ODA- Good or Bad?

DeletedUser107039

Guest
I feel like banging my head against a brick wall explaining to players about why early ODA is a bad thing, and that having 0 ODA up until you're ready to noble is generally idea.

Sure some cannot be avoided, spikes and such, but clearing active players? Even more so since militia was introduced.

So, Pro's and Con's of early ODA, and what is your ultimate opinion about trying to gain ODA?
 

DeletedUser93513

Guest
I don't think ODA is such a bad thing before nobles.

I personally only clear people when I know it's not going to set me back too much. For example, If there's a big farmer in my area and I can catch his LC at home with very few losses, then why not do it? But on the other hand... if there's a turtle right next to me that hardly farms, why would I clear him and lose more than half my troops? Just for the ODA? :lol: Playing in the core would definitely require a lot more clearing than playing in the rim with inactive farmers tho.

Either way, I don't think you should "try" to gain ODA early on.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It's neither good nor bad, in and of itself. It all depends on the situation. If you can kill a lot of people with low losses, force restarts, take out other people who are depleting farms, that's gravy. Sometimes, you even need to clear a turtle or two. But it's just a measure of how many people you've killed... and the situation causing the deaths is what really matters.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
It depends really as different situations call for different actions. What if your area only has but so many farms available, and you need to clear an active player and make him a farm? In that case I would say ODA is good. Also, this early in the game when someone is cleared it isn't really that discouraging to restart, so you have better hopes of them restarting than later in the game.
 

DeletedUser92790

Guest
ODA, that would require using troops, and troops would require resources, and those resources could go to buildings. So obviously its a bad thing.
 

DeletedUser93450

Guest
[spoil]
ben hurr said:
ODA, that would require using troops, and troops would require resources, and those resources could go to buildings. So obviously its a bad thing.
Click to expand...
[/spoil]

Flawless logic. :icon_rolleyes:
 

DeletedUser

Guest
In theory while losing nothing would put you ahead of someone who's losing stuff clearing random people sometimes it really doesn't matter.
 

DeletedUser95698

Guest
its depends on how you say "look at my ODA"

if you have ODA cause of clearing to make farms than its good cuz eventually it will repay itself
but if you are getting ODA just for the hell of it than its a waste
 

DeletedUser

Guest
ODA is fine, you don't know what your talking about. All you do is scout, put it in simulator, see if you can get more profit by clearing and farming by seeing the troop losses. The simulator even tells you how much the troops cost.
 

greenmonsta

Guest
At this stage and in a farming world, ODA means more villages cleared for farming = higher income from farming. Therefore, ODA = good.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Early-game, as a statistic, it's a negative trait - you've lost troops in gaining it. However, what it achieves is typically worth it, unless you're a fool who just attacks people for the sake of it or without scouting. Player farms are, without a doubt, the best way to get resources early game since so many people farm barbs because they're safe and because of the free FA, whereas a player will usually have higher pits, is less accessible and you tend to get a very nice 'first dibs' haul. ;)

It's all in moderation, where you set the bar is up to you.
 

DeletedUser107039

Guest
I am disappointed.

Clearing inactive players if you will get hardly any losses, then yes sure have ODA. But trying to turn an active player into a farm since militia was introduced? They lose nothing, and you repeatedly get losses.

greenmonsta said:
At this stage and in a farming world, ODA means more villages cleared for farming = higher income from farming. Therefore, ODA = good.
Click to expand...
You clear some villages, and lose some troops. I'll wait next to you, checking ODA and ODD stats to see who you've cleared and farm them anyway. ;)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
ODA is a statistic. Since when did statistics prove that someone is good or bad?

I mean, FFS. Just build those Hidding place, ressies buildings and lvl 30 VHQ, those bring points. You need points. Not ODA.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Quite a few players' stats, across the worlds, do speak for themselves. But yes, I agree with your point with the occasional exception.

As for points, at start-up I'd say that's the same concept - with ODA you clear what you need to to survive/profit, the same goes with points. Pitwhores will have slow point growth, but if they have poor/few farms around, it's the logical choice.

There is no set path in what statistics mean, it's all based on the situations presented.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I was being a little sarcastic with the points part, and the vhq 30 part, and ressies buildings part. In fact, the whole last sentence. :p
 

dukeyp123

Guest
Attacking for the sake of ODA is a sure fire way to stunt your growth..

However, If you work out what you will lose clearing a village and compare that to how much you can potentially farm from that village, then it should be obvious to whether or not you should clear it!
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Forget the stats and just clear your area. Look to catch them offline so no militia is involved and with barracks catted down they are an easy farm. Do however keep their hq below 15 just in case they get nasty and start tearing down the mines. If you gain oda so be it but the real object is to have extra resources available.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top