fav Tribe structure

Rvglos

Guest
There are many different types of tribe and ways of running them, thats what makes this game so interesting. Look at Scum V RBL for example.

Just wanted to start a discussion on this topic and see if there is a successful model for a tribe or is it horses for courses?

Discuss:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In my opinion, RBL had a great tribe structure - one duke.

The downside: Vacationing for the duke, leaving nobody in charge.
 

DeletedUser78467

Guest
I never been a fan of being in tribes with more than 175 members, or tribes with less than 30 members (I'm not just saying that because of 1nS4n3, but I do think we have just about the right number). Mass recruiters fail for reasons obvious to most, but I'll list a few--
~Forum Clutter
~Noobs make your tribe look bad
~Harder to organize
~So many blues around...where do you go?
~Put pressure on the leader if not well-structured
~Less impact of individual opinions/thoughts
~Generally bad reputation for failing
 

DeletedUser72655

Guest
1 Duke
1 Leader per continent
1 Overall attack coordinater
2-4 Council Members

Anything from 60-120 members, depending on the type of players you have it will tip the scale
 

DeletedUser

Guest
There really is no such thing as the 'perfect structure' - it's just that fewer members make for easier management ultimately. it is easier to coordinate 10 players than 100, particularly given the global nature of this game.

Essentially the founding of a good tribe is someone who has taken a 'Management 101' class, and then a group of players willing to listen, learn and most importantly be led. You don't even need that much skill - you just need to want to learn, and that sort of attitude can be the difference between good tribes and bad. Leading a tribe is no different than managing people's careers - delegation, time management, growth, reward. A leader needs to be the chief communicator and bring the tribe together. You can of course have more than one leader, but this tends to make things inefficient. The only benefits to havin 2+ leaders is that because this game doesn't stop, more of the workload is shared.

And the thing that binds the above together? Activity. If the leader is inactive, the tribe has no direction. If the tribe is inactive, the leader can't drive the tribe anywhere. It's a team game at the end of the day, and the sooner people learn to work together, the more effective that tribe is. Activity, or lack thereof, above anything else is the killer of any tribe, in any world. You don't even need to know how to send a sub-sec train, snipe or some of the more 'advanced' skills as long as you are active (and willing to learn).

And I'm well aware that, that is easier said than done :)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I would say it mainly depends on the tribal limit for the world, how active the members are and how organised the leadership structure is.

If any large tribe are highly active and well organised they will be very formidable.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Althougb it's virtually none existant, i would like to see a tribe that has no allies or NAP's, official or unofficial, no family or academy, just a single tribe that will war anyone... It doesn't happen. But still..
 

DeletedUser

Guest
There really is no such thing as the 'perfect structure' - it's just that fewer members make for easier management ultimately. it is easier to coordinate 10 players than 100, particularly given the global nature of this game.

Essentially the founding of a good tribe is someone who has taken a 'Management 101' class, and then a group of players willing to listen, learn and most importantly be led. You don't even need that much skill - you just need to want to learn, and that sort of attitude can be the difference between good tribes and bad. Leading a tribe is no different than managing people's careers - delegation, time management, growth, reward. A leader needs to be the chief communicator and bring the tribe together. You can of course have more than one leader, but this tends to make things inefficient. The only benefits to havin 2+ leaders is that because this game doesn't stop, more of the workload is shared.

And the thing that binds the above together? Activity. If the leader is inactive, the tribe has no direction. If the tribe is inactive, the leader can't drive the tribe anywhere. It's a team game at the end of the day, and the sooner people learn to work together, the more effective that tribe is. Activity, or lack thereof, above anything else is the killer of any tribe, in any world. You don't even need to know how to send a sub-sec train, snipe or some of the more 'advanced' skills as long as you are active (and willing to learn).

And I'm well aware that, that is easier said than done :)

Qft. This is it, in a nutshell.
 

Rvglos

Guest
Some really good points, how about the different was of organising a tribe, battle groups? if so how many members in each, is more delagation a good Idea. Titles? etc. lets get down to the nitty griity of tribe basics.

For the record I prefer small tribes such as scum structure. less titles, small battle groups of say 5 max who support attack for each other. Then join other groups for larger ops.
 

DeletedUser74106

Guest
posting what you prefer here would be like telling everyne how your tribe is structured lol

Butt i must say that i agree with scottie there...the structure isnt really that important...i mean you could have a tribe with 80 dukes if they were aqctive, nice people...so activity and the right attitude is what makes a good player...and also what makes a good tribe
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Top