Merge Rule

Should we keep the no merging rule?

  • yes

    Votes: 21 91.3%
  • no

    Votes: 2 8.7%
  • undecided

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    23
  • Poll closed .

catlandia

Swordsman
There's a lot here that seem to favor a smaller tribe size, and with the smaller player base, I think I'd have to agree.
It's a little off topic for this post however.. Kiki, is there any chance we could get a poll for a smaller tribe limit?
I second this. 100 would be a good limit, smaller would be even better (like 80)
 

Citizenkane

Spearman
I think limiting the tribe size to 100 would be a good move.

The next rule that needs to be addressed is the Co-Op. I think it should be completely removed. 1 Player 1 account seems the best way to structure a war game.
 

coldog22

Guest
I think limiting the tribe size to 100 would be a good move.

The next rule that needs to be addressed is the Co-Op. I think it should be completely removed. 1 Player 1 account seems the best way to structure a war game.
No on co-op. It serves a purpose. There are ways to limit a co-ops ability to do things, but removing it completely would be useless.
 

kikicaylan

Paladin
I respect all your opinions and know that tribe size is something that we have purposed to the higher ups. Whether or not it is something that will get done I can't tell you for sure. As for the co-op feature, it is something that is being looked at :)
 

death to noobs

Swordsman
Tribe size doesn't matter that's got nothing to do with tribes winning and smaller tribes just make a it even easier on the coiners this is why the game is quickly falling in it's face every world has less and less people in it T I don't think is even gonna come close to 5k of people last I checked it was at half of that. So tribe size irrelevant coiners not irrelevant though the more coiners seem to spend every world results in less and less players. At the rate it's going you won't need to worry about 200 member tribes there won't even be 200 people on a world anymore
 

battlegod

Axeman
i agree with death... i was in a tribe that had 28 people and we kicked some rearends. we didnt win the world but i am almost positive all players were in the top 200 and everyone fought hard. 3rd place isnt bad for a 28member tribe and fighting back and even rimming some good players. if you lower the limit to 100 then all that will happen instead of having a sister tribe you will have to deal with 2-3 sister tribes,
 

battlegod

Axeman
No sister tribes, no allies, no nap's. 100 member limit. Everyone is an enemy...............................
i dont see this working...there can still be a mutual agreement between tribes to go after another. just because there is no official agreement doesnt mean it isnt there. i have made personal agreements with players to not attack as long as they dont.
 

coldog22

Guest
i agree with death... i was in a tribe that had 28 people and we kicked some rearends. we didnt win the world but i am almost positive all players were in the top 200 and everyone fought hard. 3rd place isnt bad for a 28member tribe and fighting back and even rimming some good players. if you lower the limit to 100 then all that will happen instead of having a sister tribe you will have to deal with 2-3 sister tribes,
Sister tribes lack in coordination. They can easily be beaten. TNM and their sister tribe had over 300 members at the start of W18, they lost everyone within a month.
 

fiend1

Swordsman
no offense to jim bob here, but he said to me once, let's talk about the other big player on the map (something close to that) TNM
this was before we passed them with our lil band of A holes, idk if he was serious or not, but i could not believe he'd just said that. me n rizzo laughed about it, hell we'd been beating on tnm since before we got nobles just because we knew their players would mostly quit after taking a beating & receiving no support. idk how tnm was on the world it got started on i know altheras somehow scratched her way to 200+ villages in tnm, but from what i hear every world since then theyve gotten the smackdown early on, this server was no different. hell they were talking about kicking half their members on the other side of the world shortly after we formed MS & asking me to take them in so they could regroup in the south...i mean as crappy as mrts are, at least the tribe crumbles together, or the players leave when theyve learned something. its not everyday leadership just up n decides...okay we need to consolidate..you hundred people over there, we will no longer be feeding you, now go away, you hundred folks over here, come with me! it's this way to glor........
TNM was just a joke on this server
you cant get rid of diplomacy in a tribal game altogether, so either way you're going to find sister tribes & the like, but either way mrt's will be mrt's, it'll just make them a little sloppier if their playerbase is spread out into more than 1 tribe, plus as crappy as they are, infighting or lack of trust due to insufficient help would cause more of them to splinter & fight each other rather than thriving off all the rim players & whoever else they can get to join just to keep their rank in the world up, they would stay lower in the ranks until they barb munched their way to the top, or learned how to play