taking some out

thepartybrigade

Guest
Why would he support them? It's pointless. He'll just send resources from his bigger ones to the small ones so they can build up troops fast. You'd lose more troops than it'd be worth to keep them clear then.
i was just going by what he said.

but my point is if there is 2 small enemy villages near me i'm taking those first then getting the bigger village,why give the enemy time to grow,right next door to me or get support in them?
 

Ripfin

Guest
for clarification, what is the amount for a "small" village?
because if its what i'm thinking, then if the enemy is going to support the smaller villages using defense from his bigger villages, then his more developed villages are left vulnerable.
he gets support from hios tribe mates and other tribe mates,need i remind you i have an alliance only with one other tribe and they are nowhere really near me,and i'm a tribe of one so things are stacked a wee bit against me,but i am getting irked a NAP of mine is supporting them,but if i go to war with them it will be a big brouha going :icon_wink: .

as far as village size if its in my area i don't care if its 116 points i'm taking it.

when it comes to village noblement for me i don't care about morale,or village size or how many troops in it,its all about location and if its in my area i'm taking it, its because of my strategy that i'm able to survive.
 

Ripfin

Guest
you didn't say that in your original post & we cannot be expected to know that unless you do :icon_wink:
my original post was if there are 2 small enemy villages by me and one larger village about 30 hours away like mimelim said i'm taking the ones right by me first.
 

Ripfin

Guest
Wow, you have lost all credibility, this simply isn't worth my time.

thats your opinion and your entitled to it just like i'm entitled to my opinion,all i'm saying is the little 1K point village in 10 i took helped me to get about 30 more from the enemy, so i stand by my philosophy.
 

servy

Guest
Why would he support them? It's pointless. He'll just send resources from his bigger ones to the small ones so they can build up troops fast. You'd lose more troops than it'd be worth to keep them clear then.
Then you just cat the farm and possibly the HQ.
 

Mimelim

Guest
And by leaving those large abandoneds abandoned, he's leaving a free village that can give him yet another offensive army without much trouble, which will help him in the warfare. So why should he not take the abandoned if he got a spare noble and can fight the enemy at the same time?

The more solid one's cluster is, the harder will it be for the enemy to retaliate, since it'll be easy to move troops fast within a big cluster rather than in a huge cluster where 70% of the villages are abandoned and there's long distances between the villages...
We aren't talking about large abandons, we are talking about small ones like those that a player with 14 villages would be targetting when they are attacking a player with 6-7 villages. Further, you shouldn't be able to spare nobles if you are effectively fighting your enemies. I have no problem with people pointwhoring. I have never once said that it isn't an acceptable way of playing TW.net. This entire e-penis stuff came about when Ripfin made some outlandish statements about me lacking credibility.

Now, to me this is obvious, if someone has 4 villages over 7k and 2 villages under 3k, you take the 4 7k villages and you bulldoze the two small ones and farm them to hell. For players with less than 20 villages that is optimal, wasting nobles on those ~2.5k villages is just that a waste. You have to build them up which is resource intensive and VERY time consuming. You have to wait a long time before it is self sufficient and a long time before you have a functional offensive army.

No where have I stated that taking abandons or team villages is a bad thing. Its about moderation and balancing their utility to the cost of NOT taking an enemy village. In this case a farm and a saved noble is worth a lot more than a tiny village that doesn't gain you much utility for several weeks. Again, I'm not knocking the concept of large clusters when you have 300+ villages. But advocating them for someone who has 20 villages is pretty poor if you want to expand quickly and eliminate threats early.
 

Mimelim

Guest
thats your opinion and your entitled to it just like i'm entitled to my opinion,all i'm saying is the little 1K point village in 10 i took helped me to get about 30 more from the enemy, so i stand by my philosophy.
And the rest of the time you were capping freebees, I took 10 116 point villages in K50 (from K53) and took over half a continent before I quit. Again, congrats you took over 30 enemy villages. I controlled the equivolent of several fold more than that. Seriously, can you not even keep straight what you are saying.

NO WHERE did I knock taking a 116 point village far away. I did it. You just stated this VERBATIM: "as far as village size if its in my area i don't care if its 116 points i'm taking it." Those aren't comparable. You here JUST showed what I am talking about in terms of location. That small village in a GOOD location was worthwhile. A 116 village right next to you (which you just said that you would take) is useless and a waste of time. This isn't an opinon type of thing. There is effective and there is ineffective. Your concept of "take everything on my map regardless of size is extremely ineffective. You aren't even arguing against me. You are just saying random things to try to justify the idiotic things that you have said here. Like the above quote at the beginning of this post, you just supported my argument that nobling far away is helpful. NO WHERE did I knock taking that kind of village. If you are incapable of basic logical argumentation stop posting in this thread.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

servy

Guest
my original post was if there are 2 small enemy villages by me and one larger village about 30 hours away like mimelim said i'm taking the ones right by me first.
30 hours away *scratches head*

I'm pretty sure my memory isn't that bad, because I never heard anyone meantion anything about 30 hours away. We're talking about not nobling the smaller villages owned by a target player, a target player with about half a dozen village total. Now why the heck would he have villages 30 hours apart at that size. We're talking about village that may not even be further out, and if they are they're on the order of 1-2 ish hours away, not 30. Early on villages 30 hours out don't even exists for all intensive purposes, unless you plan to relocate.
 

thepartybrigade

Guest
30 hours away *scratches head*

I'm pretty sure my memory isn't that bad, because I never heard anyone meantion anything about 30 hours away. We're talking about not nobling the smaller villages owned by a target player, a target player with about half a dozen village total. Now why the heck would he have villages 30 hours apart at that size. We're talking about village that may not even be further out, and if they are they're on the order of 1-2 ish hours away, not 30. Early on villages 30 hours out don't even exists for all intensive purposes, unless you plan to relocate.
Uh, why would you want villages close to you? That doesn't make any sense. Nobody should be nobling close to you. Also, if someone nobles close to you, you should take it from them quickly, wall down, no local troops. Also thats why it should be turned into a farm so that it isn't an attractive target. By location I meant that if the village is 30+ hours from you, its worth it because you don't want to noble that far and miss the noble hits...
found it for you lol. but mim was saying not to take the village 30+ hours away.
 

Mimelim

Guest
also last time i checked world 1 has been running a wee bit longer then world 2,hence why its called world 2, also not saying world 2 is perfect either too much tribal hugs and runners for my taste why i'm in my itsy bitsy tribe and not some big behomoth family tribe.
Dear Lord, I just went back and saw this gem. You played W2 for DOUBLE the time I played W1, READ THE DAMN POSTS BEFORE YOU RESPOND.
 

Ripfin

Guest
We aren't talking about large abandons, we are talking about small ones like those that a player with 14 villages would be targetting when they are attacking a player with 6-7 villages. Further, you shouldn't be able to spare nobles if you are effectively fighting your enemies. I have no problem with people pointwhoring. I have never once said that it isn't an acceptable way of playing TW.net. This entire e-penis stuff came about when Ripfin made some outlandish statements about me lacking credibility.

Now, to me this is obvious, if someone has 4 villages over 7k and 2 villages under 3k, you take the 4 7k villages and you bulldoze the two small ones and farm them to hell. For players with less than 20 villages that is optimal, wasting nobles on those ~2.5k villages is just that a waste. You have to build them up which is resource intensive and VERY time consuming. You have to wait a long time before it is self sufficient and a long time before you have a functional offensive army.

No where have I stated that taking abandons or team villages is a bad thing. Its about moderation and balancing their utility to the cost of NOT taking an enemy village. In this case a farm and a saved noble is worth a lot more than a tiny village that doesn't gain you much utility for several weeks. Again, I'm not knocking the concept of large clusters when you have 300+ villages. But advocating them for someone who has 20 villages is pretty poor if you want to expand quickly and eliminate threats early.

let me explain this to you in another way mimelim:

you have 3 villages in a small square an enemy has 2 small villages in that square it will take you what maybe 2-3 hours max to take those and have your nobles back which you can launch on the bigger ones which are probably about 6-7 hours away, so this way your nobling him faster before he can set up a decent offense or defense and if done right you can have him nobled out before he even logs on for the day.

in my example hes nobled in 8-10 hours in yours he would be nobled in 16-20 hours which is better?
 

Mimelim

Guest
To Jirki: I do not mean to insult W2 players in general. W1 and W2 are remarkably different worlds and I personally don't think that players en-masse should be compared between the two of them. I really meant no offense. I really don't want to argue the merits of certain large empire tactics here, its just a completely differen topic.

The whole purpose of my first long post was to do something very simple. It was to demonstrate that when it comes to understanding basic tactics I have a reasonable ammount of experience that is at least as much as Ripfin. In my opinion based purely on the numbers I think that its a pretty extreme case, but the intention was not to say "I'm better than you", its to simply say throwing around insults about someone's playing ability when in terms of 3rd party verifiable ino you look like shit compared to them is pretty damn stupid. If you are going to make claims like this at least be able to back them up instead of looking like a complete idiot.
 

Ripfin

Guest
To Jirki: I do not mean to insult W2 players in general. W1 and W2 are remarkably different worlds and I personally don't think that players en-masse should be compared between the two of them. I really meant no offense. I really don't want to argue the merits of certain large empire tactics here, its just a completely differen topic.

The whole purpose of my first long post was to do something very simple. It was to demonstrate that when it comes to understanding basic tactics I have a reasonable ammount of experience that is at least as much as Ripfin. In my opinion based purely on the numbers I think that its a pretty extreme case, but the intention was not to say "I'm better than you", its to simply say throwing around insults about someone's playing ability when in terms of 3rd party verifiable ino you look like shit compared to them is pretty damn stupid. If you are going to make claims like this at least be able to back them up instead of looking like a complete idiot.

what i took offense at is how you said i never fought any good enemies when i have, granted our worlds are differant, and play styles on both worlds are also differant, but i think like a logistician and try to accomplish my task in less time with the least amount of expended resources(except where morale fits in). don't get me worng i'm not sayin gyour idea is wrong for you but it would be wrong for me and world 2, nobody allows abandoneds to stay abandoned on world 2 since its land lost if allowed.
 

Mimelim

Guest
let me explain this to you in another way mimelim:

you have 3 villages in a small square an enemy has 2 small villages in that square it will take you what maybe 2-3 hours max to take those and have your nobles back which you can launch on the bigger ones which are probably about 6-7 hours away, so this way your nobling him faster before he can set up a decent offense or defense and if done right you can have him nobled out before he even logs on for the day.

in my example hes nobled in 8-10 hours in yours he would be nobled in 16-20 hours which is better?
Oh hey, a specific case. No shit... Taking the close villages first lets you take more villages faster. Oh wait, NOBODY DISPUTED THAT. That has NOTHING to do with a reason to take small villages. It would be faster to demo the close villages after you already took the far away villages. I have stated this already multiple times.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???? Where did I state ANY case where someone would be nobled in MORE time than you? Seriously, you just yet AGAIN brought up a completely new case COMPLETELY unrelated to anything previous to try cover up the idiotic things you have said already. I was arguing that you wouldn't noble those small villages EVER, not later. You would diminish the threat FASTER by simply targetting the large villages since the small ones don't have troops and will be sitting ducks for weeks to come that you can pick off as you please.
 

servy

Guest
let me explain this to you in another way mimelim:

you have 3 villages in a small square an enemy has 2 small villages in that square it will take you what maybe 2-3 hours max to take those and have your nobles back which you can launch on the bigger ones which are probably about 6-7 hours away, so this way your nobling him faster before he can set up a decent offense or defense and if done right you can have him nobled out before he even logs on for the day.

in my example hes nobled in 8-10 hours in yours he would be nobled in 16-20 hours which is better?
If you have spare nobles just lying around when you're that small you're doing something wrong. Sure, you can noble those 2 villages in a few hours, but it'll take you a few days to build up the resources to replace thouse nobles. That means either deleying your attack on the main villages, or it means you wasted the past several days saving up packets just to take these tiny villages.
 

Mimelim

Guest
what i took offense at is how you said i never fought any good enemies when i have, granted our worlds are differant, and play styles on both worlds are also differant, but i think like a logistician and try to accomplish my task in less time with the least amount of expended resources(except where morale fits in). don't get me worng i'm not sayin gyour idea is wrong for you but it would be wrong for me and world 2, nobody allows abandoneds to stay abandoned on world 2 since its land lost if allowed.
"good" is a relative term. I have no problem with someone taking tons of abandons and pointwhoring. But at least admit that that is what you are doing. You aren't fighting a real war. You are taking abandons instead of enemy villages. I can understand fighting a good opponent and needing to take 1 freebee for every 1 enemy village, but taking 2 to 1 over the ENTIRE course of an account's existance? That seems pretty pointwhorish to me.

Again, the lack of logic in this post is astounding.
 

Ripfin

Guest
Oh hey, a specific case. No shit... Taking the close villages first lets you take more villages faster. Oh wait, NOBODY DISPUTED THAT. That has NOTHING to do with a reason to take small villages. It would be faster to demo the close villages after you already took the far away villages. I have stated this already multiple times.

WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT???? Where did I state ANY case where someone would be nobled in MORE time than you? Seriously, you just yet AGAIN brought up a completely new case COMPLETELY unrelated to anything previous to try cover up the idiotic things you have said already. I was arguing that you wouldn't noble those small villages EVER, not later. You would diminish the threat FASTER by simply targetting the large villages since the small ones don't have troops and will be sitting ducks for weeks to come that you can pick off as you please.

let me get this right i thought the whole argument was about you stated you would rather noble the further bigger village first then the closer smaller villages right?i'm saying nay, furthermore you abdicated that abandoned villages stay abandoned, and while that may be the case on your world it is not on world 2 where abandoneds are nabbed as fast as possible since thats a new farm of troops to hit the enemy with no matter the size.
 

Ripfin

Guest
"good" is a relative term. I have no problem with someone taking tons of abandons and pointwhoring. But at least admit that that is what you are doing. You aren't fighting a real war. You are taking abandons instead of enemy villages. I can understand fighting a good opponent and needing to take 1 freebee for every 1 enemy village, but taking 2 to 1 over the ENTIRE course of an account's existance? That seems pretty pointwhorish to me.

Again, the lack of logic in this post is astounding.


but you miss the point,right now with current long term sitting rules i'm not given the luxury to attack the enemy as much as i noble our inactive player,the mods have already told us to hurry up since time is vastly running out,so hurry i must,furthermore, like i said i'm in a tribe basically by myself i've fought large family tribes and survived and the fact i have not merged into a large family tribe speaks for itself.
 

Mimelim

Guest
let me get this right i thought the whole argument was about you stated you would rather noble the further bigger village first then the closer smaller villages right?i'm saying nay, furthermore you abdicated that abandoned villages stay abandoned, and while that may be the case on your world it is not on world 2 where abandoneds are nabbed as fast as possible since thats a new farm of troops to hit the enemy with no matter the size.
Okay, so basically you can't play this game effectively, you can't do simple logic and you can't read. Great... No where did I ever say that. Why would I? That is completely illogical and was mentioned NO WHERE which both servy and I mentioned. Seriously, stop making up new things to argue about when NOBODY is arguing against those points because you are bringing up things that are obvious to anyone that has played this game for more than a month.