I see alot of posts from my W21 friends. (I'm mac555 on that world), but I'm posting as a long standing member of one of the oldest worlds, W3.
Ive read almost all of this thread and want to put in my 2 cents for the super-old worlds. I'm unsure of the politics of Worlds 1 and 2, but with the rules previously proposed, W3 would never end. While my side is taking more villages than my enemies, it is at a snail's pace in comparison to what it would take for 100% control. We have 266 players so now we will have to lose 66 players to get the final reduced 1/5 noble price?
I have one more question regarding tribe rank:
The overall dominance of the top 2 tribes must be at least 85%
In W3, the top tribe (the bad guys :icon_twisted
has 93,000 villages, it stands alone as its enemies (the good guys :icon_wink
have 66,000, 60,000 and 48,000 villages respectively in three different tribes. (for a total of 174,000 villages)
Yes, I know that's not enough to win right now. But my question is: would those three tribes (aka the "good guys" have to merge to knock the large single enemy tribe? Or in this case, does the rank not matter because the enemy is in one tribe while the close allies are in three tribes?
This is why, again, I appreciate the mods understanding the subtle differences between the worlds. Yes it would be easier on the mods to have one list of rules for endgame for all worlds. But seriously, no one who signed up for worlds 1-5 would even have dreamed about endgame when they started. Now that the game has grown and changed, I wouldn't start a new world with a clear vision on how to win. I don't want to be stuck on another world for 5 more years. :icon_razz: