DeletedUser
Guest
sword you can't compare -MM- to every other tribe out there, you guys are good and do things your way. We are good and do things our way. Why can't we leave it at that?
- Status
DeletedUser
Guest
Whats there to poke holes in? He's just declared what the UA is going to do. Whether or not they do it or not is another thing. He can't predict the future and we don't know if he's a liar or not (though I have no reason to suspect he is, or isn't for that matter) so its not really a point of discussion imo.
A much better question would be, why did the game creators see fit to put a tribe member limit in the game?
DeletedUser53573
Guest
Because we're better?
You talk about "if we combine our tribes we'd be higher ranked" ect. Just do it. K based tribes are for the first months. Not now.
You could cut that alliance crap from 27 tribes to 8,9 or 10 tribes. Make everyone happier...
DeletedUser
Guest
Because we're better?
You talk about "if we combine our tribes we'd be higher ranked" ect. Just do it. K based tribes are for the first months. Not now.
You could cut that alliance crap from 27 tribes to 8,9 or 10 tribes. Make everyone happier...
Funny you say that, we're actually working on it soon ^_^
DeletedUser53573
Guest
DeletedUser
Guest
Some are actually curious what our rank would be lol.
DeletedUser
Guest
Ha you going to be making a play for the number one spot then?
DeletedUser
Guest
Naw, I'd be satisfied with top 10.
DeletedUser
Guest
You are so right, that explains why almost every tribe in UA is in the top 20 of player nobling tribes in the world every day the maps are updated. STFU and do research, k Thanks.
DeletedUser
Guest
Didn't think I'd get an answer to that one :icon_rolleyes:
DeletedUser
Guest
Another question is why there are no rules against family tribes?
DeletedUser
Guest
Because it would be impossible to implement. You should be a politician gunz, answering questions with questions.
Woodlandapple
Guest
Pointless. Too hard to implement without people diving through loopholes. They tried to make family tribes work less using the settings in W19. They have made it impossible to make family tribes in the settings in W27. It's obvious that the admins don't want people to make family tribes or they'd simply make the tribe limit unlimited, it would just be impossible to enforce said rules.
The tribe limit was set to unlimited originally on W1. That was changed. The tribe limit is there for a reason, and family tribes are simply a loophole for people trying to break out of the member limit to gain a numerical advantage against other tribes. Technically it's a form of cheating.
DeletedUser
Guest
Now family tribes are cheating? Come on WLA your being retarded now.
While Family tribes give you an advantage numbers wise organizing and maintaining a large family is very tough to do. Takes many solid leaders to keep all the egos in check and deal with day to day matters without going insane.
While Family tribes give you an advantage numbers wise organizing and maintaining a large family is very tough to do. Takes many solid leaders to keep all the egos in check and deal with day to day matters without going insane.
DeletedUser
Guest
Technically, no it's not.
For if it were, by your definition -- all alliances would be cheating.
Because that's what a tribal family is. It's just an alliance.
How ANY alliance functions is up to it's members & leaders.
For example, [BA]K4, [BA]K2 and DVA and TWA-N1 coordinated our attacks in k3 against the four SF~ tribes. This was all done via in-game messages.
By your definition, this sort of coordination would also be "cheating." Indeed, TW should shut down messaging outside of the tribe, to prevent such efforts.
You're position - if followed to its logical end - is to have TW ban all alliances.
All red dots, except you and your 99 tribemates.
An interesting concept, no doubt... but completely unenforceable. People can set up external communication systems to coordinate.
This game is, in essence, a chat room - with a war game. When people chat, they build relationships. This then translates into cooperation (or hostilities).
Indeed, the hardest coordination is the kind that occurs OUTSIDE my tribe.
It seems the UA gets criticized for having too many allies, despite the fact that tribe-to-tribe communication is MUCH more difficult than inner-tribal comm.
It's way easier to lead 99 player than to coordinate 2 or 3 other tribes.
Cheating? Hardly.
Woodlandapple
Guest
Please read all of my post. I'm fed up with people making retarded comments on single pieces of information they've picked out without making sure they have the slightest clue what context that information comes from.
It is a loophole to get past the member limit - a rule of the game. Last time i checked, trying to bend the rules to your advantage was cheating. Exactly the same concept as sitting a second account permanently to achieve multiple accounts.
There is a difference between family tribes and alliances. If you cannot see that then you quite frankly need to freshen up on your TribalWars vocabulary. If you class all your family tribes as simply allies, then that shows the true extent of how unorganised you are. family tribes are supposed to act as if one tribe. That is the point. They hold member overspill which cannot be put into the single tribe. Allies are seperate tribes, seperate diplomacy, simply helping each other in times of need. My point about family tribes being technically cheating was that they loopholed the member limit - as I explained above (I'm saying it twice this time so that maybe you'll notice) - allies do not.
Please, please actually read posts properly before you make idiotic comments like you just did.
It is a loophole to get past the member limit - a rule of the game. Last time i checked, trying to bend the rules to your advantage was cheating. Exactly the same concept as sitting a second account permanently to achieve multiple accounts.
There is a difference between family tribes and alliances. If you cannot see that then you quite frankly need to freshen up on your TribalWars vocabulary. If you class all your family tribes as simply allies, then that shows the true extent of how unorganised you are. family tribes are supposed to act as if one tribe. That is the point. They hold member overspill which cannot be put into the single tribe. Allies are seperate tribes, seperate diplomacy, simply helping each other in times of need. My point about family tribes being technically cheating was that they loopholed the member limit - as I explained above (I'm saying it twice this time so that maybe you'll notice) - allies do not.
Please, please actually read posts properly before you make idiotic comments like you just did.
DeletedUser
Guest
Breaking the rules is cheating bending the rules is certainly not. If the rules do not say specifically you can't do it then why can't you. The rules say you can't sit another account permanently they do not address anything whatsoever about family tribes.
DeletedUser
Guest
There's no way of banning family tribes without destroying the diplomacy part of the game. If the creators wanted massive tribes they wouldn't have bothered putting in a member limit. Its not cheating per se but its definitely an abuse of the diplomacy rules.
DeletedUser
Guest
Cheating:
v. intr.
1. To act dishonestly; practice fraud.
2. To violate rules deliberately, as in a game: was accused of cheating at cards.
3. Informal To be sexually unfaithful: cheat on a spouse.
4. Baseball To position oneself closer to a certain area than is normal or expected: The shortstop cheated toward second base.
Unless it is explicitly against the rules, it is not cheating. Please learn the meaning of the word "cheating" before you accuse people of it. The fact that I have to state to you the meaning of cheating is a reflection of your childish arguments, which is basically "if you don't play the game like we do, you're cheating". Cheating constitutes a violation of the rules, family tribes are far from it.
DeletedUser
Guest
Are you saying it doesn't loop-hole the member limit? Which is what WLA was saying.
- Status
