Someone had to...

DeletedUser80534

Guest
Early wars aren't really a choice. It is a must for any tribe to eliminate K threats as soon as they can to thereby gain dominance of their entire K.

From the pov of a dominant tribe. There will be skirmishes for sure, and a few tribe members might be lost and have setbacks. If skirmishes can be avoided, you can gain a head start, having higher troop counts and better villages, etc.

However, as soon as a threat presents itself it must be dealt with. For instance, another well co-ordinated tribe is popping acads. But this might not happen at all, and whoever popped acads near you might be easy targets, in which case you can continue growth without much conflict improving your head start.

Your entire K might even be filled with food instead of threats, in which case you're bound to clash with a tribe next door at some point as you move to midgame.

Not needing to face any threats in early game will extremely improve the head start, but might induce boredom.

I dont think there is much of a choice on whether or not you need to war a threat on your K, but you can play some diplo to try and delay the inevitable.

Looking from the pov of the less organised tribe filled with bad village builders without troops. They would not be able to compete with the better tribe in early game, and thus even while knowing a threat exists, wont be able to do anything about it. For instance, better tribe is popping acads while slow tribe is popping spearz.

Whatever skirmish they initiate will only add to their already massive setback while doing nothing will make them food.

Attempting to deal with the threat of a better tribe is near to impossible in early game because they simply lack the resources. The only way for them to compete is by being noobs in numbers. Families, hugging, retarded development.

So yea, avoiding wars early on is better for the dominant tribe, but not so great for the underdogs. For survival they need to act together in greater numbers.

I'm sure there are some other great tribes on the K though, who are simply behind because they didnt account push. With a well co-ordinated war and allies, they could still take the top spot.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I wonder if this disagreement is a matter of perspective.

I am still very much in the camp that early game warring is a situational tool that tribes should be prepared to utilise. In this particular case for example, I do not see a particularly clear path for any of these coalition tribes to dominate K54 without warring Riot! early. The advantages that Riot! have in terms of player skill/activity, free villages and spread really give them a very high chance of just outgrowing these guys in the longer term. Their best chance if I was honest is now, not that they have a huge chance.

I wonder whether your winning from startup was related to your general philosophy on early game wars or not. From my experience of being in worlds when a tribe was dominant from start to finish, there was almost always an earlygame gangbang against them. People are no fools, they understand the threat certain tribes possess. Tribes with better players, better spread, more activity, coplayers etc., you cannot simply out-macro those tribes and if you are in their general path of expansion, you will not end up lasting long. Now there are many paths to winning a world from early game as an individual that do not involve early wars. For example, if you were in Edge and they did not early war and they fell apart, you could then potentially join Riot! peacefully and win the world through that route.

That though is as an individual who can skip to whatever tribe he or she so chooses. The only way that Edge can win as a tribe, asides from praying for a catastrophic failure from Riot!'s end, is to wipe out Riot! as early as possible. This doesn't mean they will win or be in an advantageous position overall, they may well be weaker than if Riot! was not there and they were allowed to grow freely. The fact of the matter is, for Edge, Riot! exists and is a threat that needs to be taken care of before it grows out of control.

For Riot!, though you are right. If you only spend your time in the front-runner tribe, then it benefits you to just have peace and outgrow the other tribes in the area and slowly pick them off one by one. They'd prefer peace I'm sure at least from a strategic perspective, but alas they have no choice in the matter.
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
Funny thing is I've actually won 100% of my startups. Here is my history:

I question the accuracy of that statement, especially since your account looks to have joined every world between W2 and W15 other than W12, but that really isn't something worth debating since it isn't relevant. Winning worlds where you started an account on is NOT the same as being good at startup itself. Surviving startup isn't the same as thriving during that stage of the world.

Also adding the argument "Sir cornish believes im right" is possibly the worst one you could have made lol

By no means was I suggesting that cornish agreeing with me gives my point of view merit, merely that calling it a circle jerk seems a bit silly, since if anything he'd more likely be predisposed to disagree me.

I will say this much though: I believe you have a dramatically different view of startup than I do in large part due to you playing TribalWars in a different era than I did. It is very possible that early-game wars are far less optimal nowadays than they were back before you could purchase resources, or speed up construction, etc.

ie. The example I used of a tribe that went on to win a world after engaging in an early war and profiting immensely from the early war was on W32, years before any form of pay-to-win features existed. As such catting someones smithy to the ground effectively prevented them from creating catapults for a lengthy period of time, and you could cat smithies to set people back by days once they were close to reaching academy. While those types of maneuvers were decisive and crippling back then nowadays not so much since if you cat someones smithy to the ground they can buy res and pay to rebuild it nigh instantly.
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
To be fair Hate. was just one of the better tribes to grace this game. Even for that era where the competition was higher, they were well regarded as being a truly excellent tribe.

Every other tribe in that world was leagues below Hate. and I say that as someone who was in [H], the iP remake. They weren't even close.

Oh, I know how dominant Hate. was, I was in Hate. :p

Point still stands though that if they considered a early war to be advantageous and used it to their advantage as opposed to being crippled by it, that it wasn't their only way to win or a last resort.

For Riot!, though you are right. If you only spend your time in the front-runner tribe, then it benefits you to just have peace and outgrow the other tribes in the area and slowly pick them off one by one. They'd prefer peace I'm sure at least from a strategic perspective, but alas they have no choice in the matter.

I think this is largely setting dependent. I think an early war was good for Hate., but would be bad for Riot!. Riot! doesn't necessarily have more troops, they have higher mines, which is a different dynamic from a world where the top tribe contains single accounts that farm more than other entire tribes.
 
Last edited:

DeletedUser

Guest
I think this is largely setting dependent. I think an early war was good for Hate., but would be bad for Riot!. Riot! doesn't necessarily have more troops, they have higher mines, which is a different dynamic from a world where the top tribe contains single accounts that farm more than other entire tribes.

Well I'd personally be building up troops on my supercharged accounts with multiple villages and level 30 pits whilst continuing to take very cheap villages.

I should note from my personal experience thus far this world, an early-game war with Beast at catapults was definitely considered by my tribe Code as a possible option before going an alternative route. I think the reputation gain for winning a war early on is oft overlooked as a factor to success. Being perceived as a solid tribe that is not to be messed with is good not only diplomatically but also looked for by potential members.
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
Well I'd personally be building up troops on my supercharged accounts with multiple villages and level 30 pits whilst continuing to take very cheap villages.

I should note from my personal experience thus far this world, an early-game war with Beast at catapults was definitely considered by my tribe Code as a possible option before going an alternative route. I think the reputation gain for winning a war early on is oft overlooked as a factor to success. Being perceived as a solid tribe that is not to be messed with is good not only diplomatically but also looked for by potential members.

Yeah, I'm not saying I actually think other tribes have more troops than Riot! necessarily, but the gap is surely not like it would be on a farming world with a top tribe.

At this stage of a farming world, top accounts have had 24/7 queues for a long time, but average accounts have not, as such the top accounts have a big edge at this stage where they rebuild their losses much faster than most people would. Late-game that's less of a thing since every account has high mines, and thus can afford constant queues.
 

DeletedUser80534

Guest
Marking the map red to better spot enemies doesnt count as a war nauz XD.

I just recently witnessed cat OPs on W93 where they took down huge PP spenders before they could noble, otherwise there would be no way to compete.
 

Mintyfresh

Skilled Soldier 18 & Master Commander 21 & 22
Reaction score
4,382
I question the accuracy of that statement, especially since your account looks to have joined every world between W2 and W15 other than W12, but that really isn't something worth debating since it isn't relevant. Winning worlds where you started an account on is NOT the same as being good at startup itself. Surviving startup isn't the same as thriving during that stage of the world.

I see what you mean @ twstats which is kinda wierd as 57 genuinely was my first world. I made this forum account at the same time. My memory is a bit hazy of what i was doing exactly 7 years ago but if those older worlds were still open i may have joined them in order to practice builds or something? Either that or someone else has good taste in names and it was released after X period of time so it was available when i started.


By no means was I suggesting that cornish agreeing with me gives my point of view merit, merely that calling it a circle jerk seems a bit silly, since if anything he'd more likely be predisposed to disagree me.

Well its simple, Martin hates me more than he hates you :D. But you're right it is silly he just triggers me really hard for some reason

I will say this much though: I believe you have a dramatically different view of startup than I do in large part due to you playing TribalWars in a different era than I did. It is very possible that early-game wars are far less optimal nowadays than they were back before you could purchase resources, or speed up construction, etc.

ie. The example I used of a tribe that went on to win a world after engaging in an early war and profiting immensely from the early war was on W32, years before any form of pay-to-win features existed. As such catting someones smithy to the ground effectively prevented them from creating catapults for a lengthy period of time, and you could cat smithies to set people back by days once they were close to reaching academy. While those types of maneuvers were decisive and crippling back then nowadays not so much since if you cat someones smithy to the ground they can buy res and pay to rebuild it nigh instantly.

I cant really comment on anything pre-world 80 because w57 Im not gonna lie I was just a lucky noob who found good friends more than anything else (probably the same as most peoples first win). I've only started to look in depth at the game post return at w84. I will state for the record though my pp usage is relatively minimal as i would prefer to lose a village rather than pp wall then look back and reflect on what i could have done to avoid losing the village in the first place. Then apply that to all aspects where pp could be used.

I suppose i see your point and i'll correct my previous statement:

"Most people who engage in early wars rather than mid-late wars are those who dont have the capabilities (for whatever reason) to win a mid-late war."

There are always exceptions which i did not account for originally

I still stand by my stance that if you're in the position where your best option is to risk it all on an early game war to stand on an equal footing with someone else then you're better off developing your skillset for another world where you dont need to be in the position where that is your best option
 

ALessonInPointWhoring

Contributing Poster
Reaction score
408
I will state for the record though my pp usage is relatively minimal as i would prefer to lose a village rather than pp wall then look back and reflect on what i could have done to avoid losing the village in the first place. Then apply that to all aspects where pp could be used.

It's not so much that I am saying I believe you have an over-reliance on pp, just that your opponents having those options available to them changes what the optimal strategy is for you whether you use pp or not.

The last .net world I played with anything resembling competitive intent was W63, so I still tend to consider the games strategies from the perspective of someone playing a game that has no pay-to-win features.

I also agree with you that if you're, for example, in a position where you need to be part of an anti-riot coalition to have a chance that you've probably already lost.
 

DeletedUser114002

Guest
Its high time K44 stops nobling gifted accounts and actually fight for their villages

Thats the map of Top 15 ODA players. You can see K44 is all about gifting. Goodluck to either sides
upload_2018-5-25_1-43-51.png
 

DeletedUser80534

Guest
For a moment I thought I saw the hidden secret account I'm playing as a co on that map, then went to check my OD and saw that we're not quite in the top 15 ODA yet, *thanks teh TW gods.
 

Deleted User - 11365688

Guest
i heard they send two nobles in one attack, of course they need more than 7 allies
 

canigire

Guest
I need more then 7 allies :(
 

Attachments

  • 9387336B-389D-47E3-8C38-CF9EE366008D.jpeg
    9387336B-389D-47E3-8C38-CF9EE366008D.jpeg
    139.8 KB · Views: 37

canigire

Guest
Btw five pounch you can eat this one too like others his troops gone
 

Mintyfresh

Skilled Soldier 18 & Master Commander 21 & 22
Reaction score
4,382
tfw someone brags about a clear but doesnt hide own units lol
 
Top