[moved from top 20 thread] What kind of "politcs" tribes should use?

[DeletedUser]

His oppinion is his, not Exl.'s oppinion. You should know that Exl. isn't oligarcy, it is democracy.

A democracy is a sure sign of a weak tribe.

 

[DeletedUser]

i like more oligarcy too,because you can do whatever you wan with y our members

 

[DeletedUser]

I think a mix of the two is best.........democracy amongst the council - With last say, slash, veto rights falling on the top dogs.

Thankfully some of us have tempered leaders :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser50105]

I think a mix of the two is best.........democracy amongst the council - With last say, slash, veto rights falling on the top dogs.

Thankfully some of us have tempered leaders :icon_wink:

thats what he means when he says democracry...he means within council..over course every member dosent vote when it comes to something

 

[DeletedUser]

I´ve only been in 3 or 4 tribes in this world - even though one of those tribes disbanded and invited me back about a half dozen times when I was tiny...before I quit other worlds, there were a few that were that way. Sort of funny cause every vote was littered with noob spam. Needless to say, such tribes don´t last long, and I couldn´t for the life of me remember their names :lol:

 

[DeletedUser50771]

A democracy is a sure sign of a weak tribe.

Democracy can give a tribe power. I think that a good leader is a good leader if he makes his members follow his/her orders with no questions, if he uses democratical ways, rather than other ways.

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracy can give a tribe power. I think that a good leader is a good leader if he makes his members follow his/her orders with no questions, if he uses democratical ways, rather than other ways.

yes...let them "vote" the rules when they are set, offer them the right of not remaining or not joining the tribe if they disagree. Don't abuse the power of a leader and make sure the rules once accepted don't leave them too many options.

This probably makes them think their tribe is a democracy if the leader can put everything in a good light. Is the leader a tyrant or not if he does this?

:icon_twisted::icon_twisted:

 

[DeletedUser50771]

It depends on how the rules are.

 

[DeletedUser]

It depends on how the rules are.

I think it depends on how the leader makes them look like...when they are not guilty they all accept them because they don't care...when they feel those rules are harsh because they might be affected by them, they are reluctant to accept them...:icon_rolleyes:

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracy can give a tribe power. I think that a good leader is a good leader if he makes his members follow his/her orders with no questions, if he uses democratical ways, rather than other ways.

A leader should be competent, decisive, aware of all that goes on in the tribe, aware of worldwide diplomacy, and finally - carry more than his fair share of the day-to-day nobling, ops, sitting, etc.

Councils can work out. Ideally, however, they would advise not vote as presumably, the leader is the most capable of weighing all the information to make a decision.

Of course, if you lack aforementioned competent leader, then you may have to settle for something like a voting council.

However, it is slow - as it may take a while to get everyone together to vote.
Further, indecisiveness of leadership tends to increase with the size of the leading group. You can find many real world examples of this.

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracy can give a tribe power. I think that a good leader is a good leader if he makes his members follow his/her orders with no questions, if he uses democratical ways, rather than other ways.

Mate, you're referring to dictatorship, not democracy.

 

[DeletedUser50771]

I think you don't understand what I meant .

 

[DeletedUser]

I think he meant that democracy gives a 'tribe' power but a dictatorship would give the leader power, in the case of a game like Tribal Wars, it essential to have a mixture of both to balance the chances of a flop tribe. You got to have a council to keep the leader in check incase he/she does something totally stupid.

Dissolving a council in war time usually makes things way easier seeing as there are less internal squabbles. Councils are great during peace time but during a war its to time consuming to poll every member for ideas, tribes should be directed by a confident, good and most importantly active war leader to lead otherwise see example, -?-.

 

[DeletedUser]

Council might be slow, there should be a few leaders who would make small decisions alone and discuss big with others.. this is fast game and needs quick decisions

democracy might just be in case tribe voting for alliance

 

[DeletedUser]

Council might be slow, there should be a few leaders who would make small decisions alone and discuss big with others.. this is fast game and needs quick decisions

democracy might just be in case tribe voting for alliance

the idea of democracy in the council is good, but yes, often its too slow. We use it when we have the luxury of time, but if its a fast decision, we trust our dukes to make it

 

[DeletedUser]

I dont know, if the council is way active i dont see why democracy will not work, we pretty much decide things together, but if a decision is needed to be made immediately then for sure a strong leader that can make that decision is always best especially if he knows he will have the full backing of his council, it is always best if everyone is on the same page, makes things so much smoother

 

[DeletedUser]

A dictatorship is a very efficient way of running a tribe in TW, so long as the Leader cares about his/her underlings and isn't a tyrant. This way, decisions can be made decisively, instead of waiting days for a wishy-washy council to debate and then vote on what to do.

 

[DeletedUser]

A dictatorship is a very efficient way of running a tribe in TW, so long as the Leader cares about his/her underlings and isn't a tyrant. This way, decisions can be made decisively, instead of waiting days for a wishy-washy council to debate and then vote on what to do.

the problem is, with a dictator you're rolling the dice on whether your tribe has a good leader. This is especially a problem when the first leader quits. A good leader is rare, and a lot of tribes have fallen because they havent had a good one. A democracy can help counteract this effect by making sure there isnt one person making all the decisions

 

[DeletedUser50105]

the problem is, with a dictator you're rolling the dice on whether your tribe has a good leader. This is especially a problem when the first leader quits. A good leader is rare, and a lot of tribes have fallen because they havent had a good one. A democracy can help counteract this effect by making sure there isnt one person making all the decisions

good point. a combination of dictatorship/oligarchy is the best i think.

 

[DeletedUser]

good point. a combination of dictatorship/oligarchy is the best i think.

lol, i think everyone's seen what happens when a leader of a dictatorship steps down: the new leader isnt up to snuff, and either gets the tribe in too deep or has the tribe break up on him.

Yeah, Oligarchy is usually the best. Small group means efficiency, but you have some protection against idiots. Still, you wont get the best of either :icon_neutral:

Guess you cant have it all