The Disappointment of Mass Recruiters

Alrond2

Guest
Except when they don't.

Sometimes I feel like all these MRT tribe leaders are actually the exact same person just using different aliases, always the same excuses.
Treason do you ever post any else ? , stop complaining about how other tribes play the game , your not playing farmville , this is a war game . and no i'm not with MRT, if you don't like a challenge then go play something simple .
 

coldog22

Guest
The problem is they don't die quick enough compared to the original game, here, the larger the alliance that numbs the world, the more damage is done to the world activity the longer that alliance exists and so the world simply fizzles.

Take en.Orava, for example. No less than 3 world winners joined proclaiming their excellence and intent to prove they can do it again, it was shaping up to be a showdown of experienced players. They all talked the talk. What happened? They merged. Unapologetically. Killing the world. The map even looks sorry.
http://www.tw2-tools.com/en15/img_map/hash/a92876f37b3397b0023c1c9c58593fc9/


All I heard was, we aren't an MRT, we're just 200 guys that won a world (with an alliance), oh and these other guys, oh and these other guys, but we aren't an MRT.

How can a world win with a player count of more than 200 be a legitimate win, it took you over the single tribe limit to accomplish. It's like Claiming you are the strongest in the competition whilst taking steroid injections on the side. Even 200 is widely considered to be over the top because it is such a huge chunk of an active player based for a single world.

Let's look at it another way. Let's assume that the top 20 tribes are where most of the world's activity sits. Approximately 740 players competing. At 200 members you account for 27% of the competing world.
BUT WAIT THERE'S MORE!
You are allied to CQD, the rank 5, holding a very modest 34 members on top of your 200, not to mention who else is waiting in the wings to join.
Got bad news for you, bud, if you are recruiting SO much that you can't get everyone into a single tribe; You. Are. An. MRT. And you are certainly not winning any victories through playing ability, because who are you proving yourself against? 5 to 1 odds against almost every tribe you [/s]recruit against[/] fight against?

And yes, MRT's really grind my gears, too.
IMP only won World 9 due to TFR quitting of boredom. They did nothing but munch on barbs. We took 30 of their cities in one night for then to eat 72 barbs that same night. I was pathetic and a waste of our time.
 

coldog22

Guest
And on us9 for a very very long time the #1 and #2 tribes were at war, and it went back and forth as far as who was #1 and who was #2 between IMP and TFR. It was a very long and drawn out war, and eventually IMP got the upper hand and TFR died off. Now we are just wrapping up the server by merging in our main ally.
TFR also had allies, and they died as well. us9 was a huge world war with about 50% vs about 50% until one side lost.
No, we did not win by allying with everyone. For most of it we only had one major ally, DRL, and a couple of other much smaller tribes.

For a while we even had #1 #2 and #3 all fighting each other between TFR, IMP, and CQD.

And yes, most of our players wanted to continue on us14 with us. I don't care if that means we're an MRT. So, we're likely to control the core early, most worlds end up being core vs rim anyway.
So we have 200 of 700 people, and this means the world is over? Are we honestly expecting the world to only ever have 700 people playing on it? Don't most worlds have at least a couple thousand active players at their peak?
I love your lies mate. TFR had 0 allies. We had a few NAP's, but never any official allies. Get your information right.
 

coldog22

Guest
And again Alth, you claimed TFR had over 100 members, Our max was 80. We stuck around 72 average. You didn't beat us due to skill. Half of our tribe left of boredom and personal reasons. Y'all were never a match for TFR. Always barb munching in different directions.
 

Gryllus

Spearman
Ok, my 2 and a half cent worth.....it sounds like those who got beaten by a big tribe, hate them.....the ones who won, enjoy the benefits. Now I don't now about y'all, but if I do something...and it works or feels good...I will probably do it again. I wonder if those who "hate big tribes" were in them and won, just how much would they hate them then. Sour grapes is NOT appealing. I understand your frustration....and if so vexed, one is always free to venture on to other things. I am new to this gaming platform, but I have heard more whining than on a kindergarten field trip. Buck up little campers. Don't like a certain large tribe, join them or make one yourself. Please, moderator and player alike,....if its within the rules, maybe accept it as part of the game or maybe this game is not for you. Changing rules in the middle of a game sounds and feel more like revenge and retribution than a solution. The current world should have been grandfathered in and apply the new rules to the next world.
I like TW2 so far. I have had my behind handed to me a few times, and won a few times.....but when players draw lines about why they lost on previous worlds and want to change the rules because they lost...it kind of ruins the game for everyone.
 

Zeshinosa

Spearman
First world I have played and only one I joined a friend of mine and the leadership decided to recruit lots of people. I was lucky and in an area that not to much blue popped up but there wasn't much red either. The tribe did allow me to get to be a good size due to relative safety due to members in area and all the good players in our geographic area being in our tribe as growing. This however meant that it was 3-4 months before I got to the point in the map where I had a good fight and by that point there was very few left and most were just wore out/tired so they quit fairly fast. I would of gotten more action early on had fun and probably be either removed from the world I am on or burned out and stopped playing. But by being in a large tribe it made it so I didn't get burned out of the game and got my self to a point where I can throw my weight around to bully most people. It has it's benefits and its drawbacks in my eyes, and it suits different play styles.
 

Treason

Mounted Archer
Ok, my 2 and a half cent worth.....it sounds like those who got beaten by a big tribe, hate them.....the ones who won, enjoy the benefits. Now I don't now about y'all, but if I do something...and it works or feels good...I will probably do it again. I wonder if those who "hate big tribes" were in them and won, just how much would they hate them then. Sour grapes is NOT appealing. I understand your frustration....and if so vexed, one is always free to venture on to other things. I am new to this gaming platform, but I have heard more whining than on a kindergarten field trip. Buck up little campers. Don't like a certain large tribe, join them or make one yourself. Please, moderator and player alike,....if its within the rules, maybe accept it as part of the game or maybe this game is not for you. Changing rules in the middle of a game sounds and feel more like revenge and retribution than a solution. The current world should have been grandfathered in and apply the new rules to the next world.
I like TW2 so far. I have had my behind handed to me a few times, and won a few times.....but when players draw lines about why they lost on previous worlds and want to change the rules because they lost...it kind of ruins the game for everyone.

Whoa, it looks like you've reiterated exactly what every other zerg-noob that's a member of your tribe has already said in this thread three times, except with maybe half the intellectual capacity. Imagine that.

Buck up little campers. Don't like a certain large tribe, join them.
You are the problem.
 

Gryllus

Spearman
Treason, the funny thing is, those who cannot debate a person with facts and intellect, name call. Being a troglodyte and whining like a child is nothing to be proud of. I am so glad that a ...how did you put it..."zerg-noob" has caused you such distress. I was once told if you throw a rock into a pack of dogs....the one that yelps is the one you hit.....it seems you've been hit.
The problem is too many whiners.
Imagine that?
 
Big tribes die in the end because all they are is tribes full of small players that can.t fight a real fight.
Its the small tribes with huge players that win the end game.
 

Deathcrystal

Guest
Big tribes die in the end because all they are is tribes full of small players that can.t fight a real fight.
Its the small tribes with huge players that win the end game.
I disagree alittle..

For most the world, the small tribes win, but in the end, inactivity steamrolls these tribes, and thus the win usually goes to the bigger tribes that just out last them.
 

Prince Alucard

Guest
For most the world, the small tribes win, but in the end, inactivity steamrolls these tribes, and thus the win usually goes to the bigger tribes that just out last them.
I agree, but would also like to say that from what I noticed of other worlds.

If every tribe was small (say around 40 players max) and had the same inactivity issues that every tribe ends up getting, then every tribe and world would end up like this.

Tribes A-D all end up with around 5 active players and around 35 inactives and either they decide to just break up and join another tribe possibly tribe E who refuses to break apart despite having the same issues, simple so that they can be a tribe of more than a handful and win the world already before anybody else quits.

Or

These tribes try and recruit each others members nonstop secretly to try and get one over and to replace their inactives, but since every tribe has the same inactivity issues in this scenario, it ends up being mostly like what I said above where they all end up joining the most stubborn group that's left simply to end the world.

Personally I'm not sure how to fix these problems as people go inactive for a variety of reasons not just being bored with the game itself. Making late midgame and endgame more fun would certainly help, but it won't stop players going inactive from simple time consumption issues. Changing the current co-op system might help.
 

Treason

Mounted Archer
IMO 60 member limit to a tribe would address some of those issues because when people go inactive there could be merges that wouldn't be entirely world shattering, if two 60 member tribes have half their members internalized and merge to become a 60 person tribe- that would not amount to half the active players in the world merging into a tribe just to win.

On the other hand, When two max or near max member tribes do something similar, it takes most of the active end-game players and puts them in one tribe. I really, really don't understand the point of joining a tribe just to win instead of playing the game as it was intended, but it seems like that's the status quo on tribal wars 2, which really sucks because that was not at all the case on TW1 for the most part.
 

tfoxworthy

The Veteran
On the other hand, When two max or near max member tribes do something similar, it takes most of the active end-game players and puts them in one tribe. I really, really don't understand the point of joining a tribe just to win instead of playing the game as it was intended, but it seems like that's the status quo on tribal wars 2, which really sucks because that was not at all the case on TW1 for the most part.
The only people that complain about MRT's are those that get rimmend by numbers, so if you want to prove to the mods that MRT tribes shouldn't exist because they aren't needed, then take a stand and fight 100-200 players, prove your point that all MRT are bad. Also, that merger happens when tribes are tired of playing that world and wish to move on to other worlds, when a world drags on for months on end, then size really matters, and endgame can be achieved faster through those mercy merges.