Tribal Core Issues; from a Strategist

[DeletedUser]

Innogames,

You have two main issues with the structure of Tribal Wars 2. These issues have caused my friends with whom i play strategy games with to quit the game in frustration.

One, how is it possible for a player to launch hundreds and hundreds of attacks at no cost to themselves? This is a major flaw in the game and will push hardcore strategy lovers like myself to stop playing. Does it really matter who is the better strategist in Tribal Wars 2? Or can someone who launches attacks all day with 1 Ram each drive someone insane enough to quit the game when they have 200 incoming attacks all day long that are all FAKES. This takes away from the foundation of war strategy that Tribal is built upon, a good foundation. There should be a cost to do such tactics. Like a similar feature that is a rule in Grepolis. Ya sure, you can use fake attacks as a tactic, that is perfectly fair, but you must send a minimum provision count for each attack. So in the end, if someone wants to launch fakes all day they can still do so, but it will cost them provisions to do so. You guys really dropped the ball here.

Second, How is it possible for endless villages to have the same name? So your telling me once i start to attack a player, he can change all of his village names to the same name to try to use that as a defensive tactic? This is not something i'm interested in as a strategist. There should be a feature that only allows for one village at a time to have the same name. This is also a major flaw in the game.


It comes down to tactics. And these are not tactics that should be part of the equation in a War game. These are not tactics, but flaws in the system that players take advantage of.

Please update ASAP to fix these issues so we can play the game of War that this is meant to be. Not play "im gona light up your cell phone with alerts intill your battery dies", "good luck figuring out the 2,000 fake attacks you have incoming".

 

[DeletedUser255]

A strategist overcomes the obstacles ahead. One who attempts to change the rules to suit his "strategy" can no longer call themselves a strategist.

You think it is not a valid tactic to name all villages the same name? That makes me laugh every time I see a "master strategist" complain about it. How do you envision this rule enforced. Is there going to be a report system that you can force a player to change 500 village names because it is against your "rule"? What about villages similarly named? Barb. Barb! barB BARB .BARB. BARB.. ..BARB etcetera. etcetera. etcetera blah blah blah.
In retort to your argument that it is not a valid tactic, a quick history lesson for you; In WW2 Britain tore down or covered up all road and direction signs to cause confusion to an invading enemy. I see little difference in the TW naming tactic.

I don't disagree with the fake limits. Being able to send 1 ram at a time, 50 per village, wherever and however far is unfeasible and should be made to consider a minimum provision requirement (Tribal Wars incorporates a percentage based fake limit on worlds that have a fake limit)
Tribal Wars would however, see worlds where common strategy is to overwhelm enemies with THOUSANDS of attacks (not simply 200 lol) which, when an active and powerful tribe got into a juggernauts momentum would commonly reach 20,000 fakes to a target. Though admittedly management and tagging tools are much more convenient to help manage accounts and discern attacks.

If a player is being faked, and targeted, then the idea is to return fire, mix some real attacks in to force the enemy on the defensive and distract them from the task at hand.

Complaining about strategies that are also capable of being in your arsenal whilst calling yourself a strategist, let alone failing to strategise against these tactics are counter-indicative of your claims.
When you know neither yourself nor the enemy, you will succumb in every battle.

 

[DeletedUser]

Im trying to say that as a person that has been playing strategy games hardcore for over 10 years, these two things make the game unbalanced. Therefore those who truly search for that perfect battle of strategy will not be interested in playing this game unless these two issues are fixed. Given, i can live with the titles being the same, but not the endless fake attacks.

I did not say that i am against fakes. I think they have there place as a useful tactic. But, when fakes are abused because they are a dime a dozen its a flaw. You should have to send a minimum percent of your provisions on an attack. Think about it, if one ram or one spearmen where to attack a fortified position in real terms- that would not even be considered an attack, its not.

When a game is unbalanced it is not worth playing if your a true strategist.

 

[DeletedUser255]

Well done on not reading my post. 10/10 for lack of effort.

 

[DeletedUser]

sounds more like a whiner than a strategist. click ignore on every fake, and make sure villages that are vulnerable are protected or dodged. this is a non-issue. i generally send hundreds of nukes and often don't bother sending any fakes, but i have been targeted with fakes and never whined. fakes and sabos are for the weak. counter them by killing their troops and nobling their villages.

 

[DeletedUser1260]

Fakes have their place in the scheme of an attack on a major player. Like giantfrey pointed out, I know it takes a minute when you have 200 to 500 incoming attacks to go in figure out which are fakes and to click ignore. (Have dealt with it myself). People that quit because they have 100's of attacks coming their way are just not meant to play war games. (my opinion, not in anyway associated with the opinion of Inno). There are ways to distract the person sending attacks your way by using a good offensive.
Yato as usual you take words to a new level in your insight.

 

[DeletedUser465]

Well done on not reading my post. 10/10 for lack of effort.

hahaha

Fakes are a big part of attacking. Smokescreening has been proven to work on many players. Whether it be in a fear factor when they panic and call for support, or to distract and target elsewhere, etc, it's a fine system.

Village naming, that's the players preference in play-style.

 

[DeletedUser825]

Haha, I love fakes. In my opinion this mechanism separates who will crack and leave between those who can power through. As for the ability to name all your villages one name.... This would only be a problem if you play on mobile. It's pretty simple on a PC to go look up coordinates and plug them in to the search. Or in your reports you click the village center button. Some pretty easy things to overcome.

 

[DeletedUser465]

Haha, I love fakes. In my opinion this mechanism separates who will crack and leave between those who can power through. As for the ability to name all your villages one name.... This would only be a problem if you play on mobile. It's pretty simple on a PC to go look up coordinates and plug them in to the search. Or in your reports you click the village center button. Some pretty easy things to overcome.

I fully agree that the mobile version is very lacking in ability, in comparison to browser. However I usually think of the mobile version as more of a way to keep informed while out and about, it's hard to play solely on mobile.

 

[DeletedUser825]

I would agree to that. The best I do on mobile is farm a few inches away and check reports. Also to queue buildings and troops. Sometimes messages as well but not as many. Sorry bit off topic, I know.

 

[DeletedUser465]

Still, valid points.