Newbie Here

[DeletedUser]

My post is not absurd.

Following that concept, I've had a full nuke at 4k points.

The point I was trying to make was that rather than focusing on a certain ratio, it would be easier to just make sure you keep your queues going.

If you have 20 hours of troops queued up and 0 buildings queued, it would make more sense to upgrade some buildings, rather than just keep adding to your troop queue because you haven't met a 2:1 ratio yet. You get nothing from making your troop queue longer at that point.

200 points + 200 troops in twenty hours is certainly better than just 200 troops in twenty hours.

For example, let's say my village right now has 3 hours of troops queued in my barracks and stable, and 3 hours of buildings queued in my headquarters.

Sure, I could delete the building queues and give myself 6 hour queues in my barracks and stable, but that is counterproductive.

In that 3 hour period, I could build 3 hours worth of troops and 3 hours worth of buildings, or just 3 hours worth of troops.

Listen I agree with you that you need to keep everything queued up and running 24/7 but at lets use the 1k point that he asked about, if at that point you dont have again let say 2:1 (which at that point I think should be higher) you need to be upping barrack and stable because you arent building troops fast enough.

 

[DeletedUser]

His incompetency pains me >.<

You're pained by the fact that some players are new?

Oh dear.

Listen I agree with you that you need to keep everything queued up and running 24/7 but at lets use the 1k point that he asked about, if at that point you dont have again let say 2:1 (which at that point I think should be higher) you need to be upping barrack and stable because you arent building troops fast enough.

Counting ratios is a waste of time. If somebody starts talking to me about troop to point ratios alarm bells start ringing. It's a good way of making sure newer players are up to standard troop wise, I suppose, assuming they can't be bothered to learn/haven't been taught how to farm properly. Other than that troop ratios is an outdated and inefficient paradigm for this game.

 

[DeletedUser54064]

Honestly, I don't think the troop ratios even held an importance in good tribes for a few years now.. everyone is aware of the quantities of troops that are required - the 24/7 production wise.

 

[DeletedUser105366]

counting ratios is a waste of time. If somebody starts talking to me about troop to point ratios alarm bells start ringing. It's a good way of making sure newer players are up to standard troop wise, i suppose, assuming they can't be bothered to learn/haven't been taught how to farm properly. Other than that troop ratios is an outdated and inefficient paradigm for this game.

+1

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

If they are point whores, they will have a lot less, if they are troops whores, you might have to expect a 2:1 ratio.
[/FONT][/COLOR]

The word troopwhore is a dirty dirty word.

It means - "I can't multi-task".

Pointwhore is merely a term used to label someone that one is jealous of.

9 times out of 10 it's the small guy that can't keep up and has never seen the larger accounts troopcount calling the larger account a pointwhore for growing so quickly. NEarly every time in that scenario the larger account has far far more troops which is what is enabling it to grow at a rapid pace.

The entire point of troop ratios is faulty though.

Below is a mail that took place a few days ago that summarizes my thoughts:

cat like mice on 30.04. at 23:20
well lets see if u can match with me (Alama smex joint-group)...hw much army did u get when u were 1k points

Countdown To Extinction on 30.04. at 23:27
No clue. Not something I kept track of.

Also not important.

point:troop ratios are worth diddly because the goal is growth, not point growth, not troop growth, merely growth.

If player A raises HQ sky high very early he will reach 1,000 points faster than other players. If he has less troops at 1,000 points than other players that means nothing because when they have 1,000 points he will have 1,500 and will have more troops than they do then.

ie. How many troops 5 days in is a question that matters (though still not something I kept track of), how many troops at 1,000 points means nothing due to different people reaching 1,000 points after different amounts of time.

Countdown To Extinction on 30.04. at 23:30
Example of your account and mine:

I reached 1,000 points in 3 days and 17 hours.

You reached 1,000 points in 12 days and 1 hour.

Comparing how many troops I had after 3 days and 17 hours with how many you had after 12 days and 1 hour is beyond silly.

An accurate comparison would be your troops at 1,000 points vs. mine at 10,000 or so points (I didn't even start 12 days ago, I'll be over 10k points by the time I have done so.)

The goal of any decent player is growth. Not troop growth. Not village growth. Growth. 24/7 queues everywhere. That tends to lead to a 2-4:1 ratio, but that's not important, if everything is queued 24/7 whatever you wind up with is generally more than plenty.

Oh, and my mail was wrong. Lost my offense trying to noble village #3, so I wound up being 8k after 12 days, still far better than 1k.

 

[DeletedUser93450]

[spoil]

Oh, and my mail was wrong. Lost my offense trying to noble village #3, so I wound up being 8k after 12 days, still far better than 1k.

[/spoil]

So... after 12 days, you still have less troops than him? :icon_eek:

 

[DeletedUser]

My post is not absurd.

Following that concept, I've had a full nuke at 4k points.

The point I was trying to make was that rather than focusing on a certain ratio, it would be easier to just make sure you keep your queues going.

If you have 20 hours of troops queued up and 0 buildings queued, it would make more sense to upgrade some buildings, rather than just keep adding to your troop queue because you haven't met a 2:1 ratio yet. You get nothing from making your troop queue longer at that point.

200 points + 200 troops in twenty hours is certainly better than just 200 troops in twenty hours.

For example, let's say my village right now has 3 hours of troops queued in my barracks and stable, and 3 hours of buildings queued in my headquarters.

Sure, I could delete the building queues and give myself 6 hour queues in my barracks and stable, but that is counterproductive.

In that 3 hour period, I could build 3 hours worth of troops and 3 hours worth of buildings, or just 3 hours worth of troops.

there is about 19-20k troops in a full nuke , not 8k

i find it difficult to believe you have played before . but if that is the case , join a tribe in your area , and hopefully you will find the guidance you need .

i run 3:1 troop point ratio on startup. ratio's are nothing more than a good indicator of how battle ready you might be . keeping in mind you have to build the right type and combination of troops . troops win wars , points win even more wars lol i think you get the picture

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

[spoil][/spoil]

So... after 12 days, you still have less troops than him? :icon_eek:

Err. no. Afer 12 days I have a level 28 farm and a level 22 farm, I mean that I didn't reach 10k points in 12 days like I'd claimed I would in the mail.

there is about 19-20k troops in a full nuke , not 8k

i find it difficult to believe you have played before . but if that is the case , join a tribe in your area , and hopefully you will find the guidance you need .

Where are you getting 8k from?

I sat him, at ~4,000 points, if my memory is accurate he had 5,500+ axes and 2,700+ lc. That's 16,300 pop, before rams, scouts, cats, MA, etc.

It wasn't quite a full nuke, but it was a 30 farm.

I suspect he could give you guidance, not the other way around.

Not to mention a full nuk is not 19k-20k pop, it should be 20.5k-21k

 

[DeletedUser]

20K and 5 nobles, I find.

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

20K and 5 nobles, I find.

I tend to have 20735 for roops.

 

[DeletedUser]

The word troopwhore is a dirty dirty word.

It means - "I can't multi-task".

Pointwhore is merely a term used to label someone that one is jealous of.

9 times out of 10 it's the small guy that can't keep up and has never seen the larger accounts troopcount calling the larger account a pointwhore for growing so quickly. NEarly every time in that scenario the larger account has far far more troops which is what is enabling it to grow at a rapid pace.

The entire point of troop ratios is faulty though.

Heh, funny you should say that. Check out this mail I got the other day;

a couple members want me to try to recruit you. i dont see that as a good move considering i invited you 5 times and you have changed tribes on a daily basis for a while i see no chance of you be loyal and best bet is your point whoring

 

[DeletedUser]

If somebody starts talking to me about troop to point ratios alarm bells start ringing. It's a good way of making sure newer players are up to standard troop wise, I suppose, assuming they can't be bothered to learn/haven't been taught how to farm properly. Other than that troop ratios is an outdated and inefficient paradigm for this game.

And since this thread is about an very new player that asked how many troops he "should" have is why I gave my advice, the advice isnt for people that know what they are doing :icon_wink:

 

[DeletedUser]

And since this thread is about an very new player that asked how many troops he "should" have is why I gave my advice, the advice isnt for people that know what they are doing :icon_wink:

He'd be better off learning to farm, rather than the over-simplistic "you have to have X troops at Y points or you're a noooob" approach.

 

[DeletedUser]

He'd be better off learning to farm, rather than the over-simplistic "you have to have X troops at Y points or you're a noooob" approach.

He probably wont make the X troops and Y points if he isnt farming, so yes I agree. He needs to be reading guides like a few people have already told him.

 

[DeletedUser]

The word troopwhore is a dirty dirty word.

It means - "I can't multi-task".

Pointwhore is merely a term used to label someone that one is jealous of.

9 times out of 10 it's the small guy that can't keep up and has never seen the larger accounts troopcount calling the larger account a pointwhore for growing so quickly. NEarly every time in that scenario the larger account has far far more troops which is what is enabling it to grow at a rapid pace.

The entire point of troop ratios is faulty though.

Below is a mail that took place a few days ago that summarizes my thoughts:



The goal of any decent player is growth. Not troop growth. Not village growth. Growth. 24/7 queues everywhere. That tends to lead to a 2-4:1 ratio, but that's not important, if everything is queued 24/7 whatever you wind up with is generally more than plenty.

Oh, and my mail was wrong. Lost my offense trying to noble village #3, so I wound up being 8k after 12 days, still far better than 1k.

I am just simplifying it for the person who is new with vocabulary that they might understand :icon_rolleyes:, but I assume you just like debating.

Of course, growth is what everyone aims for, and is how you win the game, and different people have different ways of doing this; some involve the excessive building of troops, some the excessive building of points. It is not to say that either style is any worse, or leaves the player worse off.

I assure you that I can multi-task when I play Tribal Wars, and can keep up with everyone :icon_cool:

 

[DeletedUser105366]

there is about 19-20k troops in a full nuke , not 8k

i find it difficult to believe you have played before . but if that is the case , join a tribe in your area , and hopefully you will find the guidance you need .

i run 3:1 troop point ratio on startup. ratio's are nothing more than a good indicator of how battle ready you might be . keeping in mind you have to build the right type and combination of troops . troops win wars , points win even more wars lol i think you get the picture

There are not 20k troops in a full nuke. Maybe 20k population, but not 20k troops. Unless you build an all axe nuke. :icon_wink:

At 4200 points, I've had 5500 axes and 2700 LC. That's around 20k pop, when you include rams and MA and nobles. Unfortunately, not a 3:1 ratio, as you are capable of pulling off. :/.

You, sir, appear to be still stuck in the beginner stages. Experienced players tell newer players to try and keep a good troop ratio, to emphasize the importance of troops. That is not, however, a successful strategy beyond the beginner stage.

You're supposed to learn more about the game and progress, not walk around and preach "troops over points" for the rest of your life like every other semi-conscious player with half a brain cell and every tribe that decides that adopting that as their profile slogan will make them look good.

That said, hit me up in game. I'm always willing to learn, and you seem to have a few useful things to teach

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

I assure you that I can multi-task when I play Tribal Wars, and can keep up with everyone :icon_cool:

Care to explain to me when growing 24.37% as fast as someone became known as keeping up?

What you might be able to assure me is that you can outgrow the incredibly incompetent players you typically start near. Set the bar higher and you'll realize you can't keep up with those that know what they're doing.

I even stopped the chart at day 12 for your benefit because you began getting catted on day 13.

Of course, growth is what everyone aims for, and is how you win the game, and different people have different ways of doing this; some involve the excessive building of troops, some the excessive building of points. It is not to say that either style is any worse, or leaves the player worse off.

Can we please stop pretending that all opinions and methods are equal? One way certainly leaves the account in better shape.

Point in case: Day 12 you appear to have had a 24 farm, I had a 28 in one village, a 22 in the other. I didn't choose points over troops, you didn't choose troops over points, you chose to make both very slowly while I chose to make both very quickly.

PS: If your farm wasn't 24 it was even lower, 24 is the highest you possibly had, but I prefer to give someone the benefit of the doubt and highball their farm level rather than lowball it.

EDIT: To The OP, feel free to mail me ingame with any questions you have, I don't bite.

 

[DeletedUser]

There are not 20k troops in a full nuke. Maybe 20k population, but not 20k troops. Unless you build an all axe nuke. :icon_wink:

At 4200 points, I've had 5500 axes and 2700 LC. That's around 20k pop, when you include rams and MA and nobles. Unfortunately, not a 3:1 ratio, as you are capable of pulling off. :/.

do math much ??? 4200 points, 20k pop, thats about 5:1 , so what the??

and yes i did mean population in my previous post.

 

[DeletedUser105366]

do math much ??? 4200 points, 20k pop, thats about 5:1 , so what the??

and yes i did mean population in my previous post.

For someone who's so supportive of a troop ratio, I'm surprised that you would count each single population unit as a full troop.

Light cavalry requires 4 population, but it only counts as 1 troop.

 

[ALessonInPointWhoring]

For someone who's so supportive of a troop ratio, I'm surprised that you would count each single population unit as a full troop.

Light cavalry requires 4 population, but it only counts as 1 troop.

Nah, any tribe I've ever seen that had 1:1 or 2:1 requirements went off population.