Political parties

[DeletedUser]

Within tribes eventually things will get more government styled and less tribal. Which then leads to the formation of a Council and within that council are deliberations and etc. Even though the men on the council share tribes the ideals could be a little bit separate :icon_cry:, Especially when making a decision that effects the tribe. The Left < Of politics or the Right > my question is do you guys think political parties may be beneficial to the tribes inner core?

 

[DeletedUser89005]

regardless off the political aspirations of any council members within a tribe, that tribe must have its own independent driving force, that force being its duke to maintain its direction, to have so called political groups there with there own ideas and agendas will only steer that tribe from its path to suit there own, so in essence and in answer to your question, no..

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracies of the real-world kind do not work in TW. Has to be an oligarchy or a dictatorship. People will want to do what is best for them rather than what is best for the tribe as a whole, and disagreements and internal strife come from that. Come wartime, you find everyone hates each other and nobody works together.

Now, in theory it could work, if the tribe was composed of really good members who were entirely selfless and all about the tribe. But the same is true of family tribes, and mass-recruiting tribes. And in practice, we find that none of these three things work out in the end.

Plus, any tribe is a democracy at its base level - if you don't like the leadership, you can always leave. No need to add complexity to it.

 

[DeletedUser68103]

The purpose of political parties in the real world is to provide funding for the candidate and let people know their general opinion on all issues with out having to do much research on the individual. Neither of these purposes really benefit tribalwars.

 

[Paul XXXII]

Democracies of the real-world kind do not work in TW. Has to be an oligarchy or a dictatorship. People will want to do what is best for them rather than what is best for the tribe as a whole, and disagreements and internal strife come from that. Come wartime, you find everyone hates each other and nobody works together.

Now, in theory it could work, if the tribe was composed of really good members who were entirely selfless and all about the tribe. But the same is true of family tribes, and mass-recruiting tribes. And in practice, we find that none of these three things work out in the end.

Plus, any tribe is a democracy at its base level - if you don't like the leadership, you can always leave. No need to add complexity to it.

i don't agree with you, it all depends of with who are you playing and how many players have your tribe...

i remember that a few years ago, me and more 40 players of w3, join together in a game similar with this, and we layed with council, only a diplomat, all the players were dukes and barons, and did quit well that way. Off course the goal was similar have fun and fight everything around us.
But worked very well and we had a lot of fun...

 

[Deleted User - 10770065]

i don't agree with you, it all depends of with who are you playing and how many players have your tribe...

i remember that a few years ago, me and more 40 players of w3, join together in a game similar with this, and we layed with council, only a diplomat, all the players were dukes and barons, and did quit well that way. Off course the goal was similar have fun and fight everything around us.
But worked very well and we had a lot of fun...

Why did you guys quit for?

 

[Paul XXXII]

Why did you guys quit for?

the main reason was bexause we didnn't stop play w3, so no time to play 2 different games at the same time the majority decide to keep play w3

but i understand your question :icon_wink: and the answer could be the same, my tribe in w3 was #3 rank and one day we just decide to disband and hit the delete button

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracies of the real-world kind do not work in TW. Has to be an oligarchy or a dictatorship. People will want to do what is best for them rather than what is best for the tribe as a whole, and disagreements and internal strife come from that. Come wartime, you find everyone hates each other and nobody works together.

Now, in theory it could work, if the tribe was composed of really good members who were entirely selfless and all about the tribe. But the same is true of family tribes, and mass-recruiting tribes. And in practice, we find that none of these three things work out in the end.

Plus, any tribe is a democracy at its base level - if you don't like the leadership, you can always leave. No need to add complexity to it.

Democracies don't work in real life either.

 

[DeletedUser]

Democracies don't work in real life either.

What on earth does that have to do with my post? Or the thread topic? Or anything at all? :lol:

 

[DeletedUser]

I like a dictatorship with a strong duke, and an engaged and motivated memberbase. I'm not a fan of councils, as I don't like too many people with their hands in the pie.

 

[DeletedUser]

I'm a big fan of the theories I learned in my political science class once upon a time: democracy may increase overall happiness for a time, but the increased red tape means they are slower to move, even if they are less likely to face rebellion. Furthermore, because of the extreme nature of people's preferences (especially in TW), I can't foresee a way in which people would choose to continue following leadership when a mistake or unpopular decision was made. Unlike the real world, there is no insane amount of issues one could point to as more important, the people in a tribe find it a lot easier to organize and have their voices heard, and there's no real barrier to simply leaving. Lastly, there is no valid checks and balance; it relies only on the ability of players to actually follow the rules proposed to create the democracy, and if a player chooses not to listen to (as an example) the council and declares war as a duke, there is no real easy way to "impeach" them, you'd have to abandon ship.

 

[Ripfin]

Me I've always been all for the Triumvirate ruling you have 3 dukes, one Duke is overall leader, while another Duke is Defensive coordinator and other is offensive coordinator any of these dukes can handle small decisions but on major decisions which could effect the tribe drastically it would require a minimum of 2 dukes to approve, this way No one duke can go off mad hatter style and place the tribe into situations.

 

[DeletedUser]

Actually, they could. They could simply remove the other two dukes, disband the tribe, mail other tribes and get them angry enough to declare, or declare for them and cause a lot of confusion.

 

[Ripfin]

Actually, they could. They could simply remove the other two dukes, disband the tribe, mail other tribes and get them angry enough to declare, or declare for them and cause a lot of confusion.

yes but anyone with Duke privs could do that regardless if triumvirate, democracy or even dictatorship.

 

[DeletedUser89005]

been reading through some off the comments and see that this has turned to a "how do you lead a tribe" thread more or less, indeed all seem to have valid points, but all seem to have flaws also, as for politics in this game and i am sure most will agree, we tend to follow the lead of whom we actually have played with in the past, and that usually consists off them being the sole driver for a tribes direction, as thats who we trust and have always done well with before, tried and tested as such would be the expression.. and in return we give our loyalty and obedience with our hope to succeed with them at the helm as before..

 

[DeletedUser]

What on earth does that have to do with my post? Or the thread topic? Or anything at all? :lol:

BAsically this has eveything to do with your post as you know u r not inteligent enough to understand what democracy is. You do not understand real life as u live in virtual world. MAss recruiters work on demorcracy, which creates inter tribal issues. Family tribes have same political issues, and it is possible that theyyy might have democracy or dictatorship. You might be a leader of a family tribe that mass recruit and that follow democracy. If i go for a vote confidence and you lose you would becoeme a simple member and i would become the leader. Now you see how it is all inter related and relevent. But i guess due to your lack of inteligence you would not be able to understand it so do not think a lot. So the point is all this is irrelevent as i was just kidding.

On a serious note everything is fine except noob tribes run by 4 or more dukes.

 

[DeletedUser95593]

The messiah hath returned.

 

[DeletedUser]

Don't get me wrong I'm all for power but unfortunanently that isn't the case, So I figure if I can't get the whole 100% that I dangle with a good 85% control using the council in which I control. Sort of what the Young Turks did in the 1900's to the Ottoman Parliament.

 

[DeletedUser89005]

Don't get me wrong I'm all for power but unfortunanently that isn't the case, So I figure if I can't get the whole 100% that I dangle with a good 85% control using the council in which I control. Sort of what the Young Turks did in the 1900's to the Ottoman Parliament.

85% will not give it all, as there is that all important 15% missing..

 

[DeletedUser]

yes but anyone with Duke privs could do that regardless if triumvirate, democracy or even dictatorship.

Which is why I don't understand why you added:

"this way No one duke can go off mad hatter style and place the tribe into situations."

When they clearly can. Except now instead of 1 duke going mad hatter style because of an argument, disagreement, or RL issues that led to them snapping, you have 3. Where is the improvement again?