Zain bigger than ...

PeterPaine

Guest
But for the record...if RL never had an affect on this game, I think -MM- (or the -MM- that I knew) would still be going strong.

If RL never affected TW ?
If RL never affected TW, then a lot of players would never have been rimmed - because they'd be on-line 24/7 ... marking every incoming, dodging and sniping all noble trains, re-nobling every lost village.
If RL never affected TW, then it might be impossible for anyone to ever win a village at all - because all the tribemates would always be on-line to send support, fakes, and counter-attacks.

I could go on here, but I think the point is clear. Dealing with RL is a part of TW. It's not an excuse for why tribe disbanded or fell apart. Everyone and every tribe has the same RL pressures to deal with.
 

DeletedUser67005

Guest
Again, UA was a massive family full of relpenishable stock to make up for losses.

I've said it a few times now. We know that Apoc had losses, but they just pulled up a few members/accounts currently not in use and found a new owner. We couldn't. We were MM, not Apoc-D, -C, -N, -F, -W, [BA], etc...

And thats why MM was a superior tribe. As a whole, MM were far better than any tribe on W18 (LEGION may have been pretty close, though). We didn't need back up, though we lost too much skill before the war. Not to mention MM were winning until too many players had to leave. We didn't have backup (a family set of tribes) to gangbang tribes with.

Sure, MM could have allied AoO, GoC, INF and Aggression (before the original wars), UAN... The list goes on. If MM had done that... Game over for UA. But they didn't. The east was fascinated with war, which can't be said for the UA (the west).
 

merritt olsen

Guest
Again, UA was a massive family full of relpenishable stock to make up for losses.

I've said it a few times now. We know that Apoc had losses, but they just pulled up a few members/accounts currently not in use and found a new owner. We couldn't. We were MM, not Apoc-D, -C, -N, -F, -W, [BA], etc...

And thats why MM was a superior tribe. As a whole, MM were far better than any tribe on W18 (LEGION may have been pretty close, though). We didn't need back up, though we lost too much skill before the war. Not to mention MM were winning until too many players had to leave. We didn't have backup (a family set of tribes) to gangbang tribes with.

Sure, MM could have allied AoO, GoC, INF and Aggression (before the original wars), UAN... The list goes on. If MM had done that... Game over for UA. But they didn't. The east was fascinated with war, which can't be said for the UA (the west).
how do you include [BA] in your list? even though we were allied with the APOC tribes we were neutral during -MM-'s war with APOC...i remember their were 2 players i wanted revenge on but i was not able to attack them because they were purple on my map...for this reason i lost out on a bunch of k0 and k1 villages...at the time we in [BA] were busy in our war with xGoCx and a few other tribes (i think khan and legion were at this time and their were others)..so your claim that [BA] was not interested in war is simply not true...both [BA] tribes were fighting 4-5 other tribes and APOC wa fighting 5-6 other tribes...so your claim we were a family of tribes is irrelevant as we were fighting an equal number of tribes..
 

DeletedUser67005

Guest
If BA was fighting so many opponents, why is their OD nowhere near as high as MM's, or even Apoc's?

so your claim we were a family of tribes is irrelevant as we were fighting an equal number of tribes..
But you were a family. You had tribes working together to fight off enemies. You may have been taking on multiple tribes at once, but the tribes you were fighting were not (generally) allied, and not supporting eachother.

MM warred INF and Aggression, but peace was later made with both. Though INF became close to MM, they generally fought by themselves, as did Aggression. MM wasn't circulating support to a bunch of locations. GoC wasn't helped by MM, LEGION wasn't (there may be a few acceptions, friends helping friends, etc).
 

Hakushaku

Guest
Yeah, too bad on every other world the good players beat the bad players.
Weird how every other world mass recruiting is a death sentence.
Why do we think it turned out differently here?
I think it worked out for 3 main reasons:

1. Unlike most families, TWA/Apoc had many players who could have ruled this world just as much without a family.
2. Some of these players were very efficient in organizing the advantages that families give while minimizing the weaknesses.
3. The combined aggressiveness of these players and size of the family convinced many of their enemies to switch sides (for fear or fascination), and unlike "elite" tribes TWA/Apoc welcomed them eagerly, thus breaking many front lines quickly.
 

Martin Longbow

Guest
I think it worked out for 3 main reasons:

1. Unlike most families, TWA/Apoc had many players who could have ruled this world just as much without a family.
2. Some of these players were very efficient in organizing the advantages that families give while minimizing the weaknesses.
3. The combined aggressiveness of these players and size of the family convinced many of their enemies to switch sides (for fear or fascination), and unlike "elite" tribes TWA/Apoc welcomed them eagerly, thus breaking many front lines quickly.
Most of the great players on other worlds are in fact opposed to families. Here that wasnt true.

I mean you basically stated their tactics and application of good strategy in anything worth doing ie. come to grips with realities of the endeaver embrace the stigmas maximize the positives and minimize the negatives.

I respect what they have done and esp Zain and David at this point. My favorite point was: (for fear or fascination) I will never understand these folks whose main principle seems to be self preservation. I have insticts toward it but I truly try to put that aspect down in my life.
 

Andrew Done

Guest
Preserving self is not a bad thing, as long as you don't compromise others in doing so. Principle needs to be considered but principles should not be regarded as set in stone, they should be constantly re-validated.
 

Martin Longbow

Guest
a principle by definition is a rule or standard (that you live by normally). I said main principle since it seems to be the overiding thing. Apparently, players tend to have principles and speak of principles since, they are in fact inspiring. But they lay them asside for the main principle self preservation. If you believe self preservation is important thats fine you are far from alone. Just saying I have seen people speak of high standards but they find a way to rationalize the self serving choices in the end.

I've always noticed that the people who shifted sides in this game are seldom celebrated especially the later and later they did that. The real focus(as far as celebration) seems to be committed chose sides from the beginning, and stuck with it.

Thats not to say all but most.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ffs7

Guest
Arguments between "smart" people are pointless.
Even more so if it means admitting that your enemies were actually
good, and could have won if things had gone a little different.

(And that they were probably better if you compared the best members
1 vs 1.)

Right, Pootsy-Andy-Putsy? :icon_neutral:
 

Andrew Done

Guest
Noone (that I recall) on the Apoc/BA side ever suggested that, individually, our better players were better than those of MM et al. That claim appears to have been one that has been consistently argued by MM et al (yourself, included, it would seem).

No, we in Apoc (and BA) have simply claimed that we had/have a game winning strategy. We advocated it very early on when those who opposed us in principle argued that it would never work and that we were ultimately doomed.

If things had gone a little differently (specifically Apoc had broken up and BA had sided with MM) then, yes, the outcome may have been different. That said I don't think that outcome would have been one in which MM would have won as it now appears that MM was in meltdown long ago.

The leaders of Apoc and BA recognised the importance of maintaining family integrity and their alliances and worked hard to ensure that the "little differently" scenario didn't happen (despite the best efforts of Apoc-W's leadership).

That's the story of W18. Debate...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

PeterPaine

Guest
U r a noob Mac!

How's that? Did I capture the essence of the forum. :)

I don't believe the Apoc alliance with BA was ever in doubt. I know there were arguments between members and leaders but at times when things were most strained, cooler heads always prevailed. Also, outward appearances notwithstanding... BA never seriously considered joining MM against Apoc. There were certain discussions that were entered into in order to get information. But that was the extent of things.
There was a lot of "wooing" of BA by Apoc's enemies after BA "split" from the UA.
But that was a desired response. It gave us information and access that we otherwise were not likely to get.
 

Andrew Done

Guest
Sssh Peter! No one is meant to know that!

How will you work MM for information now?

...
 

Plarinsucks

Guest
Most of the great players on other worlds are in fact opposed to families. Here that wasnt true.

I mean you basically stated their tactics and application of good strategy in anything worth doing ie. come to grips with realities of the endeaver embrace the stigmas maximize the positives and minimize the negatives.

I respect what they have done and esp Zain and David at this point. My favorite point was: (for fear or fascination) I will never understand these folks whose main principle seems to be self preservation. I have insticts toward it but I truly try to put that aspect down in my life.
True. We just opposed taking barbs.
 

Martin Longbow

Guest
I know this theory is unpopular amongst many great players, but I dont concede that "the not taking barbs rule" is critical. The spirit it seems to support though, is necessary which is attacking opponents since you cant grow otherwise and...making leaps when you do. I actually think that were it properly exploited by some players who are good at this game, it could have been a trait that made Apoc beatable. Because it limits a possible strengthing mechanism. In the end taking barbs is like using a calculator and I strongly suggest people dont use a calculator until they know the actual mechanics of solving a problem well. Yet I will use a calculator to get things done quicker.
I think the rule itself is extremely beneficial in the early stages of the game, and later can be a slightly limiting factor. Just my opinion.

I know that troops in former barbarian villages attack just as well as troops in former player villages. I am only half joking on this...troops from former barbs stack better.
 

Plarinsucks

Guest
I know this theory is unpopular amongst many great players, but I dont concede that "the not taking barbs rule" is critical. The spirit it seems to support though, is necessary which is attacking opponents since you cant grow otherwise and...making leaps when you do. I actually think that were it properly exploited by some players who are good at this game, it could have been a trait that made Apoc beatable. Because it limits a possible strengthing mechanism. In the end taking barbs is like using a calculator and I strongly suggest people dont use a calculator until they know the actual mechanics of solving a problem well. Yet I will use a calculator to get things done quicker.
I think the rule itself is extremely beneficial in the early stages of the game, and later can be a slightly limiting factor. Just my opinion.

I know that troops in former barbarian villages attack just as well as troops in former player villages. I am only half joking on this...troops from former barbs stack better.
lol

Look at world 6. Its incredible how many barbs they have taken. They have filled up the ks.

It is a strategy and it could have been used. They just didn't want to take that route.

I still like you Martin.
 

mwetmore

Guest
...The spirit it seems to support though, is necessary which is attacking opponents since you cant grow otherwise and...making leaps when you do...
The main point, in my mind, is it forces people to keep working with each other. Sometimes it sucks, but it ends the game for people who can't play well with others, and self-selects those who can. That winnowing process is part of how we made sure had a solid team in place who'd been through lean times (planning and executing on long jumps) and times of bounty (when a player or tribe capitulates under the coordinated pressure.)
 
Last edited by a moderator: