Paying to Win

[DeletedUser110685]

You cant pick and choose what flags you buy, also there are a number of flags worlds around which you can join and play for a week/2 to build up a healthy stock of useful flags, award whoring is the best/easiest.cheapest way to gain flags.

Buy enough flags and eventually you will get the ones you want. I don't know about you but if I play for a week or two I won't get many red, yellow and green flags.

Again i didnt say anywhere that there are NO advantages to PP, my argument was focused on reduced building time and the fact you can still compete whether or not you choose to use it

Reducing the time it takes to build a smithy for instance level 20 (20 hours give or take) troops fully queued... level 10 stable.... (for an example) 7 mins per LC (guesstimate as i cba to check) reduced in half, reduced in half again, reduced in half again, reduced in half again, reduced in half again will leave you with... roughly 45 mins for a level 20 smithy upgrade.... in this time you build 6/7 LC.... how is that an advantage? If you took it further and insta built your acad straight after then youve in essence just jumped 700 points for a grand total of lets say 10 LC

Reducing time of smithy along with other buildings is how you will get nobles days faster, so long as you are farming enough.

If you are talking only about the one feature, reducing construction time, it doesn't have a huge effect on troop count. It does however allow you to reduce time on barracks and stable upgrades, as well as getting to your desired level of barracks and stables while your non pp user is still trying to up his HQ to some point above 20.

Chances are, if someone is paying to reduce construction time, they are also paying for the other features. All of the features combined can have a massive effect on growth and troop count.

EDIT: I am only talking about if that feature is used by skilled players who are farming a lot. For the average player the construction time feature will not have much of a benefit at all.

 

[DeletedUser]

Buying flags you get 1 red, 1 yellow, 1 green and a 25% chance of a flag at 1 level higher, you'd need to purchase a lot of flags for the purple/black flags.... i highly doubt anyone has wasted that much money for those flags to simply boost there startup. If they have they certainly have more money than sense. Personally im not a big fan of the flags setting as it forces you to use the same account (per flag world) as you cant transfer flags from 1 account to another and i like to use a new alias from time to time and if anything flags plus advanced pallys and morale are much more of an issue than reduced build times and market trades, but this is a whole different argument.

To reduce time on anything firstly you need the troops to farm the res to allow you to queue the buildings. if you keep reducing the time or even insta building everything then your points are going to grow far too quick to produce a decent amount of troops i.e pointwhoring, easy target. Also you seem to be assuming that players that use p2w features have high activity levels which isnt necessarily the case, it could in fact be they use the features simply to keep up with more active players.

Anyway to summarise everything up, if you/co's are online 24 hours a day using p2w and know how to do everything then yes your going to race out in front for a while but in reality these players are a rare breed, if you use p2w on top of an average activity level, you'll do well but are no means uncatchable, if you dont use p2w but are active enugh and know what your doing you can easily compete, its still a tribe based game anyway so if the king of p2w comes heading your way and your worried his troop/skill level is too 'leet' visit the support thread.

 

[DeletedUser110685]

For the most part I agree with you, apart from this:

if you keep reducing the time or even insta building everything then your points are going to grow far too quick to produce a decent amount of troops i.e pointwhoring, easy target.

It is like saying that a troopoint ratio is important, which it is not. If for instance a 2k player and a 3k both have the same amount of troops, the 3k player is doing better because his village is more developed. This is unlikely to happen however as the player with more points is also likely producing troops faster the smaller player due to higher stables and barracks levels.

Otherwise I agree, my argument was based around how pp allows active and skilled players to get further ahead than they would have otherwise. Perhaps I should have made this more clear.

 

[DeletedUser]

I feel like I just have to jump in on this conversation. I was #3 to second village on the world, ranked top-20 for quite a while, and never used p2w features. I started a new account and had no flags to begin with. It can be done, in the early game. The late game is an entirely different story, for a different post.

Yes, if I had used p2w, I could have got my noble a day or two earlier. Yes, if I had used p2w, I also could have kept my troop counts about the same, probably increased by maybe 10-20%. But it is /not/ at all a required part of the game. I don't play p2w worlds long on principle---I believe it is a bad road for tribalwars to follow---but I find it is just as easy to be top-10 on p2w worlds than as non-p2w worlds. (Becoming rank #1 is a different story; it's much harder on p2w worlds to become #1 without using it at times. I've only gotten to #1 on one p2w world, and only briefly.)

Now, a word about why this is possible:

1. Pay-to-win by reducing build times does decrease your total time to reaching your academy, but it does not usually decrease your total time a noble by that much. Nobles are very expensive, and if you reduce your 18/19/20 smithy times too much, you won't have the resources to get a noble as soon as your academy is built. I always have it available when I don't use p2w.

2. Not used carefully, p2w makes you too big too fast, with too few troops. This makes you a sitting duck for another stronger player who can hold off your attacks, and noble you first.

3. Players who use p2w *tend* to not be as knowledgeable about the game. They *usually* take the wrong actions. It does help them become ranked higher, but they would never have been a threat to begin with.


Now, that said, if used properly, pay-to-win can be a major advantage. I played with some friends a few worlds ago, a few of them spending some p2w points, a few of us not. They trashed us. Why?

- They got LC much, MUCH faster than us. 20% reduced cost means stables is 13k instead of 17k, and that 4k takes at least half a day to get.

- In a worse area, the 20% on mines makes it effective to bring up mines much faster.

- You will have more troops. The HQ never needs to go past 20 for academy. HQ 20 -> 24 (what I usually do) costs 230k resources -- about two days of farming worth. This means you can pump that much more in to your barracks/stable. People rarely do this step correctly.

 

[DeletedUser]

For the most part I agree with you, apart from this:



It is like saying that a troopoint ratio is important, which it is not. If for instance a 2k player and a 3k both have the same amount of troops, the 3k player is doing better because his village is more developed. This is unlikely to happen however as the player with more points is also likely producing troops faster the smaller player due to higher stables and barracks levels.

Otherwise I agree, my argument was based around how pp allows active and skilled players to get further ahead than they would have otherwise. Perhaps I should have made this more clear.

No but if for example you or i had an infinite amount of money to spend on p2w (and spent it all on instant build) then its plausible that you could quickly have a 3.5k vil (with acad) and not even 1k troops (actual troops not farm space) given the time it takes to build troops over the lack of time it takes to instant build everything, not saying this would ever happen lol but its entirely possible.

Talking about specifically active and skilled players using all p2w features then yes naturally they get an advantage over players that do not use it, that is indisputable and never once have i said otherwise but again my argument is towards the players constantly complaining they cant compete against the 'p2w cheats' which is basically all this thread is about and im simply saying you can compete and stop whining about it like little kids.

 

[DeletedUser110685]

No but if for example you or i had an infinite amount of money to spend on p2w (and spent it all on instant build) then its plausible that you could quickly have a 3.5k vil (with acad) and not even 1k troops (actual troops not farm space) given the time it takes to build troops over the lack of time it takes to instant build everything, not saying this would ever happen lol but its entirely possible.

There'd be no need to use instant build, it wouldn't be possible to farm that much. So long as you are dominating your area troop wise with constant queues and a reasonable rate of troop production the amount of points you have wouldn't matter.

@agqvvv Top 10 both before smithy rush and after nobling is easily achievable without spending money on p2w features. Very few accounts in this world have been using pp 'properly', as you described.

 

[DeletedUser]

There'd be no need to use instant build, it wouldn't be possible to farm that much. So long as you are dominating your area troop wise with constant queues and a reasonable rate of troop production the amount of points you have wouldn't matter.
.

I disagree, if you found yourself in area heaven (no active farmers, plenty of barbs, 24 hours online etc) you could certainly haul enough res to pointwhore, paywhore upto 3.5k rapidly. Im not saying its entirely plausible on a new world but starting on the rim of an established world, hp worlds, classic, casual, speed etc it wouldnt be hard at all. I know that kinda takes it away from the point of this world slightly but it is an unrealistic/silly idea anyway. Having said that though if someone were to do it they would leave themselves open to a rimming.

 

[DeletedUser]

Food, petrol, rent, alcohol, drugs.

ditto, minus the drugs

 

[DeletedUser]

I can smell an account to be deleted soon.. :lol: kidding!

Delete, it is obvious and without a doubt, p2w has more advantages whether small or big you can still make a big difference in an account with p2w..Not unless everyone or most of your 15x15 are using p2w,then that would be another story. :icon_wink:

 

[HeftySmurf]

ditto, minus the drugs

Lies

 

[LiriC]

Paying to Win .... strange name for a topic...
But this name is ok just for a month or so... need wars to start..and so on... and all that farming will be tested to the limits for the noobs.

But... for a pay to win... well... buy some beer or something... get drunk.. farm like crazy.... mail all the top players... piss them off.. see who has some ballz.... test them... kill him.. there you go.. you won thanks to beer... and it dosent cost that much... the bad part.. you get a hangover time and time again.

lol.. think I went overboard on that one.

 

[DeletedUser]

There is no doubt, that p2w helps you, especially in early game!

#1 reducing prices in HQ saves you valuable resources. Resources, which you can use to build more troops.

#2 reducing building times makes you grow faster! This helps you get up the stable and barracks faster which makes you get troops faster. Also, you will get to your academy faster and ultimately be one of the first to noble.

#3 flags will get you that little extra. more resource production for instance or the reduced building time for units. --> you have a larger army faster.

#4 the enhanced resource production will get you more resources which you need for troops and smithy costs

All of this sums up to a resource overflow and troop overflow which results in a resource overflow through farming. Now, someone please tell me, that the p2w features DON't help you??

But I do have to say, that this whole discussion is actually pointless, as this world has been opened with these settings and we should just accept it the way it is. Of course it is a little aggrevating having production times of 12 hours in the HQ and the same in the stable and rax, when you could just reduce them to grow faster.. But the good players will get to the top at some point - no matter with or without p2w!

/yo momma

 

[DeletedUser]

play to win helped me early on. I was 300 pts when my beginner protection was up and had a good little farming army. now I don't have $$ to spend on tw so im falling back on old fashioned tw strategies of kicking in doors. P to P or no P to P, the basic idea of looting weaker neighbors still applies, although their are more variables at play now (defense flags,production increase flags,ect.).

 

[mattcurr]

Guys I keep looking for the pay to win button so i can end the world but I cant seem to find it.

 

[DeletedUser110685]

Guys I keep looking for the pay to win button so i can end the world but I cant seem to find it.

Pay-to-gain-a-significant-advantage-in-terms-of-growth-if-used-by-good-players-but-mainly-only-in-startup-and-earlygame isn't as catchy.

 

[mattcurr]

Pay-to-gain-a-significant-advantage-in-terms-of-growth-if-used-by-good-players-but-mainly-only-in-startup-and-earlygame isn't as catchy.

Its minimal imo. A good player normally has ~5x the growth of a player the bottom of the top 50. Seems to still hold true, just sounds like more excuses to throw at top players.

 

[DeletedUser110685]

Its minimal imo. A good player normally has ~5x the growth of a player the bottom of the top 50. Seems to still hold true, just sounds like more excuses to throw at top players.

But if a good starter has a few hundred pp to spend, they can improve their growth by quite a bit and have a higher troop count than had they not spent pp.

Mostly the only players who gain much of an advantage from it are those who would have been high ranked anyway. You do see the odd player in the top 20 who is clearly spending huge amounts of pp to stay up there, but they will drop ranks pretty quickly past startup.

 

[HeftySmurf]

Its minimal imo. A good player normally has ~5x the growth of a player the bottom of the top 50. Seems to still hold true, just sounds like more excuses to throw at top players.

Dunno i keep holding rank #1

 

[mattcurr]

As long as you can't make cheap coins fast growth is stunted by coins and army you can't out grow your economy once you start nobling . I just don't see any of the available purchases making much of a difference and I will still give props to good attacking and defending and manipulation which is the real stuff of this game let them waste money

 

[DeletedUser103944]

Dunno i keep holding rank #1

No your not.