End-World

[DeletedUser]

End-World
(not to be confused with Westworld or Waterworld)

Forums r very quiet so i thought id throw something out there for peeps to chew over... the very real predicament of 'end-world' makes for an interesting discussion...

Looking at the W16 world map its apparent that only 1 of 3 tribes can win this world, obviously totally open for debate and posturing on who out of those 3 will go on and take the title, but the fairest starting point is to say any of the top 3 tribes can win - C², plight, LSHRV. I thought i'd check out all of the other oldest worlds situations to try to see who is closest to declaring a winner and consequently ending the world... I looked through the top 22 worlds data and came up with the following observations...

The world with the most decisive leader is W12 with DNY on 978million pts and the next larget tribe being SUDDEN on 56million. The top 63 players are all in DNY (apart from a couple of tribeless players) and the top ODD players are in SUDDEN. So they both look at war to me and therefore the winner should win the world, ok lets be honest theres only gonna be one winner! lol... This world also has the least number of players left with points at 230 players.

http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=78917

Apart from W12 none of the others look closer to end than ours, at least thats my opinion.

We have around 400 players left playing inh W16 and that seems to be the average amount of players left in the first 22 worlds. W10 is next lowest on players after W12 with 282, the most are on W17 with 807 players with pts left. W21 seems very weird with thousands of low pointer players which shows it with over 10k players left!

What i think is significant is that our top player, Bundybear, holds 7.9mill pts and this is the lowest point top player on all worlds until u reach W27... The next lowest pointscoring top player is on W21 with 8.9mill pts. I know this to be another slow world so maybe its connected with this.

The reasons i think we are next closest to 'end-game' after W12 is as follows : -

1. All other World Dominance maps show alot of 'significant' sized tribes, more than W16 has. Even W13 where all the main tribes are families still has alot more different colours on the map than here ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=117413 )

2. We appear to be losing players at a faster rate that other worlds. This is very hard to make conclusions through the data so only an opinion. I base this on the fact we are the slowest world and players get bored quicker :icon_confused:

3. We have a major war going on in W16 right now. I cant see many major wars going on in the other worlds, so their player attrition rate will be slower than ours. W7 seems to have the only world war that can be classed as 'end-game' with WE family against FxF. Theyre the top 2 tribes and pretty much split the world map ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=101780 ).

4. The average top player accounts is around 20mill points across all worlds and this indicates to me that our top players have plenty of room to grow and handle bigger accounts. Whereas other worlds r probably maxing capacity for one player (even with sitting and account-sharing) to handle. Incidentally the largest player is Ysiek on W2 with 46mill points ( http://www.twstats.com/en2/index.php?page=player&id=84913 ).

5. The amount of times a village changes hands is significant, and although i cant see an easy way to process the data i reckon that villages on our world change hands the least. This is important cos it shows that the vast majority of noblings from this time on (in all 22 worlds under observation) that ours r more likely to stay under current tribal ownership. I repeat that this is very very hard to judge/conclude but is important to determine how close we are to end-game if our villages change hands the least.

6. Our worldmap just looks the most 'clearcut'. 3 colours dominating it with a couple of dribbles of smaller colours...

The only factor i can see that goes against W16 being next (after W12) to end is that our Global Nobling Rate (GNR) is lower than all the other worlds. The total daily noblings on all other worlds seem to be nobling around 400 villages per day, some as high as 600 per day. W4 and W14 are nobling at the same GNR as us, where about 200 villages per day change hands. This is obviously slow and will therefore drag out the world.

One world of interest concerning GNR is W18 where APOC family have declared on 'the rest of the world' ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=165287 ). Theyre on a GNR of about 250 per day with the vast majority of the noblings going to APOC. But, in my opinion they have 2 factors going against them to why that world wont reach end-game any time soon. Firstly, they dont appear to be at war with the next largest tribe [BA] family, so even tho they claim to be at war with the rest of the world their main competitor is growing on the sidelines lol. Secondly, considering the top 2 tribes are families theres always potential for these tribes to break away and create more wars.

Anyway, like i said at the start, i just wanted to give us all something to discuss considering the forums are quiet... lets have a laugh at other worlds for a change instead of flaming each other! :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser]

good post ende, thats a hell of a lot of work you put into that lol :icon_cool:

 

[DeletedUser]

Very nice analysis. Another important point for how this world has developed and how it will develop is our high noble price relative to the world speed which makes this one of the slowest worlds. This also changes tactics, with much more emphasis put on killing nobles at home than other things (relative to other worlds).


Obviously I have a horse in this race so I won't go on about how my tribe has an excellent shot at winning. However I believe this world will simply come down to activity and tribal leadership (aimed at keeping up activity).

 

[DeletedUser]

End-World
(not to be confused with Westworld or Waterworld)

Forums r very quiet so i thought id throw something out there for peeps to chew over... the very real predicament of 'end-world' makes for an interesting discussion...

Looking at the W16 world map its apparent that only 1 of 3 tribes can win this world, obviously totally open for debate and posturing on who out of those 3 will go on and take the title, but the fairest starting point is to say any of the top 3 tribes can win - C², plight, LSHRV. I thought i'd check out all of the other oldest worlds situations to try to see who is closest to declaring a winner and consequently ending the world... I looked through the top 22 worlds data and came up with the following observations...

The world with the most decisive leader is W12 with DNY on 978million pts and the next larget tribe being SUDDEN on 56million. The top 63 players are all in DNY (apart from a couple of tribeless players) and the top ODD players are in SUDDEN. So they both look at war to me and therefore the winner should win the world, ok lets be honest theres only gonna be one winner! lol... This world also has the least number of players left with points at 230 players.

http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=78917

Apart from W12 none of the others look closer to end than ours, at least thats my opinion.

We have around 400 players left playing inh W16 and that seems to be the average amount of players left in the first 22 worlds. W10 is next lowest on players after W12 with 282, the most are on W17 with 807 players with pts left. W21 seems very weird with thousands of low pointer players which shows it with over 10k players left!

What i think is significant is that our top player, Bundybear, holds 7.9mill pts and this is the lowest point top player on all worlds until u reach W27... The next lowest pointscoring top player is on W21 with 8.9mill pts. I know this to be another slow world so maybe its connected with this.

The reasons i think we are next closest to 'end-game' after W12 is as follows : -

1. All other World Dominance maps show alot of 'significant' sized tribes, more than W16 has. Even W13 where all the main tribes are families still has alot more different colours on the map than here ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=117413 )

2. We appear to be losing players at a faster rate that other worlds. This is very hard to make conclusions through the data so only an opinion. I base this on the fact we are the slowest world and players get bored quicker :icon_confused:

3. We have a major war going on in W16 right now. I cant see many major wars going on in the other worlds, so their player attrition rate will be slower than ours. W7 seems to have the only world war that can be classed as 'end-game' with WE family against FxF. Theyre the top 2 tribes and pretty much split the world map ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=101780 ).

4. The average top player accounts is around 20mill points across all worlds and this indicates to me that our top players have plenty of room to grow and handle bigger accounts. Whereas other worlds r probably maxing capacity for one player (even with sitting and account-sharing) to handle. Incidentally the largest player is Ysiek on W2 with 46mill points ( http://www.twstats.com/en2/index.php?page=player&id=84913 ).

5. The amount of times a village changes hands is significant, and although i cant see an easy way to process the data i reckon that villages on our world change hands the least. This is important cos it shows that the vast majority of noblings from this time on (in all 22 worlds under observation) that ours r more likely to stay under current tribal ownership. I repeat that this is very very hard to judge/conclude but is important to determine how close we are to end-game if our villages change hands the least.

6. Our worldmap just looks the most 'clearcut'. 3 colours dominating it with a couple of dribbles of smaller colours...

The only factor i can see that goes against W16 being next (after W12) to end is that our Global Nobling Rate (GNR) is lower than all the other worlds. The total daily noblings on all other worlds seem to be nobling around 400 villages per day, some as high as 600 per day. W4 and W14 are nobling at the same GNR as us, where about 200 villages per day change hands. This is obviously slow and will therefore drag out the world.

One world of interest concerning GNR is W18 where APOC family have declared on 'the rest of the world' ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=165287 ). Theyre on a GNR of about 250 per day with the vast majority of the noblings going to APOC. But, in my opinion they have 2 factors going against them to why that world wont reach end-game any time soon. Firstly, they dont appear to be at war with the next largest tribe [BA] family, so even tho they claim to be at war with the rest of the world their main competitor is growing on the sidelines lol. Secondly, considering the top 2 tribes are families theres always potential for these tribes to break away and create more wars.

Anyway, like i said at the start, i just wanted to give us all something to discuss considering the forums are quiet... lets have a laugh at other worlds for a change instead of flaming each other! :icon_wink:

W27 and W18 are closer to the end than us, as well as W10. It may not be apparent, but if you've been following the wars of said worlds, you'd see that the progression has been that of a tribe that is losing, and will continue to lose. In W27, LIGHT loses villages daily without stopping the flow, and Shadow has advanced a full row of continents northward in the past month. In W18, the large family that was in the east has split and is also losing daily, and the people who tried to spark a revolution in Apoc were drawn back in eventually. In W10, CTRL defeated DDB and BORG, who are now split again after their merge and DDB is now 8AA8 or something along those lines.

1) Significant size means that they can actually take longer than us to finish, because they have more villages to noble. However, with the world speed of W16, that isn't a reality. However, they can cancel each other out under some extenuating circumstances. Still, size only makes their world slower.

2) Your assumption, however logical, is not based on fact. W10, for example, has less players than we do, and it is a faster world. Worlds tend to lose players to boredom, but even more lose players due to losing wars. And as you can see by the successes of CTRL and DNY in their worlds, they have less players than we do, but their world is faster. Whereas other, older worlds that aren't as close to finished, such as W9 and W8, have more players than us. I personally think that though world speed plays a factor in boredom, the age of the world is more influential, and the most influential factor is whether or not the world is close to over. To sum up what I mean, I'm saying that worlds are not losing players less quickly than us, for a lot of older worlds have less players than us, and some newer ones are fairly close.

3) I'm confused as to how you don't see the other world wars. In W1, it's Trap vs. HELL and WLE. In W2, it's LWS vs. everyone else. In W3, it's Cult (and C-NWO) and OT vs. D*DN or whatever their name is. In W4, it's LIFE and GX and AF vs. TBP F.. In W5, it's V V V vs. SCIOVA. In W6, it's a huge mess of everyone fighting. In W7, it's -WE- vs. FxF. In W8, it's Fenix and F.D vs. KNT and [DT]. In W9, it's DNS vs. TW. In W10, it's CTRL and TUBA vs. BORG and 8AA8. In W11, it's RASP vs. the world. In W12, DNY vs. everyone left. In W13, INSO vs. ORION. In W14, F0E vs. just about everyone else. In W15, a whole mess of everyone fighting. In W17, Wisdom vs. 13th and something up north, I forget what. In W18, Apoc vs. everyone. In W19, BRAINS and eastern coalition vs. ASYLUM. In W20, Prime vs. Everyone just about.

I mean, it's not hard to see that the wars are there. I follow most of the worlds on the server, and though I may be wrong on 1, 2, or maybe even 3 worlds, I'd hazard a guess at saying that W3, 7, 8, 9, 10, 12, 14, 18, 20, 26, and 27 at the very least, are closer than we are to finishing, and they all have rather large wars going on in them, though in some worlds (such as 10, 26, and 27) they are very close to finishing. Even 25 has a world war larger than ours, I'd say, and is closer to ending.

4) Yes, our players have plenty of room to handle larger accounts. But building the accounts is a lot harder here. I don't fully understand the purpose of this point, however.

5) While I agree that W16 probably has villages changing hands the least, it is not because W16 is close to end-game. In fact, that means that W16 is going to take the longest to reach end-game. By changing hands the least, the world will end much, much more slowly, because wars go more slowly. They don't change least because players aren't fighting hard, but because it's harder to fight, so to speak. So no, I don't find that it means the world is close to end-game. If they changed hands the least, and one tribe had clear dominance over the others in a war, that'd be fine. But as Plight is still a free agent, so to speak, as is what's left of BANG!, and c2 can only make headway against LSHRV so fast (as they have been steadily), I don't find that the world is even close to over.

6) Clear-cut only works against what you're claiming. If there were a lot of colors and one dominant color, such as in W26, 27, etc., then I'd agree with you. But there isn't. Check those worlds and you'll see what I mean. Also note how fast they make headway against each other. TNH in W26 had 14k villages just a week or two ago. They have players going inactive and are losing villages so heavily that they're down to 12k villages.

W18 is much, much closer to end-game. Higher rate of nobling means that when a tribe like Apoc gains the upper hand, they not only gain a faster rate of success, but they can kill players at a faster rate by nobling them and causing them to quit, hence a quicker rate of winning the world.

 

[DeletedUser90823]

As far as i can recall on world 4 GX are not at war with TBP F. TBP is at war with LIFE and AF only, Af is waring TBP and LIFE thats was what happening or that was the situation befor i quit to play here weather or not that has changed i don't thought i would just say that even though it's not relivent at all to we are the second closest to end game or not but i though i would clear that up..

 

[DeletedUser]

wel done u6s5l. u have managed to disagree with every single one of my points... ofc i disagree with your analysis :icon_biggrin:

1. the colours on the map is the absolute and main way of seeing if 1 tribe is close to winning the world whether u like it or not. And the fact is that apart from W12 no other tribe is even close to owning their world.

2. I did say 'in my opinion' cos i appreciate this point is hard to use facts or data.

3. I admit i dont know all the wars on different worlds so ur probably right here. Although these wars appear to be only drawing the worlds out longer and not making them finish quicker as your argument says. Again based on the amount of tribes existing on the dominance maps and the amount of noblings each top tribe is gaining daily.

4. The purpose of this point is completley relevant cos people are only human and can only manage a finite number of villages to play effectively. U appear to just be giong against this point for the sake of wanting to disagree with it.

5. Again another very relevant point which i dont think u fully understand. U base your opinion on whether its possible for 1 tribe to fully noble everything on the map, which game speed has relevance, but we all know that players quitting and tribes splitting is far more likely. This coupled with the villages not changing hands often indicates that players moving tribes is important (and some would argue likely). Kreamer and robonot for example.

6. show us a world with a more clearcut map than ours or W12. Possibly W7 but ive argued why i think that world will take longer than us in my original post.

And lastly ur including worlds outside of the 22 i looked at closely. Any outside that would be good to include if they truly look closer to endgame than us.

Adam - i thought W16 had half priced nobles and therefore wasnt an expensive noble world.. is that not the case?

 

[DeletedUser]

As far as i can recall on world 4 GX are not at war with TBP F. TBP is at war with LIFE and AF only, Af is waring TBP and LIFE thats was what happening or that was the situation befor i quit to play here weather or not that has changed i don't thought i would just say that even though it's not relivent at all to we are the second closest to end game or not but i though i would clear that up..

Like I said, I may be off. Thanks for the correction .

wel done u6s5l. u have managed to disagree with every single one of my points... ofc i disagree with your analysis :icon_biggrin:

1. the colours on the map is the absolute and main way of seeing if 1 tribe is close to winning the world whether u like it or not. And the fact is that apart from W12 no other tribe is even close to owning their world.

2. I did say 'in my opinion' cos i appreciate this point is hard to use facts or data.

3. I admit i dont know all the wars on different worlds so ur probably right here. Although these wars appear to be only drawing the worlds out longer and not making them finish quicker as your argument says. Again based on the amount of tribes existing on the dominance maps and the amount of noblings each top tribe is gaining daily.

4. The purpose of this point is completley relevant cos people are only human and can only manage a finite number of villages to play effectively. U appear to just be giong against this point for the sake of wanting to disagree with it.

5. Again another very relevant point which i dont think u fully understand. U base your opinion on whether its possible for 1 tribe to fully noble everything on the map, which game speed has relevance, but we all know that players quitting and tribes splitting is far more likely. This coupled with the villages not changing hands often indicates that players moving tribes is important (and some would argue likely). Kreamer and robonot for example.

6. show us a world with a more clearcut map than ours or W12. Possibly W7 but ive argued why i think that world will take longer than us in my original post.

And lastly ur including worlds outside of the 22 i looked at closely. Any outside that would be good to include if they truly look closer to endgame than us.

Adam - i thought W16 had half priced nobles and therefore wasnt an expensive noble world.. is that not the case?

Well, all of your points support the overarching claim that we are closest (besides W12) to ending this world, and I disagree with that, hence the rest must also be proven invalid or to work in my favor .

1. Yes, they are solid. But as I said, that only works in my favor. If it was one solid color and numerous other, smaller, drops of other color, one tribe would have more dominance. Look at this, for example:

http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=102268

I provided an example of how one color being solid only shows that this world is closer to ending than our own (W27, namely). Did you look at the worlds I provided? I think not, if you say that no world is close to ending in terms of one tribe owning most of the world.

2. I know, and I was providing my counter-opinion . And as this point isn't something we are contesting, as it's an opinion, let's re-number and exclude this 2.

3. Because of the wars, more players quit, and the world ends sooner. Unless you are suggesting that everyone will merge rather than war to the end, I don't see how the wars are dragging out the world :icon_neutral:.

4. I don't understand how the capacity of our players to play larger accounts influences how close we are to end-game. I just don't understand it, I'm not disagreeing with something I don't understand. If you could clarify, I could agree or disagree.

5. Ah, yes, players moving tribes helps the world end more quickly, as well as players quitting. But that's just my point. Because the world moves slower, players are more likely to quit of boredom than of losses in war. In a faster world, there are more losses, hence more people quit as a result. That means that the two are both reasons for quitting. However, in a faster world, a tribe such as Plight that still isn't at war also quits from boredom.

So on the one hand, we have Plight players quitting of boredom in our world, and LSHRV players quitting (and being replaced) for numerous reasons.

On the other, we have faster worlds, where tribes that sit out of wars have players quit from boredom, and the players in wars quit because they're being nobled and can't keep up.

Methinks the second hand has players quitting faster.

As far as players moving tribes, I think you'll find that merges are a lot more common in other worlds, but that doesn't mean that they end faster. A player changing sides didn't finish LSHRV completely, it only sped up the process. Sped up, but not accelerated the rate to the point where players in other worlds are quitting or dying off.

6. I pointed out several. W26 is more clear-cut than our own (keep in mind that [H] and Clear! are allies, and practically family since Clear beat [H] in a war earlier in the world). W27 is perhaps the best example. But as I said, clear-cut does not indicate any form of end-game closeness.

If the lines are clear cut, with numerous tribes who are all large, with none in complete dominance of the others, then wars go more slowly because the lines are harder to move (stacking is the cause). But if there is a tribe who has a large core cluster, though mixed with some other tribes, and is larger than all the rest; clear-cut doesn't mean anything. It is dominance that matters, and size, in terms of who is closest to ending their world. W12 isn't even that clear-cut, by your standards, DNY is just larger than everyone. Let me assure you, DNY's battle lines were nowhere near clear-cut half a year ago, but they still managed to gain all that dominance. So? I don't see your point :icon_neutral:.

I provided the ones that you asked for, outside of those 22, who are closer. You simply chose not to look, it appears :icon_sad:.

As for what adam says, let me tell you what I see him saying (correct me if I'm wrong, Adam):

1) W16 got noble prices slashed fairly late. - Most likely not what he's saying, but a possibility nonetheless.
2) W16 has the packet system. Unlike worlds with coins, when a noble is killed at home, the packets are permanently wasted. In a coin world, if a noble is killed at home, then you can simply rebuild him, and the coins are returned to your academy stores. Hence, more expensive nobles.

There we are .

 

[DeletedUser]

As for what adam says, let me tell you what I see him saying (correct me if I'm wrong, Adam):

1) W16 got noble prices slashed fairly late. - Most likely not what he's saying, but a possibility nonetheless.
2) W16 has the packet system. Unlike worlds with coins, when a noble is killed at home, the packets are permanently wasted. In a coin world, if a noble is killed at home, then you can simply rebuild him, and the coins are returned to your academy stores. Hence, more expensive nobles.

There we are .

I was talking about your second point, although now that I think about it the first is important as well. What I also mean is that due to the speed of W16, resources are produced slower, therefore the time it takes to store a packet is longer. The half-price packets are a wash since most of the older worlds have them and we are talking about relative speed.

 

[DeletedUser]

I haven't really kept up with other worlds, especially the older ones since they were mostly before my time. I just wanted to point out a couple of things:

I believe W21 just recently closed. I think that would explain the thousands of players with few points still remaining there.

Also, keep in mind that W27 was the world with the failed experiment of locked tribes that lasted for three months. I played that world for those first three months, and about another month after that, so I saw the devastating effects of it. So many people hated the three months locked in randomly generated tribes. I remember cases of the people voted leaders at the beginning going mad with power, and would make all of the forums hidden and only give the privileges to see them to those who sucked up to them. Players were forced to either stick around people they really disliked, or simply quit the world. Thousands quit. Even now you can see the effects looking at the W27 map, even though the locked tribes are long gone. It is much smaller that even newer worlds like W45.

So I don't believe that W27 can be used as an accurate example to which other worlds are compared.

 

[MichielK]

Very nice post, Ende. Some of us may not agree with it fully, but I think everyone respects and appreciates the amount of work you put into it.

Looking at the W16 world map its apparent that only 1 of 3 tribes can win this world, obviously totally open for debate and posturing on who out of those 3 will go on and take the title, but the fairest starting point is to say any of the top 3 tribes can win - C², plight, LSHRV.

While I don't want to pull this thread off track with PnP, I think including LSHRV in that group is wildly optimistic. They have been in a major war for 9 months, and have been unable to do more but take more than outlying clusters and the occasional retake. To think they will beat both C² and Plight to win the world seems like a huge stretch of the imagination.

We have around 400 players left playing inh W16 and that seems to be the average amount of players left in the first 22 worlds. W10 is next lowest on players after W12 with 282, the most are on W17 with 807 players with pts left. W21 seems very weird with thousands of low pointer players which shows it with over 10k players left!

As mentioned above, W21 closed relatively recently. It would also be interesting to see the amount of players left above a certain size, e.g. 100K or 1 million.

1. All other World Dominance maps show alot of 'significant' sized tribes, more than W16 has. Even W13 where all the main tribes are families still has alot more different colours on the map than here ( http://forum.tribalwars.net/showthread.php?t=117413 )

Very good point. I did an analysis of concentration of power in the past, and it consistently showed that the power in W16 was concentrated in less tribes than it was in other worlds. I have a theory about this, which I will explain below.

2. We appear to be losing players at a faster rate that other worlds. This is very hard to make conclusions through the data so only an opinion. I base this on the fact we are the slowest world and players get bored quicker :icon_confused:

I believe this is related to the conclusion of point 1. Since only a few tribes are serious factors in this world, active players are limited in their options. The amount of active tribes where they can find a home is simply very low.

4. The average top player accounts is around 20mill points across all worlds and this indicates to me that our top players have plenty of room to grow and handle bigger accounts. Whereas other worlds r probably maxing capacity for one player (even with sitting and account-sharing) to handle. Incidentally the largest player is Ysiek on W2 with 46mill points ( http://www.twstats.com/en2/index.php?page=player&id=84913 ).

Agreed. There is a lot of room to grow for all players on W16.

5. The amount of times a village changes hands is significant, and although i cant see an easy way to process the data i reckon that villages on our world change hands the least. This is important cos it shows that the vast majority of noblings from this time on (in all 22 worlds under observation) that ours r more likely to stay under current tribal ownership. I repeat that this is very very hard to judge/conclude but is important to determine how close we are to end-game if our villages change hands the least.

6. Our worldmap just looks the most 'clearcut'. 3 colours dominating it with a couple of dribbles of smaller colours...

These points are related. Since large areas of land are fully dominated by one tribe, many villages simply do not have a chance to change hands. After all, what is the risk for e.g. me to lose a K72 village this year?

The only factor i can see that goes against W16 being next (after W12) to end is that our Global Nobling Rate (GNR) is lower than all the other worlds. The total daily noblings on all other worlds seem to be nobling around 400 villages per day, some as high as 600 per day. W4 and W14 are nobling at the same GNR as us, where about 200 villages per day change hands. This is obviously slow and will therefore drag out the world.

This may be related to points 5 and 6. With large areas under control of one side, W16 players are more likely to be "stuck" nobling strong enemy villages rather than independents/tribeless villages, and those simply take longer.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok let me try to generalise my points for u6 so he can see my overall point from my 6 observations...

With the fact that all worlds from W1-W22 averaging 400 players left on each world this indicates a commonality between all those worlds and consequelty becomes the starting point of the investigation into judging which of those worlds stand out as being closer to endgame. The fact that our world has 3 very clear power bases, 3 tribes of players.

The other worlds still have many many more 'influential' tribes still in existance, some have united through families and others are even players playing solo. But this indicates that in those worlds the players left (around 400) have not united into single dominant tribes like we have here (and W12). The maps clearly show this by 3 dominant colours.

This indicates a couple of features which in my opinion show that a potential world winning tribe will find it harder to break free and win other worlds. The players probably tribe-hop alot more, tribes collapse more often (probably due to all the wars that u point out), new tribes are probably created more often, all those family tribes are probably prone to changing allieships. As for Allies, that is totally irrelevant because we all know that if 2 allies r left at the end of a world they are extremely likely to fight each other to decide the world which will draw out those worlds even longer!

All ive seen happen here is that the top 10 tribes have over time merged into each other which leaves us with the power 3 we see today.

Why this has only happend on our world (and maybe W7) is a question i cant answer...

NOTE: the fact that our players have the most room to grow due to us having the smallest top players can only mean that our top players have much more potential to become even more dominant and consequently even more influence over endgame. The other worlds where players r maxing out on the accounts being squeezed on managability limits thier gameplay and possibly even threat.

 

[DeletedUser]

Us having the smallest top player is misleading. It has to be looked at in terms of a percentage of points. I don't know the numbers on this, but I suspect its more than many.

 

[DeletedUser]

Us having the smallest top player is misleading. It has to be looked at in terms of a percentage of points. I don't know the numbers on this, but I suspect its more than many.

That has no effect on how many villages 1 player (with sitters and co-player) can handle with any effect. My point is how many villages 1 player can handle... and cos our top player is lowest it shows hes got a hell of alot more villages to add to his account , ie hes got the biggest potential growth infront of him... compared to the lareg players on other worlds who r playing on the edge of whats humanly possible...

Im not talking on how fast he can grow, just how many villages 1 player can play effectively.

 

[DeletedUser]

Ok let me try to generalise my points for u6 so he can see my overall point from my 6 observations...

With the fact that all worlds from W1-W22 averaging 400 players left on each world this indicates a commonality between all those worlds and consequelty becomes the starting point of the investigation into judging which of those worlds stand out as being closer to endgame. The fact that our world has 3 very clear power bases, 3 tribes of players.

The other worlds still have many many more 'influential' tribes still in existance, some have united through families and others are even players playing solo. But this indicates that in those worlds the players left (around 400) have not united into single dominant tribes like we have here (and W12). The maps clearly show this by 3 dominant colours.

This indicates a couple of features which in my opinion show that a potential world winning tribe will find it harder to break free and win other worlds. The players probably tribe-hop alot more, tribes collapse more often (probably due to all the wars that u point out), new tribes are probably created more often, all those family tribes are probably prone to changing allieships. As for Allies, that is totally irrelevant because we all know that if 2 allies r left at the end of a world they are extremely likely to fight each other to decide the world which will draw out those worlds even longer!

All ive seen happen here is that the top 10 tribes have over time merged into each other which leaves us with the power 3 we see today.

Why this has only happend on our world (and maybe W7) is a question i cant answer...

NOTE: the fact that our players have the most room to grow due to us having the smallest top players can only mean that our top players have much more potential to become even more dominant and consequently even more influence over endgame. The other worlds where players r maxing out on the accounts being squeezed on managability limits thier gameplay and possibly even threat.

However, as I pointed out, in worlds like 26, only one main power remains (if you count Clear! and [H] as the almost-family they are), and in W27, one dominant power remains as well. W10 has CTRL as dominant, however little you agree, but you haven't seen the chronology, hence your misinterpretation that CTRL isn't in power. W18 has Apoc as the dominant power, that's fairly clear. Because you haven't seen how the current wars have progressed and are going, you haven't seen that W10 is on the verge of becoming the next W12, as is W26, and 27, and some would argue W18 as well. I have seen the chronology for the past half year at least, hence I think I'm slightly more qualified to call that true. Unless someone with more experience, or who is in those worlds, disagrees of course.

Read my comment on your note. And I think you'll find that W13 is dominated by two allies, PWC and INSO, with ORION as the third power. And the war is fairly one-sided against ORION. Which seems to mean that after PWC and INSO finish ORION, they'll war. Methinks they are closer than us to end-game.

You only speculate in your note, and I disagree, but I confess. My 86 hour stint of no sleep has tired me out too much to even debate the point. Perhaps tomorrow .

 

[DeletedUser]

U6

Ive already shown the argument against why allies dont win worlds.. THEY DONT

When 2 allies become the last 2 tribes ni a world then they MUST fight each other. Either that or one must become the others family tribe. ANd i can assure u that a tribe does not want to become the 'academy' of the other and therefore they will fight. This is the main reason allies WILL NOT win a world. All it means is that once they clear out all other enemies they will have 1 massive and time consuming war against each other.

jurusu has also shown why W27 is a fail world and should not be included in any of this analysis. It stands as a failed TW experiment. Sure itll end soon but there is a hell of alot of room on that world to grow lol

Yep W18 falls under this problem, [BA] is not fighting APOC and therefore either have an endworld agreement or theyre allies. Either way they will have to fight at some point, according to my argument above.

 

[DeletedUser]

ok lets add another aspect to this analysis...

The continent ownership.

This shows why W10 is way behind us for endgame in my opinion.

In W10 the continents are split up as folows between 7 tribes.

15 - BORG
38 - CTRL
15 - 8AA8
3 - Wpack
12 - TUBA F.
2 - MFR
2 - No Mads

There are 4 tribes with influence over this world, even tho one of them is leading by a good margin. This indicates that alot more mergers or familes are required to achieve end game than in our world where the split is as follows.

42 C²
23 LSHRV
29 plight
5 BANG!
2 *MK*

To generalise even more, we are only a handful of diplomatic agreements away from endgame than in W10 where far more diplomacy lies ahead. Everyone pretty much agrees that diplomacy is the fastest way to progress. This involves players jumping ship and tribes merging or becoming familes. I would argue that only a handful of players jumping ship on this world could effectively bring us right up to endgame. Cos i cant see any of the top 3 using diplo at this stage... except maybe plight and LSHRV joining up to go up against C², but lets face ity thats a long shot! lol