Discussion of Tribal Domination

Discussion in 'Archive' started by Alenestra, May 9, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    You would be surprised, however steeping your point in sarcasm and vitriol tends to distract from what you are trying to say.
     
  2. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    It was late, I'd been drinking, hence 3 posts in a row. But seriously, your tribe has 6 times the villas as the tribe in 2nd. Unless your tribe is completely terrible, you should be steamrolling any opposition that's left. To me, that isn't any fun. When I'm winning my fights just because I can send 3 nukes to every villa the guy owns there's no more challenge anymore. Right now if your tribe said screw it, we're bored and took in the #2 Tribe to end this fight immediately, would that make your tribe worse?

    And if you were in one of those other tribes, what is the point in playing? You can't merge with the other tribes to try and catch up, even if you did you'd still lose. So their options are either A) quit and start on a new world or B) fight to the end on this world with no chance of winning and no reward.

    If they choose option B, their best strategy is to eat every barb in all of their provs and turtle up. Just slow you down as much as possible until your members start quitting due to boredom. That's their only hope. Which of course makes the game twice as boring for your guys.
     
  3. Altheras

    Altheras Swordsman

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    30
    I have received a warning for merely having an overflow tribe on a brand new world. The overflow tribe is temporary to simply see who actually will stay and become serious about playing on this world.

    It seems that even the earliest possible merges are now against the rules. o_o

    I'm not sure tribe domination as an endgame will work if all merges are basically against the rules now.

    I really hope that the new endgame gets finished and added to the game soon, or this game as a concept is over.
     
  4. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    Most experienced leaders know that the best test of players for staying power is to let them work out their areas, rather than to align everyone, so many so, that you require a second tribe to hold them all.
     
  5. Altheras

    Altheras Swordsman

    Joined:
    Sep 26, 2015
    Messages:
    89
    Likes Received:
    30
    I agree actually, our overflow tribe was not meant to be big at all, it was only meant to hold those leftovers from us9 who wouldn't fit into the first tribe and in actuality I only intended for it to have about 10 members temporarily, but the leader of that tribe went on a recruitment spree. So it became something it shouldn't have in my opinion.
     
  6. Outta

    Outta Spearman

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    15
    The whole Domination rule came into effect back on Bastille to make up for the fact that Innogames had not yet developed the end of game as per the original claim, where you were supposed to be able to get the kingdoms, and all that. It was a bad move from the start and has almost ruined the actual game. Now Jpex in an attempt to fix some of the messed up aspects that dominance has created, has come up with this merge violation thing. Personally, I think this is so left field that I am considering just finding another game to play.
    Face it, Innogames is in it to make money. We all spend some kind of money to play. Some more than others. I for one have now decided that I will stop spending a dime if my tribe ever gets banned for merging players into our tribe, and may stop until this ridiculious new rule is removed.. That is part of the game. How are we supposed to get the elite top 200 in a tribe to rule the world?
    Maybe instead of banning for merging, base the domination on bashpoints. This would get the game back into the battle mode it should be on.
     
    fiend1 likes this.
  7. jpex20

    jpex20 Berserker

    Joined:
    Jun 2, 2015
    Messages:
    431
    Likes Received:
    65
    No where did it state there would be bans. Your tribes villages would simply be disqualified from Domination. They will not count.
    Why in the world would you want the best 200 in a tribe? How is a world fun then? Fun for new players? All US worlds that have been won, is usually the exact same people who constantly win, through having two tribes dominate, then merge. This rule is to prevent that, and have ONE tribe win through FIGHTING.
     
    kikicaylan likes this.
  8. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    Being disqualified for winning is the same as being banned. People are competitive.

    And what do you mean the same people who constantly win? Can you give any examples? I know on W12 there are only 5 of us from W3's winning tribe that are still playing. Mostly we're going to win through better diplomacy and recruiting the better players. We took chances on guys and some of them have paid off.

    Most experienced leaders know working out your area has literally nothing to do with staying power. Staying power is at least 50% chance in this game. We've lost people who died IRL, I had one dude break his back, and numerous others have job changes/real life issues that forced them to quit playing. Even if you had a tribe of 200 total TW2 addicts, you'll still lose at least 50 of them by the end of the world.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 14, 2016
  9. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    Your constant justification of aligning all active players because of the expectation that enough will quit that you can merge the survivors into a single tribe is tedious.
     
  10. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    Except I'm not aligning all the active players.
    I'm aligning a large enough group that you can finish the game with a reasonable tribe instead of finishing the game with 20 players.

    Your constant justification of a rule that none of your players want is worse than tedious... It's honestly pretty insulting to the player base.
     
    ElectroGypsy and fiend1 like this.
  11. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    If a world has a competing player base of about a 1000 active participants within the top 20 tribes, do you not think aligning 400 or so within two or more tribes is abusing the system, cheating other players and killing any chance of competition on the world?
    It's all well and good to say that not all 400 players will be around by end game, but you are STILL killing competition in overwhelming, and frankly unfair, numbers long before they start quitting. Just because you finish off with fewer players does not detract from the fact that you are overwhelmingly abusing the recruit feature to fight fewer of the active player base.
     
  12. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    You mean diplomacy is abusing the player base?

    Literally, you are talking about diplomacy. How dare we have two tribes work together to fight common enemies. Seriously, whether we merge or not, we'd be allies until our enemies are dead.

    Oh crap, please don't ban alliances next, at that point I wouldn't even bother finishing up this world.
     
  13. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    In certain cases it is,
    You don't NEED to ally every tribe that just happens to have a common enemy with you.
    If you need another tribe with you to win a world, with a setting that states only one tribe can win a world, then how is that a win?
    If you need another tribe because the enemy is doing the same recruitment abuse, then is that not perpetuating the issue that this new rule is being trialed to address?
     
  14. Outta

    Outta Spearman

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    15
    The fix is not to push more of your playerbase away by forming yet more rules. If you want to fix it, talk to the userbase and come up with new rules and apply those to a new world. Continually changing the rules midstream is quite annoying. Some of us are quite aggressive players, and playing for the win is part of the game. But you can't keep moving the finish line after the race starts. Change them on the next world. Then if people choose not to play those worlds, innogames will see who likes what, and where they make the money...
     
    ElectroGypsy and fiend1 like this.
  15. BooksGarden

    BooksGarden Spearman

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2015
    Messages:
    2
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think I'm missing something here. People who enjoy playing together, form tribes. People naturally continue to seek ways of joining up with other people who look at the game the same way, who they've played the game with before, who they have fun with.
    Why would anyone want to continue to play, if even the opportunity to win is taken away? And we're fighting every day, all day and night to eventually win. Every tribe has new players, old players - they come and go for all sorts of reasons. Every tribe battles to recruit players they see learning and growing or give the tribe an advantage. I really don't understand this thing at all. If the game isn't fun for those people who come back world after world, what are you going to be left with?
    I joined up with people I knew I had fun with. What else is a game supposed to be?
     
  16. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    So let me get this straight. Recruiting too many players is abuse and diplomacy is abuse, so really the only way to win is to start off with a tribe of the best players... So the most effective way to win according to these rules would be to start a tribe with 200 good players I know from previous worlds. If I do that there will literally be nothing my opponents can do to stop me since their tribes will have new players and mine won't have as many weak spots
     
  17. m4cguyv3rusmc

    m4cguyv3rusmc Berserker

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2016
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    54
    I liked the merge rule when you first published, but I have to change my stance on it now. Your imposing what you think is fair and fun on everyone else. When they each have their own opinions of fun, and as long as they are not cheating and playing within the defined intent of the game it should be fine.
    If the intent is not to have a 200 person tribe, then change the tribe limit. Let the players play and have fun.
    Everyone has to win through fighting. That's why domination is 80% of the Top 10. Whether you merge with 10 tribes, you have to fight and take villages to get 80%.
    If your leaders or players are less diplomatic or aggressive, then find a new tribe. Its free choice. Kill the leader and farm his council! Who cares, the game has all the dynamics to enjoy the game based on your style of play.
    You even have morale that lets all these little non-aggressive players live longer.
    The point is the game is full of balancing and fairness. This rule is simply based on an opinion on what is fun for a sub-set of players. Meanwhile, you are alienating the other sub-sets.

    So in essence...this is DISCRIMINATION! Where is the EEO?
     
    ElectroGypsy, fiend1 and wrasler05 like this.
  18. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    I'm not saying that, I am saying that doing it to avoid fighting is abuse.
    Even doing it to the extreme early because you expect them to quit later is extreme.

    If you reach the end game and there are two tribes standing after all others have fallen and THEN you merge, right at the end. Then it took you TWO tribes to win the world, when it states only one tribe can win. Get it?
     
  19. m4cguyv3rusmc

    m4cguyv3rusmc Berserker

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2016
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    54
    I get that is a loophole, but the tribe limit is 200. The other tribes can also increase membership, and combat it. You cant impose extra rules for your opinions on what is fair and not.
    Yes, it would suck if the #1 and #2 tribe merged at the end to carry them over 80%. BUT your saying the other 8 tribes only have 20% of the villages? You wasn't going to win anyways. AND The merge can still only have 200 players max. Which is the limit placed by the game. That's not cheating, that is playing the game.
     
  20. Coolnite7

    Coolnite7 Paladin

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    167
    This made me laugh. So basically rather than fight you would enjoy winning a world by better diplomacy and recruiting the better players (perfect example of what hugging is).

    o_O

    Come on you and I both know what has been going on. Trying to fight your point with tribe limit being 200 vs a merge will not win this argument.

    Personally we enjoy the buzz this has created and will continue to answer questions regarding this.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page