Someone had to...

DeletedUser

Guest
Yea they messed up, they should have attacked earlier. The more time they wait, the weaker they become in relation to Riot!.
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
Wars are most effective at the early stages of a world. Later on they turn into drawn out wars of attrition, early wars are much more quickly and decisively ended.

The most effective way to beat an enemy tribe is to never let their members reach academy.

Completed D villages are much stronger than completed O villages, but due to build-time offense is stronger early on. As such early-world aggression pays off quite well.
 

DeletedUser80534

Guest
Just stack what they plan to noble and spike all the barbs near them, well once they're done with internals xd
 

A14C

Guest
Mintyfresh said:
The only people who think early wars are better than mid-late wars are those who dont have the capabilities (for whatever reason) to win a mid-late war.
Click to expand...

Not that I have stated whether or not early wars are better than mid-late wars, there is absolutely no justifiable way you can come to that conclusion when each war should be taken on a case by case basis. Wars early stunt overall growth in comparison to the world which is true but if you are going to struggle to get to mid-late game due to a 'powerhouse' tribe steaming ahead nearby it's very arguable that attacking them now may be the best option.

It's not difficult to see that this war may very well be the correct decision at this point when Riot have arguably so many advantages over the tribes around them. It's such a small minded way of thinking to definitively decide that a war is the wrong decision because it is early.
 

DeletedUser108039

Guest
Mintyfresh said:
The only people who think early wars are better than mid-late wars are those who dont have the capabilities (for whatever reason) to win a mid-late war.
Click to expand...
I Don't believe this is true. its easy to stop someone when you have endless troops. its harder when you don't

End game is easy and boring, the players who win most late games are terrible they just stick around long enough.

When you won a few worlds the appeal of playing a game over and over even when you are bored silly. whats the point? go have fun doing something else.


Early > mid > Late(boring throw nukes at people and stack galore)
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Riot! will win the sim city game vs. these tribes and easily. They are making the best of their circumstances.
 

DeletedUser120160

Guest
Personally I find early/mid wars a lot of fun. Troops are usually relatively sparse meaning clever play can pay huge dividends.

I have taken out many TW players early on, that probably are overall better players than me, just because they underestimate their oppoments and throw troops around like it's late game.

Also think teamwork can come even more into focus in these wars than later on when 1-2 players can hold a front
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
Mintyfresh said:
The only people who think early wars are better than mid-late wars are those who dont have the capabilities (for whatever reason) to win a mid-late war.
Click to expand...

Arrogant post of the year award goes to Mintyfresh.

>> Acknowledges being bad at math.
>> Proceeds to talk down to people on a game that revolves around math.

What is lacking is your capability to actually defend this argument you're making without relying on ad-hominem.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser80534

Guest
Early game is where you gain K dominance by actually attacking. Mostly the rest of the time you gain ground with smart diplo and playing on the insecurities of other tribes to destroy them, invite their best players and eat the rest, get spies, merge and die.

In late game its 50% eating inactives and 50% deadlock with a turtle rim tribe. I dont think many of these worlds lately see much of a late game though. I mean they're more like slow HP rounds.
 
Mintyfresh

Mintyfresh

Skilled Soldier 18 & Master Commander 21 & 22
Reaction score
4,382
Lol I'm sorry I didn't mean to trigger everyone. If you enjoy early game and have a blast in early game wars then feel absolutely free to make the most of it. At the end of the day we're all playing the game to have fun in our own way so far be it from me to tell anyone how to play.

To elaborate on my stance, I'm a firm believer in winning the world as an indicator for success/entertainment. In my opinion early game wars are extremely detrimental towards the long term goal of winning the world. Therefore I don't think early game wars are the best course of action in any scenario provided your goal is to win. If your goal is to have as much fun as possible and not worry about winning then more power to you :)
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
I'm not talking about fun, I'm talking about effectiveness. Early world is the stage which it is most effective to eliminate threats.

I don't think anyone here that disagreed with you primarily did it from a stance of what's more fun to them.
 
Last edited:

thebigt625

Guest
ALessonInPointWhoring said:
I'm not talking about fun, I'm talking about effectiveness. Early world is the stage which it is most effective to eliminate threats.

I don't think anyone here that disagreed with you primarily did it from a stance of what's more fun to them.
Click to expand...

I think its all proportional.

Sure, an early war can be fun, get some juice flowing, work on team work, get a couple 2, 3, 4k villages that you have to put a lot of work into to make even useful for the war you're currently in.

But those same wars are often wars where you take 10 villages in 3 weeks because you're fighting through 1200/1200 troops and no one even has a full nuke yet.

which those stats seem better than any tribe is even able to accomplish yet honestly
(Although I haven't checked the stats of every "war" going on right now)

Early mid-game is when your efforts can be truly cashed in on in a tribal manner.

Where true diplomacy matters, where you actually need to be afraid of your incomings to an extent, and where a decent op can land your tribe 25-50 villages at once seems pretty effective And fun.

Also, its hard to be effective when there are only a few players with actual trains ready to go.

And anyone who actually thinks super late game is fun... is only when you're in the only major dominant tribe left. Which is also boring anyway.
But winner winner chicken dinners are still delicious.

Proportions. Portions. Chicken dinners.
 

The Frog

Still Going Strong
Reaction score
190
thebigt625 said:
I think its all proportional.

Sure, an early war can be fun, get some juice flowing, work on team work, get a couple 2, 3, 4k villages that you have to put a lot of work into to make even useful for the war you're currently in.

But those same wars are often wars where you take 10 villages in 3 weeks because you're fighting through 1200/1200 troops and no one even has a full nuke yet.

which those stats seem better than any tribe is even able to accomplish yet honestly
(Although I haven't checked the stats of every "war" going on right now)

Early mid-game is when your efforts can be truly cashed in on in a tribal manner.

Where true diplomacy matters, where you actually need to be afraid of your incomings to an extent, and where a decent op can land your tribe 25-50 villages at once seems pretty effective And fun.

Also, its hard to be effective when there are only a few players with actual trains ready to go.

And anyone who actually thinks super late game is fun... is only when you're in the only major dominant tribe left. Which is also boring anyway.
But winner winner chicken dinners are still delicious.

Proportions. Portions. Chicken dinners.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top