Failed Vote Scheduled Tribe Disbanding

Do you like this idea?


  • Total voters
    45
  • Poll closed .

Seven Devils

blocked
Reaction score
469
Can not understand how this is not a thing already, but here we go. This is a crazy wild idea, but, what about if there was a timer to disband a time set by the duke?

Woha woha hear me out.

Since when do you need to disband a tribe quick? There is tribe level being lost, in uber support worlds you lose more than that as all troops defending is sent home. You can not tell me this is how TW is supposed to be played, by having some sneaky co logging the duke and disbanding an hour before ops land.

Make it a set time on 24h or something before the disbands happen, or have the tribe needed to vote for it and then 24h etc. This should have to be activated so you don't need to bother with it if you are only making a tribe quickly to disband later.

Thoughts? I know, crazy and wild.
 

JawJaw

Awesomest CM Ever
Tribal Wars Team
Community Management
Reaction score
1,978
Approved for voting. Good luck!
 

One Last Shot...

Senior In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Senior
Team
Speed Admin
Reaction score
1,532
I'm voting no. This is a suggestion that is based on trust issues and doesn't improve general gameplay.
 

Seven Devils

blocked
Reaction score
469
I'm voting no. This is a suggestion that is based on trust issues and doesn't improve general gameplay.

I will have to disagree. This will improve game play for those who are caught in the middle of spies and traitors disbanding the tribe for the benefit of another. This might never happen to you, but i am here thinking for all of the players who are not equally good or realize how nasty the community can be.

This would literally change nothing but prevent nasty plays being used, you could still choose to not have it active. Curious to see what you choose to do.
 

DaWolf85

Senior In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Senior
Team
Reaction score
570
I will have to disagree. This will improve game play for those who are caught in the middle of spies and traitors disbanding the tribe for the benefit of another. This might never happen to you, but i am here thinking for all of the players who are not equally good or realize how nasty the community can be.

This would literally change nothing but prevent nasty plays being used, you could still choose to not have it active. Curious to see what you choose to do.
Spies and traitors are a part of the game though. To me, the fun of this game is the interpersonal dynamics, and that involves spies, traitors, and more generally, a lot of drama. It's never fun to be on the wrong side of it, but that doesn't mean it should be removed. It would take away from what the game is, and dilute it down into something more sterile, and ultimately more boring.
 

goroj

In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Team
Reaction score
12
IMHO this should be a tribe-level connected function.

So basically if a tribe reaches x level (5? 10?) it gets a pair of functions (like the option to select a disbanding process).
 

One Last Shot...

Senior In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Senior
Team
Speed Admin
Reaction score
1,532
I will have to disagree. This will improve game play for those who are caught in the middle of spies and traitors disbanding the tribe for the benefit of another. This might never happen to you, but i am here thinking for all of the players who are not equally good or realize how nasty the community can be.

This would literally change nothing but prevent nasty plays being used, you could still choose to not have it active. Curious to see what you choose to do.

As this seems quite an emotive issue for some, I'll expand on my perspective here with the rationale I have.

Whilst it isn't 'good gameplay', spies, backstabbers and traitors are all part and parcel of medieval warfare. There are very few (if any) conflicts in that time period where these plays didn't happen. This game is entirely set within that era, with a lot of the game taking elements from the medieval wars as part of its setup.

If a duke has the ability to set it to be 'active', they could also simply readjust it to being disabled and immediately disband the tribe. Which would make the entire feature obsolete if it is solely to prevent someone in a duke role rage-disbanding. So it would have to be an 'all-or-nothing' approach. Which I don't believe is right.

Regarding your earlier comment about coplaying, that shouldn't be taken into account and actually undermines the entire sugestion if it is used as a reason, as coplaying isn't supported. There shouldn't be any settings that cater for people who use coplayers without coplaying becoming a built-in part of the game. Which is another kettle of fish entirely!

I get why it is in some people's interests to prevent their own experiences from happening again (and fully sympathize with those experiences, which aren't pleasant) but at the end of the day - you choose who you trust and that can make or break a war game. This suggestion would be the first in a series of steps to prevent tribe members from attacking you after leaving for several days, or 'cooldowns' with diplomacy etc. All of which are against the style of game.
 
Reaction score
1,436
Spies and traitors are a part of the game though. To me, the fun of this game is the interpersonal dynamics, and that involves spies, traitors, and more generally, a lot of drama. It's never fun to be on the wrong side of it, but that doesn't mean it should be removed. It would take away from what the game is, and dilute it down into something more sterile, and ultimately more boring.

100%
 

Seven Devils

blocked
Reaction score
469
Spies and traitors are a part of the game though. To me, the fun of this game is the interpersonal dynamics, and that involves spies, traitors, and more generally, a lot of drama. It's never fun to be on the wrong side of it, but that doesn't mean it should be removed. It would take away from what the game is, and dilute it down into something more sterile, and ultimately more boring.

It wouldn't remove any spies or traitors tough, it would remove the feature where tribes are disbanded to lose their tribelevel (shitty concept if you ask me) And this uber setting that is good to use would be upgraded to something better.

To you it's fun, for me it just ruins the game for newer players. Don't get me wrong, i am almost Never on the wrong side of the spies, but it has happened to allies and such.

Non the less, it would be benefitial to most non elite tribes.
 

Eakshow McGee

Still Going Strong
Reaction score
903
IMO this setting is perfect to combine with Uber setting, to lessen the impact on tribe being disbanded middle of war, where it could actually just end the war one a single moment cause it results in all troops being sent home...

And i dont get all this medevial arguments? Do you not care about players experience with the game? personally i stopped caring about trying in this game anymore because i realised this is the game now and 1 action can ruin all i spent months on.. :rolleyes: its not about who is the best/strongest tribe anymore, its about who is willing to play the dirtiest..

If we are going medivial, remove all rules, cause this is war and in war there are no rules lol.
 

AuroraMoon

Non-stop Poster
Reaction score
161
And i dont get all this medevial arguments? Do you not care about players experience with the game? personally i stopped caring about trying in this game anymore because i realised this is the game now and 1 action can ruin all i spent months on.. :rolleyes: its not about who is the best/strongest tribe anymore, its about who is willing to play the dirtiest..

If we are going medivial, remove all rules, cause this is war and in war there are no rules lol.

Most people couldn't read and write during mediaeval times and messages took months to receive if at all, they didn't have instant communication like we do ingame
 

One Last Shot...

Senior In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Senior
Team
Speed Admin
Reaction score
1,532
Do you not care about players experience with the game?

Can't speak for others but enjoyment is part and parcel of every game. But I don't agree with anything that blocks legitimate (if dirty) strategies. This ties a duke's hands when there may be a good reason in his or her eyes to disband their tribe without any waiting / delay. Trust and loyalty are a major element of this game and trying to reduce the impact that has isn't right imo.
 

misteralb

In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Team
Script Moderator
Reaction score
380
I voted for Yes on this suggestion since I agree with Eekshow's way of thinking on this. True, dirty play is part of the game and part of reality too but the side effects of a tribe getting disbanded on uber support worlds are too big to not have this.

I don't agree with the whole idea presented on this suggestion, for example I don't agree with the voting part. That could lock tribes from getting disbanded all the time of the majority votes for no disband.

The other idea, having only a specific time of the day when the tribe can be disbanded is a security mechanism I have seen on other platforms too and it helps minimizing security incidents, not eliminating them completely, minimizing them, still a win considering all the side effects of losing a world in such a dirty way.

Playing dirty is part of the game but I think it like this, a lot of tribe members, if not most have dedicated a whole lot of their time, sweat and have put in work and probably invested PP too ... and it would be a shame all of the effort and dedication all these people put in to go to waste just because of one guy who plays dirty.

This is why I am voting yes on this idea. If this idea can somehow minimize this kind of thing from happening, it has my support.
 

Petzy

Well-Known Member
Reaction score
22
There is also the security aspect of this suggestion. It would improve security against the effect of hacked accounts that might be in a position to have tribe rights
 

DaWolf85

Senior In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Senior
Team
Reaction score
570
Just to elaborate a little more on why I think this matters: The duke role has only a few extra privileges versus the baron role. Disbanding the tribe is the most important of those extra privileges.

The reason this takes away so much from the game, is that it removes the main reason why it's important to keep a duke account secure. It should be important to keep a duke account secure, to make sure only the people you can absolutely, completely, inherently trust have access to those duke privileges. Changing that affects the game in a variety of ways, even if nobody is actually spying or looking to betray your tribe, because you always have to assume that they are.

Also, in my opinion, the vast majority of cases (nearly all, I suspect) where this change would be relevant, are related to coplaying. In that sense, I personally would view implementing this suggestion as a change of stance on officially supporting coplaying.
 

Guesswhosback

Active Member
Reaction score
106
Legit the stupidest idea I have ever seen. Maybe the problem is that a duke account have someone on the account they obviously cant trust and not the fact you can disband a tribe by two clicks
 
Top