W64 Blogger!

DeletedUser

Guest
Easy.Farm said:
When does a "good start up player" turn into a "good player"?
Click to expand...
Simply put, they may not be good at mid to late game play, but it doesn't mean they don't know how to coordinate tribe members, talk their way out of unwanted situations or to the fact of being able to keep Tribe Members in check when things get out of hand.

There are players that can't build a village if their survival on the world depended on it, but they make up what they lack in this area with being charismatic, trust worthy and bluntly honest with their opinions. There are players that don't have PR skills (easily lose their temper etc) that build excellent villages.

So technically, there is more than just building your village that makes you a "good player".
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Pragmatic Wisdom said:
Simply put, they may not be good at mid to late game play, but it doesn't mean they don't know how to coordinate tribe members, talk their way out of unwanted situations or to the fact of being able to keep Tribe Members in check when things get out of hand.

There are players that can't build a village if their survival on the world depended on it, but they make up what they lack in this area with being charismatic, trust worthy and bluntly honest with their opinions. There are players that don't have PR skills (easily lose their temper etc) that build excellent villages.
Click to expand...

That does not really answer to my question. I am interested in how much longer I have to stay on top to be considered a good player? I guess atm I may consider myself a decent start-up player, but not really a good player...
 

DeletedUser1082

Guest
Win a world. Simply put.
As far as when startup ends, there's a great deal of contention, personally i believe after a player has 10 villages they are not in startup, but even after that it takes a while to tell whether you are good at that stage of the game.
So i suppose the short answer is that there is no short answer, and nobody will even unanimously think you are a good player. As soon as you feel confident in your own abilities in all fields you could call yourself good, but yeah, winning a world is a more or less undisputed indicator of a good player.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I'll have to disagree with you Malreaux on your opinion that only players who win the world can be considered good players. That is so not true. I have seen many players that have multi-million accounts that don't know how to backtime, snipe, or even time attacks. So it doesn't have to be the case. Players who win the world can be considered the most persistent. Not saying that players who win the w are not good players ofc, some of them, or most of them if you'd like are, but some of them can be noobs that ended up in a nice area, in a nice tribe, and so they never experienced to much of the trouble to deal on their own. Tribe pushes them and helps them.

Good players are good because they have skill, because they use brains, because they plan their actions, next steps, because they work well with their neighbors, because they have diplomacy skills and can solve their problems by just talking when there is an opportunity to do that. Activity and time to play is still a huge factor as well. There are good players that have no time to play after they get let's say 100 villas, to tag thousands of attacks, or they just don't like that part of the game. I for example like the mid game the most. It's the most fun part and most of the possible skills you can deploy as an individual can be done then. And as a team. Latter, game changes a lot. It still requires some skill, and organization, but then it's mostly about the diplomacy and about having a good leadership that will run the tribe towards the victory and plan it's steps and members targets/actions in the tribe's best interest.

So.. in my opinion, not only the end game players are good ones. Anyone can be a good player and anyone can get to the end of the world, there just isn't a pattern for that. And that's why this game is fun. That's why we play it :)
 

DeletedUser93450

Guest
I disagree with both of you. Good players don't exist, they're a myth.
 

DeletedUser93450

Guest
Seems to be a common misperception. I'm not a good player, sorry.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

DeletedUser

Guest
Malreaux said:
Win a world. Simply put.
As far as when startup ends, there's a great deal of contention, personally i believe after a player has 10 villages they are not in startup, but even after that it takes a while to tell whether you are good at that stage of the game.
So i suppose the short answer is that there is no short answer, and nobody will even unanimously think you are a good player. As soon as you feel confident in your own abilities in all fields you could call yourself good, but yeah, winning a world is a more or less undisputed indicator of a good player.
Click to expand...

This is not necessarily true at all. This reply will be short but I would like to point out a couple of things. You know who karmalot is right? He is renowned around the tribal wars world for being one of the best leaders and players of all time. Now did he win the world he was on? He did not, he was just a brilliant player. I am sure if you were to compare a lot of world winning players to him he would be a lot better than them. I know people who win worlds without even knowing how to use scripts and manually sending their noble trains. An indicator of a good player is by how they play not whether they win. Another example is Osiadus. He was rank 1 on W51 for half a year at one point leading my almost 4 million points. Was he a better player than the rest? Not at all. He was a point whore. It is about how well they play and not their points or if they end. I appreciate your views though and as a lot of people know I hate contradicting people but I would just like to point this out.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
omg a hippy said:
Since when?
Click to expand...

Since not only when Malreaux and others have mentioned it but also since the old days of tribal wars. Before worlds were beyond 20. If you don't believe me just ask any veteran player or look at one of the top 20 tribe posts by malreasux to find out yourself. He was also very big on the forums.
 

DeletedUser1082

Guest
In terms of great players i don't rate karmalot amazingly high. Certainly respectable but not amongst the best, but as a leader i think he is excellent.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Malreaux said:
In terms of great players i don't rate karmalot amazingly high. Certainly respectable but not amongst the best, but as a leader i think he is excellent.
Click to expand...

I can live with that. Sounds fair.
 

DeletedUser1082

Guest
Once a week is how often they come, but i may make some blogs unrelated to w64 in due course
 

DeletedUser19348

Guest
Nice work mate.

Liking these updates cant wait too see what happens in next few months
 

shagohad

Guest
i like the 2nd installment... just waiting for you to work your way down to more tribes.... aka DX
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Great read there Steve, to date one of the better bloggers that I've read. Very easy to understand without going overboard. I look forward to your newer blogs as they're released.

On another note, considering the flack that ELITE has gotten throughout the opening stages of the World I'm pleasantly surprised that they're doing so well. In saying that I also had no idea that Panda was in-fact Karma, this to me is a genuine surprise and I'll be looking at ELITE far more closely because of this. I wonder why he decided to mass-rec though :icon_confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top