop gain.

 

[DeletedUser]

Your entire post was fundamentally flawed.

"A Humble Player" has been top twenty on one world ever, and he had two other co-players, not at all the elitist startup whore you painted him to be.

Being "in it for the long run" requires growing fast enough to survive long enough for there to "be a long run".

For some reason rubbish players are always claiming to be "late game players" without seeming to realize that on every world you must start with 1 village and work your way towards late game,and that it doesn't matter how good you might be at 5 million points if you can't survive till that stage.

simply put staying "low on points and building troops" is stupid, to the extreme. Any player worth mentioning has the ability to run barracks, stable, workshop, and HQ, all 24/7 resulting in rapid point and troop gain.

I was responding to his post, I wasn't responding to his history. Don't talk such rubbish. As for 'you have to grow fast to last long', thats more rubbish. I started on the rim in W4 about 3 months late and I quit at 7mil points after 2-3 years. Tell me thats not long-run.

In order to work your way up without being nobled, you don't require more points than everyone else. As hard as this may be for you to comprehend, it is possible to do well and fight bigger players while having under half their points early on. I should know, I've done it.

Seriously, your whole post is just 'MOAR POINTZ MEENZ U BETTA PLAYA!' Just stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[ackcody]

I was responding to his post, I wasn't responding to his history. Don't talk such rubbish. As for 'you have to grow fast to last long', thats more rubbish. I started on the rim in W4 about 3 months late and I quit at 7mil points after 2-3 years. Tell me thats not long-run.

In order to work your way up without being nobled, you don't require more points than everyone else. As hard as this may be for you to comprehend, it is possible to do well and fight bigger players while having under half their points early on. I should know, I've done it.

Seriously, your whole post is just 'MOAR POINTZ MEENZ U BETTA PLAYA!' Just stop embarrassing yourself.

Doesn't it?
This game is based on points.
The rankings are based on points...

Players strive to have the most what?
Tribes strive to have the most what?

 

[DeletedUser]

Doesn't it?
This game is based on points.
The rankings are based on points...

Players strive to have the most what?
Tribes strive to have the most what?

Nowhere in my post did I say anything about the goals of the game. I'm talking about the fact that humble is saying more points = higher skill, which is rubbish. Most startup players can't hack it after 50k points, which is when the game really gets going.

Also, not sure what tribes you have been in, but on 2 of my 3 worlds, I've been part of tribes that have striven to be the best and most feared, not the highest ranked.

 

[ackcody]

Also, not sure what tribes you have been in, but on 2 of my 3 worlds, I've been part of tribes that have striven to be the best and most feared, not the highest ranked.

urdoinitrong

 

[DeletedUser]

urdoinitrong

Doing what wrong?

 

[ackcody]

Pretty sure I quoted correctly.

 

[DeletedUser]

Doesn't it?
This game is based on points.
The rankings are based on points...

Players strive to have the most what?
Tribes strive to have the most what?

Now that depends on the player, A massive amount of players now a days just want to have a huge OD.

Tribes don't really strive for points I'd say but that does play a part in getting ranks but what's the point in just having a rank and loads of points and then not having anything to back it up?

You can say the game is built on the concept of having points to get higher ranks, which would be correct to a degree depending on what kind of player you ask. BUT, it also depends on if that player knows how to balance his troop/point ratio =]

 

[DeletedUser]

Haha, good point Mr.Goblin

 

[DeletedUser]

Since the 'Tribes currently doing better than you expected' thread was completely derailed, I decided to take the offtopic posts from there and make a new thread for them in here. Enjoy. -.-

 

[DeletedUser]

So now it is better to be a point whore than a troup whore?

 

[A humble player]

You are very wrong on that one ...

And nowhere in my statements did i say i matched the top players. READ you learned that in kindergarden.

Umm, right...I said something about you couldn't have troops matching theres, you said i was wrong.

Only just saw this and felt I should reply.

You're just another player who plays for himself. You want rank 1, you like the attention it gets you, yet you are probably utterly useless at trbal coordination, and have most likely played on 90% of the worlds released since you joined TW. Now, I'm not flaming you, so don't start yelling and waving your arms int he hope that it will deter me from posting against them, like some people are on these forums.

A player like silverflyingwolf is obviously in it for the long-run. If you stay low points, build up troops and wait before building an academy, you can get a better village that you won't have to waste resources building later on, and you can continue nobling the bigger villages and producing troops. But as I said, anyone who strives to be even top20 early game is in general a short-term player, and will leave when the next world comes out, or when their rank is threatened by war.

I have played 3 main worlds in 4 years playing, all very successfully. Even managed to get a top10 rank in the most recent one for a shot time. Each time I've played, I've seen the long-term players start outside the top20 and eventually move into the top20 when the top20 early gamers quit.

I played on w4, w11 (until 4mil), w 45, 47, 49, 50 and 51. That isn't even a 7th of teh worlds, and I've only ever been rank 1 once, and that was on co.uk. I played shortly on w32 as well, on an 8.5 mil account, and back on my first world duked a tribe in a world war, and played as a def player to help my tribe more, but you are right, I am a rank chaser :S
Not to mention that for the past 10 worlds or so, I have been crusading for a tribe greater than self based tribe, and have been shunned by a few players because of it.

Remember the story that is told as we are kids. The rabbit lost to the turtle, slower is sometimes better if done right. Goodnight everyone and I'll be expecting hate-mail, attacks and such tomorrow morning ^^

That is only true if the hare slows down, lodda for example doesn't.

Your entire post was fundamentally flawed.

"A Humble Player" has been top twenty on one world ever, and he had two other co-players, not at all the elitist startup whore you painted him to be.

Being "in it for the long run" requires growing fast enough to survive long enough for there to "be a long run".

For some reason rubbish players are always claiming to be "late game players" without seeming to realize that on every world you must start with 1 village and work your way towards late game,and that it doesn't matter how good you might be at 5 million points if you can't survive till that stage.

simply put staying "low on points and building troops" is stupid, to the extreme. Any player worth mentioning has the ability to run barracks, stable, workshop, and HQ, all 24/7 resulting in rapid point and troop gain.

twice on .net, once on co.uk, once on beta. 4 times in total, but twice were under an hour. On co.uk, I currently play a rank 2 account with only 1 coplayer
But In general, I agree.

 

[DeletedUser]

I actually would like to correct this. Why should i want to be on top when the most amusing part is sitting on bottom and watching everyone else makes fools of themselves. It is much more amusing to watch other players fight and senseless argue and take the bait, hook line and sinker from a player like me whose only real concern is how much amusement you can provide me before I get bored of you? Now wheather or not your method of growing villages is good or not, it isn't for everyone. Just cause you hold a rank does not mean you can always back it, a lession I was taught there is always, always someone better than you out there the question is whether or not they care to try. What is right for you, is not always right for others. Some grow and do better using diffrent stragies ad village builds than you. Again it is down to who is lazy and who isn't. What gives you the right though to say that anyone has to build "their" village the way that you deem si right, who are you? You do not own this game and you are not a mod thus whatever way others want to grow their village you have on right to say it is good or bad, now wheather it gets them to the top that is their own problem not yours.

(Call me what you wish because of this but instead of flaming me how about actually sending attacks otherwise all you are is talk and no action. Plus I'm not afraid to call my own self half of what any of you say afterall action not words win in this game and your action and words amuse me to no end ^^)

 

[A humble player]

And I never care to actually be that good in this game. I actually have a life and someone I love who matters a bit more.

First of all: :lol:
As soon as you bring RL into this, you loose any credibility you might have had, not to mention your assumptions make no sense, especially to those they regard.

You are right i don't have troups to match the topplayers but I don't want to either as I've said before I care about having fun and watching you all take the bait.

If you don't want to play competitively, why play? Is there some alternative goal you have, to waste some of your time aimlessly, or what?

I'm sitting here laughing my butt off amused at how serious you guys are taking this arguement. Either way it goes how each player plays the game there is no right and there is no wrong there is only what we as a player see right and wrong.

I'm just having a little fun too, it may seem serious, but I'm arguing for no reason other than to make you sound the fool.I can't argue about right and wrong, but I can about and and good, and yours certainly isn't good.

The same goes for the concept of good and evil, what you see as evil maybe seen as good to another. So what you say is growing correctly may not be what others see as correct. Rank means nothing if you can't back it.

What does that even mean? I am rank 1, I can't back it...I can;t back up my being rank 1? What? :icon_rolleyes:

I am not gonna say I'm the best nor will ever be or want to be but i am amused at you two actually attempting to argue with someone who has no care in the world for this world.

It is entertainment, nothing more than wasting time

 

[DeletedUser]

What creditability? Hoesntly I don't care to be a fool. I'd rather be a fool than a king. Yes in truth this world is to waste time beside it says nowhere in the rules i have to play like everyone else? But honestly I doubt anyone ever stays in rank 1 long either way it goes at least this early in the game. Yea now you are rank 1 till when someone better than you steps up. It happens and it will happen to you just like it happens to everyone else. Even in a game ther eis always someone better.