Never going to happen...
And just to point it out - worlds have ended on .de, and will end on .net most likely starting with W12.
(Top player on the first .de world to close had something like 11k villages or something - like double the second guy - tribes win worlds, not players - hence the name tribalwars.)
Linky - This was managed in 3 years. the total points in the world, if you look at the tribes, comes to a little over 400mil. Considering the fact that he already has 130mil, It would only take him half the time again to get another 70mil, if that, bringing him to 200mil, half the entire points value of the world. Considering a constant rate of expansion based on the previous expansion of the account (certainly feasible), that would bring him to 200mil in, oh, about 4.5 - 5 years. That's a little bit less than 100, no?
and on a side note, I guess you haven't heard of half-priced packets, kindofabigdeal. the stage at which they are introduced varies, but when it is offered the world gets to vote on whether to halve the price of packets, assuming it goes though, that would cut the time needed in half.
Secondly, as I just noticed Weasel has also said: a player would not have to noble every village to own the entire world: barbs don't count towards dominance. Again by skipping the barbarians and simply taking out all remaining players, you could be the single player on the world by only taking about 75% or less of the villages.
Thirdly, about the "skill/playing the game will result in mergewars experts taking the top places and eventually winning", I have three things to say:
a)Experience in war: A player who has been fighting for his or her villages since the start of the war will be MUCH more accustomed to... having to fight for them. Being mass attacked, having 3k+ incoming, dodging, stacking, sniping, timing.. all the skills that can only he honed through constant practice. You put one of those guys in a war situation and they excel at it. You put an internals and barb munching 15mil player in a fight with a war hardened 9mil veteran, and I'd bet on the 9mil, hands down. Even a 4mil player would probably be able to hold hit or her own, despite being 1/4 of the size of the bigger, which brings me to my next point...
b) Relative Inconsequentiality of Points Differences: once you get past about 1/2mil in a world, the total amount of points isn't really what matters anymore, to a large extent. What matters is LOCAL points differences, and Even then, it doesn't matter as much as it did for smaller amounts of points.
To give an example, I've played a 1.8mil account up to 4.8mil in the last 6 months. I think, in that time, I've attacked one player smaller than me, and most of the players I've been fighting with have been over 8mil. Has it stopped me from taking villages? No. Have I lost any villages to them? None. What it came down to was coordination, Activity and Experience. I was much more used to fighting then some of my enemies, I had a better position than others, Others crumbled and failed to function entirely when given over 1k incomings. Moral of the story? their points, gained through barb munching and gifted villages were effectively useless when they didn't know how to use them properly. However, the biggest factor in a war-hardened tribe succeeding is...
c) Tribal Coordination: Let's consider the BBC Gangbang that recently started. ASYLUM, who have had a large amount of experience in war, including a 4/5 month crash course in fighting two tribes that coordinate well, are well used to war. At the start of this (I don't know what it's like now) they were outnumbered 6:1 by their attackers. What are the scores? Well, nowhere near 6:1 anyway. In fact, it's not even 2:1. the BBC may be winning, but the ratio at which they're winning is atrocious in comparison to what they should have, if relative points difference is what decides whether you'll win or not. A well coordinated tribe, half the size of their enemy, can easily push back their opponents if they work together, strike together, and keep up the pressure, and a tribe which is hardened in war, with smaller but more experienced players, can easily manage this.
Finally ... I took too long writing the last part, and forgot to write down what my last point was. You may assume that it completely crushed any other argument that you had
In essence, the game balances itself. Players who don't fight for their vills don't know how to use them, and will lose them to better players. When the game gets slow, stimuli are introduced, like half price packets, which double the effective rate of nobling. Finally, a tribe of 40 could own the world if they all had 2.5 continents each. A crazy sounding proposition, but there is under 25mil points in any one continent. that means 2.5K's comes to about 62.5mil. The rank 1 player on w2 right now has 40 mil, after about 3.5 years of playing. So a tribe could theoretically manage to take every village in the world in... oh, about 3,4 years. Feasibly, it would probably take more towards a Decade
However, it is all entirely possible, and it won't necessarily be the mergers who do it.
