Discussion of Tribal Domination

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

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    Straw man logical fallacy. What's wrong with recruiting to fight a war? A HUGE war instead of a small one? How is that not fun?
     
  2. m4cguyv3rusmc

    m4cguyv3rusmc Berserker

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2016
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    54
    BUT I asked that question to simply determine where my argument stood. Was I wasting my time, or does my opinion matter? I now the answer to that and am left with my own choices.

    Do I still play the game the way you want me to play it, or find a different game?

    I'll be honest, your gameplay is pretty much just like mine. So it doesn't effect me. BUT, I felt compelled to take up for the other players. As I felt the game was built to attract a large audience, build a large community, and essentially make money off of it. This is obviously counter-productive to that goal as it simply supports one sub-set of gamers. Which, lucky for me, I am included in...but long term would be the end of the game.

    The market share for targeting amateur to professional gamers is respectively significantly smaller at each level. Thus why these type of games tend to target a larger audience of casual gamers. Which that group actually supports the actual existence of a more elite group, but that's a different conversation. I have a bit of experience in the semi-pro circuit and consulting with CEVO and ESL. Many years ago.

    The point is I accept that you want to target the game to your desired style of play. I don't think that will work out for you long term.
     
  3. Coolnite7

    Coolnite7 Paladin

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    167
    Sure your opinion matter but everything you posted is you is what you assume will happen. Would you be upset if players actually agreed and found the new rule challenging?

    We don't mind opinions as this is a discussion thread "Discuss". Next people would say JPEX20 or myself cannot play the game? :rolleyes:
     
  4. m4cguyv3rusmc

    m4cguyv3rusmc Berserker

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2016
    Messages:
    340
    Likes Received:
    54
    It doesn't even matter if the majority of players agreed at this point. It is the principal of imposing rules based on personal opinion that differ from the design of the game or alienates a group of players.

    Your position on that has been established. I accepted it. Like I said, it works for me because that's how I play.

    Its not going to work for others, but I'm not making money off it, only spending it, so I shouldn't care how they feel about it anyways.
     
  5. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    I did hear about that disaster on another world... and I have to admit, I understand the players' points. Any Tribe you are in will have an advantage in the sense that you can easily tell another mod when you see cheating and rest assured that it will be looked into.

    In comparison we've had to report one player dozens of times to get them banned no matter how obvious it seemed. That said... It would mean more cheaters get banned, so I really wouldn't mind, but advantages should at least be noted.

    But back to the point of the discussion. This still feels like you've got a gunshot wound in the leg and you're bandaging someone's hands instead of dealing with it. The end game is causing people to merge to end rather than fight, so the end game should be adjusted. I'm not saying fortresses, but can't we get SOMETHING else instead of what we have? I suggested territory instead, but I'd take a bashpoints requirement or really anything but eat 80% of villas. At least take note if the enemy hasn't taken a villa from my Tribe in two weeks and call that game over. Hell that would encourage tribes to kick inactives.
     
  6. Coolnite7

    Coolnite7 Paladin

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    167
    Now it's the "personal opinion" this is starting to sound like "he said she said.

    So far words have changed to ban now personal opinions wow. This is getting interesting.
     
  7. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    How was this rule not based on the personal opinion of several mods? It seems obvious that there is a large contingent of players that hold a different opinion based on playstyles if nothing else
     
  8. Coolnite7

    Coolnite7 Paladin

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    167
    1. So what you are saying is that the rule was/is now based on the opinion of moderators?
    2. Also you suggest (or in your opinion) there many players (maybe I am not seeing them?) that hold different opinions (because hugging as the TW community has given this a name) as hugging is part of their game plan?
     
  9. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    Well done, you have omitted huge chunks of both YOUR post AND my post in response to change the context to suit your argument. CONGRATULATIONS. You are the worst type of debater. Let's take a trip down memory lane, shall we?
    Your post^ followed by my response.
    I was stating, what to me seemed like, a pretty funny comparison between the support team and the community that they support staff prefer fighting wars, whereas the community prefer recruiting wins. As per your own wording.
    And yet you removed ALL context, by clipping from both posts. So again I congratulate you. [Insert slow clap here].
    The rule is a trial attempt to address the often unheard concerns of the players who complain about the issues that are at the core of poor and unfair gameplay that the rule is an attempt to move away from ie. aligning huge portions of the world at unfair ratios to remove the competition for victory. Saying that the community as a whole disagrees with this rule because 5 of you are arguing it is quite literally the worst sample grouping, because there are only like 5 of you arguing on the forums against it out of hundreds or thousands of active players. Then you need to take into consideration that there are 3 members of the support team arguing for the rule, if you ignore that support are support and consider they are players too, that means 37.5% of this community are for and 62.5% are against. Still, really terrible sample sizing though.
     
  10. Coolnite7

    Coolnite7 Paladin

    Joined:
    Oct 18, 2014
    Messages:
    869
    Likes Received:
    167
    Couldn't have said it better myself!
     
  11. wrasler05

    wrasler05 Guest

    I have a question how does alienating those that do merge to win, obviously a good enough bunch to gather 80% of the villas and willing to put in the time and effort help the game?
     
  12. Yatogami

    Yatogami Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2015
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    52
    Tribe A recruits 200 players, 400 starting villages in a tight area, as is natural with MRTs players quit and the persistent noble their villages (often gifted) and the tribe recruits their capacity again. Such is the cycle of recruiting players to passively win their villages as they quit.
    So now tribe has majority of top players who, through their hard work, have nobled mostly their own tribe to get to where they are.
    Is this the good enough bunch of players you are suggesting has fairly won a world?
     
  13. wrasler05

    wrasler05 Guest

    Lets try this again, read it, and actually answer the question. so far all i have seen is you guys missing the point by a long shot. your so focused on the what. try looking at the why. then ask your self, how can i make the game a better experience to encourage those that do merge to win to fight.
    How to i encourage more wars on the servers.
    How do you get those new players to meet the vets.
    How do you encourage more activity in the community so they talk more and become a community.
    Look for where the problem originate then ask yourself why does this happen?

    and this does circle round to the original question of how does alienating those that do merge to win help the game? Would they not be players as well? do they not have voices?
     
  14. Deathcrystal

    Deathcrystal Guest

    Community Managers can play this game?!?!?! Are mods allowed to?
     
  15. wrasler05

    wrasler05 Guest

    get your shit right death. wrong person quoted but yet again another mod AVOIDS my questions, am i hitting home then?

    and i guess while im at it stay on topic
     
  16. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    1. There's been more than 5 players coming out against the rule.
    2. If it seems like everyone has done this on every single world, and they're aligning the vast majority of the players... doesn't that mean the vast majority of the players are doing this and therefore for it?

    Your argument is garbage because either the majority is against this rule and has been using merges/alliances or the merges/alliances shouldn't have been having a large effect since apparently the "silent majority" is against this and therefore wouldn't take part.

    Also I love the "unheard concerns" which can easily be translated to, "no one is complaining about it, but we think it's a problem, so other players must too"
     
    ElectroGypsy likes this.
  17. CoBr2

    CoBr2 Mounted Archer

    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2015
    Messages:
    225
    Likes Received:
    104
    1. You are not the TW community, you manage it, no one else says that. There's a difference despite what you seem to think.
    2. There's been at least 10 people complaining about this rule in this thread alone. Would you like me to send out a tribewide asking more people to come on the forum and express their opinions? There are like 20 people that come on these forums with any regularity. If we consider them a representative sample, then the community overwhelming majority dislikes this rule, but hey, if numbers are what it will take to convince you this rule is stupid, I'm happy to tell people to come on and share their opinion.
     
  18. Deathcrystal

    Deathcrystal Guest

    This does NOT prevent merging, this PREVENTS merging from becoming a habit. Mergers that are needed to enhance game state are still allowed, merging for no other reason but to inflate numbers and gain early advantages ARE NOT. Early Game mergers for example are only done to try to gain early top ranks.
     
  19. Outta

    Outta Spearman

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2015
    Messages:
    44
    Likes Received:
    15
    If Innogames just wants the games to last longer, make the domination 80% of ALL Villages, or something harder than the 80% of the top 10 tribes anyway.
    As far as tribal merges, Diplomacy will always happen in a game like this. Without merges, this game is becoming less inticing to play. The few that complain should not be allowed to make changes that affect us all, when most do not want it that way.
    Open a thread like this and let the players come up with some ideas of win targets, or better yet fix the whole kingdoms part that was supposed to be part of the build.
    When a change is to be done, do it on a new world being made, not in the middle of a race to win on another world.
     
  20. wrasler05

    wrasler05 Guest

    Are you refering to my questions as ways to prevent merging or are you referring to the rule that is entirely based on the Moderators concept of merges and the state of affairs of whatever is happening at that time.
    Don't Believe me look at the rules and tell me where the concrete numbers are at, then who decides who gets nullified banned whatever happens to them.

    Also with your post isnt the main reason for this rule for what happened on W9?(not entirely sure actully) where the top 2 tribes just merged into one another to call it a win and end the world. (i would callt hat late game not early game)

    also these quotes were for you moderators to ask yourselves and one another as possibly ways to enhance the game and not detract from it. i do realize i forgot to put question marks in place which i have put in within the parenthesis to make it more clear
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page