• Hello, Guest!
    Are you passionate about Tribal Wars 2 and like to help your fellow players?
    We currently have open positions for Forum Moderators!

    >> Join the Tribal Wars 2 Team now! <<
    We would love to hear from you!

Discussion of Tribal Domination

  • Thread starter DeletedUser1383
  • Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.

DeletedUser734

Guest
I'm going to be honest, I've never seen a community where the mods so consistently say screw you to the players.

Our opinions obviously mean nothing here and instead I'm being told how the game should be played by some dude who doesn't even play on this server.

Hell, you guys don't even bother to explain rules to us in any amount of detail. At this point I don't know why I even bother with these forums except stubbornness.
 

DeletedUser61

Guest
Shots fired, but coolnite honesty the only way to prevent it is to drop the tribal number limit. then they cant merge because the game wont allow it.
also on that note i think im going to keep saying this untill it happens sooooooooooo you should make it happen 50 person cap would be awesome. (hint hint wink wink nudge nudge)
Or tribes can do what was intended and fight it out.

Is recruiting not a part of this game? How does a tribe gain new members if they do not also recruit/accept applications? Is not a merge just a form of recruiting on a larger scale where you would obviously only really want to recruit the better members of a tribe but you allow most if not all to join out of respect and as a form of friendship? If a tribe is not allowed to recruit/merge then how do they grow when their members inevitably quit for various reasons or due to the endgame being so god awful and boring as it is now?
Prince you have been around long enough to know the difference between a tribe recruiting and merging. You guys make it seem like this strategy was not being used on purpose. Enough players have complained which JPEX20 took action to correct this. Wouldn't it be nice to see a tribe actually win a world because they have earned it (not by merging or recruiting (wink wink))?

Plan and simple. Players that saw this happening wanted the issue resolved and the issue was handled. When enough players report the same thing happening we look into these issues and adjust.

The rules can be modified or changed at any time.
There's an old saying:

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result! While there are some players that are upset about the new rule change there are many that have agreed and are very happy with it.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Or tribes can do what was intended and fight it out.


Prince you have been around long enough to know the difference between a tribe recruiting and merging. You guys make it seem like this strategy was not being used on purpose. Enough players have complained which JPEX20 took action to correct this. Wouldn't it be nice to see a tribe actually win a world because they have earned it (not by merging or recruiting (wink wink))?

Plan and simple. Players that saw this happening wanted the issue resolved and the issue was handled. When enough players report the same thing happening we look into these issues and adjust.


There's an old saying:

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result! While there are some players that are upset about the new rule change there are many that have agreed and are very happy with it.
14kNhVd.jpg


interesting enough I like the new rule, long overdue.
 

DeletedUser61

Guest
So what your saying is limiting the amount of people per tribe would hinder them from fighting it out?
No not at all (words never came out of my mouth) :)

What I'm saying is/would limiting the tribe limit fix the issue or will the top 50 merge? Personally I think (my thoughts only) to much is being put into the effect the new rule will have. What I have not seen yet is anyone that is deploying this strategy come forward and own up to it? Makes you wonder are they at fault?

Again this wasn't something determined to make a world go on and on as players can always speed up worlds by "fighting it out". For players to say oh lets merge so we don't have to fight and end world is just insane.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
it probably would because the other players will fight it out or quit. But if 50 people own 80% of the server dont they deserve the win?
 

DeletedUser61

Guest
it probably would because the other players will fight it out or quit. But if 50 people own 80% of the server dont they deserve the win?

I'll ask you the same question differently. If 50 players (top players I'm assuming you talking about) own 80% of the world but are in different tribes wouldn't you want to them to fight it out to see who is actually the better player? Now if these players were in the same tribe that's a completely different question but if they merged just to win can you really call the #1 player the better player?
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
Or tribes can do what was intended and fight it out.


Prince you have been around long enough to know the difference between a tribe recruiting and merging. You guys make it seem like this strategy was not being used on purpose. Enough players have complained which JPEX20 took action to correct this. Wouldn't it be nice to see a tribe actually win a world because they have earned it (not by merging or recruiting (wink wink))?

Plan and simple. Players that saw this happening wanted the issue resolved and the issue was handled. When enough players report the same thing happening we look into these issues and adjust.


There's an old saying:

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result! While there are some players that are upset about the new rule change there are many that have agreed and are very happy with it.

I've seen one player say he's agreed and a whole horde against. The definition of insanity has nothing to do with doing the same thing over and over again, but it is probably more related to seeing one player agree with you and thinking there are a whole bunch on your side.
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
And this isn't an issue to be resolved. It's part of the game you are removing. You think players are going to"fight it out" or more likely do you think they're all just going to quit end game because the end game sucks?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
I'll ask you the same question differently. If 50 players (top players I'm assuming you talking about) own 80% of the world but are in different tribes wouldn't you want to them to fight it out to see who is actually the better player? Now if these players were in the same tribe that's a completely different question but if they merged just to win can you really call the #1 player the better player?
For them to own 80% of the world they had to do a lot of fighting to get there, and honestly it kinda takes away from teh other worlds in the fact that those new worlds lose the challenge of facing those guys at full power as they will be distracted. that would also mean that 51-whatever is left probably are not playing anymore or joined so late that they wont win unless you change the morale to make it to whee only 1% fighting power against them. ( im not a huge fan of the morale factor either past a certain point but thats not the point of this post)

and if you REALLY want to find out who the #1 player on a server is, take out eh tribes portion. wouldn't that be interesting. to me a fun part of the game is diplomacy but like you said when you get 200 people tribes there is no one to have diplomacy with. and generally all the good players go to a few tribes anyway. Limit the number in each tribe and the merging will stop. least to the scale large scale as most people want to be a winner

however most times when a merge like that happens it due out of respect to those few that have been fighting for the entire server, some join others dont outa pure stubbornness. Another way to increase fighting between people, take out barbs and increase the resource output.

Saying you will nulfy merges when more than a few worlds have grown to the point of staleness is bad. plus the way i look at it the faster a world ends the more opportunity for the new guys to join and ACTUALLY have a chance at winning the world as opposed to joining a world 2-3 months late and battling with people who are super established in the core.

also relized i just avoided the question and yes i beleive you could call him one of the better players, i mean he still reached teh top spot right? but isnt that the point of the Obash, and honestly i would like to see the Dbash make it to the hall of fame because of the new supporting thing.
 

DeletedUser61

Guest
Wrasier05 very well put. While there are points to your post I do enjoy I think it would be beneficial for the world to see these players actually go head to head. What is happen is this. Player 1 wins world as player 2 is second. New world start same thing player 1 and 2 are in opposite tribes NEVER fight but come end of world merge. Same story.

What I do like and would agree to is eliminating barbs. When JPEX20 posted this new rule he did not mean that a player wishing to switch a tribe will be penalized or anything like that as players switch tribes all the time.
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Another possible solution reward the top 3 tribes when the world is ended. reward the leader of each tribe, small bonus, so they dont want to switch over. give incentive for not switching. not punishing for switching. people will fight harder if their is chance they will actually get rewarded for their fight.

give the top 50 for all bash say 50 coins, the tribe in 3rd 50 coins tribe in 2nd 100 coins tribe in 1st 200 coins per person. i would be way more likely to stick it out and fight if i knew i was going to get a bit more compensation for the time and effort i put into the world. leaders get 25 coins for leading the top 3 tribes.

if you ever get the war system in place give 10 coins for every war won to the people who were int he tribe when the war was won.

also important note because its a game the more coins you award least in small amounts the more likely people are going to spend money on stuff

The important thing to take away from this is DONT punish those who have a way to win, give incentive to win in other ways ALSO to prevent them from winning that way in the 1st place
 

DeletedUser

Guest
Prince you have been around long enough to know the difference between a tribe recruiting and merging. You guys make it seem like this strategy was not being used on purpose. Enough players have complained which JPEX20 took action to correct this. Wouldn't it be nice to see a tribe actually win a world because they have earned it (not by merging or recruiting (wink wink))?

I agree, the problem here is I've been asking in support for whether or not my tribe in us13 is going to be disqualified for having a merge earlier in the world back in april, as we've been accused of trying to "zerg" the world by EVERYONE, which was false and never was our intentions and we've made that perfectly clear and is not a fact, we couldn't help the fact that our only major competition at the time quit as soon as we attacked, and to which I have yet to get a good response back as nobody apparently knows.

NOW all the tribes that have been complaining about us have decided that the world is suddenly winnable by tribes other than mine, YET we're still waiting with our heads on the chopping block for whether or not we should even bother continuing in the world because if we're disqualified from the chance of winning, why even bother.

I've not had a problem with the no "merging to win" my problem is with who gets to decide who "merged to win" and who simply merged, I know mods don't want either happening but every tribe except 1 in my worlds current top 5 and rotating top 5 have had a merge at one point or another, YET it appears that only my tribe was on the chopping block. I would assume mine being the only one there because we're winning at the moment so anything we do is obviously just to ruin the fun for everyone else and is clearly only to win the world in the shortest time ever. (last bit being sarcasm)

I personally like the lower member limit idea and giving incentive to not merge without the idea of punishing those who have merged or had intentions of merging.

Hell IMP in us14 has an overflow tribe that is literally there just to fill their ranks with new players as the ones in the main tribe quit or go inactive, is that considered merging or recruiting or what?
 

DeletedUser

Guest
The new rule effects nothing before it was posted and made. It only effects from what happens when it was created and on.

Thank you, for clarifying that, It's greatly appreciated.

I still think some merges are "ok" (to an extent), but as I said before I do like this rule, as I was never a huge fan of merges to begin with myself (even though my tribe did have a merge and I do enjoy the new additions). I just needed that clarified for me so I could stop worrying about it, and put any worries my tribe had to rest.
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
The new rule effects nothing before it was posted and made. It only effects from what happens when it was created and on.

So anyone who merged the day before the rule got put into effect now has a huge advantage over anyone who was planning on merging later...
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
I'll ask you the same question differently. If 50 players (top players I'm assuming you talking about) own 80% of the world but are in different tribes wouldn't you want to them to fight it out to see who is actually the better player? Now if these players were in the same tribe that's a completely different question but if they merged just to win can you really call the #1 player the better player?

Let's be honest, the best player isn't the one who would win. The #1 player would be the only one who hasn't quit yet at the end of the game. The problem here is the end game, not the merging. Look at Yatogami's world that he's so proud of winning. It has 96 players in his tribe, and 94 players in all of the other top ten tribes combined. First off, if his enemies all merged into one tribe, the world would still be extremely unbalanced in his tribes' favor, but realistically, if ALL of those players are active, that's 190 players left playing a world that started with 49,998 players at one point. This game isn't a test of skill, it's a test of endurance. If you literally just don't quit, by the end of a world you're in the top 100 because that's all the active players that are left.

It isn't fun to play the game like that. Your travel times to reach an enemy become ridiculous and just going through 400+ villages and queuing up your troops can take over an hour. Then 9 times out of 10 you're only hitting an inactive anyway because everyone has quit already. So you're putting all this time an effort in and get no satisfaction.

This game has a serious problem, but I feel like this rule is a step in the wrong direction to fix that problem. It sounds like you had a previous world where players were sick of this and chose to deliberately end the world to make it stop. I don't think the right answer here is to demand that they should have fought it out to the end. Those players will probably mostly go on and play on new worlds because the start of a world, and the first few months is SO MUCH FUN. They probably just wanted to be able to experience that part of the game again. There are tribes that start up on EVERY world and do that. They play the first few months, have some fun, and then quit to join on a new world when it comes out. Some people are completionists and just wanted some sense of finality before they move on.

To be completely honest, I don't think the mods have any business stopping them from doing that. It's a game, if that's how they wanted to end it so they could start on new worlds then who are you to say "no, you have to fight it out". If you kept the world going then most probably would have quit anyway.
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
What I have not seen yet is anyone that is deploying this strategy come forward and own up to it? Makes you wonder are they at fault?

Again this wasn't something determined to make a world go on and on as players can always speed up worlds by "fighting it out". For players to say oh lets merge so we don't have to fight and end world is just insane.

I have absolutely been employing this strategy and will totally own up to it. On W3 at the end we got so sick of it we just took in 10 members of the enemy tribe in the middle of the day to end the game immediately. This was after we had probably recruited 10-15 of them because then they helped us eat up their inactive counterparts faster.

Now on W12 W/R and OTA have been planning on a merge since the start of the world. Our enemies have already accomplished several merges (KSE and KIS2 merged into KIS, WRL and NBK merged into HUG), but we decided to wait until the end of the world to complete our merge. Now suddenly this plan is against the rules.
 

DeletedUser255

Guest
Let's be honest, the best player isn't the one who would win. The #1 player would be the only one who hasn't quit yet at the end of the game. The problem here is the end game, not the merging. Look at Yatogami's world that he's so proud of winning. It has 96 players in his tribe, and 94 players in all of the other top ten tribes combined. First off, if his enemies all merged into one tribe, the world would still be extremely unbalanced in his tribes' favor, but realistically, if ALL of those players are active, that's 190 players left playing a world that started with 49,998 players at one point. This game isn't a test of skill, it's a test of endurance. If you literally just don't quit, by the end of a world you're in the top 100 because that's all the active players that are left.
But what you don't know is that my tribe has been fighting for literally all of the last year. We went from one war to the next and our opposition has never been unbalanced until they started losing. But nice try buddy, try and put down the months of fighting my tribe has endured to get to this point as if we aren't on the back end of the war and the fighting only just started yesterday.
 

DeletedUser734

Guest
You seem to have missed my point entirely.... I wasn't insulting your tribe or how you got there, I was pointing out that your tribe has already won your world by a long shot and that the world is probably getting pretty damn boring with a lack of enemies... Since everyone quits this game eventually
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top